WEBVTT

00:00:00.743 --> 00:00:05.990
[no audio yet]

00:00:05.990 --> 00:00:08.012
In this video, we'll differentiate

00:00:08.012 --> 00:00:11.440
between stereotypes, prejudice, 
and discrimination;

00:00:11.440 --> 00:00:14.513
and we'll discuss several important
social psychological concepts

00:00:14.513 --> 00:00:17.132
and hypotheses related to each,

00:00:17.132 --> 00:00:20.019
including what causes them 
to arise in the first place.

00:00:21.081 --> 00:00:24.364
Let's go over a bit of 
terminology to kick things off.

00:00:24.364 --> 00:00:28.020
A stereotype is a belief 
(which can be positive or negative )

00:00:28.020 --> 00:00:30.491
about the characteristics 
of members of a group

00:00:30.491 --> 00:00:34.675
that is applied generally 
to most members of that group.

00:00:34.675 --> 00:00:38.733
Believing that Asians are good 
at math, for example, is positive;

00:00:38.733 --> 00:00:40.398
it's not necessarily derogatory,

00:00:40.398 --> 00:00:44.433
but it's nonetheless a stereotype 
that you have about Asians.

00:00:44.433 --> 00:00:48.569
Now, stereotypes (these beliefs) can 
lead to prejudice, which in contrast,

00:00:48.569 --> 00:00:50.903
can only ever be negative.

00:00:50.903 --> 00:00:54.504
Prejudice involves drawing 
negative conclusions about

00:00:54.504 --> 00:00:56.056
a person, a group of people,

00:00:56.056 --> 00:01:00.001
or a situation prior to 
evaluating the evidence.

00:01:00.001 --> 00:01:01.979
These baseless conclusions are typically

00:01:01.979 --> 00:01:06.200
the result of those stereotypes 
that you hold about that group.

00:01:06.200 --> 00:01:07.883
Also, in contrast to stereotypes,

00:01:07.883 --> 00:01:11.022
prejudice involves emotion; 
it’s an attitude.

00:01:11.022 --> 00:01:14.639
Being prejudiced against a person 
or a group of people involves

00:01:14.639 --> 00:01:16.908
feeling negatively toward them.

00:01:16.908 --> 00:01:19.290
Now, because of these negative emotions

00:01:19.290 --> 00:01:22.079
and these negative conclusions 
that you're coming to,

00:01:22.079 --> 00:01:24.664
prejudice often leads to discrimination,

00:01:24.664 --> 00:01:29.017
which is negative behavior 
towards members of an out-group.

00:01:29.017 --> 00:01:31.670
And by the way, an out-group is a group

00:01:31.670 --> 00:01:35.591
that we don't belong to or one that we 
view as fundamentally different from us;

00:01:35.591 --> 00:01:37.240
whereas an in-group, in contrast,

00:01:37.240 --> 00:01:41.945
refers to a group that we DO identify 
with or see ourselves as belonging to.

00:01:41.945 --> 00:01:44.350
So I might be using that 
terminology quite a bit–

00:01:44.350 --> 00:01:45.973
important to know.

00:01:45.973 --> 00:01:47.067
So just to summarize,

00:01:47.067 --> 00:01:51.659
stereotypes are beliefs,
prejudice is an attitude,

00:01:51.659 --> 00:01:54.445
and discrimination is a behavior.

00:01:54.445 --> 00:01:57.583
Let's go over an example 
that puts all of this together.

00:01:57.583 --> 00:02:01.904
Let's say, for example, that you 
believe older adults are incompetent,

00:02:01.904 --> 00:02:05.437
and that's a stereotype that 
you have about older adults.

00:02:05.437 --> 00:02:09.111
(And I'll note that I'm not endorsing 
this stereotype or any other stereotype

00:02:09.111 --> 00:02:11.151
that I use as an example in this video,

00:02:11.151 --> 00:02:14.203
but we have to have some kind 
of an example to work with here.)

00:02:14.203 --> 00:02:16.777
So let's say you work at, 
I don't know, a tech company

00:02:16.777 --> 00:02:18.963
and you're looking to hire an assistant.

00:02:18.963 --> 00:02:20.835
If an elderly gentleman applies,

00:02:20.835 --> 00:02:23.505
you might walk into that interview 
with the gentleman,

00:02:23.505 --> 00:02:27.908
assuming he won't be a good fit 
or that he'd be difficult to train.

00:02:27.908 --> 00:02:30.710
Now, we would call this 
premature conclusion;

00:02:30.710 --> 00:02:33.749
this negative attitude toward 
this gentleman [is] prejudice.

00:02:33.749 --> 00:02:36.623
Finally, you may decide not 
to hire the gentleman at all

00:02:36.623 --> 00:02:39.772
because of your stereotype,
because of your prejudice.

00:02:39.772 --> 00:02:42.604
In this case, the behavior 
of not hiring him

00:02:42.604 --> 00:02:45.223
would be discrimination.

00:02:45.223 --> 00:02:48.649
Now, stereotypes and prejudice 
can be either explicit

00:02:48.649 --> 00:02:51.851
(meaning, we're consciously 
aware of having this bias)

00:02:51.851 --> 00:02:55.870
or implicit (meaning, it's there, 
but we aren't aware of it).

00:02:55.870 --> 00:02:59.857
Research shows that explicit prejudice 
is in decline, which is encouraging;

00:02:59.857 --> 00:03:03.844
however, implicit prejudice 
really isn't much.

00:03:03.844 --> 00:03:07.749
That is, people report being 
very anti-bias nowadays,

00:03:07.749 --> 00:03:11.000
but their behavior still 
tells us a different story.

00:03:11.000 --> 00:03:14.168
Let's take a look at a few 
examples to illustrate.

00:03:14.168 --> 00:03:18.265
Starting with the realm of gender, 
we can look to some of my own data.

00:03:18.265 --> 00:03:20.000
In one study, I searched through

00:03:20.000 --> 00:03:23.104
the language used by students 
evaluating their teachers

00:03:23.104 --> 00:03:28.708
in over 14 million reviews posted to 
a popular instructor evaluation website,

00:03:28.708 --> 00:03:33.696
RateMyProfessors.com,
which you've perhaps used in the past.

00:03:33.696 --> 00:03:37.448
I was specifically interested in
stereotypes about intelligence,

00:03:37.448 --> 00:03:41.954
so I searched through uses of 
the words “genius” and “brilliant.”

00:03:41.954 --> 00:03:46.225
So let's take a look at the results.
There's a lot of information here.

00:03:46.225 --> 00:03:48.490
Let me help you interpret these graphs.

00:03:48.490 --> 00:03:50.101
These are graphs for uses of

00:03:50.101 --> 00:03:54.220
the words “genius” on the left 
and “brilliant” on the right.

00:03:54.220 --> 00:03:56.715
The x-axis on both of these graphs

00:03:56.715 --> 00:04:00.072
represents uses per millions 
of words of text,

00:04:00.072 --> 00:04:02.829
which might sound a little 
complicated, but really isn't.

00:04:02.829 --> 00:04:04.264
There's a ton of text here,

00:04:04.264 --> 00:04:07.613
so to keep the numbers on the 
x-axis from being enormous

00:04:07.613 --> 00:04:09.397
and just visually unappealing,

00:04:09.397 --> 00:04:15.170
I used this uses per millions of words of text, 
but the interpretation is basically the same.

00:04:15.170 --> 00:04:17.338
The further to the right
you go on the x-axis

00:04:17.338 --> 00:04:20.590
(the higher the number), 
the more this word was used.

00:04:20.590 --> 00:04:22.392
So that's how you can interpret that.

00:04:22.392 --> 00:04:26.762
The y-axis here displays all of the 
different fields such as philosophy,

00:04:26.762 --> 00:04:30.115
music, mathematics, psychology;

00:04:30.115 --> 00:04:31.951
so you can look for your own field

00:04:31.951 --> 00:04:35.990
or just pause the video and look through
them in general, if you're curious,

00:04:35.990 --> 00:04:39.092
And fields that are higher up 
on the y-axis were the ones

00:04:39.092 --> 00:04:41.976
in which the words were used the most often.

00:04:41.976 --> 00:04:47.095
The blue dots here on the slide 
represent reviews of male professors,

00:04:47.095 --> 00:04:51.881
whereas the orange dots represent
reviews of female professors.

00:04:51.881 --> 00:04:55.098
Before I give you the punch line, 
what do you notice here?

00:04:55.098 --> 00:04:59.557
Well, what I found is that every 
field for which we have data,

00:04:59.557 --> 00:05:02.720
students describe their male 
professors as genius and brilliant

00:05:02.720 --> 00:05:05.840
significantly more often than 
they do their female professors.

00:05:05.840 --> 00:05:09.189
And in no field was this effect reversed,

00:05:09.189 --> 00:05:12.874
even for fields where women 
were the statistical majority.

00:05:12.874 --> 00:05:15.944
And this points to a stereotype 
in favor of men's intelligence

00:05:15.944 --> 00:05:18.294
and against women's intelligence.

00:05:18.294 --> 00:05:19.480
You might be wondering:

00:05:19.480 --> 00:05:22.700
Does this reflect an overall
bias against women,

00:05:22.700 --> 00:05:26.586
or is the stereotype specific 
to intellectual ability?

00:05:26.586 --> 00:05:28.616
Well, I was curious about this as well,

00:05:28.616 --> 00:05:31.857
but if you look at the data for 
the terms “excellent” and “amazing,”

00:05:31.857 --> 00:05:34.224
the gender bias goes away entirely.

00:05:34.224 --> 00:05:35.963
It appears that students believe

00:05:35.963 --> 00:05:38.795
that their female professors 
can be excellent and amazing,

00:05:38.795 --> 00:05:43.516
but they believe it's mainly the male 
professors who are genius and brilliant.

00:05:43.516 --> 00:05:45.884
Again, this is evidence of implicit bias

00:05:45.884 --> 00:05:47.329
because students are likely

00:05:47.329 --> 00:05:49.506
not consciously aware
of this discrepancy.

00:05:49.506 --> 00:05:52.186
They're simply going on line
to review their professors

00:05:52.186 --> 00:05:54.751
and they're not giving their 
stereotypes any thought.

00:05:54.751 --> 00:05:58.890
So explicitly, students would 
likely say they don't hold a bias,

00:05:58.890 --> 00:06:02.142
yet implicitly, they respond in this way.

00:06:02.142 --> 00:06:03.552
This is a common theme

00:06:03.552 --> 00:06:08.744
in modern research on stereotypes, 
prejudice, and discrimination.

00:06:08.744 --> 00:06:10.987
Now that's gender.
What about race?

00:06:10.987 --> 00:06:15.005
One study found that doctors 
were only 60% as likely to suggest

00:06:15.005 --> 00:06:19.152
a top-rated diagnostic test 
for Black heart patients

00:06:19.152 --> 00:06:21.504
than for White heart patients.

00:06:21.504 --> 00:06:23.053
There's also evidence to suggest

00:06:23.053 --> 00:06:26.355
that White men are offered 
greater financial opportunities.

00:06:26.355 --> 00:06:29.358
As one example, a study found 
that White men were offered

00:06:29.358 --> 00:06:32.245
the best deals at used car dealerships.

00:06:32.245 --> 00:06:36.622
White men paid $109 on average
less than White women,

00:06:36.622 --> 00:06:40.302
$318 less than Black women,

00:06:40.302 --> 00:06:47.757
and a whopping $935 less for a 
used car on average than Black men.

00:06:47.757 --> 00:06:51.470
Now, these are just two examples out 
of thousands that I could tell you about,

00:06:51.470 --> 00:06:53.022
but again, it's likely the case

00:06:53.022 --> 00:06:56.642
that these doctors and car salesmen
aren't EXPLICITLY biased,

00:06:56.642 --> 00:07:01.676
but their behavior provides 
evidence of IMPLICIT bias.

00:07:01.676 --> 00:07:04.513
Okay, so let's finish 
with a brief discussion

00:07:04.513 --> 00:07:09.483
of what leads to the development and 
perpetuation of some of these things

00:07:09.483 --> 00:07:11.704
(stereotypes, prejudice,
and discrimination),

00:07:11.704 --> 00:07:13.873
starting with stereotypes.

00:07:13.873 --> 00:07:17.025
A factor that we've learned about 
before is confirmation bias,

00:07:17.025 --> 00:07:20.462
the tendency to seek out evidence 
that supports our beliefs

00:07:20.462 --> 00:07:25.381
and to deny, dismiss, or distort 
evidence that contradicts them.

00:07:25.381 --> 00:07:28.918
Say, for example that you believe 
women to be bad drivers.

00:07:28.918 --> 00:07:30.984
If you're out driving for an hour,

00:07:30.984 --> 00:07:36.107
you might encounter several bad 
drivers, some male, some female.

00:07:36.107 --> 00:07:39.393
If you don't have a stereotype 
against male drivers, though,

00:07:39.393 --> 00:07:43.776
you might not think much of them 
when they speed or make dangerous moves.

00:07:43.776 --> 00:07:47.015
But the second a female driver 
cuts you off, for example,

00:07:47.015 --> 00:07:50.299
you feel vindicated as though 
you've found additional evidence

00:07:50.299 --> 00:07:52.286
or proof for your belief.

00:07:52.286 --> 00:07:54.157
And this reinforces your stereotype

00:07:54.157 --> 00:07:59.081
even though, in truth, many people are 
bad drivers regardless of their gender.

00:07:59.081 --> 00:08:01.503
Now, if we used System 2 thinking

00:08:01.503 --> 00:08:03.782
(which we've learned 
about in a previous video)

00:08:03.782 --> 00:08:07.386
to evaluate these kinds of assumptions 
and the data that we base them on,

00:08:07.386 --> 00:08:11.869
we might realize that those assumptions 
are erroneous, but we usually don't.

00:08:11.869 --> 00:08:14.854
This is because we are cognitive misers.

00:08:14.854 --> 00:08:18.040
That is, we seek to use only 
minimal cognitive resources

00:08:18.040 --> 00:08:20.593
when explaining the world around us.

00:08:20.593 --> 00:08:23.028
Evaluating our stereotypes takes effort,

00:08:23.028 --> 00:08:25.348
and because we generally 
don't go to more effort

00:08:25.348 --> 00:08:27.431
than we deem absolutely necessary,

00:08:27.431 --> 00:08:31.465
we don't evaluate or re-evaluate them at all.

00:08:31.465 --> 00:08:33.537
Now, what causes prejudice?

00:08:33.537 --> 00:08:37.372
First, we have in-group bias, 
which refers to the tendency

00:08:37.372 --> 00:08:43.146
to favor individuals from within our 
group over those from outside our group.

00:08:43.146 --> 00:08:46.117
Evidence from developmental 
psychology suggests that this bias

00:08:46.117 --> 00:08:50.551
is innate, with young infants showing
strong preferences, for example,

00:08:50.551 --> 00:08:54.670
for others who share their preferences
(such as their favorite snack)

00:08:54.670 --> 00:08:58.474
and infants disliking others who 
do not share their preferences

00:08:58.474 --> 00:09:02.605
(for example, if the other person shows
that they like a different snack more).

00:09:02.605 --> 00:09:06.236
Think of the implications 
for racism, sexism, and so on.

00:09:06.236 --> 00:09:10.051
Another factor is called 
the ultimate attribution error,

00:09:10.051 --> 00:09:11.676
which refers to the assumption

00:09:11.676 --> 00:09:14.180
that behaviors among 
individual members of a group

00:09:14.180 --> 00:09:17.554
are due to their internal dispositions.

00:09:17.554 --> 00:09:20.407
Out-group members’ flaws 
are due to internal factors

00:09:20.407 --> 00:09:25.483
such as their personality or their race, 
whereas in-group members flaws aren't.

00:09:25.483 --> 00:09:28.459
This might sound a lot like 
the fundamental attribution error,

00:09:28.459 --> 00:09:31.355
which we've learned about before, 
but it is a bit different.

00:09:31.355 --> 00:09:33.285
Think of the ultimate attribution error

00:09:33.285 --> 00:09:37.202
as more of a narrow case of 
the fundamental attribution error

00:09:37.202 --> 00:09:39.267
applied specifically to attributions

00:09:39.267 --> 00:09:43.694
about an individual in relation to
the group to which they belong.

00:09:43.694 --> 00:09:45.000
Along similar lines,

00:09:45.000 --> 00:09:48.352
out-group homogeneity 
refers to the tendency to view

00:09:48.352 --> 00:09:52.836
all individuals outside our group 
as highly similar to one another.

00:09:52.836 --> 00:09:54.356
Here, think of the implications

00:09:54.356 --> 00:09:57.442
for identifying a suspect in 
a police lineup, for example,

00:09:57.442 --> 00:10:02.314
but also consider this bias in relation 
to the ultimate attribution error.

00:10:02.314 --> 00:10:04.681
It's a very bad combination to assume

00:10:04.681 --> 00:10:08.136
that out-group members flaws 
are due to inherent factors

00:10:08.136 --> 00:10:10.143
such as their personalities or their race,

00:10:10.143 --> 00:10:11.943
and to simultaneously assume

00:10:11.943 --> 00:10:15.997
that out-group members are all 
highly similar to one another.

00:10:15.997 --> 00:10:19.866
Finally, scapegoating refers to 
the act of blaming an out-group

00:10:19.866 --> 00:10:25.872
when the in-group experiences frustration or 
is blocked from obtaining some kind of a goal.

00:10:25.872 --> 00:10:30.493
People scapegoat because it preserves 
a positive self-concept.

00:10:30.493 --> 00:10:35.329
If you believe the reason you can't get a job 
is because immigrants are taking them all,

00:10:35.329 --> 00:10:38.192
well, then you don't have to 
come to terms with the reality

00:10:38.192 --> 00:10:42.580
that you simply aren't qualified or 
competent enough for that line of work.

00:10:42.580 --> 00:10:46.431
Now, this list of causes here 
is by no means all-inclusive

00:10:46.431 --> 00:10:50.116
but should give you a good idea of 
the general psychological phenomena

00:10:50.116 --> 00:10:53.311
that lead to the formation and
perpetuation of stereotypes,

00:10:53.311 --> 00:10:55.661
prejudice, and discrimination. [END]