Behind the Stereotypes about White and Black Skinny People - Statistics Project Example

 Stereotypes Abstract This report gives a statistical survey and analysis of various traits of black and white skinned people. The survey is done in a likert scale form of questionnaire. The study is mainly to find out that whether social characteristics of different groups can be stereotyped or not. That means the report wants to specifically identify any psychological aspect that are common to any categorical group. Blacks are generally characterized as less hardworking, lazy, dishonest, less caring, less law abiding, less understanding, less intelligent, more talkative compared to whites. But this study has, however, found that, in contrast with the common view, blacks have not been stereotyped by the common features of their social group by the respondents in the survey. Introduction In geographical areas like Europe and America there are vast variety of people residing, who categorically belong to various social groups. Very often the behaviors of these different people are explained by the common characteristics of the social groups they belong to. Here comes the concept of stereotyping. Stereotyping can be thought of as a process that involves a categorical response pattern. To be said in a more precise way, under stereotyping, membership to a particular group is considered to be sufficient enough to pass the judgment that the individual under consideration possess all the traits belonging to the particular group or category that the individual belongs to. When there exists a number of strongly established stereotypes for certain social group, it’s become very difficult to judge a person belonging to that group based on his or her individual characteristics. (McGarty, Yzerbyt and Spears, 2002; Feagin 2001; Blair, Judd and Fallman, 2004) Very often stereotyped perceptions regarding certain social group are built on the basis of race, ethnicity, physical images and so on. In America, for example, there exists huge amount of stereotyped perceptions regarding the Blacks. In a study, Charles and Massey (2003) found that whites along with people of Latino and Asian origins have a tendency to stereotype the people with black skin as lazy, violent, and poor. On the other hand, people of Asian origin are used to be stereotypes as very hard working, intelligent, and self-sufficient. (Charles and Massey, 2003). Some other studies have found that very often black women are stereotyped as more talkative and more aggressive than white women. For example, Booth-Butterfield and Jordan (1989) in their research found that in a mixed race community black females are more loud and talkative compared to white females. McPherson and Nunes (2004) also found black women to be more talkative as well as more aggressive compared to white women. They also tried to explain the reason behind talkative and aggressive nature of black females. According to them, black women have been brought up in an environment in which they have always been discriminated against, in a community where crime is so prevalent that they always need to protect their children. To live in such an environment they need to scream so that their voice can be listened, they need to be more aggressive to protect their children. The extent of stereotyping in America is so strong that this has ultimately resulted in discriminatory behavior against the people belonging to a social group, which is stereotyped as to possess a number of negative personality traits. In a study, Moss and Tilly (1995) found that stereotyped perception regarding black skin had resulted in employment problems for the black people in America. They conducted interviews with 76 employers and had found that many of them were reluctant to employ black men on account of their perception that black men are lazy. In another research, Bertrand and Mullainathan (2003) found that white people used to get more job calls compared to black people. This kind of discriminatory behavior against blacks simply emerged from widely held perception that blacks are lazy, dishonest, non-intelligent and so on. Even if a black individual is hard working, honest, non-violent and intelligent, it is very much likely that his or her individual personality traits will be categorized as those which are common to his/her social group. Stereotyping is not, however, a new phenomena. Around a half century ago, Secord, Bevan and Katz (1956) conducted a study to find out whether any judgment regarding an individuals’ characteristics had been based on stereotyped notion regarding the common attributes of the social group the individual belonged to. The study took into account photographs of 10 Negro and 5 White. All these photographs, placed in a random order were judged by 58 judges on the basis of 15 Negro stereotyped attributes. Even in the presence of Caucasoid features in the photographs, the categorization of the photographs was completely based on stereotyped perception. In another study, which is relatively more recent, Blair, Judd, Sadler and Jenkins (2004), tried to find out to what extent the Afro centric feature of a human being reveals the African American characteristics of an individual. In the study, it was found that the physical appearance had played a great role in the formation of stereotypical notions. On the basis of prevalent stereotyped notions and the findings of the existing studies, it can be hypothesized that people with Afro centric physical features are perceived to possess relatively less amount of positive traits of human nature, such as understanding nature, law abidingness, intelligence, honesty, outgoing nature, non-violence, etc, compared to whites. Similarly, black males can be hypothesized as lazy and less hardworking, while about black female, it can be hypothesized that black females are more talkative and more aggressive than white females. No matter whatever have been thought of about the characteristics of Black, numerous people of afro American origin have made sufficient progress in their professional lives. The brightest example of present time is the President of America Himself, Mr. Barrack Obama. Hence, it would be quite interesting to find out whether such stereotypical notions regarding Blacks are still held strongly. Hence, the hypotheses that the paper presented here is going to check are as follows: Hypothesis 1: Blacks are perceived to possess positive traits of human nature by lesser extent than white, irrespective of their sex. Hypothesis 2: Black females are perceived to be more talkative than white females. Hypothesis 3: Black females are perceived to be more aggressive than white females. And, hypothesis 4: Black males are perceived to be lazier than white males. Method For this study the method of primary survey has been adopted. The primary survey was conducted through interviews. Before, conducting interviews, a questionnaire had been framed. The questionnaire was comprised of four photographs (one black male, one black female, one while male and one white female) and a set of closed ended questions. The questionnaire has been divided into four parts. In the first part, the interviewees have been asked to rank different personality traits of the black female in the photograph on a likert scale. Similarly, in the second, the third and the fourth part, the interviewees have been asked to rank different personality traits of the black male, the white female and the white male, respectively. In the questionnaire sixteen personality traits have been taken into account- ‘understanding’, ‘law abiding’, ‘deceitful’, ‘opinionated’, ‘talkative’, ‘arrogant’, ‘neurotic’, ‘religious’, ‘aggressive’, ‘outgoing’, ‘lazy’, ‘dominant’, ‘caring’, ‘reserved’, ‘selfish’, and ‘hard-working’. In this case, the sample for the primary survey was comprised of 24 people of different origins including white British, white Irish, Pakistani-Asian, Pakistani-Asian British, Bangladeshi-Asian, Bangladeshi-Asian British, Pure Asian, black-Caribbean, black-Caribbean British, Indian-Asian, Indian-Asian British, African-Black, African Black British, Pure Black, Chinese-Asian and Chinese-Asian British. Once the responses to the questions asked in the questionnaire were obtained, statistical tests were performed in order to check the hypotheses. However, before preceding any further to test the first hypothesis, aggregate scores for all the positive traits for each of the black and the white males and females were obtained by adding up the scores of the individual traits of ‘understanding’, ‘law-abiding’, ‘religious’, ‘outgoing’, ‘caring’, and ‘hard working’. To test each of the hypotheses, paired sample t test were applied for the purpose of comparing means. Results and Analysis In this study, four hypotheses have been checked on the basis of t test. Hence here, results of the t tests are presented. Results of t tests for the first hypothesis: Table 1 gives the mean values and the values of s.d or positive traits, while Table 2 shows the results for t test. Table 1 Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Positive traits black male 19.7500 24 4.0459 .8259 Positive traits white male 15.8333 24 3.6555 .7462 Table 1 shows that mean values of positive traits of black male is higher than that of white males. However, standard deviation of the positive traits for black males is higher than that of white males. Table 2 Paired Samples Test Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper 3.9167 5.4924 1.1211 1.5974 6.2359 3.493 23 .002 Table 2 shows that the level of significance level (.002) for the estimated value of t statistics (3.493) for the differences in the mean values of the positive traits between black and white males is smaller than 0.05. Therefore, t statistic is statistically significant. Table 3 gives the mean values and the values of s.d of positive traits for black and white females, while Table 4 shows the results for t test. Table 3 Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Positive traits black female 18.3333 24 4.9137 1.0030 Positive traits white female 21.0000 24 4.2221 .8618 Table 3 shows that mean values of positive traits of black female is lower than that of white females. Standard deviation of the positive traits for black females is, on the other hand, higher than that of white females. Table 4 Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper -2.6667 6.9135 1.4112 -5.5860 .2527 -1.890 23 .071 Table 4 shows that the level of significance level (.071) for the estimated value of t statistics (-1.890) is greater than 0.05. Therefore, t statistic is statistically insignificant. Results of t test for the second hypothesis: Table 5 gives the mean values and the values of s.d for the scores of talkativeness, while Table 6 shows the results for t test. Table 5 Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Black female 3.33 24 1.43 .29 White female 3.17 24 1.05 .21 Table 5 shows that mean value for the scores for talkativeness of black females is slightly higher than that of white females. Standard deviation for black females is also higher than that of white females. Table 6: Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper .17 1.55 .32 -.49 .82 .526 23 .604 Table 6 shows that the level of significance level (.604) for the estimated value of t statistics (.526) is higher than 0.05. Therefore, t statistic is statistically insignificant. Results of t test for the third hypothesis: Table 7 gives the mean values and the values of s.d for the scores of aggressiveness for black and white females, while Table 8 shows the results for t test. Table 7 Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Black female 2.92 24 1.35 .28 White female 2.46 24 1.10 .23 Table 7 shows that mean values of the scores for aggressiveness for black females is higher than that of white females. Standard deviation for black females is also higher than that of white females. Table 8 Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper .46 1.67 .34 -.25 1.16 1.346 23 .191 Table 8 shows that the level of significance level (.191) for the estimated value of t statistics (1.346) is higher than 0.05. Therefore, t statistic is statistically insignificant. Results of t test for the fourth hypothesis: Table 9 gives the mean values and the values of s.d for the scores of laziness for black and white males, while Table 10 shows the results for t test. Table 9 Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Black male 2.38 24 1.01 .21 White male 3.33 24 1.13 .23 Table 9 shows that mean value as well as s.d of the scores for laziness for black males is lower than that of white males. Table 10 Paired Differences t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper -.96 1.37 .28 -1.54 -.38 -3.435 23 .002 Table 10 shows that the level of significance level (.002) for the estimated value of t statistics (-3.435) is lower than 0.05. Therefore, t statistic is statistically significant. Discussion On the basis of the findings presented above, it is now possible to infer about the hypotheses of the paper presented here. This section will draw conclusion about each of the hypotheses one by one. Starting with the first hypothesis, the results of t test shows that mean value of positive traits for black males is significantly different from that of white males. But the interesting observation here is that mean value of the positive traits taken under consideration in this study of black males is greater than that of white males. It implies that on average respondents perceive black males to possess positive traits by higher extent than the white males. On the basis of this observation it would not be correct to hypothesize that black males are always perceived to possess positive traits of human nature by lesser extent than white males. On the other hand, on the basis of the finding of insignificant difference in the values of mean scores regarding positive traits between black and white females, a hypothesis that positive traits of black females are less than that of white females remains inconclusive. Hence, the first hypothesis can not be accepted. This type of finding, however, contrasts the stereotype notions that are generally known to be held for blacks. One possible reason of obtaining such results which contrasts stereotypical notion and the findings the existing studies of McGarty, Yzerbyt and Spears (2002); Feagin (2001); Blair, Judd and Fallman, (2004), etc. could be that in the case presented here respondents did not appropriately express their thought. It might well be possible that the respondents had carefully answered the questions in order to ensure that their responses did not sound like the views of racists. Another possible reason could be that in this study respondents belong to different origins. In other studies, the perceptions of whites were mainly taken into account. Hence, this contrasting result can have an interesting implication that stereotypical concepts might be confined largely in some particular social groups, like whites. As far as the second hypothesis in concerned, the result of t test implies that mean score for talkativeness for black females is not significantly higher from that of white females. On the basis of this observation the hypothesis that black females are perceived to be more talkative than white males can not be accepted. This finding also contrasts the stereotype notions that are generally known to be held for blacks as well as found in existing literatures, like in the studies of Booth-Butterfield and Jordan (1989), McPherson and Nunes (2004) etc. One possible reason for obtaining such results could be that respondents here might feel that talkativeness is a common feature for female in general, irrespective of races and hence they gave similar scores for black as well as white females. Apart from this, the reasons considered for the findings of the first hypothesis also hold good here. As for the third hypothesis, on the basis of the results of t test shows that shows insignificant difference in the values of mean scores for aggressiveness between black and white females the hypothesis that black females are perceived to be more aggressive than white females can be accepted. This observation is also in contrast with popular notions and the findings of many existing researches (Booth-Butterfield and Jordan, 1989; McPherson and Nunes, 2004). In this case, it could be that the respondents felt the under the prevailing environment of the society which is experiencing more crimes and more unfavorable conditions white females also requires to be aggressive like black females. Apart from this, the other reasons that hold for other two hypotheses also hold here. In case of fourth hypothesis, on the basis of the results of t test shows that shows mean scores for laziness for black males to be significantly lower than that of white males the hypothesis that black males are perceived to be more lazy than white males can be accepted. This observation is completely in contrast with general perception and the findings of many existing researches. Here again similar reasoning holds good. Thus, the results obtained by this study do not support the popular stereotypical views as well as the findings of existing literatures. The result of hypotheses testing of the current study can not however be taken as final verdict regarding the stereotypical notions regarding blacks and whites. This is because the study presented here is based on the views of only 24 participants. So the views of 24 participants should not be used for generalization. By increasing sample size, the result might alter. Not only that, this study has considered aggregate scores for all the positive traits well as for negative traits. If each of the traits is considered individually different results might be obtained for different traits. Hence, there lies wide scope of research in future on the issue considered in this study. References: 1. McGarty C, Yzerbyt V, and Spears R. 2002. Stereotypes as explanations: the formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 2. Feagin J.R. 2001. Racist America: roots, current realities, and future reparations. UK: Routledge. 3. Blair I.V, Judd C.M, and Fallman J.L. 2004. The Automaticity of Race and Afrocentric Facial Features in Social Judgments. Boulder: University of Colorado. 4. Bertrand. M. and Mullainathan, S. 2003. Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination. NBER Working Papers 9873 5. Charles, C.Z., and Massey, D. S. 2003.  How Stereotypes Sabotage Minority Students.  Chronicle of Higher Education, B10-11. 6. Blair I.V, Judd C.M, Sadler M.S, Jenkins C. 2001. The Role of Afrocentric Features in Person Perception: Judging by Features and Categories, Boulder: University of Colorado. 7. Secord, P. T., Bevan, W., & Katz, B. 1956. The Negro stereo-type and perceptual accentuation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 53: 78-83. 8. Booth-Butterfield, M., & Jordan, F. 1989. Communication adaptation among racially homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Southern Communication Journal, 54:253-272. 9. McPherson, M. and Nunes, M. B. 2004. Developing innovation in online learning: an action research framework. U.K.: Routledge. 10. Moss, P. and Tilly, C. 1995. Soft' Skills and Race: An Investigation of Black Men's Employment Problems. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Read More