Social Identity and Prejudice and how it relates to Cognitive Psychology - Research Paper Example

Insert Insert Insert 17 December Prejudice encompasses negative evaluations of either an individual or group of individuals concerning their group membership. Evidence reveals that prejudices remain characterized by collective processes based on negative evaluations shared across all groups. This research paper establishes the relationship between cognitive psychology, and social identity and prejudice using literature reviews. An evaluation of scenarios in relation to cognitive simplification processes would be explored. In addition, situational influences, personality, stereotyping and activation, public opinion, social dominance and social identity constitute concepts of cognitive psychology to be discussed in this paper. Further analysis would be done on the prevalence of mental health disorders in gay men, lesbians, and bisexual population. The psychology of social identification and attitudes does influence the expression of prejudices in different contexts. Thus, the relationship between the development of social identity and the expression of prejudice remains positively correlated to cognitive psychology. Social Identity and Prejudice and how it relates to Cognitive Psychology Prejudice refers to the negative evaluation of an individual or group of people based on the person’s group membership. Prejudices remain characterized by collective processes based on negative evaluations shared across all groups. Researches on prejudice concerning cognitive psychology have largely focused on individual prejudices such as racism. The psychology of social identification and attitudes does influence the expression of prejudices in different contexts. Thus, an understanding of cognitive and social processes contributes to perceptions between groups (Crandall et al., 2002). This research paper seeks to establish the relationship between cognitive psychology, and social identity and prejudice using literature reviews. Research by Crandall et al. (2002) focused on studying prejudice and social identity as well as establishing a wide understanding on the application of traditional theoretical practices in understanding psychological phenomena. They employed a social normative approach in establishing how social norms influence the expression of prejudice by various possible targets. Such targets include racists, porn stars, lawyers, gay and lesbians, politicians, drug users among other social groups. From their research, attitudes towards ethnic and racial minority groups continue becoming less prejudiced while increasing to be positive. This could be attributed to the decrease in people’s willingness to express prejudice. In their application of the Sherif and Sherif’s Group Norm Theory, they examined pressures on individuals to conform to group identity and how prejudice related identity develops within social groups. From this theory, an individual’s prejudices result from the socialization process following group membership. In this regard, social identity becomes formed in-group situations thereby functioning as standards for an individual’s perception and consequential judgment while out of the group. Manipulated social identities influence individuals’ attitudes thus one partner could affect private acceptance. In addition, an individual’s perception of stereotyping identity directly influences the person’s willingness to approve the stereotypes. Hence, the social appropriateness of prejudices determines publicly stated and suppressed prejudices. In measuring social identity about expressing prejudice, it could be established that people express their own prejudice based on its social acceptance. On the other hand, the pervasiveness of social identity in controlling the expression of prejudice would be more tolerated in intimate relationships. For instance, rejection remains founded on social history, threat value, and safety concerns whereas discrimination in the normative appropriateness of prejudice like in housing, employment and dating. Moreover, social identity dictates which jokes would delight or offend in demeaning groups. The influence of social identity determines the willingness by individuals to express prejudice rather than personal attitudes. The Group Norm Theory of attitudes also indicates that external social identities usually become internal attitudes in the end. As individuals move between groups, the process of socially identifying with the new group would involve taking on the new frame of reference of the new group. Lastly, Crandall et al. recommended the developmental model of internalization of group identity through in the event that a new member breaks the social identity of a new group. This would be achieved through the suppression of internally motivated behavior of the individual (Crandall et al., 2002). Intergroup perceptions remain determined by motivational, cognitive, and social processes. In their research, Guimond et al. (2003) applied the variable of Social Dominance Orientation in the study of situational factors and personality tendencies in providing explanations about prejudice. They also assessed the combination of a situational model with a person context in understanding prejudice. The Social Dominance Orientation centers on the extent to which an individual would wish and support a group’s hierarchy as well as the dominance of superior groups over inferior groups. In addition, the impact of situational factors would be moderated by personality. From their research, gender differences in Social Dominance Orientation would not be affected by contextual or situational variables. However, this hypothesis remains inconsistent with the Group Socialization Model. Social Dominance Orientation mediates the relationship between attitudes towards prejudice and social identity in the framework of a subjective stratification system set or self-selection. In addition to self-selection, the impact of the socialization process causes significant changes in beliefs and attitudes in different ways depending on the situational context of the personality model. On the other hand, the outcomes of the Group Social Model indicated that the acquisition of dominant social identity remains significant in the socialization process. This change could also be attributed to cognitive psychology since individuals need to justify their identity in social groups. Hence, in establishing the cause of an event, it would be essential to indicate that both the event and the cause would be present (Guimond et al., 2003). Individuals acquire different levels of Social Dominance Orientation or self-expression based on a stable and psychological tendency, as well as the conceptualization of self-expression as a personality trait. Given the Group Social Model, individuals in a dominant social identity position exhibit high levels of prejudice than others. In overall, changes in prejudice remain as a function of social identity regardless of any cognitive psychological tendencies of the individual. This explains the observed intergroup prejudices given the social dominance conditions as compared to controlled conditions (Guimond et al., 2003). Basing his arguments on Lippmann’s book ‘Public Opinion’, Newman (2009) supports Lippmann’s viewpoints on prejudice and group stereotyping through literature review. He also states that the book bears significantly rich source of ideas. Newman asserts that the distorted impression of the book’s content would be due to classical scholarly and scientific works packed with new practical ideas that could inspire the works of other researchers and scholars. However, Newman points out that stereotype perform a minor part in Public Opinion. Lippmann is accredited for defining stereotype to encompass tangible and observable factors that impinge on an individual’s senses as well as abstractions like attitudes and ideas. From his findings, complex societies have the capacity to effectively manage information processors prone to prejudice by individuals. In addition, individuals remain accurate enough while collecting information essential to their goals of social interaction. Variables attributed to cognitive psychology include, but not limited to, graphical impacts on memory and attention, imagined correlations, naïve realism, perception of a just world and impacts of cognitive load. The defensive function of stereotypes reflects a psychodynamic approach to prejudice and stereotyping. These results show how individuals perceive the world and how these perceptions merge into public opinion. In this regard, public opinion serves as the remedy to periodic existential predicaments relating to social psychology. Hence, an organized and systematic analysis of cognitive psychology remains essential and relevant in social identity and expression of prejudice (Newman, 2009). Similarly, Lepore and Brown (1997) sought to establish whether prejudice would be inevitable in the activation of stereotype and categorization. They examined the role of an individual’s level of prejudice in the pattern and occurrence of activation. In addition, they assessed the effects of automatic activation on categorization. According to Lepore and Brown, prejudices originate from normal cognitive processes and remain inevitable. Thus, individuals continue to be prejudiced for as long as they would keep on thinking. Automatic stereotype activation causes stereotyping judgments in stereotype activation whereas an effect of categorization in category activation. The outcomes of their research indicated that the overall knowledge of stereotyping remains the same for both high and low prejudiced individuals except for group representation. Low prejudiced individuals would be affected less by category activation whereas high prejudiced individuals would increase their ratings of target groups on the negative dimension of stereotyping. Knowledge of stereotyping and approval affects the automatic level of processing in various ways. Stereotype approvals, therefore, affect judgments when activated directly. They recommend approval and accommodation of automatic responses of prejudice. Hence, stereotype activation on the perception of individuals remains inevitable (Lepore & Brown, 1997). Foley (1976) reproduces Cook’s study of racial prejudice from a prison setting to a natural setting. She aimed at establishing the influences of situational and personality factors on changes regarding prejudice. From the study, the amount of change in prejudice relied on the individual’s cognitive attitudes, self-esteem, and complexity towards people in general. According to Foley, situational variables, other than those used by Cook, also include intimate relationship, positive attributes, equal status, cooperative interactions, and positive social identification. These situational variables significantly reduce prejudice in varying amounts. Other factors would produce significant influences on changes in prejudice in the event that identity becomes negative to racial equality. In addition, the impacts of Machiavellianism remain true irrespective of the race of individuals or social identity. The identity of an area in addition to dimensionality remains the most consistent predictor of changes in prejudice. Individuals change their attitudes about the identity of their residential areas. Hence, social identities have impacts on prejudice changes of individuals moving into a new area. From this study, the amount of prejudice change depends on the individual’s cognitive attitudes, self-esteem, and complexity towards people in general (Foley, 1976). Research conducted by Bradfield (2004) encompassed what individuals know and believe in relation to cognitive simplification processes, activation and scenario practitioners like Plato and George Orwell. Bradfield used intuitive judgment in developing simulation models in his study. An understanding of research literatures in cognitive psychology comprise three developmental elements of scenarios namely knowledge organization, cognitive simplification process and process of constructing scenarios. From the outcomes of research, individuals make fundamental assumptions with a pronounced degree of confidence than they would do in making diagnostic assumptions. Moreover, individuals depend on limited heuristics or judgmental rules arising from cognitive limitations in reducing the possibility of indefinite future events. Furthermore, the organization and activation of knowledge in the brain takes on cognitive representation consisting of individuals’ experiences. Information search in scenario development would be largely determined by activation and relevance. Scenarios built on diagnostic reasoning remain unrealistic. The more vivid a scenario would be developed, the higher the possibility that the scenario would be unconsciously perceived as becoming probable. He recommends that scenario planning ought to integrate science, and craft. In this regard, cognitive impacts would affect the developmental process of scenarios (Bradfield, 2004). Meyer (2003) carried out literature reviews on the predominance of mental disorders in gay men, lesbians, and bisexual population. Evidence from research findings show that lesbians and gay men suffer from additional mental health complications as compared to the heterosexual population, Such mental disorders include the use of drugs, social stress and suicide. These disorders have remained attributed to discrimination, prejudice and stigma which create stressful situations that lead to the development of mental health problems for minority groups. Minority stress may be associated by distinguishing between distal and proximal social attitudes. Proximal attitudes relate to individual’s life experiences based on action. Distal attitudes depend on how individuals manifest those concerning feelings, thoughts, and actions. Findings of the research indicate that undergoing a self-defining period increases with self-examination in recognizing homosexuality and coming out of it. In addition, the increased access to mental health services also reveals evidence of the prevalence of mental health disorders. Meyer recommends the use of interventions that change the appraisal process, as well as those that reduce exposure to stress and alter stress-inducing situations (Meyer, 2003). In conclusion, prejudices remain characterized by collective processes based on negative evaluations shared across all groups. Researches on prejudice about cognitive psychology have largely focused on individual prejudices such as racism. The psychology of social identification and attitudes does affect the expression of prejudices in different contexts. Thus, an understanding of cognitive and social processes contributes to perceptions between groups. Interventions that change the appraisal process, as well as those that reduce exposure to stress and alter stress-inducing situations need to be adopted. Scenario planning ought to integrate science, and craft. An organized and systematic analysis of cognitive psychology remains essential and relevant in social identity and expression of prejudice. This research paper established the relationship between the development of social identity and the expression of prejudice to be positively correlated to cognitive psychology. References Bradfield, R. (2004). What We Know and What We Believe: Lessons from Cognitive Psychology. Development, 47(4): 35-42. Crandall, C. S., Eshleman, A. & O’Brien, L. (2002). Social Norms and the Expression of and Suppression of Prejudice: The Struggle for Internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(3), 359-378. Foley, L. A. (1976). Personality and Situational Influences on Changes in Prejudice: A Replication of Cook’s Railroad Game in a Prison Setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(5), 846-856. Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N. & Duarte, S. (2003). Does Social Dominance Generate Prejudice?: Integrating individual and Contextual Determinants of Intergroup Cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 697-721. Lepore, L. & Brown, R. (1997). Category and Stereotype Activation: Is Prejudice Inevitable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(2), 275-287. Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, Social Stress, and Mental Health in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations: Conceptual Issues and Research Evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674-697. Newman, L. S. (2009). Was Walter Lippmann Interested in Stereotyping?: Public Opinion and Cognitive Social Psychology. History of Psychology, 12(1), 7-18. Read More