Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T17:10:11.198Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - From Prejudice Reduction to Collective Action: Two Psychological Models of Social Change (and How to Reconcile Them)

from Part III - Prejudice Reduction and Analysis in Applied Contexts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2016

By
John Dixon ,
Kevin Durrheim ,
Clifford Stevenson  and
Huseyin Cakal
Edited by
Chris G. Sibley  and
Fiona Kate Barlow
John Dixon
Affiliation:
Open University
Kevin Durrheim
Affiliation:
University of KwaZulu–Natal
Clifford Stevenson
Affiliation:
University of Anglia Ruskin
Huseyin Cakal
Affiliation:
University of Exeter
Chris G. Sibley
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Fiona Kate Barlow
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Get access

Summary

Even when the social order appears intractable, social change is constantly unfolding all around us, finding expression in the accumulation of small acts of resistance as much as in dramatic moments of revolution. Psychologists should take interest in the dynamics of social change, whether mundane or dramatic, for at least two reasons. First, the explanation of when and why change occurs – or fails to occur –requires analysis of ordinary people's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. To understand fully the conditions under which people act in ways that support or challenge the status quo, we simply cannot afford to overlook the role of psychological factors. Second and related, processes of social change invite us to (re)appraise the moral and political implications of psychological knowledge. How do we reduce discrimination against others? When do we recognize and challenge social inequality and when do we accept or even endorse it? How can we create more inclusive forms of identity and community? Such questions elide the traditional division between scholarship and advocacy. They require us to demonstrate how psychological knowledge helps create a more just and tolerant society. Perhaps less comfortably, they require us to recognize how our discipline may be complicit in maintaining social inequalities.

In this chapter, we discuss two psychological models of social change, namely prejudice reduction and collective action. Both models focus on the problem of improving relations between groups to reduce social inequality and discrimination. However, they propose different psychological pathways to the achievement of this goal and prioritize different core questions. As we shall see, the prejudice reduction model primarily addresses the question “How can we get individuals to like one another more?” whereas the collective action model primarily addresses the question “How can we get individuals to mobilize together to challenge inequality?”

The first section of the chapter elaborates the fundamental principles and underlying assumptions of these models. The second section explores the relationship between the two models of change, focusing on the allegation that prejudice reduction exerts counterproductive effects on collective action. The chapter's conclusion advocates a contextualist perspective on social change. We hold that any evaluation of the efficacy of psychological models of change must remain sensitive to the “stubborn particulars” (Cherry, 1995) of local conditions and the affordances and obstacles embedded there.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice , pp. 481 - 499
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abercrombie, N., & Turner, B. S. (1978). The dominant ideology thesis. British Journal of Sociology, 29, 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.
Allport, G. W., & Kramer, B. M. (1946). Some roots of prejudice. Journal of Psychology, 22, 9–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Bairner, A., & Shirlow, P. (2003). When leisure turns to fear: Fear, mobility and ethno-sectarianism in Belfast. Leisure Studies, 22, 203–221.Google Scholar
Barlow, F. K., Paolini, S., Pedersen, A., Hornsey, M. J., Radke, H. R. M., Harwood, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2013). The contact caveat: Negative contact predicts increased prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1629–1643.Google Scholar
Becker, J. C., Wright, S. C., Lubensky, M. E., & Zhou, S. (2013). Friend or ally: Whether cross-group contact undermines collective action depends on what advantaged group members say (or don't say). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 442–455.Google Scholar
Cakal, H., Hewstone, M., Schwar, G., & Heath, A. (2011). An investigation of the social identity model of collective action and the “sedative” effect of intergroup contact amongst Black and White students in South Africa. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 606–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherry, F. (1995). The stubborn particulars of social psychology: Essays on the research process. London: Routledge.
Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2007). Intergroup contact and attitudes toward the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological Science, 18, 867–872.Google Scholar
Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., Tredoux, C., Tropp, L. R., Clack, B., & Eaton, E. (2010b). A paradox of integration? Interracial contact, prejudice reduction and Black South Africans’ perceptions of racial discrimination. Journal of Social Issues, 66, 401–416.Google Scholar
Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., Tredoux, C. G., Tropp, L. R., Clack, B., Eaton, L., & Quayle, M. (2010a). Challenging the stubborn core of opposition to equality: Racial contact and policy attitudes. Political Psychology, 31, 831–856.Google Scholar
Dixon, J., Levine, M., Reicher, S., & Durrheim, K. (2012). Beyond prejudice: Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting us to like one another more the solution? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 411–425.Google Scholar
Dixon, J., Tropp, L. R., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. G. (2010c). “Let them eat harmony”: Prejudice reduction and the political attitudes of historically disadvantaged groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 76–80.Google Scholar
Dovidio, J. F. (2001). On the nature of contemporary prejudice: The third wave. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 829–849.Google Scholar
Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2004). Aversive racism. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 1–52). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Kawakami, K. (2003). Intergroup contact: The past, present, and the future. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drury, J. & Reicher, S. (2000). Collective action and psychological change: The emergence of new social identities. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drury, J., & Reicher, S. (2009). Collective psychological empowerment as a model of social change: Researching crowds and power. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 707–725.Google Scholar
Durrheim, K., & Dixon, J. A. (2001). The role of place and metaphor in racial exclusion: South Africa's beaches as sites of shifting racialization. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24, 433–450.Google Scholar
Durrheim, K., Jacobs, N. & Dixon, J. (2014). Explaining the paradoxical effects of intergroup contact: Paternalistic relations and systems justification in domestic labour in South Africa. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 41, 150–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durrheim, K., Quayle, M., & Dixon, J. (2016). Prejudice as identity performance: The struggle for the nature of prejudice. Political Psychology, 37, 17–35.Google Scholar
Durrheim, K., Quayle, M. & Dixon, J. (forthcoming). Prejudice as identity performance: The struggle for the nature of prejudice. Political Psychology.
Glasford, D. E., & Calcagno, J. (2011). The conflict of harmony: Intergroup contact, commonalty and political solidarity between disadvantaged groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 323–328.Google Scholar
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2012). Dehumanization and prejudice. In Dixon, J. & Levine, M. (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of intergroup conflict, inequality and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Henriques, J., Hollway, W., Urwin, C., Venn, C., & Walkerdine, V. (1984). Changing the subject. London: Methuen.
Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., Voci, A., Hamberger, J., & Niens, U. (2006). Intergroup contact, forgiveness, and experience of “The Troubles” in Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Issues, 62, 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, J., Campbell, A., Hewstone, M., & Cairns, E. (2008). What's there to fear? A comparative study of responses to the outgroup in mixed and segregated areas of Belfast. Peace and Change, 33, 522–548.Google Scholar
Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford: Blackwell.
Klandermans, B. (2002). How group identification helps to overcome the dilemma of collective action. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 887–900.Google Scholar
Le Bon, G. (1895, trans. 1947). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. London: Ernest Benn.
Lippitt, R., & Radke, M. J. (1946). New trends in the investigation of prejudice. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 244, 167–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, H. H. (1951). Race prejudice and social change. American Journal of Sociology, 57, 15–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. (1983). A contexutalist theory of knowledge: Its implications for innovation and reform in psychological research. In Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 1–47). Thousand Oaks, CA: Academic Press.
Nadler, A. (2002). Inter-group helping relations as power relations: Helping relations as affirming or challenging inter-group hierarchy. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 487–503.Google Scholar
Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & Turner, J. C. (1994). Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford: Blackwell.
Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2006). Reducing automatically-activated racial prejudice through implicit evaluative conditioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 421–433.Google Scholar
Paluck, E. L. & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment of research and practice. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 339–367.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 922–934.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Reicher, S. D. (1982). The determination of collective behavior. In Tajfel, H. (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 41–83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reicher, S. (2002). The psychology of crowd dynamics. In Hogg, M. A. & Tindale, R. S. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group processes (pp. 182–208). Oxford: Blackwell.
Reicher, S. (2007). Rethinking the paradigm of prejudice. South African Journal of Psychology, 37, 820–834.Google Scholar
Reicher, S., & Stott, C. (2011). Mad mobs and Englishmen: Myths and realities of the 2011 riots. London: Robinson.
Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social justice: A study of attitudes to social inequality in twentieth-century England. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Saenger, G. (1953). The social psychology of prejudice. New York: Harper.
Saguy, T., & Chernyak-Hai, L. (2012). Intergroup contact can undermine disadvantaged group members’ attributions to discrimination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 714–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saguy, T., & Dovidio, J. (2013). Insecure status relations shape preferences for the content of intergroup contact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 130–142.Google Scholar
Saguy, T., Tausch, N., Dovidio, J., & Pratto, F. (2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20, 14–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samelson, F. (1978). From “race psychology” to “studies in prejudice”: Some observations on the thematic reversal in social psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Science, 14, 265–278.Google Scholar
Sengupta, N. K., & Sibley, C. G. (2013). Perpetuating one's own disadvantage: Intergroup contact enables the ideological legitimation of inequality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1391–1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., & Sherif, C. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The Robber's Cave Experiment. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Simon, B., & Klandermans, B. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stott, C. J., & Drury, J. (2000) Crowds, context & identity: Dynamic categorization processes in the “poll tax riot.” Human Relations, 53, 247–273.Google Scholar
Stouffer, S. A., Suchman, E. A., DeVinney, L. C., Starr, S. A., & Williams, R. M. (1949). The American soldier: Adjustment to army life (Vol. 1). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In Worchel, S. & Austin, L. W. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Tausch, N., Becker, J. C., Spears, R., Christ, O., Saab, R., Singh, P., & Siddiqui, R. N. (2011). Explaining radical group behavior: Developing emotion and efficacy routes to normative and non-normative collective action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 129–148.Google Scholar
Tausch, N., Saguay, T., & Bryson, J. (2015). How does intergroup contact undermine collective action among disadvantaged groups? The roles of group-based anger and individual mobility orientation. Journal of Social Issues, 71, 536–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tausch, N., Saguy, T., & Singh, P. (2009). Contact between Muslims and Hindus: Benefits and limitations. Unpublished Manuscript.
Tressell, R. (1914/2005). The ragged-trousered philantropists. Oxford: Oxford Classics.
Tropp, L. R., Hawi, D., van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2012). Perceived discrimination, cross ethnic friendships and their effects on ethnic activism over time: A longitudinal investigation of three ethnic minority groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Zomeren, M., Spears, R., Fischer, A., & Leach, C. W. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 649–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Zommeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, I., & Pettigrew, T. F. (1984). Relative deprivation theory: An overview and conceptual critique. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Wright, S. C. (2001). Strategic collective action: Social psychology and social change. In Brown, R. & Gaertner, S. L. (Eds.), Intergroup processes: Blackwell handbook of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 409–430). Oxford: Blackwell.
Wright, S. C., & Baray, G. (2012). Models of social change in social psychology: Collective action or prejudice reduction, conflict or harmony. In Dixon, J. & Levine, M. (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of intergroup conflict, inequality and social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wright, S. C., & Lubensky, M. (2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action vs. prejudice reduction. In Demoulin, S., Leyens, J. P., & Dovidio, J.F. (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291–310). New York: Psychology Press.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order vs. deindividuation, impulse and chaos. In Arnold, W. J. & Levine, D. (Eds.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 17, pp. 237–307). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×