Peer Prejudice and Discrimination The Origins of Prejudice [2 ed.] 9780805837711, 080583771X, 9781410606228, 1410606228, 0805837728

Citation preview

Second Edition

Peer Preju___ and Discrimination The Origins of Prejudice

HAROLD D. FISHBEIN

PEER PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION T h e Origins of Prejudice Second Edition

This page intentionally left blank

PEER PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION The Origins of Prejudice Second Edition

Harold D. Fishbein University o f Cincinnati

RRoutledge

Taylor & Francis Croup

NEW YORK AND LONDON

Copyright © 2002 by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. No p a rt of this book may be r e p r o d u c e d in any form, by photostat, microform, retrieval system, o r any o t he r means, without t he prior written permission o f the publisher. First publi shed by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers 10 Industrial Avenue Mahwah, New Jersey 07430 This edition publ ished 2012 by Routledge 711 T h i r d Avenue, New York, NY 10017 27 C h u r c h Road, Hove, East Sussex BN3 2FA

Cover design by Kathryn H o ug h t a l in g Lacey

Library o f Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Fishbein, Harold D. Peer prejudice a nd discrimination : the origins of prejudice / Harol d D. Fishbein. — 2n d ed. p.

cm.

Includes bibliographical references a nd index. ISBN 0-8058-3771-X (alk. paper ) — ISBN 0-8058-3772-8 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Prejudices in children. 2. Prejudices. 3. Prejudices in c hi l d r en — Prevention. BF723.P75 F57 303.3'85— dc21

I. Title.

2002 2002019516 CIP

To Diane, Nuera, and Nieta, with the hope of a more compassionate world

This page intentionally left blank

C o ntents in Brief

Prcfacc 1

T h e N a tu re o f Prejudice

xiii 1

2 An Evolutionary Mo del for the D e v e lo p m e n t o f Prejudice a n d Discrimination

3 Discrimination Tow ard D e af Individuals

39 83

4 Pr ejudice a n d Dis crimination Tow ar d Mentally R e t a rd e d Individuals

110

5

Prejudice a n d Discrimination Against the O p p o s i te Sex

133

6

A Cultural History o f African Americ ans

171

7 Race Prejudice a n d Discrimination

198

8

219

Modifying Prejudice a n d Discrimination

9 Parents, Peers, a nd Personality 10 Rec apitulation

263 288

viii

C O N T E N T S IN B R I E F

References

301

Au th or Index

321

Subject Index

329

Contents

Preface 1

The Nature of Prejudice Definitions o f Prejudice an d Attitudes 2 Definition o f Discrimination 6 R e l a t i o n s h i p B e t w e en P r e j u d i c e a n d B e h a v i o r 7 Stereotypes 8 St i gma s 13 U n t o u c h a b i l i t y a n d t h e C o n s e q u e n c e s o f B e i n g S t ig ma t iz e d Psyc ho l og i ca l C o n s e q u e n c e s o f A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n Slavery 19 T h e o r i e s o f P r e j u d i c e a n d D i s c r i m i n a t i o n : I n di vi du al a n d C u l t u r a l / H i s t o r i c a l I n f l u e n c e s 20 T h e A u t h o r i t a r i a n P e r s o n a l i ty 23 P a t r i a r c h y a n d F e m a l e So cial izat ion 2 7 T h e P r e s e n t T h e o r e t i c a l View 31 S u m m a r y 33 P l a n o f t h e B o o k 35

2

An Evolutionary Model for the Development of Prejudice and Discrimination Canalization 40 Genes, Mind, an d Culture 41 B e h a v i o r G e n e t i c s 46 H u n t e r - G a t h e r e r M i n d s in P o s t i n d u s t r i a l B o d i e s The Prim ate Heritage 48

48

Old World Monkeys and Apes 49 The Hunter-Gatherer Heritage 51 Inclusive Fitness 53 Authorit y-Beari ng Systems 55 I n t c r g r o u p Hostility— He r it a g e From the C o m m o n An ce sto r o f Apes a n d H u m a n s 60 G e n e Flow a n d O u t g r o u p Attractiveness 63 Identification o f T ri be M e m b e r s a n d Mu l ti gr ou p M e m b e r s h i p 67 D e v e l o p m e n t o f a G r o u p Identity 69 i n t c r g r o u p Behavi or 74 H u n t e r - G a t h e r e r Mi nd s Revisited 78 S u m m a r y 80

D iscrim ination T ow ard D eaf Individuals M e t h od o lo g ic a l C on s i d e r a t i o n s 84 Prejudice 84 D iscrim in a lion 8 6 Overview o f t he Cu lt ur al a n d Historical Bases o f P re ju d ic e a n d Di s cr iminati on 89 Brief E d uc a ti on a l History o f Ame r ic a n De af C h i l d r e n 90 D e v e l o p m e n t o f Di sc ri mi na ti on T ow ar d D e af Individuals 98 Summary 107

P rejudice a n d D iscrim ination T o w a rd Mentally R e tard e d Individuals Brief E d uc a ti o na l History o f Ame ri ca n C hi l dr e n With Me nt a l Re t ar d at io n 111 D e v e l o p m e n t o f Pr ej udice T o w ar d P e op l e With Me nta l Re ta rd at i o n 118 D e v e l o p m e n t o f Di scr iminat ion T ow ar d Pe op l e With Me nt a l Re t ar d at io n 123 S u m m a r y 130

P r e ju d ic e a n d D is c r im in a tio n A g a in st th e O p p o s i t e Sex Brief C ult ur al History o f t h e Role of Femal es in Am e r ic a n Society 134 A n t e c e d e n t s o f Opposi te-Sex Prejudice a n d Discr imi nat ion 142 G e n e t i c / E v o l u t i o n a r y Predisposi tions 143 Cu lt ur al N o r m s 144 Socialization of Sex-Typing 145 Parents’ Socialization o f Sex-Typing 148 Influence o f Family Type on Socialization 151

xi

C O NT E NT S

Influence o f Peers a n d Teachers on Socialization D e ve lop m e n t o f Opposite-Sex Prejudice 156 Indirect M easures 156 Direct M easures 159 D evelopm ent o f Opposite-Sex Discrimination Summary 168

6

154

164

A Cultural History of African Americans B r i e f C u l t u r a l Hi st or y o f Af r ic a n A m e r i c a n s Brown v. Board o f Education 182 D e v e l o p m e n t o f E t h n i c I d e n ti t y 185 C o m p a r i s o n s A m o n g t h e H i s t or i es 192 Summary 195

171 172

7 Race Prejudice and Discrimination

198

D e v e l o p m e n t o f R ac e P r e j u d i c e 199 White Children a n d Adolescents 200 Black Children a n d Adolescents 202 D e v e l o p m e n t o f Race D i s c r i m i n a t i o n 203 Behavioral Observations 204 Self-Reports 2 08 Sociometric Experiments 2 0 9 Com parison of Prejudice and Discrimination o f t h e T a r g e t G r o u p s 213 S u m m a r y 216

8

Modifying Prejudice and Discrimination

219

Introduction 219 Predictions 221 Contact Theory 2 22 L ew inian Theory 22 3 M easures Employed 224 Desegregation 225 The Studies 226 Contact Theory 231 L ew in ia n Theory 231 Mainstreaming 232 The Prejudice a n d D iscrim ination Studies 233 The Social a n d Academ ic S kill Studies 236 Contact Theoiy 2 3 7 L ew inian Theory 23 8 Cooperative Interaction 23 8 The Studies 2 3 9 Opposite-Sex Prejudice a nd D iscrim ination 242 R acial a n d E thnic Prejudice a n d D iscrim ination

242

xii

CO NT EN T S

D iscrim ination Toward the Disabled Competitive Studies 24 7 Contact Theory 2 4 7 L ew inian Theory 2 4 7 T h e M e d i a 24 8 The Studies 24 8 Contact Theory 2 5 0 Lew inian Theory 251 Role-Playing S i m u l a t i o n s 251 The Studies 252 Contact Theory 253 Lew inian Theory 254 I n d i v i d u a t i o n a n d Se lf - Ac c ep t a nc e Research on Children 255 Research on A d u lts 255 In d ivid u a tio n o f Others 256 Contact Theory 258 L ew inian Theory 25 8 A M ul t i p l e F a c t o r A p p r o a c h 258 S u m m a r y 26 0

9

245

254

Parents, Peers, and Personality

263

P a r e n t a l I n f l u e n c e s o n C h i l d r e n ’s P r e j u d i c e 264 P e e r I n f l u e n c e s o n C h i l d r e n ’s P r e j u d i c e 268 Pe r s o n a l i t y I n f l u e n c e s o n P r e j u d i c e 272 Religious Beliefs a n d Practices 272 Right-W ing A uthoritarianism 277 Social D om inance Orientation 280 H u m an ita ria nism -E galitarianism 28 3 S u m m a r y 285

10

Recapitulation D o m i n a n t a n d S u b o r d i n a t e G r o u p s 288 Cultural C h a n g e 29 0 G e n e t i c / E v o l u t i o n a r y P r e d i s p o s i t i o n s 292 D e ve lop m e n t o f Prejudice and Discrimination M o d i f y i n g P r e j u d i c e a n d D i s c r i m i n a t i o n 296 P a r e n t s , Pe er s, a n d P e rs o n a l i t y 298 A Fi nal N o t e 299

288

294

References

301

Author Index

321

Subject Index

329

Preface

My overall goal for this b oo k is to give t he r e a de r genetic/evolutionary, cul­ tural/historical, a nd devel opment al analyses o f the d e ve l op me n t o f pr ej u­ dice a nd discrimination. These analyses also emphasize how certain of the g e ne ti c/ evol ut iona ry me cha nis ms can be utilized ei ther to prevent pr ej u­ dice a nd discrimination from occurring, o r to modify these behaviors once they arc established. T he mechani sms arc simple, yet powerful. And if a p ­ plied systematically, they may have the desired effects of increasing toler­ ance a nd acceptance o f t he outsider. I’ve b ee n mulling ab ou t a nd “m i n i n g ” a geneti c/evol ut ionary view of h u ­ ma n d e ve l o pm en t for mo re than 30 years, since I started writing my first book, Evolution, Development, and Children’s Learning (1976). It’s an exciting area of research, a nd many in the field of psychology have now i nc o r po ­ rated an evolutionary view into their writing. Peer Prejudice and Discrimination is i n t e n d e d bot h for the individual scholar a nd for advanced u nd e rg r ad u at es a n d graduat e students for class­ r oo m use. I ’ve used the first edition for both g roups o f students, both in the Uni te d States a nd India, where I was a Fulbri ght lecturer in 1994. After a shor t per iod o f uneasiness or uncertainty a bo u t a geneti c/evoluti onary a p­ proach, most s tudents come to both appreciate it a n d value it. It was very gratifying also t hat my peers in Developmental Psychology at the American Psychological Association awarded the first edition o f this b oo k the first Eleanor Maccoby Book Award in 1996. This second edition gave me the op p o r t un it y to make some improve­ me nts on the first edition, as well as to i ncor por at e new material whose shape was u nk no wn to me when the first book was published. T h e r e arc xiii

xiv

PREFACE

t hr ee b r o a d significant c h a n ge s to the original text. First, a n u m b e r o f r e a d ­ ers a n d reviewers o f t he first edition w o n d e r e d why I h a d n ’t i n c o r p o r a t e d the historical material with t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ejudi c e material. In the first edi ti on, t h e r e was a single c h a p t e r dea li ng with “cultural histories” of females, African Amer icans, e d u ca t i o n of t he deaf, a n d e d u ca t i o n o f the ment al ly r e t a r de d . This c h a p t e r was followed by discussions, in separate cha pte rs , c o n c e r n i n g opposite-sex p re j ud i c e a n d d i scr iminat ion, race p r e j­ udice a n d d iscr imi nat ion, d i sc ri mi na ti on toward the deaf, a n d p r ej ud ic e a n d d i scr imi nati on toward the ment all y r et a rd e d. In the p r e s e n t edit i on, I pla ce d the historical a n d p re j ud i ce a n d d is c r imi na ti on mat eri al in the same c h a p t e r a n d tr ea te d each type o f p r ej u d ic e a n d d is cr imi nat ion separately. I believe t ha t the c h a p te r s arc m u c h b e t te r t ha n the previous o ne s b ec au se of these mergers. T h e s e c o nd significant c h a n g e got its start in 1998 wh en I was on sabbati­ cal leave at the University o f Chi cago a n d having l u n c h with Professor S a n d e r Gil man. I was descr ibi ng to him t he t h r e e g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y fac­ tors t ha t p r ed isp os e us to p re j ud i ce a n d discr imi nat ion against o ut g r o u p s , when he casually m e n t i o n e d t ha t s o me t i m e s w e ’re att r acted to o ut g r o u p s . After a b r i e f p aus e I said “Y o u ’re r igh t. ” I m u l l e d a b o u t t ha t for a c ou pl e of years a n d finally got a r o u n d to discussing it with Professor Bert H u c t h c r of the Biology D e p a r t m e n t at t he University o f Cinci nnati . I w o n d e r e d a l ou d to Bert what the genet ic m e c h a n i s m s m i g h t be t h a t u n d e r l a y o u t g r o u p at­ tractiveness. After a b r i e f p aus e he said “g e n e flow.” A n d I said, “T h a t ’s i n­ credibly simple a n d e l e ga n t . ” I t h e n p r o c e e d e d to do s ome serious genetics r e a d i n g a n d often c on s u lt e d with Bert a b o u t aspects that I d i d n ’t fully grasp. He was very p a t i e n t with me, a n d several times h e ed it ed the material I wrote a b o u t it, which a p p e ar s in c h a p t e r 2 o f this edition. T h e c o n ce p t a n d implications o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness a p p e a r in m os t o f the r e m a i n ­ ing c ha p te r s o f the book. T h e t hi r d significant c h a n g e mainly deals with the work o f my students, Megan O ’Bryan a n d Kim Case, my coll eague Neal Ritchey o f the Sociology D e p a r t m e n t o f t he University o f Cincinnati , a n d myself on the bases o f i n d i ­ vidual di fferences in p r e ju di ce a n d d iscr imi nati on. For several years, we h a d b e e n investigating this issue systematically, focusing on the influences o f pa re nt s, peers, a n d personality on a d o l e s c e n t s ’ pr ej udice. We were r e ­ peat edl y a s t o u n d e d by o u r results, a n d we s ur pr is e d o u r fr i ends a n d col­ l eagues w h e n we conveyed these findings to t h e m. I c o n c l u d e d that a dis­ cussion o f this r es ear ch woul d m a ke a fine addi ti on to the b ook. All this material c ompr is e s c h a p t e r 9, Parents, Peers, a n d Personality. T h e various c h a n ge s to the b o ok resul ted in a very substantial r e o r g a n i ­ zation a n d the i nclusion o f substantial new material in bo th the new a n d original chapter s. My estimate is th at t h e r e are a p pr o xi ma t e l y 15% new ref­ e re n ce s in the p r e s e n t edition.

PREFACE

XV

Th e publ isher of the first edition gave me the copyrights to it. I t hen called Lawrence Erl baum, described what I wanted to do with a revision, and asked if he was interested in publishing it. Larry was the publi sher of my s econd book a n d was familiar with my work. He said h e ’d be pleased to publish it, b ut said that it ha d to go t hr ough the nor mal acquisition process. T h a t was fine with me, a nd the latter went smoothly. I was del ight ed by their speedy response a nd am very pleased that Lawrence Erlbaum Associates is the new publisher. I ha d p l a n n e d to compl ete the revision in a bo u t a year and a half, b u t unf ortunately a re c ur r ence of Non-Hodgki ns Lymphoma, aggressive type, a nd the sub se que nt high dose c he mo th e ra p y p u t a crimp in those plans. But, 9 m o n t h s after the initial d u e date, 1 did finish the book, and her e it is.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I’ve always liked the Beatles song “A Little Help From My Friends.” For this edition of the book, several years o f collaboration with Neal Ritchey p r o ­ vided the basis for mu ch of the new writing. Discussions over the years with my graduat e students, Jan Baker, Ron Hoover, Kim Case, a n d Megan O ’Bryan allowed all o f us to test o ut new ideas, e x pa nd i ng their views and mi ne about the area of prejudice a nd discrimination. Bert H u c t h e r was nearly always available to discuss evolution with me a nd answer questions ab ou t genetics. I’m n o t sure what Bert got ou t o f all of this, b u t I surely gained a lot. Maybe t h a t ’s what friends are for sometimes. Along the way I b e came par t o f a discussion g ro up on anti-bias education p ut t og e th er by the American Jewish Commi tt ee o f Chicago. While associ­ ated with this group I got to know a nd to talk extensively with the social psy­ chologists Jack Dovidio, Walter Stephan, a n d Cookie Stephan. This was stimulating a nd p u t me in touch with materials with which I wasn’t very fa­ miliar. Bill D c m bc r of the Psychology D e p a rt me n t o f the University of Cincinnati a n d Bob Sala, architect a n d writer, edited the new c ha p te r 9. I’m very grateful for that, especially in light of the tight time schedule I asked them to comply with. Wh a t are friends for? Finally, Dr. John Bealle, folklor­ ist a n d writer, r ea rr an ged the original chapters 3, 4, a n d 5 into the new chapters 3, 4, 5, 6, a n d 7. I worked closely with John on this revision, b u t the writer a nd editor in him led to some unanti ci pated innovations. T h a n k you, John, a n d thank you, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. — Harold D. Fishbein

This page intentionally left blank

C h apter

1

T h e N atu re of Prejudice

The s u m m e r after I g r ad ua te d college in 1959, I took a tempor ar y j o b as a swimming pool a tt e n d a n t at a Chicago Recreation Commission park in the southwest side of Chicago. T he park was located in a rou gh , working-class n e i g h b o r h o o d whose p opul at ion ha d shifted d ur i ng the p r ec edi ng 10 years from extensively Slavic origin to mixed Slavic a n d Latin American. The transition, I was told, had b e en very tense a nd many fights ha d o c cur r ed b e ­ tween teenagers of the two e thnic groupings. T he Slavs were still in the m a ­ jority, a nd many o f their adolescents a nd young adults were strongly antiNegro. (In 1959, African Americans a nd E u r o p ea n Americans referred to the f o r m e r as “c ol o re d ” or Negroes,” n o t “Blacks” or “African Americans.” In fact, referring to a Negro as a Black was considered a potentially pr ej u­ diced statement.) T he pool was o p e n to the public, free of charge, with no official age, race, ethnic, or g e n d e r restrictions. The lifeguards were male, r e ce nt high school graduates o f Slavic origin, a nd residents of the n e i g h bo r ho o d . I was the only outsider who worked at the pool, in that I was Jewish a nd lived in a Northsidc n e i g h bo r ho o d. I had some c oncerns a b o u t my own safety, especially when I worked late a nd took the evening bus h om e. I felt fortunate that I was never verbally or physically attacked. O n e day at the pool, I was talking with two of the lifeguards when one of the Slavic male teenagers a p p r o ac h e d the guards with a serious problem. T he r e was a young “colored girl” in the c h i l dr e n’s pool area. Wh a t should they do? Th e lifeguards told me that colored children w e r e n ’t “allowed” in the pool a nd the last o ne who came in, a teen-age male several years ago, was thrown out, over the fence. In fact, I never saw an African American in 1

2

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

t he park itself d u r i n g the e nt ir e s u m m e r . T h e d i l e m m a the g u a r ds faced was t ha t the child, t h o u g h very d a rk- skinne d with strongly African features, was y o u n g — a n d a girl. S h o u l d they throw h e r o u t now, wait until the e n d of the h o u r wh e n everybody h a d to leave the pool for 10 m i nu t e s , or do n o t h ­ ing? Just t h e n a n o t h e r mal e Slavic t e e n a g e r a p p r o a c h e d a n d said t h e r e was no p r o b l e m , the girl was C u b a n a n d spoke Spanish. Everybody b r e a t h e d a sigh o f relief. T h e girl was n o t co l or ed , she was C u b an . T h e girl was n o t co l or e d, she was C u b a n . W h a t an e x t r a o rd i n ar y e x p e r i ­ ence. T h e girl was n o t seen as a C u b a n and co lo re d, despite the fact t ha t she h a d very p r o n o u n c e d Black African features. She was a C u b a n , which m e a n t she was a Latin a n d t hus okay. T h e n e i g h b o r h o o d consisted o f Slavs a n d Latins. T h e battle over t h a t piece o f i nt eg ra t io n h a d b e e n settled, t h o u g h I was n o t aware o f any par ticular f ri ends hi ps b et ween the two g r oups. T h e y h a d a worki ng r ela ti onship t ha t the majority Slavs were unwill­ ing to chal l enge. Both g r o u p s c ou l d peacefully reside in the n e i g h b o r h o o d , use the park a n d pool, a n d even c o m p e t e with each o t h e r in softball games. But, c o l or e d p e o pl e h a d b e t t er stay clear o f the park a n d the n e i g h b o r ­ h o o d . A n d they did, in 1959. All o f us pr oba bly have stories to tell a b o u t p re j ud i ce a n d d i scr imi nati on a m o n g ch il dr e n a n d adolescents. Many o f us “e t h n ic s ” have b e e n on the r e ­ ceiving e n d o f p re judi c e. Certainly o u r p a re n ts or g r a n d p a r e n t s , if they were i m mi g r a n t s to the U n i t e d States, e x p e r i e n c e d p r e ju di ce e i t h e r h e r e or in t h e ir c ou n t r y o f origin. We arc told in o u r high s chool history b ooks that the English pilgrims c ame to the New Wo rl d to escape religious p e r s e c u ­ tion in t h e i r h o m e l a n d . T h e y were w e l co me d by native Ame r ic a ns — the In­ dians. Ironically the d e s c e n d a n t s o f those victims o f pr ej ud i ce a n d the d e ­ scendants of o th e r im m igrants developed a virulent prejudice and d i scr iminat ion t ha t nearly destr oyed the Indians. T h a t story is n o t clearly told in the history b ooks used to teach o u r c hi ldr en.

D E F I N I T I O N S O F P R E J U D I CE AND A T T I T U D E S Arguably the best a n d mo st influential b o o k written on p re ju d i ce since W or l d Wa r II is Al lp o rt ’s The Nature o f Prejudice (1954). T h e scope o f this b o o k is awe some a n d the intelligence a n d sensitivity conveyed arc inspir­ ing. Allport starts the b o o k with s o m e a n e c d o t e s a b o u t “e t h n i c ” p r e ju di ce a n d n ot es two essential i n g r e di e n t s o f it: (a) hostility a n d r ejection, a n d (b) the basis of the hostility is the t ar get in di vi d ua l’s m e m b e r s h i p in a g r ou p. T h e s e two i n gr e di e n ts arc clearly seen in the story o f the C u b a n co lo r ed girl. A l l p o r t discusses t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n “o r d i n a r y p r e j u d g m e n t s , ” which all of us periodically e n g a ge in, a n d pr ejudi ce, a special type o f prc-

DE F I NI TI ONS O F PREJUDI CE AND ATTI TUDE S

3

j u d g m e n t . Allport concludes: “Pr ejudgme nt s b e c ome prejudices only if they arc not reversible when e xposed to new k nowledge” (p. 9). He argues that we emotionally resist evidence that contradicts o ur prejudices unlike that which occurs with ordinary pr ej udgment s. Thus, we have a third key in­ gre di en t of prejudice— resistance to new knowledge. T h e swimming pool story indirectly supports this i n gr ed i en t— the girl c o u l d n ’t be c olored— she was a Cuban. Col ored children would have to be hostilely rejected, b ut Cu ­ bans were okay. Allport summarizes his discussion a b ou t the characteristics o f prejudice with the following definition: “. . . prejudice is an antipathy based u p o n a faulty a n d inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a gr ou p as a whole, or toward an individual because he is a m e m b e r of that g r o u p ” (p. 9). A mor e r ec ent book on prejudice, Eh r l i ch ’s The Social Psychology of Preju­ dice (1973) provided an excellent discussion o f the co nc ept o f prejudice. He quotes 16 definitions o f prejudice from works published between 1950 and 1966 of highly r egar ded sociologists a n d social psychologists. Nearly all the definitions have the following in c o mmo n : It is an unfavorable attitude di­ rected toward others because o f their m e mb e rs h ip in a particular group. Ehrlich concurs with this consensus a nd defines prejudice simply as “. . . an attitude t oward any gr ou p o f p e o p l e ” (p. 8). Attitudes may be positive or negative. We view prejudice as a negative attitude. But w ha t’s an attitude? He defines attitude as follows. “An attitude is an interrelated set of pr oposi­ tions a b ou t an object or class o f objects which arc organized a r o u n d cogni­ tive, behavioral a nd affective di me ns io ns ” (p. 4). T he r e arc f our principle cognitive di mensi ons of propositions (or f un da ­ mental beliefs). T he first is salience, which is the de gr ee to which the belief is assumed to accurately characterize all the m e m b e r s of a group. Thus, “All Jews arc miserly” is mo r e salient than “Most Jews are miserly.” T he s ec ond is intensity, which is the degree to which beliefs arc accepted a nd a greed with, or rejected a nd disagreed with. Thus, “I sort of agree with that belief” is less intense than “I strongly agree with that belief.” T h e third is evaluative direc­ tion, which is the extent to which the belief a b o u t a person or g ro up is g o o d / f a v o r a b l e / d e s i r a b l e or b a d / u n f a v o r a b l e / u n d e s i r a b l e . Thus, “All Arabs arc mildly deceitful" is less negative than “All Arabs arc very dcccitful.” T h e fourth is centrality, which is the e xte nt to which a belief is i m p o r ­ tant to an individual’s attitude a b o u t others. Central beliefs capt ure the core or essential aspccts o f attitudes, whereas m o r e peri pheral beliefs can be readily c ha ng c d without having mu c h o f an effect on an attitude. T he behavioral dimensi on of attitudes refers to the extent to which o n e ’s beliefs arc linked with intentions to behave in particular ways. Some beliefs only indirectly relate to behavior; for example, an American employer mi g ht say, “Japanese mo t he rs arc very n ur t u r i n g to their chil dr en. ” O the rs

4

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

m o r e directly relate to behavior, for e xa mp l e, the s ame e m p l oy e r saying, “J a p a n e s e workers are e n e rg et ic a n d di li gent .” Ehrlich i ndicates t h a t the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d f o u r cognitive d im e n s i o n s o f beliefs can be a pp l i e d to b e ­ haviors. T h e affective dimension o f attitudes is basically how a p e r s on feels a b o u t o r e mot iona ll y reacts to the object of h e r attitudes. O n e pole o f these feelings is l o v e / l i k i n g / a t t r a c t i o n , a n d t he o t h e r is h a t e / d i s l i k i n g / r e p u l s i o n . P e opl e may be strongly at tr ac te d to o t h e rs they evaluate as bad, a n d conversely may be r ep ul s ed by s o m e o n e they evaluate as g ood. With pr ejudices, negative beliefs are usually a c c o m p a n i e d by negative feelings. I have s p e nt this m u c h time dea li ng with E h r l i c h ’s work, n o t b ecause I a cc ept his defi nit i on o f pr ej udice, b u t r a t h e r be c aus e he shows us how c o m ­ plex the c o n c e p t o f altitude is. Pr ej udice d o e s involve attitudes, a n d to dis­ cuss t h e m , they m u s t be m e a s ur e d. Yet, in virtually n o n e o f t he studies d e a l­ ing with c h i l d r e n ’s attitudes is t he re even a faint a p p r o x i m a t i o n to E h r l i c h ’s analysis. Before I give my defi ni ti on o f pr ej udi ce, it would be useful to p r e s e n t two ot her s, those by Mi lne r (1983) a n d A b o u d (1988), who have written books d ea li ng with c h i l d r e n ’s racial prejudices. M i l n e r ’s definition is: P re ju d ic e d a ttitu d es . . . a re ir ra tio n a l, u n ju s t, o r in t o l e r a n t disp osition s to­ w ards o t h e r g ro u p s , a n d they are often a c c o m p a n ie d by stere o ty p in g . T his is the a ttrib u tio n o f th e s u p p o s e d ch aracteristics o f th e w hole g r o u p to all its in ­ div idual m e m b e r s . S tereoty pes e x a g g e ra te th e u n if o rm ity within a g r o u p an d similarly e x a g g e ra te th e d iffe re n c e s b etw een this g r o u p a n d o th e r s, (p. 5)

Like o t h e r writers in this a r e na , Mi l ner ma in t ai ns t h a t from a psychologi­ cal viewpoint, t h e r e are n o essential dif fer ences be twe en racial pr ej udices a n d o t h e r for ms o f pr ej udi ce . l i e notes t ha t t he o c c u r r e n c e o f physical dif­ f er ences b et we e n g r o u p s may facilitate ster eot yping a n d p re j udi c e, b u t those are certainly n o t necessary. M i l n e r ’s definition is similar to A l lp or t ’s, especially if we e q u a t e “irrational, unjust, or i n t o l e r a n t ” with “faulty a n d i n­ flexible.” Additionally, M i l n e r ’s “s t e r e ot y p in g ” is equi val ent to Al lp o rt ’s “g e ne r al iz in g ” a b o u t gr oups. Finally, A b o u d (1988) d e f i n e d racial p r e j u d i c e as “. . . an o r g a n i z e d p r ed i s p o si t i on to r e s p o n d in an u n f a v or a bl e m a n n e r towar d p e o p l e from a n e t h n i c g r o u p b e c a u s e o f t h e i r e t h n i c affil i at ion” (p. 4). T h i s de f in i t io n fits closely with t he c or e de fi ni ti on o f p r e j u d i c e f o u n d in E h r l i c h ’s g r o u p o f 16. W h a t d i st i nguis he s it from A l l p o r t ’s a n d M i l n e r ’s de f in i ti o n s is that it lacks t he idea o f “faulty a n d inflexi bl e. ” T h u s, a w el l - f ou nd e d u n f a vo r ­ able g en er a li z at io n a b o u t a g r o u p , a c c o r d i n g to A b o u d ’s de fi ni t i on , would be pr ej udice. Based on this discussion, I a d o p t e d a definition of pr ej ud ic e t ha t closely follows the ideas of Allport a n d Milner: Prejudice is an u n r e a s o n a b l e ncga-

D E F I N I T I O N S O F P RE J UDI CE AND A T T I T U D E S

5

live atti t ude toward o t h e rs b ecaus e o f thei r m e m b e r s h i p in a par ti cul ar g r ou p. T h e quality th at ma ke s an a tt i tude u n r e a s o n a b l e is t h a t it docs n o t readily ge t mo di f ie d wh e n e x p os e d to new a n d conflicting i n fo r ma t i o n . Pr ej udice is n o t an all-or-nonc p h e n o m e n o n . Rather, like o t h e r attitudes, it is g r a de d , as Ehrlich p o i n t e d out. T h e e x t e n t to which c hi l dr e n will be p r ej ­ u d i c e d at any p o i n t in time d e p e n d s on (a) t he ir genet i c e n d o w m e n t , (b) t he ir specific e x p e r i en c es o f the ta rge t g r o up , (c) thei r own personalities, (d) the p r e j u d i c e d atti t udes e xpr es se d to t h e m by family a n d friends, a n d (c) the cultural portrayal of t he target g r o u p by television, books, a n d schools. Prejudice, o f necessity, will c h a n g e over time, b ecaus e ch i ld re n gain new i n f o r ma t i on a n d t h e i r cognitive, social, a n d e m o t i o n a l u n d e r ­ s ta ndi ngs a n d capacities c h a n g e with m a t u r a t i o n a n d e x pe ri en ce. T h e m e a s u r e m e n t o f p r ej udic e, as al ready de fin ed , has rarely b e e n suc­ cessfully a c c o m pl i s h e d with c hi l d r e n a n d adolescents. T h e m a j or s t u mb l i n g block has b e e n assessing t he u n r e a s o n a b l e aspect o f t he negative attitudes. T h e r e a p p e a r to be no r el evant studies t ha t have directly a t t e m p t e d this as­ sessment. T h e r esear ch efforts seem to assume, as an e xa mp l e , tha t negative att itudes d ir e ct e d toward Blacks or Whites are u n r e a s o n a b l e . From an adult viewpoint, they may be, b u t from a c h i l d ’s viewpoint, the negative attitudes may be r e as onabl e. In a simple case, a child is told by h e r p a r e nt s t h a t d r i n k ­ ing milk is g o o d, crossing streets wi thout looki ng bo th ways is bad, pol ice­ m e n can be trusted, s tr anger s in cars arc d a n g e r o u s , a n d t ha t Whites will try to h u r t you. Is it r e as ona bl e to have positive attitudes toward police, n e g a ­ tive at ti tudes toward st rangers in cars, a n d yet u n r e a s o n a b l e to have n e g a ­ tive attitudes toward Whi te c hil dr en? In a n o t h e r simple e xa mp l e , if a child has h a d a n u m b e r o f u n p l e a s a n t e n c o u n t e r s with h e a r i n g i m pa i r e d c hi l d r en , are negative attitudes toward h e a r i n g i m p a ir e d p ee rs r e as o na bl e or u n r e a s o n a b l e ? Cat egorizat ion is i n ­ evitable, n o r ma l , a n d necessary for adaptive f u n c t i o n i n g (Allport, 1954). It c ou l d be c o n c l u d e d th at in the s e c o nd e x a mp l e , t he c h i l d ’s negative atti­ tudes toward the h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d were r e aso na bl e in th at they were based on a c onsistent generali zat ion. Is the child pre ju di ce d ? Allport would ar­ gue, a n d I c o n cu r , t ha t if the attitudes were inflexible a n d d i d n ’t c h a n g e with new a n d conflicting i n f or m a t i on , t h e n the child woul d be c o n s i de r e d p r e j ud i c e d (because the attitudes arc n o t r e a s o na b le ) . T o state t h a t n e g a ­ tive attitudes toward a pa rti cula r g r o u p arc re a so n a b le is not to say t h a t they are desirable. Frequentl y, responsi bl e m e m b e r s o f a c o m m u n i t y will try to ge t ch il dr en a n d o t he rs to c h a n g e thei r negative attitudes. If successful, t h a t pr oba bl y is an indi cat ion th at these at tit udes were flexible a n d h e nc e, not p r ej ud i ce d. Finally, t h e r e is an i m p o r t a n t a re a o f h u m a n beliefs that may a p p e a r to lead to p re jud ic e , b u t technically d oe s n o t — religion. T h e r e are m a ny

6

1.

T H E NATURE O F PREJUDI CE

cont empor ar y a nd historical examples in which “nonbelievers” have been treated with extreme prejudice by me mb er s of fundamentalist religious groups (e.g., Jews a nd Protestants duri ng the Spanish Inquisition). To the atheist and agnostic, the beliefs held by fundamentalists arc unreasonable; however, within the latters’ belief system, they arc being reasonable. For ex­ ample, in a conversation I had with a recent convert to Christian f u n d a m e n ­ talism, I was told that, as a Jew, I was “an agent of the devil.” I was relieved that this person d i d n ’t plan to organize any action against me or my fellow Jews. In o u r definition o f prejudice, an unreasonable altitude is one whose cog­ nitive c o m p o n e n t can be disproved by contradictory i nformation. If such di sproof is not possible, then despite horrible acts carried o ut against o t h ­ ers by religious fundamentalists, it can n o t be asserted that prcjudicc u n ­ derlies these behaviors. Religious faith a nd belief arc rarely susceptible to p r o o f or disproof. If nonbelievers arc t h o u gh t o f as bei ng agents of the devil, a nd thus treated with suspicion a nd distrust, there is no obvious way that that belief can be contradicted. Thus, beyond c h a pt cr 1 in this book, religious-based attitudes a b o u t the religious beliefs of others will no t be dealt with.

DEFI NI TI ON O F DISCRI MI NATI ON Prejudices are particular kinds of attitudes that, accordi ng to Ehrlich (1973) have three major di mensi ons— cognitive, affective, a nd behavioral. T h e behavioral dimension reflects a disposition to act negatively toward others, a nd n ot the behavior acts themselves. It is thus t e mp ti n g to define discrimination in relation to prejudice. However, it frequently h a p p en s that people who are n ot prej udi ced toward a particular target gr ou p may act negatively toward m e mb e rs of that gr oup because of their gr ou p affiliation. For example, some n o np re j ud ic e d real estate agents may not show houses in certain n e ig h b o r h o o d s to m e mb e rs of particular ethnic groups, for ex­ ample, Jews, African Americans, or Hispanics, because the agents have b ee n instructed by their employers or the h om e ow n e r s to not do so. Or some female e m pl o y me n t manager s may n ot hire w ome n for particular jobs, such as those in construction, because of cultural n o r ms indicating that w ome n do n ot have the physical capacity to do the work. Thus, acting negatively (discriminating) toward individuals because of their g ro u p m e mb e rs h ip may or may not be based on prejudice. Accord­ ingly, we a do p t the following definition of discrimination. It is similar to definitions offered by Allport (1954) a nd Marger (1991): Discrimination in­ volves h ar mf ul actions toward others because of their me mb e r sh i p in a p ar ­ ticular gr oup. The discrimination can be mild, for example, ignoring some on e , calling s o m e o n e a derrogatory n a m e b e hi nd his or h e r back, or it can be e xtreme,

R E L A T I O N S H I P BE T W E E N P RE J UDI CE AND B E HAVI OR

7

for instance, t he m u t u a l killing by e t h n i c g r o u ps in t he 1990s in w h at was f or mer l y Yugoslavia, o r the sl au gh te r o f Jews by the Nazis in the 1940s. With c h i ld r en , d is c ri mi na t io n is usually m a n i fe s t e d by a voi dance, r ud e ne ss , n a m e calling, a n d , on occasion, fighting. A l t h o u g h d i scr iminati on is n o t always based on p r ej udic e, it f requent ly is, especially if the p e r p e t r a t o r is acting o n his own as o p p o s e d to on b e h al f o f s ome institution or authority. C h i l d r e n , for e x a mp l e , may be c o e r ce d into di scr iminator y acts by thei r p a r e nt s o r n e i gh b o r s. But w he n t h e y’re freely i nt er ac ti ng w i th o ut a d u l t con tr o l , it is likely that d is cr imi n a t io n a n d pr ej udi ce go h an d- in - h a nd . W h i c h c o m e s first, p r e j u d i c e o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n ? F r e d e r i c k s o n a n d Kn ob el (1980) a nswe re d in the following way: D iscrim in atio n may a p p e a r to be simply a ctin g o u t o f p r i o r p re j u d ic e , b u t t h e r e is ev ide nc e to su g g est th a t p re ju d ic e b e c o m e s fully d e v e lo p e d a n d fo r­ mally s a n c t io n e d only after th e p rocess o f d iffere ntial t r e a t m e n t is well u n d e r way. A ttitud e a n d action t e n d to feed on each o t h e r , c re a tin g a vicious circle th a t works to e n h a n c e th e po w er a n d p restige o f o n e g r o u p at th e e x p e n s e of th e o th e r , (p. 31 )

R E L A T I O N S H I P BETWEEN P R E J U D I C E AND B E HA VI OR In the early 1930s, R. T. La Piere, a Whi te Am e r ic a n, traveled widely in the U n i t e d States with a Chines e coupl e. T h e t hr ee o f t h e m s t o p p e d for food at 184 re st au ra nt s a n d for lod g in g at 66 hotel s a n d motels. Only o n c e d i d the m a n a g e r refuse to provide service for t h e m. After c o m p l e t i n g the trip, La Piere wrote to the p r o p r i e t o r s o f each e st ab li sh me nt , encl osing a q u e s t i o n ­ nair e that i n c l u de d an item asking w h e t h e r they woul d take “m e m b e r s of the Ch ine s e race as guests.” O n e h u n d r e d twenty-eight r e t u r n e d the q u e s­ t ionna ir es a n d m o r e t h a n 92% o f t he m stated that they woul d n o t accept Ch i ne se p e o pl e as guests (La Piere, 1934). O n the basis o f thei r q u e s t i o nn a i re r es pons es it a p p e ar s t hat over 92% of these e stabl is hments were p r e j u di c ed against Chi nese. Yet, in a face-to-face int er ac ti on , less t h a n 1% b e h a ve d in a p r e j u di c e d m a n n e r . How can we u n ­ d e r st a n d this d ra ma t i c discrepancy? Mil ne r (1983) a n d W7icker (1969) discussed this issue in the b r o a d e r c o n te x t o f the relat ion be twe en attitudes a n d behavior; in ge n e ra l, t h e r e is a relatively weak c or re la ti on b e tw ee n the two. Mi lne r a n d Wicker identified two g r o u ps o f factors that play a p a rt in m e d i a t i n g behavior: p e r so na l fac­ tors a n d situational factors. Salient a m o n g the p e r s on a l o ne s are o t h e r atti­ tudes hel d by p e o p l e a n d c o m p e t i n g motives. T h u s, the p r o p ri e t o r s in La P i e r e ’s study may have disliked Chi ne s e b u t may have h e ld s t r ong attitudes toward treat ing strangers with courtesy. Fu r t he r , they may have w an te d to

8

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

reject the C hi ne s e c ou p l e b u t were also mot ivated to m a k e mon e y . A m o n g situational factors two o f the salient o n e s are t he p r e s en c e o f o t h e r p e o pl e a n d social n o r m s for p r o p e r behavior. T h e C h i ne s e c ou pl e w e r e n ’t alone, b ut r a t h e r with a Whi t e, mal e friend. Additionally, r e st au ra nt s a n d hotels are s u p p o s e d to care for guests, n o t t u r n t he m away. W. G. S te ph an (1985) s u m m a r i z e d m u c h o f the e mpir ic al research de al ­ ing with t he rel at io ns hi p b et ween p re j ud ic e a n d behavior. T h e r e arc sev­ eral clusters o f f indi ngs for which a ccur at e general izat i ons can be m a d e . In o n e g r o u p o f studies involving no di r ec t c on t ac t be twe en p e op le , for e x a m ­ ple, voting be ha vi or a n d signing petitions, t h e r e was a fairly s t r o ng r e la t io n­ ship b et ween p re ju d i ce a n d d iscr imi nat ion. For e x a mp l e, Whi te Ame ri c ans who are p r e j u di c e d against Blacks do sign d o c u m e n t s o p p o s i n g h o u si n g in­ tegration. In studies involving d i r ect c o n t ac t be twe en p r e j u di c e d p e o pl e a n d the targets o f pr ej udice, the findings arc m o r e c om pl e x . O n e o f the largest sets o f these studies involves “h e l p i n g ” behaviors, for ex a mp le , Blacks versus Whi tes m a k i n g an e m e r g e n c y call to seek assistance. In these studies, Whi t es who receive these calls a n d who express little pr ej udi c e of­ ten di s c ri mi na te t he m o s t against Blacks. W. G. S t e ph a n (1985) suggested t h a t two o p p o s i n g attitudes arc in play— sympathy for the u n d e r d o g a n d feelings o f aversion. In r e s p o n d i n g to a q u e st i o n n a i r e , s ympathy wins out, b u t w h e n asked to take action, aversion p r e d o m i n a t e s . In a third g r o u p o f i nt er ac ti on studies, wh er e the me as u r e s o f pr e judic e are quite specific a n d the b ehavi or m e a s u r e d is specific, t he re is a m o d e r a t e c or r el at io n bet ween pr e judi ce a n d d e g r e e o f discri mi nati on. W. G. S t e p h a n (1985) i n t e r p r e t e d all the findings from the view o f how individuals evalu­ ate the relative costs a n d benefits o f e xpr essi ng pa rt ic ul a r o p i n i o n s a n d act­ ing in p a rt ic ul ar ways in p a r tic ul a r social contexts. So, the link b etween p r ej ud i ce a n d b eh a v i o r will be s tr ong in situations whe r e individuals b e ­ lieve they will b e ne fi t from b e i ng consi stent in thei r beliefs a n d actions, b u t the link will be weak w he re the benefits favor inconsistency. Finally, Schütz a n d Six (1996) c ar ri e d o u t a meta-analysis o f 60 studies t h a t e x a m i n e d the r el at ions hi p be twe en p r ej u d ic e a n d d iscr iminat ion. T h e c or re la tions r a n g e d f rom a b o u t .20 to a b o u t .60, with the average b ei ng .28. This indicates t h a t a l t h o u g h p r e ju di c e a n d di scr iminat ion are modestly r e ­ lated, they are generally highly i n d e p e n d e n t o f each o t he r. Thus , c o n c l u ­ sions drawn fr om p re ju d i ce r es ear ch can n o t readily be ap pl ie d to discrimi­ n a ti on research, with the converse h o l d i n g also.

S T E RE O TY P E S WTe saw in the previous discussion o f M i l n e r ’s (1983) work t ha t stereotypes are closely rel at ed to prejudices. T h e c u r r e n t use a n d m e a n i n g of the term, stereotypes, was or i gi na te d d u r i n g the 1920s by the Am er i c a n j ou r na li st , Wal­

S TE RE OTYP E S

9

ter L i p p m a n n ( B et h l e h e m , 1985). Most c o n t e m p o r a r y psychologists defi ne the term in a similar way to L i p p m a n n . For R. Brown (1986), it is . a s h a r e d c o n c e p t i o n o f t he c h a r ac t er o f a g r o u p ” (p. 586). Milner (1983) d e ­ f ined the term as “o ve rgc nc rali za ti ons” a b o u t the characteristics o f a g r o u p , usually un d e si ra bl e, whi ch f un c ti on to e xa gg e ra te t he dif fer ences bet ween gr ou ps . For Ehr li ch (1973), stereotypes arc . . a set o f beliefs a n d di sbe­ liefs a b o u t any g r o u p o f p e o p l e ” (p. 20). Finally, D. L. H am i l t on a n d T ro lic r (1986) d e f i n ed a stereotype . . as a cognitive st r uc tu r e t ha t co nt ai ns the pe rc eive r ’s knowledge, beliefs, a n d expectancies a b o u t some h u m a n g r o u p ” (p. 133). It is clear from the psychological l it erat ure t h a t the d e v e l o p m e n t o f stereotypes, as categories o f beliefs a b o u t g r o up s of pe op l e , is inevitable, n o r m a l , a n d necessary for adaptive f un ct ioni ng. Stereot ypes may be positive or negative. Negative stereotypes, for e x a m ­ ple, “All Asians arc secretive,” may differ from pr ej ud i c e s in t h r e e ways: (a) T h e y may n o t be “u n r e a s o n a b l e ” as t h a t term has b e e n de fi ne d; (b) T he y may n o t have an affective c o m p o n e n t , for e x a mp l e , th at Asians arc secretive may be felt a b o u t with i ndi ff er ence; a n d (c) T h e y may n o t dispose o n e to beh av e in any p ar ti cula r way. However, be ca u s e o f t he ways t h a t stereotypes a n d pr ejudi ces arc m e a s u r e d , it is s o me t i m e s difficult to d e t e r m i n e which o n e is b e i n g assessed. Strongly h e l d negative stereotypes certainly have the look a n d feel o f prejudices. However, in an analysis o f a n u m b e r o f e x p e r i ­ m e n t s t ha t m e a s u r e d bo th p re j ud ic e a n d stereotypes, Dovidio, Br igham, B. T. J o h n s o n , a n d G a e r t n e r (1996) f o u n d the average co rr e la tio n between t he two to be a b o u t .25. Given the facts that, at a m i n i m u m , stereotypes a n d pr e ju d ic es s har e the be li ef c o m p o n e n t o f attitudes, a n d th at a substantial a m o u n t o f res ear ch has b e e n car ri ed o u t with stereotypes, we can profit by e x a m i n i n g this r e ­ search. In the following discussion it is likely t h a t the conclusi ons drawn are applicable to prejudices. Roge r Brown (1986) raised two i nt er est ing issues a b o u t stereotypes that are p e r t i n e n t to the p u r p o se s o f this book. T h e first deals with c ons e­ q u e n c e s o f the way stereotypes have usually b e e n m e a s u r e d . T h e s e c ond deals with the relation b etween stereotypes a n d how we bchaviorally deal with individual m e m b e r s o f the st er eo t yp e d g r o up . T h e latter discussion gives an e xp la n at io n o f t he “s o m e o f my best fri ends are . . .” p h e n o m e n o n . In 1933, two social scientists, Katz a n d Braly, asked Pr i n c e to n University u n d e r g r a d u a t e s to select from a large list o f traits those t h a t were “typical” for each o f 10 e t hn ic gr oups. This t e c h n i q u e was the way Katz a n d Braly m e a s u r e d stereotypes. T h e p r o c e d u r e was r e p e a t e d in 1951 a n d 1967 by dif­ f e r e n t r e se ar ch er s for the t he n c u r r e n t Pr i n c e to n u n d e r g r a d u a t e s . T abl e 1.1 co nt ai ns p ar t o f the s u m m a r y by Karlins, Cof fma n, a n d Walters (1969) o f the dat a f or f ou r et h n i c g r o u ps for the t h r e e testing periods. As you can see, for m o s t o f t he gro up s, t he re is s ome , b u t n o t c o mp l e t e , cont i nui t y

10

1.

T H E NATURE O F PREJUDICE

TABLE 1.1 The Five Most Frequently Cited Stereotypes for Americans, Germans, Jews, and Negroes: 1933, 1951, 1967 19.33

1951

1967

A me r i c a n s I n d us tr i ou s Int el ligent Materialistic Ambi ti ous Progressive

Materialistic Int el li gent Ind us t ri ou s Pleasure loving Individualistic

Materialistic Ambi ti ou s Pl easure loving I n d u s tr i ou s Int ell i gent

Germans Scientifically m i n d e d I nd us tr i ou s Stolid Intelligent M e t ho di ca l

Scientifically m i n d e d I nd us t r i o u s Ext re me ly nationalistic I nt el li gent Aggressive

I n d u st r i ou s Scientifically m i n d e d Efficient E xt re me ly nationalistic Aggressive

J e ws Shr ewd M e r c en a ry I n d u st r i ou s G r as pi ng I nt ell i gent

Sh re wd Int ell i gent I n d u st r i o u s M e r ce n ar y Ambi ti ou s

Ambi t i ou s Materialistic Int el ligent In d u s tr i ou s Shr ewd

Negroes Superst it ious Lazy Happy-go-lucky Ignorant Musical

Super st i ti ous Musical Lazy Ignorant Pl easure loving

Musical Happy-go-lucky Lazy Pl easure loving O s t e nt a t i o u s

Note. F r o m “O n t h e F a d i n g o f Social St er eo t yp e s: St udies in T h r e e G e n e r a t i o n s o f C o l ­ lege S t ud e nt s , " by M. Karlins, T. I.. C o f f m a n , a n d G. Walters, \9 6 9 , Jou rn a l o f Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 1 -16. C o p y r i g h t €> 1969 by t he A m e r i c a n Psychological Association. R e ­ p r i n t e d with p e r mi ss i o n .

fr o m g e n e r a t i o n to g e n e r a t i o n . A m e r i c a n s b e c a m e viewed as less p r o g r e s ­ sive a n d m o r e p l e a s u r e loving fr om 1933 to 1967; G e r m a n s , in th e s a m e p e ­ rio d , w ere viewed as m o r e aggressive a n d na tio na lis ti c a n d less i n te ll ig e n t a n d stolid. T h e Jews c a m e to b e s een as less m e r c e n a r y a n d g r a s p in g , a n d m o r e ma te rialistic a n d a m b i t i o u s — m o r e A m e r i c a n . N e g r o e s lost t h e s t e r ­ e o ty p e o f “i g n o r a n t ” in 1967, b u t n o t t h o s e o f b e i n g lazy a n d mu sical. N ear ly e v e r y o n e kn ow s t h a t all th e s e s te r e o ty p e s a r c i n c o r r e c t in th e s en s e t h a t th e y d o n o t c h a r a c t e r i z e all o r even m o s t o f t h e m e m b e r s o f th e va ri ou s e t h n i c g r o u p s . As a c o n s e q u e n c e , we t e n d to d i s c o u n t t h e m , a t least w h e n h e l d by o t h e r s . P a rt o f th e p r o b l e m s tem s fr om t h e way t h e d a t a were

S TE RE OTYP E S

11

c oll ec te d— s tu d e n t s were asked to identify traits typical o f each g r o up . No o n e knows how “typical” was u n d e r s t o o d , b u t t h e r e is g o o d r eason to b e ­ lieve t ha t t he s t u d e n t s were f or ce d to m a ke absolute j u d g m e n t s a b o u t g r o u p s r a t h e r t h a n relative ones. For e x a mp l e , wh at docs it m e a n t ha t N e ­ groes are musical? Relative to wh at or wh o m? S u b s e q u e n t research by C. McCauley a n d Stitt (1978) a n d o t he r s c or ­ r e ct ed this p r o b l e m a n d p r e s e n t e d us with a m o r e palatable view o f s te re o­ types. T h e essential idea is th at a trait is seen to char acter ize an e thni c g r o u p if it is m o r e typical of t hat g r o u p th an it is for p e o p l e in g ener al. S u b ­ jects were asked the following kinds o f questions: W h a t p e r c e n t a g e o f G e r ­ m a n s are e xt r eme ly nationalistic? W h a t p e r c e n t a g e o f p e o p l e in the world generally are e xt re me ly nationalistic? W h a t p e r c e n t a g e o f G e r m a n s are su­ perstitious? W h a t p e r c e n t a g e o f p e o p l e in the worl d generally arc supersti­ tious? C. McCauley a n d Stitt (1978), for t he first q u e st io n, f o u n d t ha t t he av­ e rage p e r c e n t a g e for p e o p l e in ge ne r al was 35.4, a n d for G e r m a n s , 5(5.3. For t he s e c o nd q u e st io n, the p e r c e n t a g es were 42.1 for p e o p l e in g ener al , a n d 30.4 for G e r ma n s . By c o m p u t i n g the ratio for each pair o f p er ce nt ag es , you can d e t e r m i n e how m u c h m o r e or less typical each stereotype is for G e r m a n s , o r for any e t hn ic g ro u p. T h u s G e r m a n s are viewed as m u c h m o r e nationalistic t han o t he rs (the ratio is m u c h g r e at e r th an 1.0), b u t a p p r e c i a ­ bly less superstitious ( the ratio is m u c h less th an 1.0). Are these stereotypes valid? Are G e r m a n s really m o r e nationalistic a n d less superstitious? T h e r e is n o way to d e t e r m i n e t he answers. How do you find o u t how m a ny p e o p l e in ge ne ra l arc superstitious? Stereotypes f u n c­ tion to he lp us b ri ng c o n c c p t u a l o r d e r to o u r e xp er i en ces , a n d periodically to m a k e decisions on the basis o f t h e m. Wre a ssume t ha t the o n e s we h o l d are, m o r e or less, valid. Do wtc always act on the basis o f o u r stereotypes? Most o f us have h e a r d p e o p l e d e r i de a p a r tic ul a r e t h ni c g r o up , a n d soften thei r stance by saying, “S om e of my best friends are . . .” S om e of thei r best fri ends may really be m e m b e r s o f th a t g r o up . R. Brown (1986) h e l p e d us u n d e r s t a n d this p h e ­ n o m e n o n by casting it in the f r ame wo rk o f d eci sion- maki ng theory. He points o u t an i m p o r t a n t distinction b et ween ge ne ra l base rale kno wle dg e a b o u t a g r o u p o f which a p er s on is a m e m b e r , for e x a mp l e , lawyers, en g i ­ neers, w o m e n , Jews, a n d individuating information (specific i n f or ma ti on ) a b o u t a p a rt i c ul a r m e m b e r o f t ha t g r o u p. Stereotypes arc wh at is believed to be base rates a b o u t gr oups, for e x a mp l e, t h a t G e r m a n s arc m o r e n a t i o n ­ alistic t h a n p e o p l e in g ener al . Su pp o s e you w a n te d to hire a p e r so n for i n ­ t e rn a ti o na l work a n d it was very i m p o r t a n t to you t h a t t he e mp lo y ee n o t be nationalistic. All things b e i ng equal, if you believed the G e r m a n stereotype, you woul d n o t hire a G e r m a n for t ha t j o b . But, you interview several peo p l e, a n d o n e o f w h om is a G e r m a n who d oc s n o t a p p e a r to be in t he least n a ­ tionalistic. WTh a t do you do?

12

1.

T H E N AT U RE O F PREJUDI CE

T h e r e is a rule in decision theory, Bayes* Rule (Goldb erg , 1960), which states tha t the optim al decision we can make will take into a c c o u n t both base rates a n d individuating in fo r m at io n . Intuitively this mak es sense. T h e individuating in fo r m at io n is usually based on a small, potentially i n a d e ­ q ua te sample o f be ha vi or for o n e partic ula r p e rs o n , whereas the base rates tell us s o m e t h i n g based on ma ny p e o p le across ma n y situations. It turns out, in a wide variety o f labora tory studies deal in g with such stereotypes as the relative assertiveness o f m e n , the political conservatism o f e ng ine er s, a n d the relative e m o ti o n a l instability o f “n i g h t ” pe o p le , that mos t o f us do n o t use Bayes’ Rule. Surprisingly, p e ople do n o t use stereotypes either. W h e n subjects in e x p e r i m e n t s have relevant individuating in fo r m at io n , they ig n o re the stereotype a n d m ak e th e ir decisions on the individuating inf or ma ti on . T h u s the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d e m pl oy e r m ig h t very well hir e the G e r m a n applicant. T h e social psychology literature has ma ny e xa mp le s o f prejud ices over­ riding individuating i n fo r m a t io n , a n d o f the converse. Nevertheless, lab o­ ratory research makes it clear tha t pe rs ons are n o t necessarily hypocrites or liars when they tell you th a t “some o f their best friends are. . . As we no te d , stereotypes are so me o f the ways we categorize p e ople in o r­ d e r to he lp brin g o r d e r to o u r co nce pt s a b o u t t h e m , a n d to r e d u c e the e n o r m o u s a m o u n t o f social in fo r m at io n we arc e xp os e d to in o u r daily lives. D. L. H am ilt on a n d T ro lie r (1986) asked wh at arc the psychological c o n s e q u e n c e s o f categorizing others. W h e n the person is a m e m b e r o f o n e g r o u p (the in g r o u p ) a n d is ma kin g c o m pa r is o ns between h e r o r his g r o u p a n d m e m b e r s o f a n o t h e r g r o u p (the o u t g r o u p ) , five int eresting effects occur: 1. People believe they are m o re similar to i n g r o u p m e m b e r s in a hos t of u n r e l a t e d ways than they are to o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . 2. Yet i n g r o u p m e m b e r s believe that th er e is m o r e pe rs on al diversity in the i n g r o u p tha n in the o u t g r o u p , for e xam pl e, “T h e y ’re all alike in that g ro u p (the o u t g r o u p ) . ” 3. O n the o t h e r h a n d , almost in c o n tr a di ct io n to the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d , w he n a p e rs on rates m e m b e r s o f an i n g r o u p a n d an o u t g r o u p on vari­ ous psychological characteristics, o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s receive m o r e e x t r e m e ratings, for e xa mp le , “T h e y ’re t r e m e n d o u s artists, whereas w e’re pretty g o o d . ” 4. Individuals are m o r e likely to r e m e m b e r m o r e positive in for ma ti on a b o u t i n g r o u p than o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s a n d m o r e negative in f o r m a ­ tion a b o u t o u t g r o u p tha n i n g r o u p m e m be rs . 5. Individuals are m o r e likely to perceive m o r e favorable causes for the same beh avi or of i n g r o u p tha n o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , for e x am pl e, “We

STIGMAS

13

d o it b e c a u s e w e ’re g o o d - h e a r t e d . T h e y d o it b e c a u s e the y w a n t to loo k g o o d . ” It s h o u l d b e c l e a r f r o m H a m i l t o n a n d T r o l i e r ’s r e s e a r c h t h a t c a t e g o r i z ­ ing p e o p l e d o e s m o r e t h a n b r i n g o r d e r a n d r e d u c e i n f o r m a t i o n flow o f o u r e x p e r i e n c e s . C a t e g o r i z i n g also biases th e way we pe rc ei ve , r e m e m b e r , a n d u n d e r s t a n d o t h e r s , th u s r e i n f o r c i n g th e c a t e g o r i e s the m s el ve s . As a c o n s e ­ q u e n c e w h e n ne w a n d p o te n ti a ll y c o n t r a d i c t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n is p r e s e n t e d , ind iv id ua ls o f t e n u n c o n s c i o u s l y d i s t o r t it so t h a t it will be e x p e r i e n c e d as c o n s i s t e n t with t h e i r c at e g o ri e s . F o r e x a m p l e , Bigler a n d L i b e n (1993) p r e ­ s e n t e d 4- to 9-year-old E u r o p e a n - A m e r i c a n c h i l d r e n stories d e a l i n g with traits a n d social r e l a t i o n s t h a t w er e e i t h e r c o n s i s t e n t with o r i n c o n s i s t e n t with c u l t u r a l s te r e o ty p e s a b o u t Afri can A m e r i c a n s . C h i l d r e n g e n e r a ll y h a d p o o r e r m e m o r y f o r th e c ul tu ra lly i n c o n s i s t e n t t h a n c o n s i s t e n t stories. M o r e o v e r , th o s e w ho h e l d s t r o n g racial s te r e o ty p e s h a d th e p o o r e s t recall, overall. W e d e v e l o p beliefs a b o u t o t h e r s b e c a u s e o f t h e i r g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p ; a n d has b e e n s e e n , it m a k e s a big d i f f e r e n c e w h e t h e r the y are i n g r o u p o r o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . In th e n e x t two s e c ti o n s we e x p l o r e s o m e o f c o n s e ­ q u e n c e s o f m o r e e x t r e m e beliefs a b o u t o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s .

ST IG M A S D u r i n g W7o r l d W a r II, th e Jews in N a z i - o c c u p i e d c o u n t r i e s w e re r e q u i r e d to w e a r s i x - p o i n t e d stars ( t h e St ar o f David) on t h e i r o u t e r g a r m e n t s . T h i s i d e n t i f i e d t h e m as Jews, w h o w e r e c o n s i d e r e d by t h e Nazis to be less t h a n h u m a n , b u t i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m non-J ews in n e a r l y all o t h e r ways ( m a l e c i r c u m c i s i o n was a n o t h e r way, b u t n o t r e a d il y o b s e r v a b l e ) . T h e Jews wrc r e s t i g m a t i z e d by t h e Nazis, a n d t h e St ar o f David was t h e outwTa r d sign. U n l i k e t h e to p i c o f s t e r e o t y p i n g , t h e r e is n o a m b i g u i t y a b o u t t h e r e l a t i o n ­ s h ip b e t w e e n s ti g m a s a n d p r e j u d i c e . M o r e o v e r , u n l i k e o t h e r f o r m s o f p r e j ­ u d i c e , in w h i c h t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n a t t i t u d e s a n d b e h a v i o r is n o t s t r o n g , s t i g m a t i z e d g r o u p s a r c n e a r l y always d i s c r i m i n a t e d a g a in s t, s o m e ­ ti m e s fatally. G o f f m a n , o n e o f t h e m o s t im a g in a tiv e social scientists o f o u r ti m e , w ro te a b o o k on this topic, Stigm a, Notes on the M anagem ent o f Spoiled Identity (1 96 3) . G o f f m a n tells us t h a t th e G r e e k s o r i g i n a t e d th e te rm stigma w h o se m e a n i n g r e f e r r e d “. . . to b od il y signs d e s i g n e d to e x p o s e s o m e t h i n g u n ­ usual a n d b a d a b o u t t h e m o r a l status o f t h e s ig ni fie r” (p. 1). T h e c u r r e n t m e a n i n g o f th e te rm is d e ri v e d fr om its G r e e k o ri g i n s b u t de als with th e “d i s g r a c c ” itself— s o m e c h a r a c te ri s ti c o r a t t r i b u t e o f an in d i v i d u a l t h a t

14

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

spoils, discredits, or disqualifies h i m — a n d n o t so m u c h to t he physical sign itself. Stigmas h el p de fine the social identity o f individuals a n d s h o ul d be seen in a social context . T h u s , a stigma to o n e g r o up , for e x a mp l e, a cr imi­ nal r e c o r d to middle-class p e o pl e , may n o t be a stigma to a n o t h e r g r o u p , for e x a mp l e , a cri minal r e c o r d to m e m b e r s o f the Mafia. In fact, for the lat­ ter g r o u p , it may be a positive characteristic. Stigmas are based on objective characteristics o f peo p le , for e x a mp le , bci n g j e w i s h , African Ame ri ca n, physically d e f o r m e d , deaf, mentally r e t a rd e d, h o m o s e x u a l , an ex-ment al patient, b u t these characteristics usually have no i n h e r e n t stigmatizing effect. T h e stigmatized characteristic gets identified as such by o n e or m o r e g r o u p s in a c ul tur e a n d c o m e s to s tand for, o r sig­ nify the p e r so n himself, for e x a mp l e , “H e ’s an African A m e r i c a n , ” “S h e ’s d eaf .” Being stigmatized is to be d e h u m a n i z e d o r d ep e r s on a li z ed , which leads to b e i ng tr ea te d in often discriminatory, p r e di c ta bl e ways. T h e person with the stigma b e c o m e s an object, a special de va lue d one. Gof fma n (1963) de sc r i b e d t h r e e b r o a d types o f stigma: (a) physical d e ­ formities or incapacities; (b) “b l e mi she s o f individual c h a r a c t e r , ” such as i m p r i s o n m e n t , m e n t a l di so rde r, radical political behavior; a n d (c) “tribal” o ne s o f race, n a ti on , a n d religion. T h e latter are “i n h e r i t e d ” c i t he r g e ne t i ­ cally, o r t h r o u g h o n e ’s family o f origin. Go f fma n views these as having m o r e o r less eq u iv al en t effects on adults, b u t I t hi nk they may have very diff er ent d ev e l o p m e n t a l p at hs for ch i ld re n. As an e x a mp l e , t h e re may be c har act er is­ tics such as physical def or mit i es or behavioral a bn o r ma l it i e s th at are readily stigmatized by c hi l d r e n . Stigmas for m o r e purely, culturally d e f i n ed c h a r a c ­ teristics such as religious o r sexual p r e f e r e n c e may be a c q u i re d m o r e slowly o r with g r e at e r difficulty be ca u s e they are n o t readily observable. T h e r e may be d e ve l o p m e n t a l di fferences for ac qu i r i n g stigmas for which the p e r ­ son is b lamewor thy, for e x a mp l e, criminality, as c on t r a st e d with those for which a p e r so n is blameless, such as race o r ethnicity. T h e causes for stigmatizing o the rs arc pr ob a bl y n o dif fe re nt t ha n those u n de r ly i n g p r ej u d ic e in g ener al. As has b e e n n o t e d , f o r m i n g social c a te go ­ ries is a n a t u ra l c o n s e q u e n c e o f pr ocessi ng social i nf o rm at io n . Certainly stigmas “a i d ” in t ha t process. I. Katz (1979) in di ca t ed t h a t t h e r e is a fair a m o u n t of evi dence to s u p p o r t a “s c ap e g o a t i n g ” cause. T h a t is, individuals o r g r o u p s arc periodically fr ust r ated or p r o v ok e d in thei r a t te mp t s to attain certain goals a n d b l a m e o t h e r s for t he ir failures, for e xa mp le , “T h e Blacks are gett ing all the g o o d j obs, now. ” Sc a pe go a t in g is essentially displ aced ag­ gression. I. Katz (1979) suggested a n o t h e r relat ed cause t ha t deals with at­ t e mp ts to assuage guilt or mo r al d is co mf or t based on o u r k no wi cd gc o f the e xistence o f stigmatized gr oups. We see t ha t it is w r on g to mi st r eat h o m o ­ sexuals, or Blacks, o r wh o me v er . In o r d e r to justify t ha t t r e a t m e n t and o u r failures to ge t ot he r s to c h a n g e th at mi s t r e a t m e n t , we c o m e to believe that the stigmatized g r o u p really deserves it— they are morally i nferior. This is es-

STI GMAS

15

scntially a d i s so na nc e e x p l a n a ti o n. Still o n e m o r e possible e x p l a n at i o n is t h a t the existence o f stigmatized g r o u p s m a k e s us feel b e t t e r a b o u t o u r ­ selves. We may sec ourselves as morally s u pe ri or , o r alternatively, as f o r t u­ na te t h a t we are “n o t o n e o f t h e m . ” Psychologically a n d socially, status is a powerful mo tiva tor o f behavior. O n e o f the c o n s e q u e n c e s o f stigmatizing o th er s is t ha t it p r o d u c e s “a m ­ bi val ent” feelings in us toward m e m b e r s o f the stigmatized g r o u p (I. Katz, 1981). T h e c o n c e p t o f amb iv al en ce has its roots in early 20th c e n t ur y psy­ choanalytic a n d sociological theory. It refers to dual or o p p o s i n g feelings we occasionally have towards ot hers, such as love a n d hat e, att ract ion, a n d repul si on. In the realm o f stigmas, the o p p o s i n g feelings arc hostility or aversion versus a c c e p t a n c e o r sympathy; w h e n these dual feelings arc a r o u s e d d u r i n g i nt er ac ti on s with stigmatized ot her s, we try to resolve the i n ­ compatibility o r conflict t h r o u g h a variety o f behavi oral strategics. O n e of the i m p o r t a n t c o n s e q u e n c e s o f amb i va le nc e is t ha t o u r positive or negative feelings ge t e x a g g er a t ed o r amplified, d e p e n d i n g on t he situation. T h u s m o d e r a t e c o n c e r n can ge t t r a n s f o r m e d into d e e p compass ion a n d m o d e r ­ ate dislike into m a r k e d rejection. I. Katz (1981) d e ve l o p e d a n d tested these ideas t h r o u g h research involv­ ing two stigmatized g r o u ps in t he U n i t e d States: Blacks a n d those who have physical disabilities. T h e d o m i n a n t feeling ma ny Whit es have toward Blacks is r ejection, a n d by a bl e- bodi ed toward disabled persons, sympathy. But r e ­ j e ct io n toward Blacks is often a c c o m p a n i e d by feelings o f positive c o n c er n a b o u t racial di scr imi nat i on; a n d s ympathy toward the h a n d i c a p p e d is often a c c o m p a n i e d by avoidance or p at roni z ati on. In a typical racial e x p e r i m e n t , Katz bri ngs Whi t e a d ul t subjects i nto a lab­ or at or y setting a n d they are m e t by a Black or Wrhite c o n f e d e r a t e o f the e x ­ p e r i m e n t e r (This p a r t n e r s h i p is u n k n o w n to the subjects) a n d a Whi t e ex­ p e r i m e n t e r . S ome activity is car ri ed o u t in which the subjects are asked to do s o me t h i ng , for e x a mp l e, h e l p i n g o r insulting the c o nf e de r at e . T h e n the subjects arc asked to fill o u t an i mpression r ati ng scale a b o u t t he c o n f e d e r ­ ate. Similar p r o c e d u r e s arc used with n o n h a n d i c a p p e d adults as subjects a n d c o nf e de r at e s wh o are e i t h er n o r m a l a p p e a r i n g o r in wheelchairs. T h e basic m e a s u r e in all these cases is the subj ect s’ r espons es to t he two types of con fe de rate s. Based on the t he or y t h a t ambiva l e nc e causes e x a g g er a t ed r es pons e s to stigmatized persons, Katz p r e d i c t e d th at bo t h positive a n d negative r e ac ­ tions to Black relative to Whi t e c o nf e d er a t es a n d to h a n d i c a p p e d relative to n o n h a n d i c a p p c d c o nf e de r at e s woul d be m o r e m a r k e d . T h e s e p re dic ti o n s were s u p p o r t e d in nearly all e x p er i m en t s. For e xa mp l e , in o n e study, Whi t e subjects were asked by the r e s e a r c h e r to m a ke highly critical s ta te me nt s to t he Black o r Wh i te c o n f e d e r a t e a b o u t the l a t t e r ’s personality. S ub se ­ quently, the subjects were asked by the c o n f e d e r a t e to h e lp him with a tc-

16

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

clious task. T h e Black c o n f e d e r a t e received m u c h m o r e h e l p th a n the Whi te ones, which indicates g r e at e r s ympathy for the Black t ha n Wrhitc persons. We can sec fr om this scenari o that the ramifications o f p r ej u d ic e a n d dis­ c ri mi na ti on arc c o m p le x , b u t occasionally p r ed i ct ab l e in s urprising ways. Stigmatizing o th er s is p e r h a p s the m o s t d e ba s i ng form o f p r ej udi ce a n d t h u s the mo st psychologically destructive for the targets. T h e physical cons c q u e nc c s o f stigmatization can also be e n o r m o u s as seen in the nearly total anni hi la ti on o f E u r o p e a n Jews by the Nazis d u r i n g W o r l d W a r II. Official stigmatization o f certain g r o u p s within a c ul tur e do e s n o t usually lead to thei r physical d e st r uct ion. In fact, it leads to thei r con ti n ui ty over time be ca us e o f t he i m p o r t a n t funct ions the stigmatized g r o u ps serve for the l arger society. We can learn a gr eat deal a b o u t the study o f p re j ud i ce by e x a m i n i n g such situations.

U N T O U C H ABILITY AND T H E C O N S E Q U E N C E S O F B EI NG STI GMATI ZED This section is based on Passi n’s (1955) article de al in g with outcasts in I n ­ dia a n d J a p a n , the books by DeVos a n d Wra ga t s u ma (1966) on the J a p a ne s e, a n d Isaacs (1965) on the Asian Indians. A l t h o ug h the existence o f “u n ­ t o u c h a b l e ” castes in I ndia is well-known in We st er n cul tur e, c o m p a r a b l e g r o u p s have existed in J a p a n for over 1,000 years. T h e r e are m a r k e d similar­ ities in the origins o f these g r o up s in the two cult ures as well as in the social a n d psychological c o n s e q u e n c e s o f b ei ng u n t o u c h a b l e . Unlike the idea of social class, which implies the long-term possibility o f u pw ar d or d ownwa rd m o v e m e n t , castes are m o r e o r less p e r m a n e n t i n h e r i t e d characteristics o f peop le . In b o t h count ri es, untouchability was a legally s a n c t io ne d status for su b­ stantial p or t i on s o f the p o pu l a t i o n. In I ndi a these g r o u ps c o m p ri s e d a b o u t 15% o f the society a n d in J a p a n , a b o u t 2% . Peopl e o f u n t o u c h a b l e castes lit­ erally coul d n o t be t o u c h e d by o t h e r g r o u p s wit ho u t the o t h e r g r o u p s r u n ­ n i n g the risk o f b e i n g c o n t a m i n a t e d o r defiled themselves. U n t o u c h a b l e s lived in s e gr eg at ed villages or n e i g h b o r h o o d s a n d were generally isolated fr om others. In b o t h cultures, u n t o u c h a b l e s were often viewed as n o t quite h u m a n . In J a p a n the n a m e for the m a j or u n t o u c h a b l e g r o u p , E ta, refers to four-legged animals. Legally, they were often restricted in the clothes they c ould wear, the way they coul d d e c o ra t e their houses, a n d the way they c ould beh av e publicly. T h e y c o u l d n ot s har e public facilities with the h i g h e r castes. T h e i r legal rights were greatly r e d u c e d , a n d they c ould n o t a t t e n d school. Also, until p r e s e n t times they c ou l d n o t own l and, which in a grari an societies woul d be a powerful h i n d r a n c e to o v e rc o mi n g poverty. T h e category of u n t ou c ha bi l i ty was first officially b a n n e d in J a p a n in 1871, a n d in India, in 1949. But, similar to t he effects o f abolition o f slavery

U N T O U C H A B I L I T Y AND T H E C O N S E Q U E N C E S O F BE I NG S T I GMATI ZE D

17

in t he U n i t e d States, the J a p a n e s e a n d I ndi a n e x -u n to u ch a bl e s r em a i n stig­ mati zed in t h e ir societies, socially a n d physically s e p a ra t e d fr om th ei r c o u n ­ trymen. Passin (1955) suggested, a n d Isaacs (1965) a n d DeVos a n d W a g at s um a (1966) c o n c u r r e d , that t he re were t h r ee essential e l e me n t s r e q u i r e d for the evolution o f untouchabi lit y. T h e first was t h a t t he society have a rigid a n d he re di ta ry caste system. In bo t h societies, historically t h e r e were t h r ee to f o u r hierarchically a r r a n g e d caste g r o u ps a n d below t h e m , t he u n t o u c h ables. T h e second was t he be li ef t h a t status dif fer ences be twe en p e o p l e arc i n h e r e n t in the n a t u r e of the universe; a n d m o r e o v e r that these differences are bas ed on an u nd e rl y i ng i n h e r i t e d mor al state. For the I ndi a n cult ure, the c o n c c p t o f t r ans mi tti ng o n e ’s mo ra l state across g e n e r a t i o n s is based on religious beliefs. For t he J a p a ne s e, transmission o f a “g o o d ” or a “b ase ” mo ra l state is n ot directly based on religious principles. T h e third e l e m e n t was the existence o f a religious be li e f that associates the c o n c e p t o f p ol l ut ion a n d ritual imp ur it y with certain substances, usually dirt, b lo od , a n d d e a d ani mal s a n d p e op l e. E x c r e m e n t falls in the pol l ut ed category in India b u t n ot in J a p a n . T h e key aspect h e r e is t hat p e o p l e with certain o c c up a ti on s regularly a n d necessarily c o m e in c o n t ac t with pol l u t ed substances, for e xa mp l e , s tr eet cleaners, b ut c he r s, u n d e rt a k e r s, a n d thus b e c o m e p ol lu t ed themselves. T h e “fact” o f this polluti on indicates t h a t they have a base mo ra l state received from their ancestors, which will t ra nsmi t to th ei r offspring. Thus , even if u n t o u c h a b l e s arc n o l o n g e r in c o n t ac t with po ll u te d substances they arc still po ll ut ed , a n d “c o n t a g i o u s ” to others. In­ d e ed , in bo th J a p a n a n d India, the majority o f e x -u n t ou c ha b le s do not e n ­ gage in jobs t ha t p u t t he m in c o n t a c t with these substances. Despite the u n p r o v e n beliefs ma ny In di a ns a n d J a p a n e s e have t ha t the u n t o u c h a b l e s c o m e from dif fe re nt racial stocks th an the h i g h e r castes, t he re arc essentially n o physical dif fer ences be twe en the gr oups. In J a p a n the u nt o u c h a b l e s , officially callcd B uraku, look exactly like t h e i r nei gh bo rs . T h e r e are behavioral differences, however, b u t these are rel ated to e d u c a ­ tion a n d social class differences. In I ndi a t h e r e arc a n u m b e r o f regi onal dif fer ences in physical a p p c a r a n c e . Generally, li ghter skin is m o r e valued t h a n d ar k skin. Al th o ug h the u n t o u c h a b l e s , now officially r e f e r r ed to as scheduled castes, may often be d a r k e r t han t he h i g h e r castes, t h e r e is s ubs t an ­ tial overlap in skin color. T hu s, a very dar k- ski nned o r very l ight-skinned In­ dian may be fr om the hig he st as well as from the lowest castes. In b ot h c o u n ­ tries, t h e re are generally no l a ng u ag e o r religious di fferences be twe en the u n t o u c h a b l e s a n d those o f the h i g h e r castes. T h e original creat ion o f u n t o u c h a b l e castes, a n d thei r unofficial m a i n t e ­ n a n c e today is largely bas ed on e c o n o m i c , social, a n d psychological r e a ­ sons. Economically, the n o n o u t c a s t e g r o u p s are assured t ha t m a n y o f the least desirable work activities will be c ar rie d out , likely for relatively low

18

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

wages. High status or hi gh paying jobs in n o cul t ur es go to t he lowest social classes. For the u n t o u ch a bl e s , however, e m p l o y m e n t in these u nd e si r ab l e jobs is g u a r a n t e e d b ecause they have a m o n o p o l y on t h e m. Fu r th e r, these oc c up a t io n s are essential to t he m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e society so t ha t the like­ l ih oo d o f u n e m p l o y m e n t is often less for t he m than for individuals in the h i g h e r caste groups. Socially, t he e x -u n t o u c h a b l e g r o up s arc given a g r e at deal o f a u t o n o m y in g ov er n in g th ei r own s eg r eg a te d c o m m un i ti e s. T h e y arc well-known to each o t h e r a n d mut ual l y supportive. This g e o g r a p h i c segr egati on gives the h i g h e r caste s o m e as s ur anc e t ha t they will n o t c o m e in c o n t ac t with cxu nt o u c h a b l e s . Psychologically, t h e r e are the benefits to the non- out cast es t h a t we previously n o t e d in o u r discussion o f stigmas. T h e status o f the exu n t o u c h a b l e s is e n o r m o u s l y d e g r ad i n g . Apparentl y, nearly all cx - un t ou c hablcs carry the e m o t i o n a l scars o f this d e g r a d a t i o n t h r o u g h o u t t h e ir lives. In J a p a n a n d India, t he official e li mi nat i on o f u n t o u c h a b l e status c ame a b o u t t h r o u g h c h a n ge s in t he g o v e r n m e n t . In J a p a n , t he To k ug a wa rulers were r cp la c cd by t he Meiji, a n d in India, the British were r e p l ac e d by the Indi ans themselves. T h e eli mi na ti on o f slavery in t he South in the U ni t e d States o c c u r r e d after the start o f the Civil War, n o t b ef or e it. In all t hr ee cases, a h u m a n e p hi lo s op h y o ve rc ame e n t r e n c h e d cul tural practices at times o f political revolution. T h u s powerful conservative forces h a d to be ov er c om e to p r o d u c e these h u m a n e changes. Both Isaacs (1965) a n d DeVos a n d W a g a t s u m a (1966) wrot e in d e p t h a b o u t the psychological c o n s e q u c n c e s o f b e i n g b o r n into an cx -u nt ou ch ablc caste. T h e y have p o i n t e d o u t s o m e obvious parallels to b e i n g b o r n Afri­ can Ame ric an. In bo t h J a p a n a n d India, the e x - u n t ou c ha b l e c hi ld r en us u ­ ally p e r f or m m o r e poorly in school a n d have a h i g h e r d r o p o u t rate th an o t h e r gro u p s. In seg r eg ate d schools, it is often difficult to find h i g h e r caste t eacher s to i ns t ru ct t h e m , a n d in in t eg r at e d schools, the h i g h e r caste chil­ d r e n often di scr imi nate against t he e x- unt ouc ha bl e s. E x- u nt o u c ha b l e chil­ d r e n , adol escent s a n d adults are s o m e w h a t a pp r eh e n s i ve a b o u t leaving thei r c o m m u n i t i e s for fear o f b e i ng ostracized. As a c o n s e q u e n c e o f persis­ t e nt hostility o r t he t h r e a t o f it from the l arger cul tur e, ma ny, p e r h a p s mo st e x- u nt o uc h ab le s c o m e to view themselves as c o n t a m i n a t e d . Because o f this per si st ent d isc ri min ati on , t he ir exp ec ta ti on s a b o u t f ut ur e success in the larger cul tu r e arc mi ni ma l. T h e safety n e t is t he s e gr eg at ed n e i g h b o r h o o d , b ut at the s ame time, that is the “s p i d e r ’s we b. ” E d u ca t io n a n d mo vi ng to the cities offer s o m e p r o s pe c t o f escape from unt ouchabi l it y. But escape can be a c co m p l i s h e d mainly t h r o u g h “pass­ i n g ”— p r e t e n d i n g to be a h i g h e r caste individual. T h e psychological costs are e n o r m o u s . O n e loses his s u p p o r t system be ca us e he has cut hi ms e lf off from family a n d friends, has a c o n s t a n t fear o f discovery, a n d c a n n o t live a n o r m a l social life. Mor eover , in these two cultures, p e o p l e are very con-

P S Y C H O L O G I C A L C O N S E Q U E N C E S O F AF RI CAN- AMERI CAN SLAVERY

19

c c r n e d a b o u t “family o f o r i g i n ” a n d m a k e inquiries a b o u t it. You have to lie, b u t t he re is a fair c h a n c e t h a t it will be discovered. Isaacs (1965) a n d DcVos a n d W a g at s u m a (1966) r e p o r t e d t h a t s ome pr ogress has b e e n m a d e against this stigmatization, b u t it has b e e n slow. No o n e ant icipates t ha t it will be er as e d be for e several g e n e r a t i o n s have passed. If the history o f p re ju di ce a n d di scr i minat ion toward t he Jews a n d the Blacks is any i ndi cat or, several g e n e r a t i o n s is an optimistic speculation.

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES O F AFRICAN-AMERICAN SLAVERY As n o t e d , several writers have p o i n t e d o u t t he parallels be twe en cx-unt ouchability in Asia a n d ex-slavery in the U n i t e d States. This section e x ­ plores s o me o f t he socialization c o n s e q u e n c e s o f b e i n g raised as a slave a n d o f b e i n g d e s c e n d e d from African-American slaves. Two will be e m p h as i z ed h e r e — t he positive a n d negative c o n s e q u e n c e s — feeling worthy versus feel­ ing unwor thy. T h e slaves a n d their d e s c e n d a n t s have a h er it age o f b e i ng free p e o p l e from African societies rich in cultural traditions. T he y were c a p ­ t u r e d by o t h e r Africans, a n d u p r o o t e d from t he ir sources of n u r t u r a n c c , p r ot e c t i o n , a n d identity. A new i m p o s e d definition o f self was given t h e m , a def init ion t ha t a t t e m p t e d to strip t he m o f dignity. T h e r e were c o n t r a d i c ­ tions, the m o s t salient, p e r h ap s , b e i n g Christianization. As slaves, they were per cei ved by thei r mast er s a n d society as b e i ng h u m a n e n o u g h , worthy e n o u g h to a c c ep t the Christian bible a n d God. Most d ev e lo p e d two p e r s o­ nas, the h u m b l e , usually o b e d i e n t , self-effacing p r es e nt a ti o n o f self to White peopl e, a n d freedom-loving, self-respectful, mutually supportive pres­ ent at i on o f self to thei r Black relatives a n d friends. A mistake often m a d e by the Wrhite p o p u l a t i o n was believing th at the p e r s o n a shown to Whi tes was t he tr ue pe rs o n a . T h e slaves’ f r e q u e n t a t t e m p t e d escapes a n d d i so b ed i e n ce were a tt r ib u te d to alleged Black s u b h u m a n qualities, as o p p o s e d to n at ur al h u m a n r es pons e s to f or c ed e nslavement . But did the slaves, to s ome ex te nt , a c ce pt t he Whit e view o f themselves? T h e r e is a psychoanalytic c on c e pt , identification with the aggressor, that has b e e n used to u n d e r s t a n d the ap pa re ntl y cont radi ct ory reactions o f prisoners toward their guards (Bcttlchcim, 1943). In the Nazi c o nc e nt r at i o n camps, Jews, Poles, a n d o t h e r et hni c g r ou ps occasionally ac cc pted the values o f their prison gua rds toward themselves. S o me viewed the guards as su pe ri or beings, a n d themselves as inferior, deserving o f their d e h um a n iz a ti o n. A m o r e r e c e n t t heoret ical view o f c o m p a r a b l e p h e n o m e n a is r e f er r e d to as the Stockholm Syndrome ( G r a h a m & Rawlings, 1991). T h e s y n d r o m e d e ­ rives its n a m e from observations o f value a n d affcctional shifts by hostages lea di ng to b o n d i n g with th ei r captors. T h e r e arc f ou r m a j o r c on d it i o n s that

20

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

arc pr er equisit es to dev elo pi n g this s yn dr ome : (a) an in d iv id u a l ’s survival is t h r e a t e n e d by “o t h e r s ,” (b) h e is u n a b l e to cscapc from those “o t h e r s , ”1 (c) he is isolated from p e o p l e who arc n o t similarly t h r e a t e n e d , a n d (d) the o t h e r s periodically show k i nd ne ss to hi m. W h e n a p e r so n develops the syn­ d r o m e he c ome s to a d o p t the c a p t o r s ’ values as his own a n d to feel s trong affection for t h e m. T h e s e f o u r c on di t i o n s often o c c u r r e d in slavery c o n d i ­ tions, which suggests t ha t m a n y African A me ri ca ns at least partially ac­ c e p t e d the Whi te p e o p l e ’s views o f t h e m . T h a t is, m a n y slaves, o p e r a t i n g u n d e r t he p s yc hodyna mi cs o f the Stockholm S y n d r o m e c ame to see t h e m ­ selves as less worthy t ha n the Whi t es who c on tr o ll e d t h e m, t h r e a t e n e d their lives, b u t wh o periodically sh o we d t he m kindness. G r a h a m a n d Rawlings (1991) d o c u m e n t e d the evidence o f this syn­ d r o m e in a bu se d w o m e n a n d a b u s e d c h i ld r en . T h e y arc in the process of e x t e n d i n g t he ir analyses to w o m e n , in ge ne ra l, in Ame ri ca n society. I dent i­ fication with the aggressor o r the Sto ck ho lm S y n d r o m e likely applies to all o p p r e ss e d g r o up s in any cul t ur e, a n d n o t only to hostages, a b u s ed peopl e, o r slaves. H e n c e , it ma ke s sense to c o n s i de r its applicability to m a n y postCivil Wa r African Amer i cans , who are still o p p r e ss e d a n d still e n g a g e d in the struggle for f r e e d o m . T h u s , the t h e m e o f feeling wor thy versus feeling u n wo r th y is n o t restricted to slavery. Rather, t h e r e is historical evi dence i n ­ dicat ing t ha t for African Amer icans , these co nt ra di ct or y feelings live side by side within the g r oup.

T H E O R I E S O F P R EJ U D I C E AND D I S C R I M I N A T I O N : I NDI VI DUAL AND C U L T U R A L / H I S T O R I C A L I N F LU E N C E S W h e r e do p re j ud i ce a n d di scr iminati on c o m e from? Many p a r e nt s are s h oc ke d w he n their c hi ld re n express p r e j u di c ed at t it udes that are a n t a g o ­ nistic to l ong-st andi ng family values. Contrariwise, how is it that s o m e chil­ d r e n from bi goted families are n o t in the least pr eju di c ed ? Is p r ej ud ic e in the individual, o r is it in the culture? Allport (1954) c a u t i o n e d us t ha t the law of mult ipl e causation is at play in all social p h e n o m e n a , especially for p re j ud i ce a n d di scr iminat ion. T h a t is, t h e r e are nearly always several causes u n d e r l yi n g the d e v e l o p m e n t an d e x p r e s s i o n o f p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . H e i d e n t i f i e d six m a j o r “causes” o r t heor ies o f p re judi c e, five o f which vary a l on g a d i me n s io n b o u n d e d by individualistic p e r c e p t i o n s a n d beliefs at o n e e n d , a n d by cul­ t u r a l/ hi s t o r i c a l infl uences at the o t he r. It s h ou l d be n o t e d th at t he six causes are o r i e n t e d toward u n d e r s t a n d i n g e t hn i c pr ejudi ce; b u t I believe T h e m a s c u l i n e is u s e d , b u t t h e s y n d r o m e a p p l i e s to b o t h g e n d e r s .

T H E O R IE S O F PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION

21

m o s t , if n o t all, a r c a p p l i c a b l e to o t h e r targe ts o f p r e j u d i c e . I briefly s u m m a ­ rize t h e m . T h e m o s t tra n s it o ry a n d individualistic o f th e six is called t h e phenome­ nological emphasis. In this view, th e p e r s o n ’s c u r r e n t beliefs, p e r c e p t i o n s , a n d t h e ve rba l labels h e uses r e g a r d i n g any p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p d e t e r m i n e how h e will r e a c t to th e s itu a tio n h e is c o n f r o n t e d with. T h e r e is an i m m e d i a c y a b o u t th e se r e a c t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g p r e j u d i c e d o n e s , which m ay b e q u i t e dif­ f e r e n t on s u b s e q u e n t oc casions. A m o r e e n d u r i n g individualistic c au s e is th e psychodynamic emphasis. In this view, p e o p l e d e v e l o p m o r e o r less stable p e r s o n a li t y c ha r a c te ri s ti c s t h a t th e y b r i n g to all social situ at ion s. T h e s e c ha r a c te ri s ti c s p r e d i s p o s e th e i n d i ­ vidual to r e a c t in p r e j u d i c e d ways. A ll p o rt (1954) n o t e d t h r e e types of the se c h ar act er is tic s: conflict resolution, frustration reactions, a n d character structure. C o n fl ic t r e s o l u t i o n re fe rs to th e p e r s i s t e n t a t t e m p t s o f s o m e p e o p l e to gain p o w e r o r status o ve r o t h e r s . F r u s t r a t i o n r e a c t i o n s , also k n o w n as scape­ goating, refe rs to t h e p e r s i s t e n t a t t e m p t s to d i r e c t host ile im p u l s e s t ow a rd m i n o r i t y g r o u p s in o r d e r to d i s c h a r g e feelings o f f r u s t r a t i o n a n d d e p r i v a ­ tion e x p e r i e n c e d in daily life. C h a r a c t e r s t r u c t u r e p r im a r i ly re fe rs to “. . . i n s e c u r e a n d a n x i o u s p e r s o n a l i t i e s w h o take th e a u t h o r i t a r i a n a n d exclus i o n i s t w a y o f life r a t h e r t h a n th e r e l a x e d t r u s t i n g d e m o c r a t i c way” (p. 216). In th e n e x t s ec tio n, wc p r e s e n t an ex ten si ve dis cus si on o f this type. T h e t h i r d c aus e is th e situational emphasis. In this view, p r e j u d i c e is seen as aris ing o u t o f c o n f o r m i t y to t h e c u r r e n t social forces o p e r a t i n g in a c u l­ tu re . T h e focus h e r e is so cio p sy ch olo gic al, as o p p o s e d to p u r e l y i n d iv id u a l­ istic o r p u r e l y c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l . T h e f o u r t h cau se , sociocultural emphasis, is the p r i n c i p a l type o f e x p l a n a ­ tion o f p r e j u d i c e o f f e r e d by sociologists a n d a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s . T h e total so­ cial c o n t e x t is e x a m i n e d with th e view o f id en ti fy in g th o s e t r a d i t i o n s a n d c o n d i t i o n s t h a t p r o d u c e c on fl ic t a m o n g d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s , f o r e x a m p l e , job a n d h o u s i n g c o m p e t i t i o n , a n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s for u p w a r d social mobility. T h e s e le a d to i n c r e a s e d u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t o n e ’s values a n d c u st o m s, w hic h in t u r n le ads to p r e j u d i c e a g a in s t th e g r o u p s o f p e o p l e with w h ic h o n e is in conflict. T h e fifth cau se , historical emphasis, r e c o g n i z e s t h a t t h e r e is ne ar ly always a l o n g history inv olved with conflic t a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n b e t w e e n p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p s in a given c u l t u r e . T h i s history serves to b o t h justify t h e p r e j u d i c e s h e l d by d o m i n a n t g r o u p s a n d to p e r p e t u a t e t h e m . M a n y h i s t o r i a n s believe t h a t e c o n o m i c e x p l o i t a t i o n is at th e h e a r t o f th e m a t t e r . If Blacks, Asians, o r Jews ar c historically s een as m o ra ll y o r “racially” i n f e r i o r , t h e n ne gat iv e t r e a t m e n t o f t h e m by th e e c o n o m i c a l l y d o m i n a n t g r o u p s is s a n c t i o n e d . T h e sixth cause, emphasis on earned reputation is n o t on th e individualisticc u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l d i m e n s i o n . T h i s c aus e asserts t h a t t h e r e a r c p e r c e i v e d d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n g r o u p s , a n d t h a t the se d if f e r e n c e s s ti m u la te dislike

22

1.

T H E NATURE O F PREJUDICE

a n d hostility. T h e not io n o f earned reputation acknowledges tha t at least some o f the perceived differences are based on objective reality. In d e e d , in o u r previous discussion o f stereotypes, we implicitly stated that th e re is of­ ten a re aso na ble basis for the existence o f particular stereotypes. A m o r e r e c e n t analysis o f the ori es o f pre jud ic e a n d dis crimination by M argcr (1991) both simplifies a n d e x te n d s A llp or t’s (1954) conclusions. M argcr identifies th re e types o f theories: psychological, normative, a nd pow er conflict. T h e s e are n o t mutually exclusive, b u t ra th e r, the causes d e ­ scribed often work to ge th e r. T h e psychological the ori es arc exactly the same as A llp or t’s psychodynamic emphasis, a n d n e e d n o t be red escribed. Normative the ori es are c o m b in a ti o n s of A llp or t’s situational emph asis a nd historical emphasis. T h e essence o f these the ori es is that th er e are social n o r m s in a given culture that tell us the way we o u g h t to perceive a n d b e ­ have toward m e m b e r s of partic ula r outg ro u p s . Th e s e n o r m s get trans mi t­ ted to o u r chi ldr en t h r o u g h the processes o f socialization. So me tim es socialization practices arc subtle, almost u nc onsci ous , for e xam pl e, the p a r ­ ents refe rri ng to the African-Amcrican cl ea ni ng w om a n as “the girl” a nd o t h e r times quite blatant. Acting with pre jud ic e a n d dis crimina tion thus b e ­ came the no rm a l, acceptable ways to act in society. T h e r e is some variation in pr e ju di c e a m o n g the d o m i n a n t g r o u p s because th e re are a variety o f “re fe re nc e g ro u p s , ” whose values may be em u la te d . Different socio ec o­ no m ic classes, for e xa m pl e, may develop so m ew ha t di ff ere nt ways o f ex­ pressing pr e ju di c e toward the same target gro up . Power-conflict theories explain how pr e ju di c e a n d discrimination arise, w hereas the previous two categories of theories explain how pre ju dic e a nd discrimination are sustained a n d tran smitted . T h e essential idea in powerconflict theories is tha t d o m i n a n t g r o u p s in a culture arc contin uous ly w orking to ma in ta in the pow’cr a n d privileges they hold. Thes e g r o u p s c re ­ ate social, political, a n d e c o n o m i c institutions to p r o te c t their interests a nd to c ontro l any te n d en c ie s o f s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s to modify the social ord e r. Prejudice a n d discrimination are protective devices th a t are a r o u s e d when a su p e r io r position is t h r e a t e n e d by s u b o r d in a te groups. M ar ger (1991) suggested tha t th e re are usually historical traditions within a c ul tu re that s u p p o r t the claims a n d practices o f the d o m i n a n t groups. In the n e x t two sections o f this c ha pt e r, we ex plo re aspects o f the two e n d p o i n t s o f the individualistic-cultural/historical d im e ns io n. In the first of these sections, T h e A u th or it ar ia n Personality, both a s u m m a ry a n d criti­ cisms of some o f the prin ci pa l research findings on this topic arc p re s e n te d . T h e material is very i m p o r t a n t in the history of research on preju dic e, a nd m o re o v e r indicates the s h o rt c o m in g s of an individualistic a p p r o a c h . In the s e c o n d section, Patriarchy a n d Female Socialization, a discussion is p r e ­ s en te d o f how cultural history a n d socialization practices in te ra ct to p r o ­ du c e female g e n d e r identity. This material is very i m p o r t a n t in h e lp in g us

T H E AU T HOR ITA RIA N PERSONALITY

23

u n d e r s t a n d h o w s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s o cc as ionall y o p e r a t e to p e r p e t u a t e t h e i r own s u b o r d i n a t i o n .

TH E A UTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY T h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e Jewi sh p o p u l a t i o n in E u r o p e was t h e c u l m i n a t i o n o f several h u n d r e d years o f o f t e n v io l en t a nt i- Semi t is m. T h e m a g n i t u d e o f t h e h o r r o r was, a n d is, n ea rl y i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . T h a t it h a p p e n e d , a n d t h a t it was d i r e c t e d by t h e l e a d e r s h i p o f a highl y civilized c o u n t r y , G e r m a n y , c a n ­ n o t be d e n i e d . But, w h a t k i n d o f p e o p l e c o u l d have p e r m i t t e d this to o c cu r? A n u m b e r o f sociologists a n d psychol ogists p u r s u e d an a n sw e r to this q u e s ­ tion in t h e U n i t e d States sh or tl y af t er W o r l d W a r II. T h e i r initial r e s e a r c h was p u b l i s h e d in a 990 p a g e b o o k , The A uthoritarian Personality ( A d o r n o , Fr cn k c l- Br un swi ck , Le v in s o n , 8c S a n f o r d , 1950). S o m e o f t h e a u t h o r s c o n ­ t i n u e d e x p l o r i n g this a r e a f or several m o r e years, a n d m a n y o t h e r s j o i n e d in. Mo st o f t h e r e s e a r c h a n d t h e criticisms o f it w e r e c o m p l e t e d by t h e early 1960s. R o g e r Brown e l o q u e n t l y s u m m a r i z e s this w o r k in t h e first e d i t i o n o f his b o o k , Social Psychology ( 19 6 5 ) . O t h e r m o r e r c c c n t s t u di e s s u p p o r t his c o n c l u s i o n s , f o r e x a m p l e , C h e r r y a n d Byrne (1977) a n d F or b e s ( 1985) . T h e basic p r e m i s e o f A d o r n o c t al. (1950) was t h a t c e r t a i n p er s on a li t y types we re m o r e likely to d e v e l o p s t r o n g p r e j u d i c e s t h a n o t h e r s. It was p o s ­ sible t h a t p a r t i c u l a r c u lt u r e s, for e x a m p l e , t h o s e o f G e r m a n y a n d Austria, wer e m o r e c o n d u c i v e to p r o d u c i n g t h e s e types o f p e o p l e , b u t it was also c l ea r t h a t ant i-Semi ti sm a n d a n ti - N e g r o p r e j u d i c e s w e r e w i d e s p r e a d in t h e U n i t e d States. T h u s , th e y s o u g h t to f i n d t h e p r e j u d i c e d p er so na li ty , a n d n o t t h e p r e j u d i c e d society. T h e i r wor k is heavily b a s e d o n p syc hoa na lyt i c t h e ­ ory, as wTas m u c h o f t h e p e r so n a l i t y r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d o u t in t h e 1940s a n d 1950s, a n d t hey u s e d this t h e o r y to h e l p us u n d e r s t a n d t h e u n d e r l y i n g m echanism s of prejudice. R e s e a rc h o n t h e a u t h o r i t a r i a n p e r s on a l i t y u s e d two b r o a d k i n d s o f m e t h ­ ods, f o r c e d c h o i c e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a n d t h e m o r e clinical t e c h n i q u e s o f p r o ­ j ective q u e s t i o n s , interviews, a n d t h e T h e m a t i c A p p e r c e p t i o n Test. (I am closely f oll owi ng R. B r o w n ’s, 1965, s u m m a r y now. ) T h e s ubj ect s f or t h e r e ­ s e ar ch we re ov e r 2,000 a du lt s f r o m p a r t i c u l a r o r ga n i z a t i o n s , w h ic h i n ­ c l u d e d c o ll ege s t u d e n t s , t e a c h e r s , n u r s e s , u n i o n m e m b e r s , v e t e ra n s, p r i s o n i n m a t e s , a n d p a t i e n t s o f a psychi atri c clinic. Mo st we re W h i t e , n at iv e -b o r n, middle-class, non-Jewish A me r i c a n s . T h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c o n s is t e d o f f o u r scales: t h e Anti -Semi tism Scale, t h e E t h n o c e n t r i s m Scale, t h e Political a n d E c o n o m i c Con ve rv a ti sm Scale, a n d t h e Po te nt i a l it y for Fascism Scale. T h e Anti-Semi t ism Scale c o n s i st e d o f s t a t e m e n t s d e s i g n e d to m e a s u r e t h e e x t e n t to wh i ch t h e indi vi du al h o l d s “. . . s t e r e o t y p e d n eg at iv e o p i n i o n s d e s c r i b i n g t h e Jews as t h r e a t e n i n g , im-

24

1.

T H E NATURE O F PREJUDICE

m o r a l , a n d cat eg ori ca lly d i f f e r e n t from non-Jews, a n d of hos til e a tt it u d e s u r g i n g v a ri ous f o r m s o f r e s tr ic ti o n , e x c lu s io n , a n d s u p p r e s s i o n as a m e a n s of solving th e ‘Jewish P r o b l e m ’ ” ( A d o r n o ct al., 1950, p. 71). All th e items w e re w ri tt en in s uch a way t h a t a g r e e m e n t with a s t a t e m e n t was s u p p o r t i v e o f an anti-Semitic view. O n e of t h e it e m s was: “T h e t r o u b l e with le tti ng Jews in t o a nic e n e i g h b o r h o o d is t h a t th e y g r a d u a l l y give it a typical J ew is h a t ­ m o s p h e r e ” (R. B row n, 1965, p. 512). T h e E t h n o c e n t r i s m scalc c o n s is te d o f s t a t e m e n t s d e s i g n e d to m e a s u r e th e e x t e n t to w h ic h ind iv id ua ls rigidly a c c e p t e d aspects of t h e i r own c u l t u r e a n d r e j e c t e d w h a t was d if f e r e n t. E t h n o c e n t r i s m is th u s a b r o a d e r for m o f p r e j u d i c e t h a n ant i-S emit ism . T h e it e m s d e a l t with va rio us m i n o r i t y g r o u p s , fo r e ig n e r s , socially d i f f e r e n t p e r s o n s , a n d th e “A m e r i c a n Way.” As with th e Anti-Semitism Scale, th e it e m s h e r e w e re w o r d e d so t h a t a g r e e m e n t with a s t a t e m e n t was s u p p o r t i v e o f an e t h n o c e n t r i c view. O n e o f th e it e m s was: “A m e r i c a n s ma y n o t b e p e r f e c t , b u t th e A m e r i c a n Way ha s b r o u g h t us a b o u t as close as h u m a n b e i n g s can ge t to a p e r f e c t society” (R. Brown, 1965, p. 485). T h e Political a n d E c o n o m i c C on se rv a ti s m Scalc c o n s is te d of s t a t e m e n t s d e s i g n e d to m e a s u r e th e e x t e n t to w h ic h i n di vi d ua ls h e l d th e values of th e A m e r i c a n conservative r i g h t wing. T h e m a i n c o m p o n e n t s involved k e e p i n g th in gs as th ey w ere, resi sti ng social c h a n g e , a n d v a lu in g a m b i t i o n , effi­ ciency, a n d fin an ci al success. U n li k e th e o t h e r t h r e e scales, t h e it e m s in th e Co n se rv a ti s m scale w e re not all w o r d e d in th e s a m e d i r e c t i o n . O n e o f th e it e m s was: “A ch il d s h o u l d le ar n early in life t h e value o f a d o l l a r a n d t h e i m ­ p o r t a n c e o f a m b i t i o n , efficiency, a n d d e t e r m i n a t i o n ” (R. Brow n, 1965, p. 485). T h e P o te ntia lit y fo r Fascism Scalc ( t h e F scale) is c o n s i d e r e d by m a n y to be th e scalc t h a t m e a s u r e d a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m as a p e r s o n a l i t y trait. It c o n ­ sisted o f s t a t e m e n t s r e f le c ti n g n i n e a n t i d e m o c r a t i c c ha ra c te ris tic s, all writ­ ten so t h a t a g r e e m e n t with a s t a t e m e n t s u p p o r t s an a u t h o r i t a r i a n view. T h e n i n e c ha r a c te ri s ti c s involve: c o n v e n t i o n a l i s m , a u t h o r i t a r i a n s u b m is s io n , a u ­ t h o r i t a r i a n a g g r e s s io n , a n t i i n t r o s p e c t i o n , s u p e r s t i t i o n a n d s t e r e o ty p i n g , p o w e r a n d “t o u g h n e s s , ” d e s tr u c ti v e n e s s a n d cynicism, projectivity, a n d e x ­ a g g e r a t e d s exu al c o n c e r n s . Two o f t h e b r i e f e r s t a t e m e n t s were: “S o m e d a y it will p r o b a b l y be sh o wn t h a t ast ro log y c an e x p la i n a lot o f t h i n g s , ” a n d “Fa­ miliarity b r e e d s c on t e m p t ” (R. B row n, 1965, p. 488). In g e n e r a l , t h e s pl it- ha lf re liability o f e a c h o f t h e scales was q u i t e satis­ factory, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t e a c h scale m e a s u r e d a c lu s t e r o f hi ghl y r e l a t e d att it u d e s. A d o r n o e t al. (1950) c o n s t r u c t e d th e s e scales be lie vin g t h a t antiSe m iti s m , e t h n o c c n t r i s m , c o n se rv a ti s m , a n d a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m w er e an i n ­ t e r c o n n e c t e d set o f beliefs, values, a n d p e r s o n a li t y char act er is tic s. WTc r c they? Yes, m o d e r a t e l y so. T h e Anti-Semitism a n d E t h n o c c n t r i s m Sc al es’ scor es c o r r e l a t e d on a ver ag e a b o u t .80 with o n e o t h e r . Sc ore s o n th e C o n ­

T H E A U TH O RIT A RIA N PERSONALITY

25

se r v a ti s m Scalc c o r r e l a t e d o n a v e r a g e w ith E t h n o c e n t r i s m a n d AntiSem itism scores, .57 a n d .43, respectively. Finally, F scalc scores c o r r e l a t e d on a ver ag e with Anti-S emitism, E t h n o c e n t r i s m , a n d C on se rv a ti s m scores, .53, .65, a n d .54, respectively. Followi ng d a t a co ll e ct io n for t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , 80 su bjects, h a l f m e n a n d h a l f w o m e n , w ere a sk e d to p a r t i c i p a t e in th e clinical p a r t o f th e study. H a l f o f th e se s c o r e d in th e to p 25% o f t h e E t h n o c e n t r i s m scale, a n d h a l f s c o r e d in th e b o t t o m 25 % . T h e p r i m a r y goal o f t h e clinical interviews a n d tests was to d e v e l o p a d e e p u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f p r e j u d i c e d (t o p 2 5 % ) a n d u n p r e j u d i c e d ( b o t t o m 2 5 % ) subjects. T h i s a ss um e s, o f c o u rs e , t h a t t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f p r e j u d i c e d p e o p l e r e s e m b l e e a c h o t h e r , as d o th o s e o f u n p r e j u d i c e d p e o p l e . P r i o r to th e a ct ua l clinical sessions, th e inte rvi ew er s k n e w w h ic h g r o u p t h e i r su bject s w e re f r o m , a n d w e re t h o r ­ o u g h l y fam ili ar with e a c h s u b j e c t ’s q u e s t i o n n a i r e p e r f o r m a n c e . T h e two ju d g e s w h o c o d c d the interviews w e re p a r t o f t h e r e s e a r c h team a n d fa mi l­ iar with th e g e n e r a l results o f th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . S o m e o f t h e m a j o r f in d i n g s o f th e clinical d a t a were as follows: P r e j u ­ d i c e d sub jec ts t e n d e d to ha ve an un re a li st ic positive view o f th e m s e lv e s a n d t h e i r p a r e n t s , w h e r e a s u n p r e j u d i c e d su bje ct s w e re m o r e objective in th e i r ap praisals. W h e n p r e j u d i c e d su bje ct s d o criticize th e m s e lv e s o r t h e i r p a r ­ en ts, th e y d o so in a way t h a t a l m o s t d e n i e s th e validity o f th e criticism. T h e negativity is t r e a t e d as an e x c e p t i o n , a l m o s t e x t e r n a l l y f o r c e d u p o n th e criti­ cized p e r s o n , a n d n o t a t r u e criticism. T h e a u t h o r s a r g u e t h a t th e glorifica­ tion o f self a n d p a r e n t s a l o n g s i d e t h e d e n i a l o f criticism i n d ic a te s th e p r e s ­ e n c e o f c o n s i d e r a b l e u n r e s o l v e d a m b i v a l e n c e . T h e p r e j u d i c e d p e r s o n deals with this a m b i v a l e n c e by p r o j e c t i n g o n t o ( u n c o n s c i o u s l y a t t r i b u t i n g to) m i ­ nori t y g r o u p s th e u n a c c e p t a b l e ne gat iv e charac te ris tic s. W h y a r c ne gat iv e c h ar ac te ri s ti c s so difficult to “own u p t o ”? T h e m a i n r e a s o n s e e m s to be th e excessive c o n c e r n p r e j u d i c e d p e o p l e have with status a n d e x t e r n a l signs o f success. T h e a d m is s io n o f ne gat iv e c h ar ac te ri s ti c s w o u ld low er o n e ’s p e r ­ c e p t i o n o f h i m s e l f a n d his p a r e n t s ’ status. Finally, p r e j u d i c e d su bject s s eem to have b e e n ra is ed by p a r e n t s w h o p r a c t i c e d a u t h o r i t a r i a n dis ci plin e. T h e aggressive fee lin gs this dis cipli ne p r o d u c e d in th e su bje ct s c o u l d n o t b e d i ­ r e c t e d t o w a rd t h e i r p a r e n t s . I n s t e a d th ey w e re d is p l a c e d o n t o m i n o r i t y groups. Followi ng p u b l i c a t i o n o f The A uthoritarian Personality a d e l u g e o f r e ­ s ea rc h a n d criticism o c c u r r e d . R. Brown (1965) sifts t h r o u g h this fo r us, a n d I h i g h l i g h t t h r e e asp ec ts o f B r o w n ’s analysis. T h e first p r o b l e m with th e st udy involves t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h r e e o f th e f o u r scales, s uch t h a t r e ­ s p o n s e s t h a t a g r e e d with th e s t a t e m e n t s always le d to h ig h a nti-S emitism, e t h n o c c n t r i s m , o r p o t e n t i a l fascism. It ha s b e e n d o c u m e n t e d t h a t m a n y subjects have an “a c q u i e s c e n t r e s p o n s e s e t” (a t e n d e n c y to a g r e e with any k i n d o f a ss e rt io ns ). T h u s th e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s w ere sp u ri o u s ly h i g h — so

26

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

high that t he results are meaningless? No. Car ef ul follow-up research sh owe d th at a cqu ie s c en ce a cc o un t s for only a m i n o r p o r t i o n o f subject s’ scores on these scales. T h e s e co n d p r o bl e m involves t he objectivity o f t he clinical interviews. T h e m a j o r issue h e r e is t h a t the interviewers were n o t only k no wl ed ge ab l e a b o u t the t he or y a n d the hypot heses, b u t also very familiar with the q u e s­ t i on n a i r e dat a o f each subject. T hu s , t he r e were c on s i d e r ab l e o p p o r t u n i t i e s for biasing the n a t u r e o f the mater ial the subjects p r o d u c e d . If you know, for e x a mp l e , t ha t a subject is p r e j ud i c ed , t h e n you can ( a n d mi ght ) c o n ­ tinue to ask qu est ions until you ge t t he r es po ns e consistent with a p r e j u ­ d iced answer. Fortunately, this was n o t an issue with t he o t h e r clinical data. T h e s e latter dat a t e n d to s u p p o r t the c onclus ions bas ed on the interviews. T h e t hi r d p r o b l e m involves t he relat ionship b et ween a ut h o r i t a r i a n is m, e d u c at i o n, I Q , a n d social class ( so ci oc c on o mi c status [SES] ). Basically, F scale scores were inversely rel at ed to a m o u n t o f e d u ca t io n, I Q , an d , SES. S ome of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e differences are striking. For e xa mp l e , 80% of p e o p l e with a g r a m m a r school e d u c at i o n , 60% with a high school e d u c a ­ tion, a n d 35% with a college e d u c a t i on a g r e ed with t he following state­ m e nt : “T h e m os t i m p o r t a n t t hi ng to teach ch il dr en is absolut e o b e d i e n c e to thei r p a r e n t s . ” So, is the F scalc a m e a s u r e o f personality o r is it a m e a ­ sure rel at ed to the cluster o f I Q , e d u ca t i o n , a n d SES? Fortunately, o n e does n o t have to choose. T h e answer is b o t h. Low e d u c a t e d , low I Q , low SES i n­ dividuals are m o r e likely to devel op a u t ho r i t ar i an personalities t ha n arc others. T h e fact o f this covariation does n o t u n d e r c u t t he validity o f t he r e ­ lations b etween the f o u r scales. T h e h o p ef u l aspect o f these dat a is the k no wle dge t h a t e d u ca t i on lessens a u t ho r i t ar i an i sm. W h a t are we left with? Brown (1965) a n d o the rs c o n c l u d e d th at despite the s tr ong me t ho d o l o g i c a l criticisms b r o u g h t against The Authoritarian Per­ sonality, t h e r e is a personality type, m e a s u r e d by the F scale, t h a t is likely to develop pr ej u di ce s against o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . Mor e r e c e n t research, for ex a mp le , C he r ry a n d Byrne (1977) showed t h a t t he situation o r c o n t e x t a pe r so n is in is a m o r e power ful d e t e r m i n a n t o f w h e t h e r p r e ju di ce will be e x ­ pressed t ha n is the F scalc scores. O t h e r re se ar c h, for e x a mp l e , Forbes (1985) sho we d that political attitudes, especially nationalist ones, may n o t be globally rel ated to a ut h or i ta r ia n i sm . Rat her , subjects with high F scalc scores may be e t h n o c e n t r i c in relation to s ome b u t n o t all o u t gr o up s , d e ­ p e n d i n g on the n a t u r e o f the o u t g r o u p . T h u s , knowl e dg e o f an in d iv id u a l ’s F score is n o t sufficient to pr e di c t the d e g r e e o f p r e ju d i c e in any part icular situation or against any p ar ti cula r g r o u p. T h e r e has b e e n a r e s u r g e n c e o f r es ear ch starting in t h e l 9 8 0 s a n d c o n t i n ­ ui ng to the p r e s e n t time dea li ng with t he a u th o r i t a ri a n personality. This work, s p e a r h e a d e d b y A l t e m e y e r (1981, 1988, 1996) a n d r e f e r r ed to as right-

P A T R I A R C H Y A N D F E M AL E S O C I A L I Z A T I O N

27

w ing authoritarianism o v e r c o m e s m o s t o f t h e criticisms leveled a g a in s t th e e a r l i e r r e s e a r c h . I extensively discuss this r e s e a r c h in a la t e r c h a p t e r .

P A T R I A R C H Y AND FE MA LE S O C I A L I Z A T I O N A l t h o u g h t h e first A m e r i c a n s w e re t h e A m e r i c a n I n d ia n s , th e m o s t i n f l u e n ­ tial A m e r i c a n s in c o n t e m p o r a r y society w ere E u r o p e a n i m m i g r a n t s a n d t h e i r d e s c e n d a n t s . E u r o p e a n s c a m e to this c o u n t r y in i n c re as in gl y large n u m b e r s fr om th e 17th c e n t u r y t h r o u g h t h e early p a r t o f th e 20th c e n tu r y , w h e n hi ghl y restrictive i m m i g r a t i o n laws w e re e n a c t e d . T h e s e p e o p l e c a m e fr o m p a t r i a r c h a l societies— societies with an “i n s ti tu ti o n a l system o f m a le d o m i n a n c e ” ( L e r n e r , 1986) — a n d b r o u g h t t h a t m o d e o f social o r g a n i z a ­ tion with t h e m . H igh ly s u p p o r t i v e o f social p a t r i a r c h y was t h e i r C h ri s ti a n r e ­ ligion, with its m a l e d o m i n a n c e a n d m a s c u l i n e G o d . C hr is tia ni ty m a in ly evolved o u t o f J u d a i s m , b u t also o u t o f G r e e k a n d R o ­ m a n m o r a l p h i l o s o p h i e s . J u d a i s m ha s its ro o ts in th e g r e a t a n c i e n t c u lt u r e s o f t h e N e a r East, su ch as S u m e r , Ur, M e s o p o t a m i a , Egypt, a n d Babylonia, all s tro ngly p a t r i a r c h a l c u lt u re s. In this relig ion a n d th e se c u l t u r e s , w o m e n a t t a i n e d t h e i r status t h r o u g h m a r r i a g e a n d m o t h e r h o o d ; b u t it was near ly always a s e c o n d a r y stat us to t h a t o f m e n a n d d e p e n d e n t o n m e n . T h e J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n Fifth a n d T e n t h C o m m a n d m e n t s are pa rti c ul a rly r e l e v a n t to this dis cussion. T h e fifth says: “H o n o r y o u r f a t h e r a n d y o u r m o t h e r , t h a t yo u m a y have a l o n g life in t h e l a n d w h ic h th e L o r d , y o u r G o d , is giving y o u . ” T h u s , th e m a s c u l i n e G o d is c o m m a n d i n g off sp ri n g to h o n o r b o t h t h e i r p a r e n t s . T h e pa y o ff f o r w h ic h is a l o n g life in th e l a n d G o d gives you. T h i s s e e m i n g e qu al it y o f f a t h e r s a n d m o t h e r s is clarified in th e T e n t h C o m m a n d m e n t , w h ic h says: “You shall n o t c ove t y o u r n e i g h b o r ’s h o u s e . You shall n o t c ovet y o u r n e i g h b o r ’s wife, n o r his m a l e o r f e m a l e slave, n o r his ox o r ass, n o r a n y t h i n g else t h a t b e l o n g s to h i m . ” T h u s , w o m e n ar e c o u n t e d a m o n g th e “p r o p e r t y ” o f m e n , in t h e s a m e way as slaves a n d farm a n im a ls . D e sp ite this m a r k e d s u b o r d i n a t i o n o f w o m e n to m e n , as m o t h e r s they a r e th e ri g h t fu l r e c i p i e n t s o f h o n o r fr o m t h e i r c h i l d r e n . T h e G r e c o - R o m a n i n f l u e n c e o n th e status o f w o m e n draws m a in ly on t h e writ in gs o f Aristotle, w h o p r e d a t e d C h r is tia nity by a b o u t 350 years. In the A ris to te lia n p o s it io n , w o m e n are viewed as morally, intellectually, a n d physically i n f e r i o r to m e n . T h e y a r e i n c o m p l e t e h u m a n b e in gs , w i t h o u t a fully d e v e l o p e d soul. T h e y are i rr a ti o n a l, a n d even with e xte ns ive s c h o o l i n g c o u l d n o t a tta in t h e i n t e ll e c t u a l status o f m e n . T h e i r m a i n f u n c t i o n is to p r o d u c e males, w h o a r c c o m p l e t e , u n i f i e d h u m a n b e in g s , with a fully d e v el ­ o p e d soul. B ec au se o f the se g e n d e r d i s c r e p a n c i e s , Aristotle m a i n t a i n e d t h a t it is a virt ue fo r m e n to d o m i n a t e w o m e n , a n d s h a m e f u l to give w o m e n e q u a l t r e a t m e n t ( L a n g e , 1983; L c r n c r , 1986).

28

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

It is clear from r e a d i n g L e r n e r (1986) a b o u t historical cult ures o f the Ne a r East, as well as r e a d i n g c o n t e m p o r a r y cross-cultural a cc ou n t s (Frcidl, 1975), t h a t the s u b o r d i n a t e status o f w o m e n to m e n is n o t rest ri ct ed to E u ­ rope. In ge ne r al with the a d v en t o f i nt en se a gr icul tur e (as o p p o s e d to sim­ ple h o rt ic u lt u r e ) a n d warfare, status di fferences b et ween m e n a n d w o m en b e c a m e e x ag g er a te d, relatively i n d e p e n d e n t o f historical time or place. T h e significance o f t he J u d e o / G r e e k / R o m a n / C h r i s t i a n i nf lue nc e in the U n i t e d States is th at the justification o f the t r e a t m e n t of females by males was partly based on religious g r o u nd s . N o t only are cultural practices diffi­ cult to c h a ng e , b u t w h e n those practices are involved with religion, c h a n g e b e c o m e s a sacrilege. T h e r e arc at least two i m p o r t a n t lessons rel ated to the p r e s e n t discussion to be l e a r n e d from r e a d i n g history. T h e first is t h a t whatever the party in p owe r is, a n d wh oe ve r const itut e its m e m b e r s , t h e re arc always s o me who o pp os e t he party in power. In a n c i e n t Gr eece, t h e r e was nearly always a g r o u p wh o sided with the e n e m y a n d who did, or wh o were p r e p a r e d to o p e n the gates for the at tacking army. T h e s e c o nd lesson is t ha t m a n y m e m ­ bers o f s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u ps take active steps to mai nt ai n the status q uo . In r e c e n t times, m a ny Ame ri ca n w o m e n f o u g h t against passage o f the Equal Rights A m e n d m e n t , a r gui ng in favor o f m a i n t a i n i n g traditional female roles with such s ta te me nt s as “A w o m a n ’s place is in the h o m e . ” T h e signifi­ cance o f these two lessons is t hat historically, in the U n i t e d States, t he re were nearly always m e n a n d w o m e n who c on t e s te d t he t raditional roles as­ signed to w o m e n . I n d e e d , f eminism, as a clear voice for g e n d e r equality, has existed for at least 150 years (S. M. Evans, 1989; Ryan, 1975). C o n ­ versely, we can see th at m os t w o m e n did n o t join the femini st m o v e m e n t a n d m a n y a tt acked it, using the same a r g u m e n t s as their h u s ba n ds , b r o t h ­ ers, a n d fathers. It is t hus likely t ha t at any p o i n t in history, t he majority o f m e n a n d w o m en a c c e p t ed the t h e n existing g e n d e r status quo. Given t h a t m e n h a d the d o m i n a n t a n d s u p e r io r positions in nearly all aspects of society, their ac­ c ep tance of the status qu o is u nd er s ta nd ab l e . Losing a p r ef er r ed place has its practical a n d e mo t io na l costs. But why s ho ul d w ome n have b e e n accept ing of their inferior status? O u r socialization expe rie nc es tell us who we are. This identity is n o t like a g a r m e n t t hat can be s he d for a new occasion. We are deeply tied to, c o m m i t t e d to, a n d de fi ne d by o u r identity. Anyone who has b een in psychotherapy, as giver or receiver, knows in very pow’erful ways the adhesive quality of identity, even when we acknowledge its dysfunctionality. A h u m a n bei ng n o t c o m m i t t e d to his or h e r identity is left very vulnerable to c h a n g i n g cir cumstances ; a n d c i r cu ms ta nc es usually do cha ng c. T h e r e arc also p r o f o u n d c u l t ur a l/ s ym bo li c re as on s for the m a i n t e n a n c e of t he g e n d e r status q uo , which L c r n e r (1986) convincingly wrote about. L c r n c r ’s a r g u m e n t , on the surface, is a b o u t the writing o f history. But

PATRI ARCHY AND F EMALE S O C I A L I Z A T I O N

29

L e r n c r ’s a c c o u n t s h o u l d be viewed as bo th a p r i m e e x a m p l e o f ho w m a s cu ­ line values ge t t r ans mi tt ed in a c ult ur e, a n d also o f ho w historical writings he lp mai nt ai n those values. T h e centr al idea is t ha t m e n have c ont r ol l e d b o t h t he writing o f a n d i n te r pr e ta t io n of history; they have cho se n bo t h what to write a b o u t a n d w h o m to write a bout. N o t surprisingly they have written a b o u t the activities o f m e n , asserting o f cour se t ha t these are the m o st i m p o r t a n t f eat ur es o f culture. W h e r e w o m e n have b e e n n o t ed , they are identified as e xc ept ional. I n d e e d , they are the ex ce p ti on t ha t proves the rule: the superiority a n d centrality o f m e n , a n d m e n ’s interests. T h e symbols, the rules of i n t e rp r et a t i o n , the c on c ep t s e m p l o y e d for u n ­ d e r s t a n d i n g history have all b e e n filtered t h r o u g h a n d p r oc ess ed by m e n ’s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of society. T hu s , until recently, w o m e n ’s activities a n d c o n ­ c er ns have rarely b e e n m e n t i o n e d in historical accounts. T h e y arc taken for g r a n t e d , the g r o u n d u p o n which the central, a n d male, figures act o u t their m a j o r roles. As L e r n e r (1986) n o t e d , w o m e n b e c o m e invisible. T h e histori­ cal di sr ega rd o f w o m e n even carries over i nto traditionally ma sc uli ne realms in which w o m e n have b e e n successful. For e x a mp l e , until r e c en t years, a rt histories a n d music histories did n o t even m e n t i o n w o m e n ’s c o n ­ tributions. If the p ai n ti n g or the score was c re a te d by a w o m a n , historians imply it was n o t g o o d e n o u g h to discuss. W e r e t h e r e n o t w o m e n his tor ians ? W h y di d they n o t write a b o u t w o m e n ’s achi evement s? T h e r e were some , b u t two factors militated against th ei r p r e s e nt in g a di f f er en t p o i n t o f view. First, m e n have c o n t r ol le d the cultural resources, which i n c l u de h i g h e r e d u c at io n , pu b l is hi ng houses, a n d the me di a . T hu s, w o m e n ’s p r o d u c t i o n s h a d to pass t h r o u g h m e n ’s cultural filters. S e c on d, w o m e n historians were t r a i n e d by m e n in male d o m i n a n t cultures. T h u s , the c on c ep ts a n d rules they were t a u gh t were those es­ p o u s e d by th ei r male teachers. It is very difficult to b r e a k the intellectual a n d cultural m o l d into which you have b e e n p o u r e d a n d in which you have b e e n c ur e d. So, w o m e n historians have u s e d m e n ’s symbolic a n d i n t e r p r e ­ tative f ramewor ks in u n d e r s t a n d i n g society. Let us move the a r g u m e n t o u t o f t he realm o f history m a k in g a n d into t he realm of c h i l d r e n ’s socialization. Traditionally, m o t h e r s a n d o t h e r w o m e n have b e e n the p ri ma r y c ar et aker s in the h o m e . In the schools, e s p e ­ cially for y o un g c hi ld r en , t ea ch e rs have also b e e n w o me n . In We st er n cul­ ture, the “r ul es ” for u n d e r s t a n d i n g , perceiving, a n d categori zi ng arc based on m e n ’s values, b u t these rules arc t a u g h t to c hi l d r en by w o m e n . O n e c o n ­ s e q u e n c e is t ha t the s ame be ha vi or car ri ed o u t by boys a n d girls may have d if f er e nt m e a n i n g s a n d be t r e at e d differently by m o t h e r s a n d teachers. In the e x t r e m e , w o m e n arc full par t ici pant s in devaluing t hemselves in s u p ­ p o r t o f m a le - ge n er at e d values. Valeric W al k cr d in e , a d e v e l o p m e n t a l psychologist, has d o c u m e n t e d s o m e o f these activities in nur se ry school settings in En g l a n d . Below is a

30

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P R E J U D I CE

q u o t a t i o n f ro m h e r 1981 article. T h e c h i l d r e n a r c a 3-year-old girl, A n n i e , two 4-year-old boys, Sean a n d Ter ry, a n d t h e 30-year-old t e a c h e r , Miss Baxter. The sequence begins when Annie takes a piece of Lego to add on to a con­ struction she is building. Terry tries to take it away from he r to use himself, and she resists. He says: Terry:

You’re a stupid cunt, Annie.

The teacher tells him to stop and Sean tries to mess up anot her child’s con­ struction. The teacher tells him to stop. Then Sean says: Sean:

Get out of it Miss Baxter paxter.

Teny:

Get out of it knickers Miss Baxter.

Sean:

Get out of it Miss Baxter paxter.

Terry:

Get out of it Miss Baxter the knickers paxter knickers, bum.

Sean:

Knickers, shit, bum.

Miss B: Scan, that’s enough, you’re being silly. Sean:

Miss Baxter, knickers, show your knickers.

Teny:

Miss Baxter, show your bum off. (they giggle)

Miss B:

I think you’re being very silly.

Teny:

Shit Miss Baxter, shit Miss Baxter.

Sean:

Miss Baxter, show your knickers your bum off.

Sean:

Take all your clothes off, your bra off.

Teny:

Yeah, and take your bum off, take your wee-wee off, take your clothes, your mouth off.

Sean:

Take your teeth out, take your head off, take your hair off, take your bum off. Miss Baxter the paxter knickers tax ter.

Miss B: Sean, go and find something else to do please, (p. 15) T h is is a n a m a z i n g script. It is so n o t j u s t b e c a u s e Se an a n d Te rr y, at age 4, a r e a l r e a d y d e p r e c i a t i n g f e m a l e s as sex objects; b u t m a i n l y t h a t Miss Ba xt e r c o l l u d e s with t h e m in t h e pr ocess . H e r g o o d - n a t u r e d t o l e r a n c e o f t h e i r b e h a v i o r , f o r e x a m p l e , “Y o u ’re b e i n g very silly,” “F i nd s o m e t h i n g else to d o p l e a s e , ” i n d i c a te s t h a t t he b e h a v i o r is e x p e c t a b l e , a n d to s o m e e x t e n t a c c e p t a b l e . Miss Ba xt er , w h o is a f e m a l e a u t ho r i t y, a n d r e p r e s e n t s o t h e r fe­ m a l e a u t h o r i t i e s , c o n t i n u e s to e d u c a t e b o t h t h e boys a n d girls in h e r c h a r g e t h a t it is p e r m i t t e d f or m a le s to d e m e a n fe ma le s. In h e r discussi on with W a l k e r d i n e a b o u t this i n c i d e n t , s he states t h a t w h a t t he boys di d was n a t u ­ ral a n d h a r ml e s s. H o w d i d Miss B a x t e r c o m e to th es e views? W a l k e r d i n e , a f o r m e r t e a c h e r her sel f, asserts t h a t t e a c h e r s a r e t r a i n e d in a “scientific p e da gogy. ” T h i s is a p e d a g o g y t h a t p r e a c h e s f ree a n d n a t u r a l e x p r e s s i o n , b u t this e x p r e s s i o n on ly n a t u ra l ly takes o n t h e c ha ra ct er i st i c s o f t h e society in

T H E PRESENT T H E O R E T I C A L VIEW

31

which it is e m b e d d e d . In this case, the messages arc that females arc sex o b ­ jects a nd males, even 4-year-olds, are m or e powerful than they.

T H E PRESENT T H E OR E T I CA L VIEW Prejudice a nd discrimination, as Allport (1954) assured us, have multiple causes. Th e re appears to be a consensus a m o n g social scientists as to their nature. For example, Duckitt (1992) e x a mi ne d the psychological research from a historical perspective a nd arrived at f our categories of causes that are quite similar to those of Allport (1954) a nd Marger (1991). However, I believe there is an im po r ta n t “cause” that these a nd many o t h e r writers have overlooked— the geneti c/evol ut ionary bases. We are n ot only crea­ tures of culture. Rather, as the Nobel Prize w inne r Konrad Lorenz argued in 1969, a nd I c on cu r re d with in my books (Fishbein, 1976, 1984) evolu­ tionary processes have designed us to operat e in particular ways in particu­ lar e nvir onme nt s. T he eno rmo us ly influential sociobiology m o v e m e n t started by Edward Wilson in 1975 makes a similar point. Wh at is me a n t by a g en et ic/ evol ut ionary design? To u n d e r s ta n d this, we must distinguish between genotypes, the set of genes that individuals possess, a nd phenotypes, the physiology, anatomy, a nd behavior of individuals that develop from the genotypes in specific sequences of environments. G e n o ­ types do n ot vary over t he course of a lifetime, whereas p henot ypes do, for example, infancy, c hi ldhood, a dolescence, a d ul t hood. Moreover, the same genotype can lead to somewhat different phenotypes if the individuals are reared in different environments, for exampl e, identical twins s eparated at birth. It is genotypes that get inherited, and it is genotypes and environ­ ment s that d et e r mi n e how phenot ypes will develop. Generally there is a close c o nnect ion between genotypes a nd phenotypes, for exampl e, identi­ cal twins reared apart do resemble each other. More blatantly, no mai ler what the rearing, chi mpanzees remai n chi mpanzees a nd never are trans­ f or me d into huma ns . Particular genotypes are transmitted from generat ion to gener at ion because the p henot ypes they develop in given environments r e p r od u ce mo re than those developed by o t h e r genotypes. Thus, there is a certain indirectness a bo ut the relation between successful p h enot ypes and successful genotypes. Retur ni ng to ge net ic/evolut ionary designs, the basic idea at the species level (as opp os ed to the individual level) is that the characteristic genotype of any species e m er g ed because m e mb e rs of the species possessing that genotype were m or e adaptive than me m b e r s n ot possessing it, that is, they survived a nd r e p r o du c ed mo re viable offspring than the latter. Eventually, because of this differential r ep ro du ct i o n over many generations, nearly all m e m b e r s of the species acquire the successful genotype. This characteristic

32

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

g en o t yp e is m a i n t a i n e d in a species as l on g as it leads to successful p h e n o ­ types. A n d tliis will o c c ur if the e n v i r o n m e n t s in which individuals devel op a n d r e p r o d u c e c o n t i n u e to be s uppor ti ve o f the characteristic genot ype. S o u n d s circular? It really is not. Both g ra du a l a n d d r a ma t ic shifts in t he e n ­ v i r o n m e n t can c h a n g e the characteristic ge no t y pe of a species, i n c l u d i ng its extinction. T o say that evolution d e s i g n e d us to o p e r a t e in p a rt ic ul ar ways in p a r t ic u ­ lar e n v i r o n m e n t s docs n o t m e a n t ha t we act only reflexively o r instinctively. We are s o m e w h a t plastic or flexible, b u t n o t infinitely so. O u r d e v e l o p m e n t is c h a n n e l e d o r “c an a li z ed ” as the geneticist W a d d i n g t o n (1957) d e m o n ­ strated for a na to mi ca l characteristics, a n d the psychologist Piaget (1971) for behavior. T he se behavioral characteristics or p at te r ns e m e r g e p rovi de d t h a t individuals arc r e a r e d in e n v i r o n m e n t s falling in a r a n ge n o r m a l for thei r species. T h e y are p a r t o f t he evolutionary design a n d can be c on s id ­ e r e d as n o r m a l , inevitable, a n d necessary for adaptive f u nc ti on i ng . For h u ­ mans, s ome o f the m o r e obvious o n e s arc l angua ge , bi p e da l l o c o mo t i on , c o o r d i n a t e d use o f two h a n ds , b u t also rule-giving a n d following, reci procal h e l p i n g a n d h a r m i n g , a n d pa rt ic ul a r family a n d g r o u p social st ruct ures (Fishbein, 1976). O n e ma jo r a spe ct o f t he h u m a n design is in the a re a o f in­ t e r g r o u p relations. This is the topic t h a t e n c o m pa s se s the social psychology o f p re j ud ic e a n d di scr iminati on (sec, e.g., W. G. S t ep h an , 1985). A central conviction o f this b o o k is t ha t e vol uti onary processes have de si g n e d us in such a way t ha t the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r ej ud ic e a n d di scr imi nat ion toward o u t g r o u p n u m b e r s is highly likely, a n d p e r h a p s inevitable. T h e se ideas arc e l a b or a t ed in the n e x t c ha pt e r. O u r gene ti c/ ev ol ut io na ry heritage provides the initial push toward p r ej u­ dice a n d discrimination. We have l e ar n e d from Allport (1954) a n d Marger (1991) t ha t cultural n o r m s a n d values define or identify some o f the targets of prejudice a n d discrimination. Certain o u t g r ou ps are m o r e likely to be the recipi ent s o f p re ju d i ce than others. Pr ej udi ce toward t he m b e c o m e s e x ­ p e ct e d a n d n or mat i ve. However, c ul tu re is n o t static o r st agnant, b u t r a t h er evolves, th at is, u n d e r g o e s historical c ha ng e . A n o t h e r centr al conviction of this b o o k is t h a t in o r d e r to identify a n d u n d e r s t a n d cultural n o r m s toward pa rt ic ul a r gro u p s, we m us t u n d e r s t a n d their historical evolution. T h e tele­ vision portrayal o f African Ame r ic an s, w o m e n , o r mental ly r e t a r d e d , for ex­ amp le , in 2001, may n o t be reflective o f l ong-st andi ng, relatively p e r m a n e n t attitudes a n d values. T h e latter do c h a n g e over time; a n d it is i m p o r t a n t to d o c u m e n t t h a t c h a n g e in o r d e r to accurately assess w h e re we arc today. In t h a t the focus o f this b o o k is on p e e r p r e ju di ce a n d di scr iminat ion involv­ ing dif fer ences in race, sex, h e a r i n g i m p a i r m e n t , a n d m e n t a l ret ar da ti on, cultural histories arc p r e s e n t e d for each o f t he f ou r t ar get groups. Finally, Allport (1954) a n d M ar gc r (1991) in di ca te d that cultural a n d g r o u p processes ge t r eflected in t he be ha v i or o f individuals. T o a large ex­

S UMMARY

33

t e nt indi vi duals’ b e h a vi or is d e t e r m i n e d by t h e ir socialization e xpe ri e nc es . Parts o f these socialization e x p e r i e nc es arc the d ir ect a n d i nd ir e ct t ea ch in g o f cultural n o r ms , in c lu d i ng those involving pr ej udi c e a n d discrimi nat i on. O u r discussion o f pa tr ia rc hy a n d female socialization in this c h a p t e r was an e x a m p l e o f this. Given t ha t the focus o f this b o o k is on p r ej ud ic e a n d dis­ cri mi na ti on in ch i ld r en a n d adol escent s toward peers, a d e e p u n d e r s t a n d ­ ing o f these topics r eq ui re s an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e i r social d e ve l o p m e n t . Re g ar d in g opposite-sex p re ju di ce a n d d is cr imin at io n , we e x a m i n e how families, peers, a n d t ea c he rs socialize sex-typing. Sex-typing involves b eh av ­ ior, attitudes, a n d values a b o u t o n e ’s own a n d the opp os it e sex. Ch i ld re n learn wh at the a p p r o p r i a t e a n d i n a p p r o p r i a t e behavi ors a n d aspirations arc for themselves a n d others. T h e s e valuations set t he g r o u n d for i nt e ra ct ions with a n d j u d g m e n t s a b o u t same- a n d oppositc-sex peers. Re g ar d i ng race pr ej ud ic e a n d d is cr imi na ti on, we e x a m i n e h ow e t hn ic identity is socialized a n d develops. O n e ’s e t h n i c identity i ncl udes pa t te r ns o f behaviors, e x p e c t a ­ tions, a n d values a b o u t m e m b e r s o f o n e ’s r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p as well as o t h e r groups. T h e s e valuations have differential effects on Black a n d Whi te c h il dr e n, which arc played o u t in t he ir p re ju d i ce a n d d i scr iminat ion. Re­ g a r d i n g d e a f a n d ment all y r e t a r d e d ch i ld r en , dat a c o m p a r a b l e to sextyping a n d e t hn ic identity are, unf or t un at el y, n o t available. This is a lacuna t h a t I h o p e o t h e r writers will hopeful ly fill in the n e a r future.

SUMMARY A variety o f defi nit ions o f p re ju d i ce were discussed. Nearly all have in c o m ­ m o n the idea that it is a negative attitude toward ot hers because o f their m e m b e r s h i p in a particular g roup. Following the lead o f Allport a n d Milner, an additional c o m p o n e n t s e em e d necessary to distinguish prejudices from o t h e r types of negative attitudes— unreasonabl enes s. Allport refers to this c o m p o n e n t as “faulty a n d inflexible” attitudes a n d Milner as “ir rational” atti­ tudes. Pr ej ud i ce d individuals resist modifying their pr ej u di ce s in the face of c on t ra di ct or y i nf or ma ti on. Discrimination was d e f i ne d as h a r m f u l actions tow’ard o t h e r s be ca us e o f th ei r m e m b e r s h i p in a p a rt ic ul ar g r o up . Discrimination may o r may n o t be b ased on pr ej udi ce, a l t h o u g h w he n chi l d r e n arc freely i n te ra ct in g wi t ho u t a du l t c ontr ol , it is likely th at the two go h a n d in h a n d . R e c en t t heor izi ng suggests t h a t p re j ud i ce a n d d iscr iminat ion feed on a n d e n h a n c e each ot her . T h e rel at ionshi p bet ween p r e j u d i c e a n d be ha v i or is c o mp l ex . Research shows th at w he n t he re is n o d i r e ct c o n t ac t b etween p e o pl e , as in voting situ­ ations, t h e re is a fairly s tr on g rel a ti on sh i p b etween p r ej ud i ce a n d behavior. However, w he n p e o pl e i nt e ra c t with each o t he r , the r ela ti onship is weak.

34

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

Pr ej udi ce is j u s t o n e fact or a m o n g m a ny t ha t me di at es behavior, for e x a m ­ ple, o t h e r p e rs on al attitudes a n d motives a n d situational c on d it i o n s arc also influential. Stereotypes arc closely relat ed to prej udi ces, a n d s om et im es c a n n o t be dis­ ti n g ui sh e d from t h e m. Stereotypes are categories of beliefs a b o u t g r o u ps of p e o p l e t h a t assist us in sor ti ng o u t the o ve r whe l mi ng social i nf o rm at io n we receive. We know that o u r stereotypes arc n o t c ompl etel y accur at e, yet they are often the mo st reliable gui des for m a k i ng decisions. W h e n we c a te go ­ rize p e o pl e into i n g r o u p s a n d o u t g r o u p s , o u r p e r c e p t i o n s a n d beliefs a b o u t t he m as individuals a n d as g r o u p m e m b e r s are ma rk e dl y in f l ue nc ed . O n e p ot e nt ia l c o n s e q u e n c e o f p r e j u d i c e is stigmatizing others. Stigmas are characteristics of p e o p l e — for ex a mp l e, b e i n g a m e m b e r o f a parti cular e t hni c g r o up , having a par ticul ar disability, b e i n g an ex-ment al p a t i e n t — t h a t spoil o r discredit t h e m. S om e likely r easons for stigmatizing o the r s arc: s capegoat ing, justifying o u r failures to he lp p ar ti cula r gr oups, e n h a n c i n g o u r own status. But, as I. Katz’s (1981) research shows, we are f requentl y ambi va le nt a b o u t the g r o u p s we stigmatize. This a mbiva l e nc e often leads us to e i t h e r exa gg er at e o u r negative or positive r espons es to t h e m. Historically, t h e r e have b e e n g r o u p s o f p e op le in India a n d J a p a n who have b e e n legally stigmatized: the u n t o u c h a b l e castes. Al t ho u gh u n t o u c h ­ ability has b e e n d ec l a r ed illegal in these count ri es, it still exists a n d p r o ­ d uces p r o f o u n d negative social a n d psychological c on s e q ue n ce s . T h e r e arc s ome obvious parallels bet ween t he t r e a t m e n t o f e x -u n to u ch a bl e s a n d th at o f African A me ri ca ns in the U n i t e d States. O n e o f the c o n s e q u e n c e s o f b e i ng raised as an African Ame ri ca n d e ­ s c e n d e d f rom slaves is the d e v e l o p m e n t o f feelings o f u nwor thi nes s. O n e o f the e xp l an a ti on s o f this p h e n o m e n o n is called the Stockholm Syndrome, d e ­ rived fr om the observation o f value a n d affectional shifts by hostages that p r o d u c e b o n d i n g with t he ir captors. It is t h o u g h t t h a t the c o n d i ti o n s l e ad ­ ing to th e Stockhol m S y n d r o m e often o c c u r r e d in slavery co nd it io ns , which suggests th at m a n y African A me r ic a ns at least partially a c c e p t ed t he Whi te p e o p l e ’s views o f t he m. A c ons e ns us has e m e r g e d a m o n g social psychologists c o n c e r n i n g the bases o f p re j ud i c e a n d discr imi nat ion. All believe th at t h e r e are mult i pl e causes t h at can be c o n s t r u e d as falling s o m e w h e r e on a c o n t i n u u m , with i n­ dividualistic o r psychological causes at o n e pole, a n d c ul t u r a l / h i st o r i c a l causes at th e o t h e r pole. T h e initial motivating force for th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re j ud ic e a n d d i scr imi nati on is the a tt e mp ts o f d o m i n a n t g r o u ps within a c ul tu re to c o n t i n u e h o l d i n g the p o w e r a n d privileges they have. Research on the a u t h or i t a ri a n personality was a m o n g the mo st i n f l u e n ­ tial p r o g r a m s on t he topic o f pr ejudi ce. It o ccupi es the individualistic pole o f the causal d i m e n s i o n . T h e original i m p e t u s f or the study of a u t h o r it a ri ­ anism was the de st r uc ti on o f m o s t o f E u r o p e a n Jewry by t he Nazis d u r i n g

PLAN O F T H E B O O K

35

Wo rl d W a r II. T h e r es ea rc h was c e n t e r e d in California a n d was d ir e ct e d to­ ward identifying a personality type t ha t was likely to show e t hn o c e n t r i s m a n d anti-Semitism. T h e original studies h a d s o m e serious m e t h od ol o g i c a l flaws, a n d the original r e se a rc h er s did n o t study situational i nf luences on p re judi ce ; b u t t h e r e is a c ons e ns us t h a t individuals with a u th o r i t a r i a n p e r ­ sonalities arc likely to be m o r e p r e j u di c ed than others. Research on pa tr i a r ch y a n d femal e socialization occupi es the c u l t u r a l / historical pole. This research tracks historically how male d o m i n a n c e a n d femal e s u bo r d i n a t i o n e m e r g e d in the U n i t e d States. It shows how females themselves, who take on t he value system o f the cul t ur e, p e r p e t u a t e their own s u b o r d i n a t i o n in bo th th ei r professional activities a n d socialization of c hil dr en. T h e o n e causal factor o f p r ej ud i ce a n d d is c ri mi na ti on t h a t m os t social scientists i g no r e is o u r g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y i n h er i t a nc e . T h e view is taken t h a t genetic evolution has d e s i g n e d us to o p e r a t e in p ar t ic ul a r ways in p a r ­ ticular e n v i ro n me n t s. A m o n g these ways arc p a t t e rn s in f o r mi n g a n d c o n ­ t in ui n g i n t c r g r o u p relations. Al t h o ug h o u r genetic ma ke -u p pr edi sposes h u m a n s to p r e ju di ce a n d d is cr imina tion, c ul t u r e identifies the targets. Cul ­ tural n o r m s a n d values arc n o t static, b u t r a t h e r “evolve” over time. Finally, it is individuals who have p r e j u d i c e d att it udes a n d act in a di scrimi nat ory fashion. In o r d e r to gain a d e e p u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f these, we have to u n d e r ­ s tand c h i l d r e n ’s social d e ve l o p m e n t .

PLAN O F T H E B O O K O n e i m p o r t a n t que st i o n this b o o k addresses is w h e t h e r gener ali zat ions a b o u t the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p e e r p r ej ud i ce a n d d is cr imi nat ion can be m a d e. In o t h e r words, can we talk a b o u t the d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ej ud i c e a n d the d e ­ v e l o p m e n t of discr imi nati on? O r do these processes vary with t he target g r o u p s u n d e r c on s ider at ion? In o r d e r to generali ze, it is necessary to c o m ­ pa re di ff er ent gro up i ng s. In a very extensive search o f the psychological, so­ ciological, a n d e d u c a ti o n a l literatures o f N o r t h Amer ica, I was only able to find f o u r target g r o u p i n g s for which at least several r es ear ch articles existed a n d t h a t covered a relatively wide age span. T h e se involved race, g e n d e r , h e a r i n g status, a n d intellectual status, t ha t is, mentally r e t a r d e d versus n o n r e t a r d e d . T hu s, the selection of these f o u r g r o u p i n g s was c omplet ely f or tui tous a n d n o t based o n any u n d e rl yi n g theory. For tun at el y th e c h a r ac ­ teristics t ha t distinguish these g r o u ps are sufficiently diverse t ha t s ome c o n ­ fidence can be pl ac ed in any g ener ali zat ions t h a t may e m e rg e . T h e cent ral a r g u m e n t s o f the b o o k arc as follows. Prejudice a n d di scr im­ i nation have an evolutionary basis, r o o t e d in the n a t u r e o f p r i m a t e a n d h u m a n subsistence gr oups. A l t ho u gh the existence o f c ult ur es is also e v o l u t i o n a r y based, the p ar ti cula r c ul tu re individuals grow a n d m a t u r e in

36

1.

T H E N A T U R E O F P RE J UDI CE

plays a significant role in d e t e r m i n i n g t he values assigned to various groups. M e m b e r s o f certain o f these g r o u p s b e c o m e the targets for p r e ju di ce a n d d i sc ri mina tion. As with o t h e r cultural values, n o r m s, a n d beliefs, pr ej ud ic e a n d d is cr imi nat i on have to be l e ar n ed . Thi s is often a l on g process a n d d e ­ p e n d s on the d e v e l o p m e n t a l status o f th e l e ar n e r, t he n a t u r e o f the p r e j u ­ dice a n d di scr imi nat i on to be l e a r ne d , a n d the cultural i m p o r t a n c e o f the l ea r ni ng. Pr ejudi ce an d, to s o me ex te nt, d is c ri mi n a t io n, are based on atti­ tudes. T h e s e f re qu en t ly can be mo di f ie d. W h a t are the best a p p r o a c h e s for modifying prejudice? In c h a p t e r 2, An Evolutionary Model for the D e v e l o p m e n t o f Pr ejudice a n d Di sc ri mi na ti on, I a t t e m p t to tie t o g e t h e r a diverse l it e ra t ur e t h a t p r e ­ sents the a r g u m e n t t h a t o u r evolutionary he ri ta ge ma ke s it nearly inevitable t h a t ch il dr en a n d adults will devel op p re j ud i ce a n d d i scr imi nati on toward o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . It s u mm a r iz e s r es ear ch on (a) inclusive fitness, which leads to i n g r o u p favoritism; (b) o u r e volut ionary h er itage s h a r ed with the African apes, which leads to hostility toward o ut g ro u p s ; (c) authorityb e ar i n g systems, which lead to a d o p t i n g the beliefs t h a t a ut hor it y figures hol d; (d) c h i l d r e n ’s g r o u p processes, which i ndicate the c on d i ti o n s u n d e r which i n g r o u p favoritism a n d o u t g r o u p hostility will occur; a n d (e) the d e ­ v e l o p m e n t o f g r o u p identity. T h e p u n c h line o f t h e latter is t ha t p r ej udi ce a n d di scr imi nat i on s ho ul d e m e r g e at a b o u t age 4, w h en c hi l d r e n a p p a r ­ ently have a well-developed sense o f g r o u p or social identity. In co nt ra st to the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d , I i n t r o d u c e a n d discuss a n o t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y based c on c ep t , outgroup attraction, which is bas ed on the geneti c processes o f g e n e flow. O u t g r o u p attraction has the effect of positively or i e n t i ng m e m b e r s of i n g r ou p s to e i t h e r certain characteristics o f o u t g r o u p s o r to certain individ­ ual m e m b e r s o f those gro u p s, effects th a t o p p o s e p r e ju di ce a n d d isc ri mi na ­ tion. T h e s e processes can exist side by side with p r e ju di ce a n d d is cr imina ­ tion toward t hose groups. C h a p t e r 3, Di scrimination Tow’a rd De af Individuals, begi ns o u r tr eat­ m e n t o f f o u r t a rge t g r o u p s — p e o p l e with a l engthy history of p re judi c e a n d di scr imi nati on in the U n i t e d States. Each offers a glimpse at t he u n i q u e cul­ tural a n d historical c on d it io n s t ha t trigger p r ej udi ce a n d discri mi nati on, a n d a c o m p a r is on o f the f o u r will i lluminate g e ne r al principles. This c h a p ­ ter begi ns with a discussion o f s o me ge ne r al issues in this study— s ome m e t h o d o l og i c al principles, the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y hypotheses, a n d the c u l t u r al / h is t o r ic a l a n t e c e d e n t s o f p re j ud i c e a n d d iscr imi nat ion. Next, wTe t u r n to the h e a r i n g i mp a ir ed, establishing first the history o f discr imi nat ion towards the d e a f in the U n i t e d States. T h e n we e x a m i n e the e x p e r i m e n t a l a p p r o a c h e s , n o t i n g the p a rt ic ul ar c on d it io n s t ha t foster di scr imi nati on to­ ward the deaf. C h a p t e r 4, Prejudice a n d Di scrimination T ow ar d Mentally R e t a rd e d In­ dividuals, is the s e co n d in the scries on t ar get gro u p s. It begins with a s u m ­

PLAN O F T H E B O O K

37

ma ry o f t he cul t ural history o f this g r o u p , focusing particularly on t he p e d a ­ gogical issues s u r r o u n d i n g men t al l y r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n in e d u c a t i o n a l settings. T h e c h a p t e r t ur ns th en to c o n t e m p o r a r y school settings, l ooking at age-based p a t t e rn s in p r ej ud ic e a n d d is cr imi nat ion toward mental ly r e ­ t a r d ed students. Much a tte nt ion is given to the various c on te xt ua l factors, such as m a i ns t r e a m i n g , labeling, a n d behavioral triggers, a n d t he effect of various types o f school settings. C h a p t e r 5 is called Pr ej udice a n d Di scri mi nat i on Against t he Op p o si t e Sex. It begins with a historical s u m m a r y o f the role o f femal es in Am er i ca n cult ur e, identifying the c on d it i o n s o f s u b o r d i n a t i o n in t he earliest Europ ea n- Ame ri ca n sett lements. T h e role o f A m e ri c a n females t h r o u g h o u t U.S. history has largely consisted o f struggles by w o m e n for an e x p a ns i o n o f le­ gal rights, social a n d cultural roles, e m p l o y m e n t a n d e d u ca t i o na l o p p o r t u ­ nities, position in domes t ic life, a n d c on tr ol over sexuality a n d c hi ldbirt h. T h e c h a p t e r t h e n a dd re ss e s g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y h y po t he se s, dr awi ng from p at t e r ns observed in h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r societies. T h e s e hy po th e se s — along with those involved with g e n d e r a n d age p a t t e r ni n g, with kno wl e d g e o f stereotypes, a n d with cultural acqui si ti on— are the operative t h e m e s o f the r e m a i n d e r o f the c ha p te r . T h e t r e a t m e n t o f t he n e x t selected g r o u p , African Amer icans , spans two chapt er s. C h a p t e r 6, A Cultural History o f African Amer icans , focuses on cultural history, surveying t he d r a m at ic struggle that led fr om f orced slavery to t he civil rights m o v e m e n t . Next, the c h a p t e r devotes a section to the in­ fluential Brown v. Board o f Education ruling, which was based heavily on psy­ chological research a n d set a decisively psychological c our se for the civil rights m o v e m e n t . T h e c h a p t e r t h e n t ur ns to a discussion o f ethnicity, the g e n er a l cul tural p r inc ipl e u n d e rl y i ng race p re ju d i ce a n d discri minat ion. Finally, this b e i n g the last o f the c ha p te r s on the histories o f the selected gr ou ps , t he re is a comp ar at iv e discussion t h a t notes similarities a n d differ­ e nces a m o n g t h e m. C h a p t e r 7, Race Pr ej udi ce a n d Discri mi nati on, t ur ns to t he e x p e r i m e n ­ tal d at a on race p r e ju di ce a n d d i scr imi nat i on. T h e first subjects u n d e r c o n ­ sideration are to establish the p a rt i c ul a r g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y h ypotheses potentially associated with this issue. T h e n we s u m m a r iz e the l it erat ure on r a c e / e t h n i c i t y pr ej ud ic e a n d discr imi na ti on , with an e mp h a s is on Black a n d Whi te racial gr oups. T h e ma jo r issues i nc l u d e the m e a s u r e m e n t o f race p re ju di ce a n d d is c ri mi n a t io n, age- a n d g en de r -b a se d d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t ­ terns, a n d racial dif f er ences in racial pr ej u d ic e a n d d is c r imi na ti on d e v el o p ­ m e n t . Finally, this c h a p t e r s umma ri ze s a n d c o m p a r e s t he c oncl us ions from this a n d previous c ha pt e rs on the t arget groups. C h a p t e r 8 is called Modifying Pr ejudice a n d Discri minat ion. A r g u m e n t s are de ve l o p e d a n d pre di ct io ns are m a d e b ased on g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c u l t u r al /h i st o ri c a l consi der ati ons. C o n t a c t t h eo ry a n d Lewinian t he or y

38

1.

T H E NATURE O F PREJUDICE

(L ewin, 1948, 1951) arc also di s cu s s ed a n d r e l a t e d to race p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . T h e t h r e e m a j o r s ec tio ns o f th e c h a p t e r arc c o n c e r n e d with th e i m p a c t o f s ch oo l d e s e g r e g a t i o n on racial p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , th e i m p a c t o f m a i n s t r e a m i n g on p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t o w a rd th e h a n d i c a p p e d , a n d c o o p e r a t i v e l e a r n i n g as a vehicle for r e d u c i n g p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . T h e n e x t t h r e e s ec tio n s a r c necessarily b r i e f a c c o u n t s o f th e effects o f role-pla ying s im u la ti o n s , th e m e d i a , a n d i n d i v i d u a t i o n / s e l f ­ a c c e p t a n c e efforts to r e d u c e p r e j u d i c e . T h e final section a t t e m p t s to i n t e ­ gra te t h e s e find in gs. C h a p t e r 9 is called P a re n ts , Peers, a n d Personality. In this c h a p t e r , we fo­ cus o n t h e issue c o n c e r n i n g t h e cau se s o f i n d iv id u a l d i f f e r e n c e s in p r e j u ­ dice. R es e ar ch is re vie w ed a n d dis cu s s ed c o n c e r n i n g th e i n f l u e n c e s t h a t p a r e n t s a n d p e e r s have o n t r a n s m i t t i n g p r e j u d i c e to c h i l d r e n a n d a d o l e s ­ cents. Also th e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a d o l e s c e n t s ’ a n d y o u n g a d u l t s ’ p e r s o n ­ alities a n d t h e i r level o f p r e j u d i c e is e v al u a te d . T h e r e is a m o d e r a t e a m o u n t o f r e s e a r c h on p a r e n t a l in fl u e n c e s , b u t t h a t on p e e r i n f l u e n c e s is very l im ­ ited. T h e p a r e n t a l r e s e a r c h shows, at best, m o d e s t i n f l u e n c e s o n c h i l d r e n , a n d th e p e e r li t e r a t u r e shows essentially n o i n f l u e n c e , a very s u r p r i s i n g r e ­ sult. O n th e o t h e r h a n d , s t r o n g a n d c o n s i s t e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s have b e e n f o u n d b e t w e e n several p e r s o n a li t y traits a n d p r e j u d i c e , s u g g e s t i n g tha t s o m e traits p r e d i s p o s e ind iv id ua ls to a c c e p t societal m e ss a ge s a b o u t p r e j u ­ dice, a n d o t h e r traits, to r e je c t th e se messages. In c h a p t e r 10, R e c a p i t u l a t i o n , an a t t e m p t is m a d e to pull t o g e t h e r th e m a j o r t h e m e s a n d fi nd in g s. Pr im ari ly this c h a p t e r will give t h e c e n t r a l p u n c h lines o f th e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s , in a s en s e , h i g h l i g h t i n g t h e s u m m a ­ ries. N o n e w m a t e r i a l is p r e s e n t e d , b u t I try to i n t e g r a t e w h a t ha s b e e n p r e ­ viously dis cussed.

C h apter

An Evolutionary M odel for the D ev elo p m e n t of Prejudice a n d Discrimination

The overarching goal o f this c ha p t er is to make the a r g u m e n t that o u r gcneti c/evoluti onar y heritage has predisposed us to develop prejudice to­ ward a nd discrimination against o ut gr ou p me mbe rs. This goal will be r eached t h r ou gh the a t t a i nm en t o f seven mo re limited goals. Th e first is to p re se nt an evolutionary based genetic mo de l that accounts for species-wide behavioral constancies. T h e m o d e l draws heavily from the work of Wadd ingt on (1957), Fishbein (1976), G. Gottlieb (1991), a nd Lu ms dc n and E. O. Wilson (1981). T he essence o f the m od e l is that genes, anatomy, b e­ havior, a n d social a nd physical e nvironment s operate to direct a nd correct psychological d evel opment . Additionally, genes a nd culture co-cvolvc such that species-specific characteristics arc sustained across generations. The second goal is to p r es e nt some results from behavior gcnctics re­ s earch, which show that individual differences in social behavi or arc strongly i nfl uenced by genetic inheritance. This research indirectly sup­ ports the a r g u m e n t that genes can control species-wide behavior c har act er ­ istics, including the d ev el op m e nt o f prejudice a nd discrimination. The third goal is to p r es e nt research describing the evolutionary history of, a nd linkages between the Old World monkeys, apes, a nd hu ma ns . T he focus is on c o m m o n elements a nd distinctions c o n cc rn ing social organiza­ tion a nd social behavior. T h e central a r g u m e n t is t hat h u m a n s arc socially oper at ing with me nt al structures evolved for h un tc r- ga thc rcr modes o f ex­ istence. Prejudice a nd discrimination have their roots in this tribal organi ­ zation. The f ourth goal is to p re se nt the three geneti c/evol ut ionary factors that form the bases of prejudice a nd discrimination, a nd one factor that tends 39

40

2.

AN EVOLUT I ONARY MO D E L

to c ou nt cr act these predispositions. T h e first three factors are i ngr oup fa­ voritism based on inclusive fitness, authority-bearing systems based on the c me r gc n cc of cultural sociogcnctic systems, a nd in tc r gr ou p hostility, based on i nt cr gr oup relations of the c o m m o n ancestors o f gorillas, chimpanzees, a nd h u m a n hunter-gatherers. T h e fourth factor is o u t g r o u p attractiveness, based on the necessity o f mai nt aining within-group genetic variability in o r­ de r to a cc o mmo d at e to envi ronment al changes, a nd to prevent the delete­ rious effects of excessive i nb re ed i ng a nd genetic drift. T h e fifth goal is to p r es e nt psychological data bearing on the develop­ m e n t in children o f a gr oup identity. T h e principal consideration is the idea that p rejudice a n d discrimination arc i nt c rgr oup p h e n o m e n a , which have as a prerequisite that individuals can identify with an ingroup. At what age docs g roup identity e me rg e , a nd how does this identity change with maturation? T h e sixth goal is to describe some of the psychological processes in­ volved in i nt er gr oup behavior. I ngr oup favoritism a nd o u tg r ou p hostility are two p r o m i n e n t processes that are obviously c on n e c tc d with prejudice a nd discrimination. Wh at factors control their emer gence? T h e seventh, a n d final goal, is f o u n d e d on the premise that prejudice a nd discrimination partially stem from g e neti c/evol ut ionary processes “in­ appropriately” applied to gr oups within a culture. We at t e mp t to identify those processes that lead to successful social interactions within a tribal cul­ ture, b ut to unsuccessful ones in an industrial or postindustrial society.

CANALIZATION The core assumption of this c ha pt er is that genes d e t e rmi n e some aspects of h u m a n social behavior. O u r genes make all of o u r social behavior possi­ ble. But because of o u r evolutionary design, nearly all h u m a n s have i nh e r­ ited a genetic structure that makes certain species-specific kinds of social behavior inevitable. Further, the oc cur re nce of some of these behaviors makes the d ev e l op me nt o f prejudice a nd discrimination nearly inevitable. On the basis of the cu r r en t stale of genelic knowledge, il is highly u n ­ likely that the social behaviors themselves are coded in the genes. Rather, particular processes are genetically coded that normally ensure that the evolved social behaviors (phenotypic characteristics) will develop. For exam­ ple, English or Spanish are not coded in the genes, but language inducing processes are. If a child is reared in an English-speaking community, she or he will learn English. If the child is reared in an American Sign Language (ASL) community, he or she will learn ASL. Either o ut come can occur be­ cause the language-inducing processes have developed and are in place. As no te d in c hapter 1, a likely genetic process controlling the speciesspecific devel opment al aspect of evolutionary design is canalization (Wad-

G E NE S, MINI), AND C U L T U R E

41

d i n g t o n , 1957). G. Go ttl ieb (1991) synthesized r e c e n t th e o re ti c al a n d e m p i ­ rical r e s e a r c h on this topic, w h ic h h e re fe rs to as “e x p e r i e n t i a l c an a li z at io n o f b e h a v i o r . ” In this view, b e h a v i o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t involves a h i e r a r c h i c a l system o f f o u r m u t u a l l y i n t e r a c t i n g c o m p o n e n t s . T h e s e c o m p o n e n t s arc: g e n e t i c activity, n e u r a l activity, b e h a v i o r , a n d e n v i r o n m e n t . G e n e t i c activity i n f l u e n c e s n e u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t , b u t th e activity o f t h e n e r v o u s system in fl u ­ e n c e s g e n e t i c activity by d e t e r m i n i n g w h ic h g e n e s will be t u r n e d on o r s h u t off. T h e r e is a sim ila r b i d i r e c t i o n a l effe ct b e t w e e n b e h a v i o r a n d n e u r a l ac­ tivity, a n d i n d e e d , fo r all o t h e r c o m b i n a t i o n s o f th e f o u r c o m p o n e n t s . T h u s , it is n o t m e r e l y g e n e s t h a t e n s u r e t h a t any i n f a n t o r ch ild a tta in s a spccies-spccific c h a r a c te ri s ti c , for e x a m p l e , l a n g u a g e , b u t r a t h e r , t h e ef fec t o f all f o u r c o m p o n e n t s w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r . T h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l ta r g e t is c o d e d in th e g e n e s in th e s en s e t h a t for n o r m a l r e a r i n g e n v i r o n m e n t s t h e g e n e s p r o d u c e n e r v o u s systems t h a t activate b e h a v i o r a l p ro c e ss e s t h a t d e t e r m i n e t h a t th e species-specific b e h a v i o r a l c h a r a c te ri s ti c will b e a c q u i r e d . T h e g e n e s , th e n e r v o u s system, th e b e h a v i o r , a n d th e e n v i r o n m e n t all w ork to­ g e t h e r to can al iz e th e d e v e l o p i n g b e h a v i o r . T h u s , as a ch ild starts to sp e a k Engl ish in n o r m a l E n g l is h - sp e a k i n g e n v i r o n m e n t s , his Engl ish s p e e c h is r e ­ i n f o r c e d by o t h e r s in t h e e n v i r o n m e n t w h o c o n t i n u e to sp e a k English to h i m . A n d his n e r v o u s system c o n t i n u e s to d e v e l o p th e ne ce s sa ry c o n n e c ­ tions to sustain a n d e n h a n c e his s p o k e n English. W h e n th e g e n e s a n d the va rio us e n v i r o n m e n t s , fo r e x a m p l e , intra-cellular, extra -cellul ar , family social i n t e r a c t i o n s , a t m o s p h e r i c p o l l u t i o n levels, a r e in a n o r m a l r a n g e fo r th e species, t h e n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l targ et s will b e a t t a i n e d . In f an ts will n u r s e , crawl, walk a n d talk, a c c o r d i n g to th e e p i g e n e t i c t i m e t a b l e c o d e d in th e g e n e s (Epigenesis is t h e e m e r g e n c e of a n a ­ to m ic a l s t r u c t u r e s a n d b e h a v i o r a l a n d ph ysiological f u n c t i o n s p r o d u c e d by th e i n t e r a c t i o n s a m o n g g e n e s , t h e d e v e l o p i n g in di vi du a l, a n d th e e n v i r o n ­ m e n t ) . M o r e o v e r , c a n a li z a t io n p r o c e s s e s are s el f- co rre cti ng in a d d i t i o n to b e i n g self-directing. E p i g e n e s i s works to p u t b a c k o n t h e e vo lu ti o n a ri ly d e ­ s i g n e d d e v e l o p m e n t a l track any d e v ia t io n s fr o m th e species-specific targets. F o r e x a m p l e , in fa nt s will le ar n to walk at a b o u t 1 y e a r o f ag e even if they have h a d very little o p p o r t u n i t y to crawl, as is t h e case with H o p i infan ts . As a n o t h e r e x a m p l e , h e a r i n g i n fa n ts r e a r e d by deaf, ASL u s in g p a r e n t s le ar n to s p e a k n o r m a l l y if th ey are f r e q u e n t l y e x p o s e d to o t h e r s w h o use s p o k e n language.

G E N E S , M I N D , AND C U L T U R E T h e title o f this s ec tio n is th e title o f th e 1981 b o o k by L u m s d e n a n d E. O. W ils on . All h u m a n s a r e r e a r e d in a n d live in c u l t u r e s . T h e s e c u l t u r e s r e ­ s e m b l e e a c h o t h e r in m a n y wrays, a n d yet t h e r e are i m p o r t a n t d if f e r e n c e s

42

2.

AN EVOLUT I ONARY MO D E L

between t he m, for example, language or religious practices. Infants and children are r equir ed to learn the cultural practiccs they arc reared in, a nd canalization processes e nsure that they will learn some o f them. The process of socializing children into their eulture is callcd enculluralion. Enculturation makes us uniquely American, or English, or Mcxican. From a g e neti c/ evol ut ionary view, how mi ght this enculturation conic about? Lu ms de n a nd Wilson provide a very convincing mo d e l as an answer to this question. We should distinguish three kinds of culturally learned behavior. T he first is species-specific patterns that arc seen in all cultures, for example, nursing by infants, walking, the c oor din at ed use o f two hands. T h e second is variants of species-specific patterns that distinguish cultures from each other, for example, language, religious practiccs, rules for sharing, tool manuf actur e, wh et he r the bride o r the b ri degr oom leaves the family o f ori­ gin. Both the first a nd second kinds arc thus universal patterns o f h u m a n behavior. T h e third is relatively u ni qu e practices that arc cultural specific, for e xample, piano playing or b u ng e e jumping. All three kinds o f learning are possible bccausc h u m a n s evolved as cultural animals. In a sense, culture is e n c o d e d in o u r genes. Figure 2.1 is Lu ms de n a nd Wilson’s (1981) pictorial representation of how genes a nd culture cocvolved— how systematic changcs in h u m a n genctic structure led to systematic changcs in the nat ure of h u m a n culture a nd vice versa. In the model, the four principal levels o f biological organiza­ tion arc shown: molecular, ccllular, organismic, a n d populational. T h e first three of these levels constitute the details of epigenesis, as already defined. Note that the arrows follow a particular direction, in contrast to the pr oc ­ esses in G. Gottlieb’s (1991) discussion. This directionality implies that there is systematic c ha ngc in each of the levels, as op p os ed to the m ai nt e­ na nc e o f stable canalized characteristics. At the mol ecul ar level, the genes, which are gr oups of DNA molecules, p r o d uc c proteins. These proteins b o n d t ogether to form all the varied cells in the body. O f particular interest arc the brain cells (neurons). T he struc­ ture a n d funct ioni ng of these n e u r o n s p ro du c c cpigcnetic rules for acquir­ ing cultural characteristics a n d for developing individual cognitions and behavior, for exampl e, the names of colors, the qualities of apples. T he cpigenctic rules are canalizcd, a nd if the external e n v i r on me n t is highly similar for all individuals, t hen their cognitions a n d behavior will be simi­ lar. T h e pop u l at i o n o f individuals who reside a n d int eract in a given r e­ gion form a eul ture a n d share a language. T h e linkage b etween the o r g a n ­ ismic a n d pop u l at i o na l levels reflects the t ranslation of genes into culture. T h e linkage o f the populational a n d molecular levels reflects how evolu­ tionary processes oper at i ng on a popul at ion of individuals influence gene frequencies.

CELLULAR MOLECULAR y -

DNA

a

-

j

-

g

-

g

-

c

- y

A - T - A - C - C-G-Á i

T U -A -U -G -G -C -U

RNA (TRANSCRIPTION)

A - Ú - A -C -C -G -A

1

O

t

PROTEIN {TRANSLATION)

•••

TYROSINE-GLYC1 NE-SERNE

Û

POPULATIONAL

ORGANISMIC

EPIGENETIC RULES CULTURE

English

a (j ^ S

1

V / /

«i

visual te rm s

ma.

auditory smell 8 term s taste terms

a

I INDIVIDUAL COGNITION AND BEHAVIOR (mellow)

FIG. 2.1. T h e full c irc ui t o f cau sa tio n in g e n e - c u lt u r e co evo lutio n. F r o m Genes, M in d a n d Cul­ ture: The (revolutionary Process by C . J . L u m s d e n a n d E. (). Wilson* 1981, C a m b r i d g e , MA: H a r ­ vard University Press. R e p r i n t e d by pe rm is si o n o f t h e a ut hors .

( (tree)

(health)

44

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

Let us f u r t h e r e x a m i n e these latter two linkages. L u m s d e n a n d E. O. Wil­ son (1981) identified two b r o a d classes o f epigenetic rules: (a) those that t ra ns f or m cul tural input s, for e x a mp le , socialization e x p e r i en c es , into “knowledge structures,” a n d (b) those th at transform knowledge structures into behavior. Knowledge structures primarily consist of m e m o r y a n d cogni­ tive processes. Behavior is what individuals do in their social a n d physical e n ­ vironments. T h e c o n s e qu e nc e s o f behavior arc different levels o f “genetic fit­ ness,” that is, survival a n d r e pr o du c t io n . If certain types o f epigenetic rules lead to behaviors with high genetic fitness within a given popul at i o n , then those rules will ultimately b e c o m e the n o r m for that p o pul ati on. If certain epigenetic rules lead to behaviors with low genetic fitness, then the genes s u p p or t in g those rules will ultimately disappear. Per haps the clearest e x a m ­ ple o f this gene-culture coevolution is spoken language. Individuals in a p o p ­ ulation whose anat omi cal structure a n d epigenetic rules led to l anguage behavi or h a d h i g h e r genetic fitness than those who lacked these rules. L a n­ g ua ge is cultural, b u t l an gu a ge use p r o d u c e d the genet ic c h a n ge s in a p o p ­ ulation t ha t m a d e l an g ua g e d e v e l o p m e n t inevitable. It is i m p o r t a n t to distinguish cultural-specific from species-specific c a n a ­ lized characteristics. All canalized characteristics started at t he culturalspecific level. If they s p r e ad to o t h e r cul tures t h r o u g h “i n t e r m a r r i a g e ” a n d h a d high genetic fitness in the new cultures, t h e n ultimately those c h a r a c ­ teristics b e c a m e canalized in the new cultures. T h e only r e as on ab l e way that a characteristic c ou l d b e c o m e canal i zed for all m e m b e r s o f the species is if it h a d high genetic fitness in every c ul tur e on e ar th. Based on t he p a l coant hr opol ogic al r e co r d, m o d e r n h u m a n s e m e r g e d at least 40,000 years ago, a n d pr obabl y consider ably earlier (Fishbein, 1976, 1984). It is t hu s highly likely t ha t any cultural c ha nge s t h a t have o c c u r r e d in h u m a n p o p ul a t i o ns since th en were e i t h er purely cultural, t ha t is, n o t genet ic, o r were coevolved, cultural-specific changes. R e c ent research by Gr ee nf i e ld a n d Childs (1991) a m o n g the Zinacantecos, a Maya I ndi a n cult ur e, is highly consi stent with the L u m s d e n a n d E. O. Wilson (1981) mo de l. T h e Z i na ca n t eco s have a relatively distinct cul­ t ure that distinguishes t he m fr om n e i g h b o r i n g g r o u p s — a n d , o f course, from all non-Mayan cultures. Moreover, they have a distinctive p o p ul a t i on genet i c s tr uc t ur e b ecause ma r r ia ge is largely restricted to o t h e r m e m b e r s o f thei r cul ture. Gr ee nf ie ld a n d Childs (1991) asked two q ue sti ons within a c u l t u r a l / g e n e t i c f r a m e ­ work. First, d o Z in a ca n te co infants a n d ch il dr e n show p a t t e r ns o f psycho­ logical d e v e l o p m e n t characteristic o f non- Mayan cultures? S ec on d, d o they show culture-specific pa t t e r ns tha t have conti nuit y into a du l t h o o d ? An affir­ mative answer to the first quest ion provides s u p p o r t for the existence of universal species-specific g e n e / c u l t u r e coevol ut ion. An affirmative answer to the s e c o n d q ues ti on provides s u p p o r t for culture-specific coevolution.

GE NE S , MI ND, AND C U L T U R E

45

T h e dat a are based on 4 years o f fieldwork car ried o u t in th e native la n­ gua ge o f Tzotzil, b u t also, 30 years o f multidisciplinary studies car ri ed o u t by o t h e r colleagues. Re ga rdi ng universal species-specific capabilities, the following results were o b t a i ne d . 1. O n me nt a l a n d m o t o r tests car ri ed o u t with babies, t he s e q u e n c e of behavioral mi lest ones was the s ame as for babies in the U n i t e d States. 2. In a study with y o u n g Zi na ca nt eco c hi ld r en wh o h a d no familiarity with “ne st in g c u p ” toys, Z in a c a nt e co c hi ld re n a n d U.S. ch il dr e n showed the same d e v e l o p m e n t a l s e q u e n c e o f strategies for c o m b i n ­ ing the cups. 3. In several studies us ing d if fer ent materials a n d r e q ui r i n g diff er ent cognitive activities, Z i n a ca n te co c hi ld r en be twe en the ages of 4 an d 18 showed the s ame s e qu e nc e s o f abilities, at the s ame ages, as U.S. c hi l d r en , for e x a mp l e , the ability to classify di f f er ent objects in a vari­ ety o f ways. In s ome o f these tasks, the cognitive abilities t a p p e d for the Z inacant ecos were quite novel a n d on the surface, inconsi st ent with cultural lear ni ng. Gr ee nf ie ld a n d Childs (1991) c o n c l u d e d t h a t the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d p a t te rn o f results s up p o r ts a universal species-specific d e v e l o p m e n t a l s equ en c e . R e g ar d i ng culture-specific behavior, Z i na ca nt eco babies show very low levels o f physical activity. This “r e s t r a i n e d ” m o t o r activity is also f o u n d a m o n g Ch i nes e- Amer ican, Navajo, a n d J a p a n e s e babies, b u t n o t in Europ ea n- Ame ri ca n babies. T h e f ou r g r o u ps wh o are r est ra ine d all have differ­ e nt diets a n d p r en a ta l care fr om each o t he r , suggesting the exi st ence of a genetic basis for the restraint. Given t hat these g r o up s also have Asian roots, the a ss ume d genetic basis ma ke s sense. Focusing on the Zi nacantecos, the b eh a vi o r o f m o t h e r s reinforces i nf ant s’ low activity levels; the babies are swaddl ed ( wr ap pe d) a n d are n u r s e d at the slightest m o v e m e n t . E u r o p e a n Amc ri c an babies rarely receive this ki nd o f t r e a t m e n t . As a c o n s e q u e n c e of dif fe re nt starting activity levels a n d diff er ent m a t e r n a l t r e a t m e n t , the activ­ ity levels o f t he two g r o up s o f babies b e c o m e even m o r e di ve rg en t d u r i n g the first wreek o f life. Mor eover , relative to E u r o p e a n Amer icans , this pa t­ tern of Zi na c an te co m o t o r r estraint is observed at all d e v e l o p m e n t a l levels, in cl u d in g a d u l t h o o d . It is n ot t he case t h a t Z i n a c ant eco babies are m o r e listless t han E u r o p e a n Amer icans. In fact, the opp os i te may be the case. Re­ search has f o u n d t h e m to be m o r e attentive to their s u r r o u n d i n g s , for l o n g e r t ime periods, t h a n E u r o p e a n - A m e r i c a n babies. Gr ee nf i e ld a n d Childs (1991) discussed these results from cultural a n d g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y poi nts o f view. T h e y c o n c l u d e d t h a t in the Zinaca nt ec o cult ur e, m o t o r r estraint has an adaptive advantage. Given t he a p ­ p a r e n t long-term stability of t he ir cultural practices, it is likely th a t this m o ­ tor r estraint was a cocvolved b eh avi or characteristic.

46

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

BEHAVIOR GENETICS

Is t h e r e evidence to s u p p o r t the c o n c e p t o f canalization, a n d by i mpl i ca­ tion, the evolution o f species-specific p h e no t y p i c characteristics? Yes, a lim­ ited a m o u n t . Fishbein (1976) s u m m a r i z e d s ome o f the genetics research by Fraser a n d W a d d i n g t o n t h a t clearly d e m o n s t r a t e s t he existence o f c a n a ­ lized a na t omi c al species-specific characteristics in flies a n d mice. G. G o t t ­ lieb (1991) p r ov id ed a s tr on g d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f the species-specific b eh av ­ ior r es p on se to m a t e r n a l calling by mall ar d ducklings. An d R on a l d Wilson (1978) sho we d t h e existence o f canalizati on of intelligence in h u m a n twins. Al th ou g h the just m e n t i o n e d research is highly c o m p e t e n t a n d i m a g i na ­ tive, n o n e of it is directly c o n c e r n e d with canalized h u m a n social behavior. However, t h e r e is an allied research area, b e ha vi or genetics, which docs have a b e a r i n g on this issue. Behavior genetics deals with assessing the relative c o nt r i b u t i o n o f g enes a n d e n v i r o n m e n t to t he e xp la n at io n o f individual di fferences in behavior. In a sense, b eh a vi o r genetics is th e o ppos i te o f canalization, which is c o n ­ c e r n e d with similarities a m o n g individuals, t h a t is, wh a t makes us alike. As Scarr (1992) p o i n t e d out, t h e r e is n o necessary c o n n e c t i o n b et ween b eha v­ ior genetics analyses a n d canalizati on analyses. T h e genes a n d g e n e activi­ ties t ha t m a k e us alike may o p e r a t e in a di f f er en t fashion than t he g enes t h a t m a k e us different. However, be ha v i or genetics analyses d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t g en e s do, at least partially, c ont r ol behavi or . If it can be shown that g enes c o n t r o l individual dif fer ences in social behavior, th en by anal ogy the a r g u m e n t is s t r e n g t h e n e d that g enes cont r ol similarities in behavior. Two r e c e n t relevant p ap er s arc those by Pl omi n a n d Daniels (1987) a n d Eysenck (1992). Pl omi n a n d Daniels reviewed t hei r r esear ch a n d t h a t of colleagues c o n c e r n i n g t he relative c o n t ri b u t i o ns o f genetic similarity a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l similarities a n d dif fer ences to variations (individual differ­ ences) in personality, ps yc hopathology, a n d cognitive abilities. Eysenck re­ viewed his a n d his colleagues research c o n c e r n i n g individual di fferences in p r ej ud ic e. Two o f the m a j or m e t h o d o l o g i e s for m a k in g these assessments are the a d o p t i o n design a n d t he twin design. In the adoption design, the e x p e r i m e n t e r c o m p a r e s e i t h e r identical twins r e a r e d apart, f raternal twins r e a r e d apart, n on tw i n siblings r e a r e d apart, or n o n r e l a t c d c hi ld r en r e a r e d t o g e t h e r (i.e., at least o n e o f w h o m is a d o p t e d ) . By look ing at t he c o r re la ti o n in personality, ps yc hopathol ogy, o r cognitive abilities in identical twins r e a re d apart, a d i r e c t est imat e of the genetic c o n ­ t ribut ion to p h e no t y p i c variations can be m a d e . For e x a mp l e , a c orrel at ion o f .50 b et ween identical twins on a personality m e a s u r e implies t h a t o n e h al f of p h e n o t y pi c di fferences bet ween p e o p l e on t h a t m e a s u r e arc causcd by geneti c variations. Similar c o m p a r i s o n s can be m a d e by e x a m i n i n g fra­ t ernal twins a n d o t h e r siblings r e a r e d apart. P he no ty pi c variations n o t ex­

B E H AVI O R G E N ETI CS

47

pl ai n e d by gcncti c variations arc a s s u me d to be caused by e n vi r o n m e n t a l similarities a n d differences. T h e r e are two kinds o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects: s ha re d a n d n o n s h a r e d in­ fluences. T h e e x t e n t to which two no n gc nc tic al ly r el at ed siblings r e a r e d to­ g e t h e r arc phcnotypical ly similar reflects s h a r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences. T h e e x t e n t to which they are di ff er en t reflects b ot h genetic di fferences a n d n o n s h a r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences. O n the o t h e r h a n d , if pairs o f sib­ lings r e a r ed t o g e t h e r are n o m o r e similar t han pairs o f siblings r e a r ed apart , t h e n p he n ot yp i c similarities are at tr ibut able to gcnct ic similarity, a n d dif fer ences within the sibling pairs arc at t r i b u t e d to gcnctic dif fer ences a n d to n o n s h a r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l variations. In the twin design, the p h e n o t y pi c r e se m b l a n c e o f identical twins a n d same-sex fraternal twins is e x a m i n e d . Each set of twins is r e a r e d in t he same h o m e at t he same time. By c o m p a r i n g the c o r rel at ions for a p a rt i c ul a r psy­ chological characteristic for these two types o f twins, t he genet ic, shar ed, a n d n o n s h a r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n t r i bu ti o ns for t ha t characteristic can be m a d e . If h er e di t y has n o effect on t ha t characteristic, for e xa mp l e , t he n identical a n d frat ernal twins will r es e mb l e each o t h e r equivalently. P h e n o ­ typic variations a c c o u n t e d for by s h a r ed e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences arc d e ­ t e r m i n e d by su bt r a ct in g t he p r o p o r t i o n o f p h e n o t y p i c similarity at t r i bu te d to geneti c similarity from the total p h e n o t y p i c similarity. For e x a mp l e, if the total p h e no t yp i c similarity is 50%, a n d 40% is a tt ri but abl e to gcnctic similarity, t he n 10% is a tt ribut abl e to s h a re d e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences. T h e n o n s h ar ed e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o nt r i b u t i o n is assessed by c o m p u t i n g the po rt io n of p h en o t y p i c variations that distinguish identical twins from o n e a n o t h e r . This is d o n e by n o t i n g the e x t e n t of p h e no t yp i c variation r e m a i n ­ ing after the gcnct ic a n d s h a r e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l i nf lue nc es are subtr act ed. In the c u r r e n t e x a mp l e , this woul d be 50%. W h a t are the results o f this r esearch? Plomin a n d Daniels (1987) r e ­ p o r t e d t h a t across a wide variety o f studies, the geneti c c on t r i b u t i o n to in d i ­ vidual differences in personality, ps yc hopat hol ogy, a n d cognitive abilities ra nge s from a b o u t 30% to (50%. Re ga r di n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l i nfluences, nearl y all o f t h e m consist of n o n s h a r c d e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects. T h a t is, envi­ r o n m e n t a l dif fer ences within families p r o d u c e individual di fferences in b e ­ havior; b u t e n v i r o n m e n t a l similarities within families have little effect on i n­ dividual dif fer ences bet ween rel ated a n d u n r e l a t e d individuals. How a b o u t p rej udi ce? Eysenck (1992) f o u n d a nearly identical p at t e r n as j u s t m e n ­ t i on e d for males a n d females in b ot h E n g l a n d a n d Australia for six items c o n c e r n i n g Blacks a n d Jews on the Eysenck Social Attitudes Scale. Do Eys enck’s results m e a n that individual dif f er ences in p r e ju di ce tow’ard Blacks a n d Jews are c o d e d in the genes? No, b u t t he processes t h a t lead to variations in the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re jud ic e p r obably are. At the p r e s e n t time, we d o n o t know what these processes may be.

48

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

H U N T E R - G A T H E R E R MI ND S IN P O S T I N D U S T R I A L BODI ES Alicc Rossi (1977) wrote: . . . t he two h u n d r e d years in which industri al societies have existed is a s h o r t ti me, i n d e e d , to say n o t h i n g o f t h e twenty years in whi ch a few o f the mo s t a d ­ va nc e d i ndustri al societies have b e e n u n d e r g o i n g t h e p a i nf ul t r a nsit ion to a post -industri al stage. O u r m o s t r e c e n t g e n e s derive f r om t h a t largest s e g m e n t o f h u m a n history d u r i n g which m e n a n d w o m e n lived in h u n t i n g a n d g a t h e r ­ ing societies; in o t h e r words, We s t er n i ze d h u m a n bei ngs now living in a t e c h ­ nologi cal world a r e still geneti call y e q u i p p e d only with an a n c i e n t m a m m a ­ lian h e r i ta g e t hat evolved largely t h r o u g h a d a p t a t i o n s a p p r o p r i a t e to m u c h earl i er times, (p. 3)

As n o t e d previously, it is highly likely t hat the universal species-specific canalizations were in place at least 40,000 years ago, a n d that evolutionary c ha nge s since t h e n have b e e n e i t h er purely cultural or genetically culturespecific. We d e sc ri be d an e x a mp l e of the latter with m o t o r r estraint in the Zinacantecos. T h e r e is n o evidence o f species-specific genetic c h a n ge s in the past 40,000 years. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , the as s ump t io n b e in g m a d e h e r e is t h a t h u m a n s are c ur r entl y o p e r a t i n g with h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r e pige ne ti c sys­ tems. T h e se systems evolved a n d s u p p o r t e d c ul tur es t ha t were tribal, c o n ­ sisting on average, o f a pp ro x i ma t e l y 500 m e n , w o m e n , a n d ch il dr e n. T h e systems were sufficiently flexible to allow the d e v e l o p m e n t o f agricultural societies, which have b e e n in exi st ence for a b o u t 10,000 years. T h e y also p e r m i t t e d the very r e c e n t cul tural evolution o f industrial a n d postindustrial societies. T h e fate of t he latter is q u e s ti ona bl e as can b e e n seen in the m u ­ tual d es t r uc ti on in which m a n y societies are e n g a ge d. As Rossi (1977) n o t e d, m u c h o f o u r geneti c e q u i p m e n t is b ased o n “an a n ci e n t m a m m a l i a n h e r i t ag e . ” While that is certainly true, a m o r e profit­ able a p p r o a c h for t he p r e s en t p ur p os e s is to focus on o u r m o r e r e c en t pri­ ma te a n d h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r heritages. In this ancestry lie the keys to u n d e r ­ s tandi ng the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y bases of the d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ej udic e a n d discrimi nat ion. T h e Pr i ma t e He ri t ag e T h e p ri ma t es evolved a b o u t 60 million years ago fr om m a m m a l i a n a nc es­ tors pr ob ab l y r es e mb li n g c o n t e m p o r a r y tree shrews (Andrews, 1985). F o u r m a jo r events o c c u r r e d within that time span: 1. T h e New W or l d a n d Ol d Wo r l d pr ima te s were se pa ra te d a b o u t 50 million years ago.

H U N T E R - G A T H E R E R M I N D S IN P O S T I N D U S T R I A L B O D I E S

49

2. T h e Ol d W or l d m o n k c y - a p c split o c c u r r e d a b o u t 40 million years ago. 3. T h e c o m m o n O l d Wo rl d ancest or s o f gorillas, c h i m p an z ee s , a n d h u ­ m a n s e m e r g e d a b o u t 12 to 16 million years ago. 4. T h e evolutionary lines l ea d in g to distinct gorilla, c h i m p a n z e e a n d h u ­ m a n species a p p e a r e d a b o u t 6 to 10 million years ago. T h e r e are two c h i m p a n z e e species, Pan troglodytes k no wn as the c o m m o n c h i m p a n z e e , a n d Pan paniscus, k no wn as the pygmy c h i m p a n z e e or bonobo. O f the f o u r species— h u m a n s , gorillas, pygmy a n d c o m m o n c h i m p a n ­ zees— the two c h i m p a n z e e species have the hi gh est d e g r e e o f genet ic relat­ edness. A m o n g the primates, these f o u r species are a pp a re n tl y m o r e closely r elated to each o t h e r t h a n they are to any o t h e r species ( W r a n g h a m , 1987). I i ndic at e d that evolution is an e x p e r i m e n t in design. W ha t is the n a t u r e o f the h u m a n design? In t ha t o u r focus is the evolutionary basis o f p re j udi c e a n d d i sc ri mina t ion, we are mainly i nt er es te d in the social aspects of the d e ­ sign. T h e r e are t h r e e m a jo r c o m p o n e n t s o f the design: (a) the he r it ag e we s har e with the Ol d Wo r l d mo nk ey s a n d apes; (b) that which we s har e with the c h i m p a n z e e s a n d gorillas (which we discuss in a n o t h e r section); a n d (c) o u r h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r heri tage. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , o u r e mp h a s is h e r e is o n those s o c i a l/ be h av io r al e l e m e n t s that are c o m m o n l y f o u n d a m o n g Old Wor ld pr ima te s a n d those s o c i a l/ b e h av i o r al e l e m e n t s that charact eri ze h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r gr oups. It is n o t e d that the m o n k e y - a p e split o c c u r r e d a p ­ p r oxima te ly 40 million years ago, a n d t hat the a p e - h u m a n species have ha d 6 to 10 million years o f i n d e p e n d e n t evolutionary history. All living species are d if f er ent t ha n the c o m m o n ancestor . It is thus a ss u me d that any social/ b eh a vi or c o mm o na l i t i es that exist a m o n g the mo nk ey s a n d apes, o r a m o n g the apes a n d h u m a n s , were p a r t o f the design o f the c o m m o n ancestors a n d c o n t i n u e to be p ar t o f the c u r r e n t h u m a n design.

O l d Wor ld Monkeys an d Apes T h e p r i m a r y a d a p t at io n o f nearly all the Ol d Wo r l d (African) p r i m a t e s pe ­ cies, i n c l ud i ng h u m a n s , is for life as a m e m b e r o f a g r o u p (Fishbein, 1976, 1984; T o o b y & DeVore, 1987). T he se species have evolved so that the g r o u p provides the f r ame wo rk for subsistence activities, p r ot e c t i on , r e p r o d u c t i o n , a n d socialization o f the young. In these species, t he re is a f r e q u e n t associa­ tion o f m e m b e r s o f all ages a n d b o t h sexes t h r o u g h o u t the lifetime o f each individual. In all cases, the offspring are typically b o r n singly a n d are rel a­ tively helpless at birth, a n d they are highly d e p e n d e n t on the adults for a c ons ide ra bl e p e r i od t hereaft er. Socialization starts shortly after birth, a n d o ccurs primarily t h r o u g h play, observation, imitation, a n d int er acti ons with

50

2.

AN EVOLUT I ONARY MO D E L

gr ou p me mbe rs . T h e major task o f preadults is to learn to lit into a nd c o n ­ tribute to the stability of the social group. In o r d e r to accomplish this task they have to develop: (a) knowledge o f who arc gr ou p member s; (b) a set of social skills i m p or t a nt to the group; (c) an e n du r i n g set of social relation­ ships with many, if n o t most member s; a n d (d) knowledge of the rules of in­ teraction a nd o f the roles a ppr opr iate to self a n d others. These rules and roles arc both age a n d sex related. W h at is tolerated in infants, for example, tugging on the hair of adults, is often treated harshly in juveniles. Male and female infants a n d juveniles n o t only act differently from each o t h e r — for example, males are m o r e activc, females stay closer to their m o t he r s— but adults treat them differently. If the social d e ve lo p me nt o f ccrtain ma t ur i n g me m b e r s of the gr o up is abnor mal , then as adults they will n ot be able to contr ibute to the four vital functions of the social gr ou p to which they belong. Natural selection has o p er at ed a nd conti nues to operat e in such a way that individuals who are appropriately socially developed cont ri bute to all four vital functions o f the gr oup, a nd those that are n o t appropriately socially developed b c co mc p e ­ ripheral m e m b e r s o f the group. The latter likely r e p ro d u c e less than the m o r e ccntral member s. This is a negative feedback system involving genes a nd behaviors. In a stable env ir o n me nt , animals a nd people who have a ge­ netic structure such that their social d ev e l op me nt will be n or ma l develop into n or ma l individuals a n d r e p ro d uc e (or get their close relatives to do so), thus con t in ui ng their genes in the popul ati on gene distribution. Those whose gcnctic structure is such that they do n o t readily develop into n or ma l adults have low fitness, a n d h en c e their genes are dimi ni shed in the gene distribution (Fishbein, 1976, 1984). For the p res ent purposes, o n e of the most significant social aspects of p ri ma te g ro up s is t he e xistence o f d o m i n a n c e hierarchies. D o m i n a n c e r e­ fers to the ability o f o n e g r o u p m e m b e r to “s u p p l a n t ” a n o t h e r in o r d e r to gain access to p r e fe r re d o r scarce resources. Some o f these arc particular foods, locations, for ex a mpl e, shade, water, close proximity to ccrtain o t h e r g r o u p m e m b e r s , sex with specific individuals. T h e r e arc t h r ee typi­ cal ways o n e m e m b e r gains d o m i n a n c e over a n o t he r : (a) def eat ing the o t h e r in a fight, or giving the a p p e a r a n c e o f be in g able to do so; (b) f o r m­ ing a coalition with a n o t h e r g r o u p m e m b e r against some or all o t he r g ro u p me mbe rs ; o r (c) being t he son or d a ug h t e r o f a m o t h e r who is high in the d o m i n a n c e hierarchy. T h e latter characteristic typically has i mp o r ­ tance a m o n g the Old World monkeys, a n d n o t a m o n g the apes. T he critical factor h er e is that in monkey a nd ba bo on species, males typically leave their natal gr oups at adolcsccncc, whereas females remain with their group t h r o u g h o u t their lives. These females form d o m i n a n c e hierarchies, b ut the males do n ot ( Hi nde, 1983).

H U N T E R - G A T H E R E R M I N D S IN P O S T I N D U S T R I A L B O D I E S

51

Primat es d o n o t retain thei r d o m i n a n c e status by constantly fighting with ot her s, o r t h r e a t e n i n g t h e m . Rather, o t h e r g r o u p m e m b e r s with which they d o n o t have close positive r elations simply avoid t h e m o r move away from t he m when they a p p r o a c h . Two of the c o n s e q u e n c e s o f b e i n g a highly d o m ­ i n a n t individual arc: O t h e r g r o u p m e m b e r s pay at t e nt io n to you or try to gain your at t en ti on ( C h a n ce , 1975); a n d o t h e r g r o u p m e m b e r s a t t e m p t to “g r o o m ” you o r ge t you to g r o om t he m ( g r o o m i n g involves o n e individual tactually s ea r ch i n g t h r o u g h a n o t h e r ’s fur for parasites; Seyfarth, 1983). It has b e e n shown by St rum (1987) a n d o t he rs t h a t o n e o f the c o n s e q u e n c e s o f g r o o m i n g r el ati onships is the d e v e l o p m e n t o f alliances. T he se alliances i ncrease o n e ’s effectiveness in a c co mp l i sh i ng goals within the g r o up . T hu s , t he p ic tur e t ha t has e m e r g e d in r e c e n t years c o n c e r n i n g d o m i ­ n a n c e h i er ar ch i es is t h a t the mo st d o m i n a n t individuals arc n o t only to be fear ed, b u t to be favored. O t h e r s want to be allied with t he m a n d to be r e ­ s p o n d e d to affectionately by t h e m . A l t ho u gh t h e r e is n o e v idence t h a t in n o n h u m a n p r i m a t e g r o u ps highly d o m i n a n t individuals b e c o m e role m o d ­ els for y o u n g e r g r o u p m e m b e r s , we will see this characteristic e m e r g e in h u ­ m a n gr oups. T h e H u n t e r - G a t h e r e r He ri t a ge Er ns t Mayr (1997) m a d e a useful distinction b etween u lt i mat e a n d p ro x i ­ ma te evolutionary causes. Ultimate causes arc closely tied to the evolutionary history o f a species a n d get ma ni f e s t ed in t he s tr u ct u re o f t h e ge no ty pe o f t h a t species. This leads to t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f genetically specified p r o c ­ esses, for e x a mp l e , m e m or y , l an g ua g e acquisition, in the p h e n o t y p e s o f m e m b e r s o f the species. T h e proximate causes arc the playing o u t o f those processes in the h e r e a n d now— in t he c u r r e n t e n v i r o n m e n t in which the m e m b e r s find themselves. T h e ulti mate causes exist b ecause in the social a n d physical e n v i r o n m e n t s in which the genetically bas ed processes were played out, the individuals manif es ti ng the un d er l yi ng ge no t yp e were rcpr oductively successful. T h e p r o x i m a t e causes get played o u t in any envi­ r o n m e n t s in which they are tri ggered, even if these e n v i r o n m e n t s differ substantially from t hose in which the g en ot yp e evolved. As i nd ic at ed in a previous section, the evolutionary line l ea di ng to the h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r design is 6 to 10 million years b e yo n d the e m e r g e n c e of t h e c o m m o n a nc e st or o f h u m a n s , gorillas, a n d c h i m p a n ze es . T h e h u n t e r g a t h e r e r subsistence m o d e a n d social s t ru ct ur e has b e e n a relatively c o n ­ stant h u m a n f e atur e for 99% o f o u r existence. W h a t are t h e m a j o r aspects o f this design that differentiates us from the African mo n k e y s a n d apes? My s u m m a r y draws o n five sources: Fishbein (1976, 1984), Irwin (1987), T oo by a n d DeVor e (1987), a n d W r a n g h a m (1987).

52

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

At the b r o a d e s t level, nearl y all h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r societies consist o f a set o f genetically rel ated subsistence g r o up s t h a t collectively for m a tribe. Each subsistence g r o u p resides in a ccrtain r egi on a n d g enerally has limited c o n ­ tact with o t h e r tribal g r o u ps t h r o u g h o u t t he year. M e m b e r s o f t he various g r o u p s arc often closely rel ated in t ha t sisters a n d d a u g h t e r s move to o t h e r g r o u p s for ma rr ia ge . T h e i r offspring are cousins or n e ph e w s a n d nieces o f m e m b e r s o f the natal g r ou p . Female d e p a r t u r e is the n o r m ; however, in s ome societies the males usually leave the natal g r o u p , a n d in ot her s, males o r females may leave. Unlike the African apes, h u m a n s m a i nt a in b o n d s b e ­ tween family m e m b e r s in di f fe r en t g r o u p s t h a t c o n t i n u e over time a n d space. T h us , all m e m b e r s develop s t r on g identifications with the tribe as a whole. Unlike the African p r i ma te s, subsistence g r o u p s arc c o m p o s e d o f fami­ lies. T h e family is t he basic social unit, typically consisting o f a m a r ri e d a du l t male, a d ul t female, their p r e a d o l e s c e n t mal e a n d female offspring, u n m a r r i e d a do l e s ce n t a n d a d ul t sons, a n d often, p a r e nt s o f the father. Polygyny is t ol erated, b u t i n f re q ue n t. Marriages arc relatively p e r m a n e n t . In p r i m a t e terms, the c ou p l e is p a ir - b o n d e d , a characteristic r are in the Af­ rican apes. D e p e n d i n g on rate o f survival, family size may be small o r large, which obviously will affect size o f the subsistence g r o u p . In times o f limited availability o f food, which is usually seasonal, t he g r o u p may split into its family c o m p o n e n t s , each mo v in g to an a re a with e n o u g h f o o d to s u p p o r t it. Unlike the African pr imat es, fathers identify their wife’s offspring as thei r own. Assumi ng a relatively low f re q ue n cy o f sexual infidelity l eadi ng to “illegitimate” offspring, a wife’s offspring arc in fact the sons a n d d a u g h ­ ters o f h e r h u s b a n d . C o r r e s p o n d i n g to this p a re n ta l identification, fathers invest a lot o f time a n d e ne rgy in h e l p i n g to raise t h e i r ch il dr en . T h e e x t e n t o f this activity is far gr e at e r t h a n a m o n g the African apes. In a ddit ion to m u ­ tual i nvol ve me nt in child r e ar i ng a n d sexual fidelity, h u s b a n d s a n d wives have extensive reci procal a n d cooper ati ve r elat ionshi ps with each o t her . Food sh ar in g is an integral p a rt o f this col l aborat ion. H u n t e r - g a t h e r e r gro up s, as gr oups, shar e m a n y goals a n d activities above a n d b e y on d those at the family level o f o r gani zat ion. Socialization o f chil­ d r e n is a g r o u p responsibility, as arc t he division o f l abor, p r o t e c t i o n , a n d f o od s h a r i n g a l o ng g e n d e r lines. In s o m e societies, h u n t e r s are n o t even p e r m i t t e d to e at t h e i r own “kills,” b u t m u s t give t h e m to o t h e r g r o u p m e m b e r s . They, o f c our s e, b e n e f i t f ro m t he successes o f t h e i r c o m p a t r i ­ ots. Re la te d to f o o d s h a r i n g a n d g r o u p o r ga n i z a t i o n , t h e r e is extensive m a l e - m a l e c o o p e r a t i o n , a n d relative to t he African p r i ma t es , a m a r k e d r e ­ d uc t io n in aggression a n d c o mp e t i t i o n . T h e pri nci pal g r o u p ethics arc s h a ri ng a n d reciprocity. T he se bo th p r o d u c c a n d r e q u ir e extensive i n t e r ­ p er s onal i n t e r d e p e n d e n c i e s a n d social c o h e s i o n — m u c h m o r e so t ha n in the African apes.

I NCL US I VE FI TNESS

53

Finally, unlike the African primates, t he re are very m a r k e d cultural differ­ ences between tribes, especially those separ ated by substantial g e ogr aphi c distance. T h e term culture emphasizes h e r e language, dialect, religious p r a c­ tices, mor al rules, belief systems, rituals, dress, art, tools a n d tool decor at ion, a n d any or all activities t hat characterize a given tribe, for e xa mple , shaking h a n d s as a greeting, offering particular food or dr ink to visitors. T hu s , h u m a n s a n d n o n h u m a n pr i ma t es evolved as m e m b e r s o f closely knit subsistence gr oups. O n e u n i qu e ly h u m a n characteristic is t ha t these g r o u p s were additionally strongly i n t e r c o n n e c t e d t h r o u g h tribal identifica­ tions. M e m b e r s o f t he s ame tribe were relatively safe with a n d c oul d c o u n t on n u r t u r a n c e from same-tribe m e m b e r s , even if t hos e m e m b e r s were u n ­ known. Ot he r- t r i b e strangers, however, were potentially d a n g e r o u s , e sp e­ cially d u r i n g the regularly r e c u r r i n g p er i od s o f scarce r esources. Given the l ikel ihood t h a t the h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r tribal m o d e o f living has b e e n in exis­ t ence for m o r e th an 1 million years, it is a s s u me d t h a t g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y processes e m e r g e d t h a t led to sust ai ning tribal a u t o n o m y a n d cont inui ty against n e i g h b o r i n g tribes. It is believed t ha t these processes b e c a m e i n c o r­ p o r a t e d into h u m a n e pi ge ne tic systems a n d m a d e it nearly inevitable that individuals would be p r e j u d i c e d toward a n d d iscr imi nat e against m e m b e r s o f o t h e r tribes ( ultimate causes). W h e n h u m a n s recently shifted to n on tribal, for e xa mp l e , industrial m o d e s o f subsistence, o u r e pig en e t ic systems did n o t shift. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , m e c h a n i s m s t h a t evolved for re gul at in g i n­ tertribal cont act s b e c a m e in ap p r o p r i a t e l y a pp l ie d to within-culture rela­ t ionships ( p r ox i ma t e causes). In o t h e r words, h u m a n s are p r e d i s p o s e d to treat o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s o f o u r own cul tures as if they were m e m b e r s o f dif­ f e r e n t tribes. I believe that t h e r e are at least t h r e e g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y factors that have p r o d u c e d this state o f affairs. T he se factors e m e r g e d to sustain tribal a u t o n o m y a n d c on ti nuit y against n e i g h b o r i n g tribes. T h e y arose from: (a) the i n h e r e n t n a t u r e o f Darwinian selection processes on relatively elosed b r e e d i n g p o p u l a t i o n s (inclusive fitness), (b) t he g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y d e ­ sign o f a ut hor ity- bear ing systems in h u m a n cultures, a n d (c) the g e n e t i c / e volutionary design o f i n t e r g r o u p r elations a m o n g the c o m m o n ancestors o f h u m a n h u n t e r - ga t h c re rs . We turn now to a discussion o f these factors, following which we will discuss a f ourt h factor, outgroup attractiveness, that can serve to m o d e r a t e prejudice.

I NCLUSI VE FI TNESS O n e o f t he m a j or r c c c n t i nnovat ions in evolutionary t he or y is t he e l a b or a ­ tion o f the c o n c c p t o f inclusive fitness a n d its r el at ions hi p to social b eh av i or (E. O. Wilson, 1980). T h e o r i g i na t o r o f this c o n c c p t is William D. Ha mi lt o n

54

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

(1964, 1975), a n d it has b e c o m e a c o r n e r s t o n e of the new discipline of “sociobiology.” Inclusive fitness refers to the e x t e n t to which an individual a n d h e r or his close relatives have surviving offspring. T h o s e with hi gh in­ clusive fitness tr a ns mi t relatively m a n y g ene s to the n e x t g e n e r a t i o n . T ho s e with low fitness (individuals a n d close relatives) tr a ns mi t relatively few g enes to the n e x t g e n er a t i o n . O n e impli cat ion o f inclusive fitness is th at in­ dividuals ( w h e t h e r insects or h u m a n s ) consciously or unconsciousl y at­ t e m p t to ge t th ei r ge ne s into the n e x t g e n e r at io n . T h e y can do this in basi­ cally two ways: r e p r o d u c e a g re at deal; o r act in ways to ge t t he ir close relatives to r e p r o d u c e a g r ea t deal. For e xa mp l e , a ss umi ng t h a t my sibling a n d I have in c o m m o n o n e h a l f o f o u r genes, my inclusive fitness woul d be h i g h e r by his having five surviving offspring a n d m e , n o n e , t ha n by my hav­ ing two surviving offspring, a n d he n o n e . A n o t h e r implication is t ha t when r es our c es i m p o r t a n t for survival arc limited, individuals will show p r e f e r ­ e nces to relatives a n d act in w’ays to d ecr eas e the li keli hood t h a t no nrelatives will successfully r e p r o d u c e o r survive. T h e y may p r e v en t n on relatives fr om ma ti n g , wit hho ld f oo d o r sh elt e r from t h e m , o r kill their offspring. T h e latter is a strategy th at mal e l a n g u r monkeys usually p e r fo r m (Hrdy, 1999), b u t is seen in o t h e r pr i ma te s, i n c l u d i ng h u m a n s . T h e mo s t obvious r e pr od uc ti ve strategy for get t ing y ou r g en es into the n e x t ge n e r a t i o n is to ma te with y ou r oppositc-sex p a r e n t o r siblings— carry o u t incest. This level o f i n b r e e d i n g has two negative c o n s e qu e nc e s, o n e s h o r t term a n d o n e l on g ter m. T h e short-term c o n s e q u e n c e is called “in­ b r e e d i n g d e p r e s s i o n . ” Basically the m o r e closely rel at ed are two m a t in g p ar t ne rs , t he g r e a te r is t he li kel ihood t ha t lethal recessive g en e s will b e ­ c o m e manifest, a n d their offspring will be stillborn, die early, o r have m e n ­ tal o r physical defects. T h e s e all have the effect o f de cr e as i n g t he likelihood t h a t o n e ’s g enes will survive b e y o n d the n e x t g e n e r a t i o n (E. O. Wilson, 1980). T h e long-term c o n s e q u e n c e o f high levels o f i n b r e e d i n g is t hat gc­ nctic variability across m e m b e r s o f a b r e e d i n g c o m m u n i t y gets r e d u c e d . T hu s , w he n e n v i r o n m e n t s c h a n g e , as they ultimately do, the d e sc e n d a n t s may n o t have the genetic re s our ce s to a d a p t to th e new e n v i r o n m e n t , a n d t h u s die out. H e n c e , in a t t e m p t i n g to ma xi mi ze y ou r g enes in s uc c ee d i n g g e n e r a ­ tions, a ba l an ce has to be struck b etween d e g r e e o f incest a n d b r e e d i n g d e ­ pression. O n e wants to m a t e with a close relative, b u t n o t t oo close in o r d e r to avoid i n b r e e d i n g d ep re ss io n. T h e r e arc l imited da ta with h u m a n s on in­ b r e e d i n g depr ess ion. T h e r e is m a r k e d dep re ss io n for i m m e d i a t e family m a t i ng (E. O. Wilson, 1980), b u t in Australian abori ginal tribes, t he p r e ­ f er re d form o f ma r ri a ge is to first cousins ( Ti nda l c , 1974). However, in the U n i t e d States, first-cousin ma rr i ag es are u n i for ml y restricted. It can be i n­ f er re d from the Australian e x a m p l e t ha t i n b r e e d i n g d epr essi on is pr oba bly n o t extensive for first cousins, a n d is m i n o r for s e c on d cousins.

A U T H O R1TY-B E A R I NG SYST E M S

55

T h e r e is a n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t implication o f this line o f r e as on in g. T h a t is, we s h o ul d p r e f er t ha t o u r siblings m a rr y s e c o nd cousins r a t h e r t ha n u n r e ­ lated persons. O u r siblings s ha re on average 50% o f o u r genes, o u r s e c on d cousins sh ar e a b o u t 6% o f o u r g enes, a n d u n r e l a t e d p e r s on s s ha re close to 0% o f o u r genes. T hu s , m o r e o f o u r g en e s get t r an s mi t t e d to the n e x t g e n ­ er ati on w he n o u r siblings ma rr y a s e c on d cousin t ha n w he n they ma rr y an u n r e l a t e d per s on . T h e r e are s o me r e c e n t historical d at a c onsistent with this analysis. Irwin (1987) analyzed ma rr i a ge p a t t e r ns for t he Netsilik Eskimos o f C an a da . T h e y were m o r e likely to ma rr y within the local c o m m u n i t y t ha n with a m e m b e r o f a n e a rb y Netsilik c o m m u n i t y , a n d relatively unlikely to ma rr y a m e m b e r o f a n o t h e r tribe. This p at t e r n o f ma rr ia ge s leads to rela­ tively high genetic r el at ed ne ss in m e m b e r s o f the local c o mm u n i ty . T h e r e are o t h e r i m p o r t a n t gcnctic, as well as social c o n s e q u e n c e s o f this analysis, which Ha mi lt o n (1964, 1975) d escr ibed. In short, H am il t o n shows ma the ma tic al ly that n atu ra l selection c ou ld o p e r a t e in such a fashion that, given the o p p o r t u n i t y, individuals woul d beh av e altruistically toward thei r relatives. Altruism refers to the p e r f o r m a n c e o f s o m e act t h a t benefit s a n ­ o t h e r at s o m e e x p e ns e to o n e ’s self, for e x a mp le , giving f oo d to your cousin. His analysis d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t be ha vi ng altruistically to y ou r rela­ tives ( an d t he ir like be ha v io r in r e t u r n ) increases t he Darwinian fitness o f b o t h parties. H e n c e , over m a ny g e ne r a t i o n s the g en e s o f bo th parties, i n ­ c l u d i n g t hose i nf l u e n c i n g al tr ui sm, woul d b e c o m e w i d e s pr e ad in any b r e e d i n g p o pu l a t i o n. In H a m i l t o n ’s analysis, th e Darwinian success o f altruistic be ha vi or d e ­ p e n d s on b ei ng able to d ir ect it toward relatives as o p p o s e d to nonrelatives. In small i n b r e e d i n g c o m m u n i t i e s like t h a t o f t he Nctsiliks, nearly everyone is a relative, so identifying t he m is n o t a p r o b l e m . From the p o i n t o f view of pr ej udi ce a n d d iscr iminat ion, the d ir ect implication o f H a m i l t o n ’s analysis is t ha t we are essentially d es ig n ed to be ethnocentric— to favor o u r own g r o u p as o p p o s e d to others. S o me writers have suggested t ha t inclusive fitness also leads to the concl us ion t ha t we s h o u l d be hostile o r antagonistic to n o n ­ g r o u p m e m b e r s (e.g., Irwin, 1987; Reynolds, 1987). T h e u n d e rl y i ng basis of this a nt ag on is m is t he n e e d to k e e p valuable re sour ce s within the g r o u p o f relatives to e n s u r e o n e ’s genet ic continuity.

A U T H O R I T Y - B E A R I N G SYSTEMS As e m p h a s i z e d in a previous section, o n e o f t he m o s t d ra ma t ic shifts h u m a n evolution took relative to t h a t o f t he African pr i ma t e s was in t he area o f cul­ ture. T h e p r o m i n e n t e vol ut ionary theorist, W a d d i n g t o n (1960) r e f e r r ed to this h u m a n characteristic as a “cultural sociogcnct i c system” (which I will abbreviate by CS-G system). CS-G systems arc built on biological h e r ed i ta ry

56

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

systems. L u m s d e n a n d E. O. Wi ls on (1981) d e s c r i b e d t h e u n d e r l y i n g p r o c ­ esses o f t h e c o e v o l ut i o n o f g e n e s a n d c u l t u r e . Like b iol ogi cal systems, CS-G systems ar c f u n d a m e n t a l l y i nvolved with t r a n s m i t t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f rom o n e g e n e r a t i o n to t h e n e x t . T h e p r i m a r y p r o c e ss e s o f d o i n g this ar e social t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g . CS-G systems evolve ov er t ime , b u t t h e m e c h a n i s m s a r e d i f f e r e n t t h a n t h o s e o f b iologi cal e v o l u t i o n , f o r e x a m p l e , n o g c n c t i c c h a n g c s o c c u r in t h e f o r m e r . CS-G systems involve t h e t r an s mi s s io n o f an e n o r m o u s a m o u n t o f i n f o r ­ m a t i o n . T h i s is m a d e p o ss i b l e by o u r h i g h l y evol ved s ym b o l ic a n d c o m m u ­ n i c a t i o n abilities, a n d , W a d d i n g t o n a r g u e s , by t h e e v o l u t i o n of “a u t ho r i t yb e a r i n g s y s t ems .” T h e e s s e n c e o f t h e s e s yst ems is t h a t t h e r e c e i v e r s o f i n f o r m a t i o n a r c d e s i g n e d to a c c e p t as t r u e o r valid t h e me ss a g e s t r a n s m i t ­ ted to t h e m by a u t ho r i t i e s . H u m a n c u l t u r e s a r e so c o m p l e x , f or e x a m p l e , t h a t in di v id ua ls c an n o t i n d e p e n d e n t l y test o u t o r e va lua te e a ch p ie c e o f n ew i n f o r m a t i o n . T h e m e c h a n i s m evolution “s e l e ct e d ” for o v e r c o m i n g this p r o b l e m was a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e . W a d d i n g t o n suggests t h a t a u t h o r i t y ac ­ c e p t a n c e h a s its r o ot s in “m o d e l - m i m i c ” o r “l e a d c r - f o l l o w e r ” p a t t e r n s of i n ­ t e ra c ti o n s e e n in o t h e r a n ima l s, b u t it is d r am a t i c a l l y e x t e n d e d to e n c o m ­ pass c o n c e p t u a l o r symbol i c mat er ial s. T h e n o t i o n o f “a u t h o r i t y ” is a relative o n e . Y o u r o l d e r sister o r b r o t h e r may take o n t h e r ol e o f a u t h o r i t y relative to you, b u t y o u r m o t h e r is a n a u ­ tho ri ty to t h e m . In g e n e r a l , an a u t h o r i t y is a p e r s o n w h o ha s g r e a t e r legiti­ m a t e status o r p o w e r t h a n a n o t h e r p e r s o n . W e saw in t h e discussi on o f m o n ­ key d o m i n a n c e h i e r a r c h i e s t h a t high- st atus in di v id ua ls ar e a t t e n d e d to m o r e t h a n o t h e r s , a n d a r e s o u g h t o u t for g r o o m i n g . T h e y h o l d p r ivi leged p o s i t io n s in t he social g r o u p a n d o t h e r s follow t h e i r l e a d a n d r e s p e c t t h e i r desires. I t h i n k t h a t t h e s e p r i m a t e c ha ra ct er i s t ic s f o rm t h e bases for a u t h o r ­ ity a c c e p t a n c e . T h e p r i n c i p l e shift is f r o m t h e b e h a v i o r a l ( n o n h u m a n p r i ­ ma te s ) to t h e c o n c e p t u a l ( h u m a n s ) . W a d d i n g t o n (1960) m a i n t a i n e d t h a t m u c h o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t r a n s m i t ­ ted in a CS-G system is “v a l u e - l a d e n ” o r “e t h i c a l ” a n d takes t h e f or m of b e ­ liefs. T h u s , n o t onl y d o c h i l d r e n have to k n o w w h a t i te ms n o t to e a t b e c a u s e they ar e p o i s o n o u s a n d w h a t l o c a ti o ns to avoid b e c a u s e s na k es o r l e o p a r d s r es id e t h e r e ( a n d n o t p e rs o n a l l y test o u t t h e validity o f this i n f o r m a t i o n ) , b u t t h e y a r e r e q u i r e d to k n o w a n d a c c e p t beliefs a n d b e h a v i o r s c o n c e r n e d with o t h e r p e r s o n s a n d spi rit ual entities. T h e r e ar e “r i g h t ” a n d “w r o n g ” b e ­ liefs a n d c o u r s e s of a ct i o n , a n d t he s e a r e o f t e n h ig hl y c u l t u r a l specific, for e x a m p l e , w e a r i n g veils, n o t e a t i n g p o r k , a i d i n g t h e p o o r , f aci ng Ea st while praying. W a d d i n g t o n (1960) a r g u e d t h a t o n e e ssent ial c o m p o n e n t o f a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e is t h e p syc hologi c al i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f w h a t a u t h o r i t i e s tell us. We p e rs o n a l l y t ake o n (take in) t h e beliefs a n d values of a u t ho r i t i e s , giving th es e i deas an o bl ig at or y c h a r a c t e r . T h i s is t h e s u p e r e g o o f p syc hoa na lyt ic

A U T H O R1TY-B E A R I NG SYST E M S

57

theory. In psychoanalytic theory, the m e c h an i s m u nd e rl y i n g i nt ernalizing beliefs is the i n d i vi du a l’s n e e d to identify with a ut h o r it ie s in o r d e r to p r e ­ vent p u n i s h m e n t by t h e m . We eventually c o m e to extol t h e i r values a n d , in tur n, tra ns mi t these to o t h e r s over w h o m we have authority. T h u s , we n o t only ac ce pt as valid what author it ies tell us, b u t also, in a sense, c o m e to m a i nt a i n th at the ideas arc wh at they should be. W a d d i n g t o n (1960) indi cat ed, following psychoanalytic a n d Piagetian r ese ar ch, that a uthor it y a cc e pt an c e has a d e v e l o p m e n t a l pat h. It a p p e ar s to p ea k be twe en the ages of 4 a n d 7, a n d to decli ne s o m e w h a t as chi l d r en m a ­ ture. O n e reason for the decli ne is the growing i nf lu en ce o f p e er s on o u r t h o u g h t s a n d actions. In Pi a ge t’s ( 1 9 3 2 / 1 9 4 8 ) research, for e x a mp l e , chil­ d r e n u n d e r age 7 usually say that g a m e rules c a n ’t be c h a n g e d b ecause the r ules were h a n d e d down by the elders. After age 7, ch i ld r en start to say that t hey can c h a n g e t he rules if th ei r playmates agr ee to it. Al th o ug h aut hor it y a c c e p t an c e m i g h t decli ne after age 7, it r em a i ns a p o t e n t force t h r o u g h o u t the h u m a n lifetime. As an e x a mp le , y o un g m e n a n d w o m e n go to war, risk t he ir lives (often zealously) be ca us e thei r l eader s tell t h e m t ha t d oi n g so is b ased o n a j u s t cause. T h e r e are at least t h r e e types o f evidence t h a t s u p p o r t t he c o n c e p t that h u m a n s are a ut hor i ty acceptors. T h e first involves c h i l d r e n ’s ideas a b o u t o b e d i e n c e to authority. Basically, the literature indicates t h a t t he re is little c h a n g e b et ween the ages o f 4 a n d 11 in c h i l d r e n ’s willingness to obey legiti­ m a t e aut hori t ies, pr ovi de d that i m m o r a l acts are n o t r e q u es t e d o r that the a uthor it ies are n o t i n t r u d i n g in areas o f the c h i l d ’s j ur isd ic ti o n (Braine, P o m c r a n t z , Lo r b e r, 8c Krantz, 1991; D a m o n 8c I la rt , 1988; Turiel, 1983). This r esear ch shows that s ome of the r easons c h i ld r en give for o b e d i e n c e c h a n g e with age. O t h e r r ese ar ch ( Sme ta na , 1986) finds t h at d u r i n g a dol es­ ce nc e, the a re a o f a c h i l d ’s juri sd ic t io n increases, which has the c o n s e ­ q u e n c e o f n ar r ow in g the r an ge o f o t h e r s ’ legitimate authority. In Braine et al.’s (1991) study, boys a n d girls b et ween the ages o f 6 a n d 11 were r ea d stories a b o u t c h i l d r e n ’s conflicts with six types of legitimate aut hori ty, a n d two types o f n o n s a n c t i o n e d authority; a p o w e r move by an o l d e r sibling a n d stealing by a r m e d r o b b e r s from a store. After each story was r ead, the subjects were asked how the child in the story felt, what he (or she) s h ou l d do, why, a n d how the au th or i ty figure wo ul d r eact if the child was n o t o b e d i e n t . T h e m a j or results were: 1. Al th o ug h ch il dr en i nd i ca te d different levels o f o b e d i e n c e to different types o f legitimate aut hor it y figures, t h e r e were essentially n o age dif­ f er ences in e x t e n t o f comp li an c e. 2. In nearly all cases, c hi l d r e n o f all ages stated t h a t t h e r e wo ul d be n e g ­ ative c o ns e q u e n c e s , for e xa mp l e , p u n i s h m e n t , for n o n c o m p l i a n c e . This suggests t ha t c o m p l i a n c e is largely b as ed on avoi dance o f these ba d o utc ome s .

58

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

3. T h e r e was a decr ease, with increasi ng age, in the f re q ue n cy with which the subjects believed t ha t the c hi ld r en in the stories wo ul d feel “s a d ” w h e n pl aced in conflict. O l d e r subjects were m o r e likely t han y o u n g e r o n e s to a tt r ibut e angry feeings to the c hi ldr en. 4. O l d e r subjects gave m o r e varied r easons for c ompl yi ng with legiti­ m a te aut h o r i ti es t h a n y o u n g e r ones, reflecting g r e a te r social knowl­ edge. 5. T h e r e were m a r k e d dif fer ences b et ween o l d e r a n d y o u n g e r subjects to the r o b b e r story, b u t n o t to the o l d e r sibling story. T h e se differ­ e nces were based on the relative values the subjects placed on avoid­ ing physical h a r m a n d p r o t ec t i n g o n e ’s money. T h e s e c on d line o f evi dence s u p p o r t i n g t he idea t ha t h u m a n s are a u ­ thority ac ce pt or s involves c h i l d r e n ’s m o d e l i n g behavior. T h e as su mp ti on m a d e r e g a r d i n g a uthor it y a cc e pt an c e is t hat c h i l d r e n will n o t only a c ce pt as valid wh at aut hor it ies tell t h e m , b u t also wh a t a u th or it ie s show t h e m. Thus, ch i ld re n s h o ul d be m o r e likely to m o d e l their own be ha vi or after highstatus t h a n low-status models. A n u m b e r o f studies s u p p o r t this concl usion. In I l e t h e r i n g t o n ’s (1965) e x p e r i m e n t , g r o u p s of 414-, 7-, a n d 10-year-old boys a n d girls a n d their p a r e nt s were the subjects. T h e relative d o m i n a n c e of each p a r e n t was assessed t h r o u g h m e a s u r i n g which p a r e n t h a d the mos t inf luence in solving hypot het i cal child care p roble ms . Two me a su r e s of c h i l d r e n ’s identification with thei r m o t h e r s a n d fathers, respectively, a n d o n e m e a s u r e o f imitation o f each p a r e n t were taken. T h e identification m e as ur es involved st re n g t h of masculi ne a n d f e m i n i n e sex roles, a n d simi­ larity o f personality characteristics with par ent s. T h e i mitation m e a s u r e i n ­ volved j u d g m e n t s o f the prct tiness o f pictures, as m o d e l e d by each p ar e nt . In g ener al , the results strongly s u p p o r t the i m p o r t a n c e o f p a r en t a l status in identification a n d imitation. Both boys a n d girls wTere m o r e likely to identify with a n d imitate t he m o r e d o m i n a n t p ar ent ; however, girls were relatively less susceptible to variations in m o t h e r d o m i n a n c e t h a n boys were to varia­ tions in f at he r d o m i n a n c e . In G r u s e c ’s (1971) r ese ar ch , the subjects were 7- a n d 11-year-old boys a n d girls who were given o p p o r t u n i t i e s to imitate a same-sex a dul t with ei­ t h e r high o r low “p o w er . ” In the hig h- po we r c o n d it io n , t he a d u l t was i n t r o ­ d u c e d as a p e r son who was g o i ng to select c h l d r c n for an in te re st in g trip. Moreover, after the ad u l t a n d child finished thei r tasks, the ad ul t was going to interview the child for possible trip selection. In the low-power c o n d i ­ tion, the s a me adults were given no special status or r ela ti onship with the c hi ldr en. While the c hi ld r en wa tc he d, the adults in b o t h c on d i ti o ns played a bowling g a m e a n d c i t h e r conspicuously gave s o me o f th e ir wi nnings to charity ( E x p e r i m e n t 1), or used very st r i ng e nt p e r f o r m a n c e criteria for r e ­

A U T H O R1TY-B E A R I NG SYST E M S

59

wa rd in g t hemselves ( E x p e r i m e n t 2). T h e adults left t he r oo m a n d the chil­ d r e n played the s ame ga me . In b o t h e x p er i me n t s, c h i ld r en were f o u n d to imitate the hig h- po we r mo de ls to a g r e at e r e x t e n t t ha n t he low-powcr ones. Finally, Brody a n d S t o n e m a n (1981, 1985) sho we d t h a t ch il dr en arc m o r e likely to imitate high-status th an low-status c hi ld r en . In these e x p er i ­ me nt s, t he subjects were c i t h er s econd- o r thi rd-grade boys a n d girls who wa tc h e d a same-sex “m o d e l ” child cho o se his or h e r favorite foods from pairs o f pictures. T h e m o d e l was c i t h e r y o u n g e r (low status), t he sa me age, or o l d e r (high status) t ha n the subjects, who were i n f o r m e d a b o u t the m o d e l ’s age. After the m o de l s m a d e thei r choices, the subjects selected th ei r favorite foods. In bo t h studies, the subjects i mi t at ed the choi ces o f the same-age or o l d e r ch il dr en m u c h m o r e f requent ly than they d id the y o u n g ­ er ones. T h e t h i r d line o f s u p p o r t i n g evi dence deals with the ge ne r al ques tion of the rel ati onshi p b et ween u n d e r s t a n d i n g ideas a n d c i t h e r believing or dis­ believing t he m (Gilbert, 1991). Gilbert reviewed a n d in t eg r at e d a large n u m b e r o f empi r i cal a n d theoret i cal p ap e r s c o n c e r n e d with this issue. In­ terestingly, the fr a me wo rk o f G i l b e r t ’s study is phil osophical, c on tr ast in g D e s ca r t e’s view t h a t a p e r s o n ’s decision to believe o r disbelieve an idea oc­ curs after he or she has a t t e m p t e d to u n d e r s t a n d it, with S p i n o z a ’s view that believing an idea a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g it o c c ur at the s ame time. Spinoza t h o u g h t th at disbelieving an idea r eq ui re s a dd it iona l m e n t a l processing. Author it y a c c e p t an c e is highly consi st ent with S p i no z a’s view, a l t ho u gh n e i ­ t h e r Descartc n o r Spi noza qualify t he ir positions r e g a r d i n g the status o f the p e rs on who transmits the i n f o rma t io n . Simply put , Spi noza says t h a t we b e ­ lieve wha t o t he rs tell us. Gi lbert co n c lu d es t ha t S p i n o z a ’s view, o r o n e simi­ lar to it, is correct. At a m i n i m u m , bel ief o f ideas p r e c ed e s disbelief. T h e c o n n e c t i o n b etween au th or i ty a c c e p t an c e a n d the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re ju di ce a n d d i scr iminati on is fairly obvious. C h i l d r e n believe wh at thei r p a r e n t s a n d o t h e r a ut ho r i t ie s— for e x am p l e , teachers, political figures, a t h ­ letes, actors, o l d e r siblings— tell t he m. T h e y also believe what they r ea d in books, magazines, a n d newspaper s, a n d what they h e a r a n d see on tele­ vision. Much of what they learn conveys consistent messages a b o u t various out g r ou p s, for e xampl e, those based on race or g e n d e r or me nt al status. Chi ldren n o t only believe these messages b u t they i nc or po ra te them into their own value systems. As we saw in c h a pt e r 1, adults ( and presumabl y chil­ d r e n ) may ho ld beliefs that arc n o t readily modif ied by particular c o u n t e r ­ examples. T h u s a Black child may have a White child as a best friend a n d still believe, as his peers, par ent s a n d o t h e r family m e m b e r s have instructed him, that Whites arc n o t trustworthy. If this same Black child develops a large n u m b e r o f friendships with Whites, however, these e xp er ie nc es may trans­ form the beliefs he has a cquir ed from his family a n d friends.

60

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

I N T E R G R O U P H O S T I L I T Y — H E R I T A G E F RO M T H E C O M M O N A N C E S T O R O F APES AND H U MA N S Ri ch ar d W r a n g h a m (1987) pr ov id ed an e n o r m o u s l y useful i ntegr at ion of r es ear ch c o n c e r n e d with t h e social organi zati on o f the African apes (both c h i m p a n z e e species a n d gorillas) a n d h un tc r -g a th e re rs . T h e s e four species s har e a c o m m o n a nc e st or that lived 6 to 10 million years ago. It is as su me d t h a t if t he c o m m o n a n c e st o r possessed a given social characteristic, t he n t he re is a 6- to 10-million-year g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y cont inui ty of t h a t p h e ­ notype. We infer this possession if all o f the d e s c e n d a n t s — all f our o f these species— shar e the given social characteristic. Wr angha m*s (1987) analysis o f the ap e species is b as ed on all t h e l o n g­ t erm (2 or m o r e years) m a j o r field studies t h a t exist. T h e r e arc only 10 such studies, two each for the gorilla a n d pygmy c h i m p a n z e e , a n d six for the c o m m o n c h i m p a n z e e . Th us , t h e r e may be serious p r o b l e m s with sampli ng, b ut this is w h at we have, a n d W ' r a n g h a m ’s co mp a ra ti ve analysis s ee ms to be the m os t c o m p l e t e available. For t he h u n t c r - g a t h c r e r data, W r a n g h a m re­ viewed several sources t h a t d ea lt with t h e ir social or gani zati on. T h e se i n­ clude well over 150 e t h n o g r a p h i c analyses o f d i f f e re nt h u n t c r - g a t h c r c r soci­ eties. Sa mp li n g d o e s n o t seem to be a p r o bl e m her e. W'rangham (1987) chose 14 categories of social or gani zati on t h a t h e b e ­ lieves c a p t u r e d the cssencc o f t he s tr uct ur e a n d f u n ct i o ni n g o f t he g r oup s f o r m e d by t he f o u r species. For six o f these, he c o n c l u d e d t ha t t he c o m m o n a nc es to r o f all f o u r species h a d the characteristic b e i n g c o n s i d e re d , a n d for two, h e c o n c l u d e d that the c o m m o n a nc e st o r did n o t have the c har act er is ­ tic. For t he r e m a i n i n g six, t he re is co n si de ra bl e variability across the f o u r species a n d no co n c lu si on s c ou ld be m a de . I s u m ma r iz e his results o f the ei gh t “conclusive” characteristics. T h e first, “social n e t w o r k, ” refers to w h e t h e r o r n o t the subsistence g r o u p is relatively closed o r relatively o p e n to outsiders. T h e critical o b s er ­ vation involves w h e t h e r n o n g r o u p m e m b e r s arc e x c l u d e d from the activi­ ties o f t he i n g r o u p . As a p o i n t o f r e fe r en ce , subsistence g r o u p size averages a b o u t 25 for h u n tc r -g a th e rc rs , 13 for gorillas, 60 for c o m m o n c h i m p a n z e e s (Jolly, 1972), a n d pr ob ab ly a b o u t 60 for pygmy c h i m p a n z e e s (this is i n ­ fe rr ed from W r a n g h a m ’s, 1987, discussion). A dist ingui shing featur e of h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r s is t ha t they typically are m e m b e r s o f a “t r i b e ” averaging a b o u t 500 m e m b e r s , which consists of m a n y subsistence gr oups. All t h r e e African ape species have closed social networks, a n d h u n t c r - g a t h c r c r s are closed with r espe ct to t he tribe, a n d semicl osed with r espe ct to t he subsis­ t enc e g r o up . W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n c l u d e d t h a t t he c o m m o n a nc e st o r f o r m e d g r o u p s with closed social networks. T h e s e c on d characteristic, “lo ne mal es, ” refers to w h e t h e r males ever travel alone. Traveling a l on e is potentially d a n g e r o u s in t h a t it may p u t o n e

IN T E R G R O U P H O S T I LI T Y

61

in c on ta c t with n e i g h b o r i n g gr ou ps . This occurs with all f o u r species. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n c l u d e d t ha t this activity o c c u r r e d for the c o m m o n ancestor. T h e thir d deals with w h e t h e r “females b r e e d in thei r natal g r o u p ” (the g r o u p they were b o r n int o). In all f ou r species, females generally leave the natal g r o u p , join a n o t h e r n e a r by subsistence g r o up , o r in the case o f h u ­ ma ns, o f thei r tribe, a n d m a te t he r ei n. This is a very dif f er en t pa t te r n than is seen in African mo n k e y s a n d b a b o o n s , w h e re the females generall y stay in the natal g r o u p fr om birth to d ea th ( H i n d e , 1983). W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n ­ c l u de d t h a t in t he c o m m o n ancest or , femal es rarely b r e d in t h e i r natal g r o up . By contrast, the f o u rt h characteristic in bo th c h i m p a n z e e species a n d h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r s is t h a t males generally r e m ai n in the natal g r o up . T h e pi ct ur e is u n c l e a r for gorillas, however. T h e fifth t h r o u g h ei ght h characteristics, p e r h a p s m o s t i m p o r t a n t in t e rms o f the d e v e l o p m e n t of p r ej udi ce a n d d i sc r imi na ti on, deal with “i nt cr ­ g r o u p re la ti on sh ip s. ” T h e s e arc c o n c e r n e d with how ad ul t m e m b e r s o f o n e social networ k r eact to m e m b e r s o f o t h e r social networks. For the apes, t he re is o n e subsistence g r o u p in relation to outsiders a n d for the h u n t c r g at h er s t h e r e is o n e tribe in relation to outsiders. T h e fifth characteristic, “quality o f th e i nt e r a c t i o n , ” involves the d i m e n ­ sion o f fri endl iness versus hostility. For the gorilla, c o m m o n c h i m p a n z e e , a n d h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r species, reacti ons to outsiders typically are hostile. Vio­ lent attacks, occasionally le ad in g to killings, have b e e n observed. In o n e study o f 50 h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r societies, tribal warfare typically o c c u r r e d on av­ er age every 2 years. T h e m a j o r fu n c ti on o f hostility toward outsider s is to p r ot e c t g r o u p m e m b e r s from attack o r c ap t ur e . An i m p o r t a n t s ec onda ry fu nc ti on is the p ro t e c ti on o f scarce resources, for e x a mp l e , f oo d a n d water. Few observations have b e en m a d e o f the pygmy c h i m p a n z e e , b u t these in di ­ cate at least tense i nt er ac ti ons with outsiders. W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n c l u d e d t h a t hostile i n t e r g r o u p relations were the n o r m for o u r c o m m o n ancestor. T h e sixth characteristic deals with t he “identity o f the active part ici pant s in hostile i nt er ac ti on s .” Insufficient da ta arc available for t he pygmy c h i m ­ panzees, b u t for the o t h e r t h r e e species, the a d u lt males a n d occasionally ad o l e s c en t males, arc the usual int eractant s. In the O l d Wor l d monkeys, by contrast, ad ul t females often participated in the violence. W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n c l u d e d t h a t “males only” w*as the p at te r n for the c o m m o n ancestor. T h e seventh characteristic, “st a l k / at t a c k, ” refers to w h e t h e r the a du l t a n d a do l e s c e nt mal es o f a g r o u p will actively seek out, stalk, a n d attack o u t ­ siders, in a ddi tion to re ac t in g hostilely d u r i n g c h a n c e e n c o u n t e r s . Again, limited data arc available for t he pygmy c h i m p a nz e es , b u t stalking a n d at­ tacking have b e e n obser ved for the o t h e r species. In o n e study, a g r o u p o f mal e c h i m p a n z e es were obser ved stalking a n d killing a femal e c h i m p a n z e e who h a d formerly b e e n a m e m b e r o f thei r g r o u p ( Goodall et al., 1979).

62

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

T hu s , violence is n o t only d ir e ct e d toward strangers, o r toward a d ul t males. W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n c l u d e d t h a t these activities c ha ra ct er i z ed the c o m ­ m o n ancestor. T h e e ight h characteristic, “territorial d e f e ns e , ” refers to w h e t h e r these species stake o u t a pa rt ic ul a r g r o u p territory a n d a t t e m p t to p r e v en t o u t si d­ ers from e n t e r i n g it. T h e m os t c o m m o n observation is t ha t they occupy a h o m e r a n g e that overlaps with t ha t o f n e i g h b o r i n g grou ps . It is rare for any o f t he m to patrol the p e r i m e t e r to p r e v en t i nc ur s ions o f outsiders. W h e n o utsiders p e n e t r a t e too deeply into the h o m e r a ng e , they will be r epelled. W r a n g h a m (1987) c o n c l u d e d t ha t the c o m m o n a nc e st or did n o t e n g a ge in territorial defense. Let m e s u m ma r iz e the W r a n g h a m (1987) material. T h e h u m a n evolu­ tionary social h er it age from the c o m m o n a nc e st o r o f pygmy a n d c o m m o n c h i m p a nz e es , gorillas, a n d h u m a n h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r s is t h a t we were d e ­ s igned as m e m b e r s o f relatively closed subsistence gr oups. T h e p e r m a n e n t m e m b e r s o f these g r o u p s are typically the males wh o d e f e n d the g r o u p against outsiders. T h e s e e n c o u n t e r s are usually hostile, a n d occasionally vi­ olent. Males periodically travel al one, a n d with o t h e r males, may stalk a n d attack n o n g r o u p m e m b e r s . Femal es mi gr at e o u t o f thei r natal g r o u p a n d join o t h e r n e ar by gr oups. W h e n they d o so, they arc v u lne ra bl e to attack by stalking a d u l t males. T h e s e observations suggest th at the e volut i onary basis for p re j ud ic e a n d di scr imi nati on differs f or males a n d females. T h e key da t a are these: Males usually stay with t h e ir natal g r o up , whe re as females leave at a d ol es ce nc e a n d join a n o t h e r g r ou p; a n d a d o le s ce n t a n d a d u l t males, b u t n o t females, d e f e n d the g r o u p against outsiders, a n d even stalk a n d attack t h e m . T he s e b eh a vi or p a t te r ns show that males are m o r e hostile to n o n g r o u p m e m b e r s than arc females, a n d o l d e r males, m o r e so th an y o u n g e r ones. T h e o b se r­ vations may m e a n t ha t males are m o r e p r e d i s po s e d th an f emal es to form a s t r o n g g r o u p identification a n d to devel op c o m m i t m e n t s to m a n y g r o u p m e m b e r s , a n d o l de r mal es m o r e so than y o u n g e r ones. Adult females form close b o n d s with thei r offspring a n d with only a small n u m b e r o f adult males a n d / o r females. Using evidence c onsi stent with these findings, Lever (1978) sho we d t hat boys in West ern cul t ures arc m o r e likely than girls both to be m e m b e r s o f large g r o u ps a n d to play in competitive games. Prea d o l e s ce n t a n d a d o l e s c e n t f emal es m u s t even have a m o r e t e n u o u s identifi­ cation with t he natal g r o u p t h a n same-age males, in t h a t they eventually leave it to join a n o t h e r g r o up . P e r h ap s weaker g r o u p identification on the p a r t o f females is a necessary c on di t i o n for thei r p e r m a n e n t d e p a r t u r e . T h e link b et ween s tr engt h o f g r o u p identification a n d p re ju di ce a n d discrimi­ n a ti on is t h a t a s t r o n g e r identification may lead to s t r o n ge r negative r ea c­ tions to outsiders, a n d h e n c e , to s t r o n ge r pr ej udi ce.

G E N E F LOW ANI) O U T G R O U P AT T R ACT I VE NE S S

63

A lt h ou g h t he a f o r e m e n t i o n e d pr ed ic ti on a b o u t g e n d e r di fferences in pr ej udi ce is speculative, the idea o f genetically o r evolution-based differ­ e nces in mal e a n d female social b e ha v io r has b e e n c o n f i r m e d by David Buss (1994) a n d c oll eagues in a series o f cross-cultural studies. T h e c en tr a l o r ­ ganizing thesis o f this research is t ha t males a n d females have di ff er en t d e ­ grees o f p a r en t a l i nv e s tm en t in t he ir offspring— f emal es are vastly m o r e i nvested in bo th time a n d energy. This differential i n ve s t me n t leads to hy­ p o t he si ze d dif fer ences in m e n ’s a n d w o m e n ’s short-term a n d long-term m a t i ng strategics. Buss (1994) listed n i n e hyp ot he s e s t h a t have b e e n consis­ tently c o n f i r m e d in up to 37 d if fer ent cultures, for e x a mp l e , short-term m a t i ng is m o r e i m p o r t a n t for m e n than for w o m e n ; w o m e n will be m o r e se­ lective t ha n m e n in c ho os in g a short-term mat e. T h e c o nf i rm a t i on o f these h yp ot h e s e s in o n e area o f social b eh a vi o r — m a t i n g strategies— certainly does n o t prove h ypot he si z ed g e n d e r di ff er ences in p r e judi ce , b u t it does m a ke the a r g u m e n t plausible. Finally, the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y factor o f i n t c r g r o u p hostility fits very well with the r e c e n t psychological m o d e l o f i n t c r g r o u p relations by W. G. S t e p h a n a n d C. W. S t e p h a n (2000), which they refer to as “An i n t e g r a te d t h r e at t he or y o f p r e j u d i c e ” (p. 23). T h e m o d e l consists o f f o u r types of t h r e at t ha t arc p os ed by o u t g r o u p s , i n c l ud i ng those within a c ult u r e a n d those from d if fer ent cultures. T h e first type is called “realistic t h r e at s ” (p. 25), a n d i nc lud e t hr ea t s to the physical, e c o n o m i c a n d political well-being o f the i n g r o u p by an actual o u t g r o u p . T h e s e c ond type is called “symbolic t h r e at s ” (p. 25), a n d these “primarily involve per cei ved g r o u p differences in morals, values, s tandar ds, beliefs, a n d a tt i t ud e s” (p. 25) be twe en the i n g r o u p a n d specific ou tg r o u p s. T h e thi rd type is called “i n t c r g r o u p anx i­ ety” (p. 27), a n d refers to the p er so na l threats, for e xa mp le , e mb a rr a ss ­ m e nt , ridicule, or r ejection t hat individuals may e x p e r i e n c e w h e n they arc involved in i nt er ac ti on s with m e m b e r s of o u t g r o up s. T h e f our t h type is called “negative s ter eotypes ” (p. 27), a n d refers to the fear o f negative c o n ­ s e q u e nc e s t ha t individuals will e x p e r i e n c e with o u t g r o u p s , in large p a r t b e ­ cause o f the negative stereotypes they h o l d a b o u t the o u t g r o u p s . T h e s e four types o f t h r e at collectively s h a pe the pr ej udi ces t ha t we h ol d toward pa r t i c u­ lar o ut gr o up s .

G E NE FLOW AND O U T G R O U P A TTRACTI VENES S In this section, the genet ic analyses c o m e pr imarily from five sources: Cavalli-Sforza a n d B o d m e r (1971), Do b z ha ns k y (1962), B. C. L a m b (2000), T h o m p s o n (1999), a n d Thrall, Richards, McCauley, a n d Antonovics (1998). T h e c o n c c p t o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness b ased on these analyses is mi ne .

64

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

In monkeys a n d apes, m at in g rarely occurs with individuals t ha t have b e e n r e a r e d t og e th er . At sexual maturity, d e p e n d i n g on the species, c it he r t he a do le s ce n t male o r female leaves the natal g r o u p a n d mi grat es to a n ­ o t h e r subsistence g r o u p . In t ur n, each subsistence g r o u p accepts migr ant s from o t h e r gr oups. For e xa mp le , a dol es cent s f ro m G r o u p A generally m i­ grate to G r o u p B or G r o u p C; t hos e fr om G r o u p B generally mi gr at e to G r o u p A o r G r o u p D; a n d t hos e fr om G r o u p C generally mi gr ate to G r o u p B or G r o u p E; a n d so on. In th at these subsistence g r o u p s arc relatively small in n u m b e r , this has b o th the s h o r t - a n d long-term effect o f dec re asi ng the l ikeli hood o f incest a n d i n b r e ed in g . It also has the long-term effect of k e e p i n g with i n- group genet i c variability at a sufficiently high level to ac­ c o m m o d a t e e n v i r o n m e n t a l c h a n gc s t h a t inevitably occur. T he se may i n ­ clude such diverse events as the i nt r o d u c t i o n o f new diseases a n d long-term d r o u g h t . In a relatively i n b r e d p o p u l a t i o n , p he n o t y p i c variation may n o t be wide e n o u g h for individuals to survive a n d r e p r o d u c e in the c h a n g e d envi­ ronment. In h u m a n h u n t e r - ga t h er er s , m a t i n g nearly always occurs out si de the su b­ sistence g r o up , b u t within the tribe. O n average, tribes consist o f a b o u t 500 m e n , w o m e n , a n d ch i ld r en , divided into ten or m o r e subsistence groups. Assuming th at at any o n e time no m o r e t h a n h a l f the tribal m e m b e r s have r epr odu ct iv e capacities, this yields a n u m b e r of a b o u t 125 m a t i ng couples. T h e r e are at least t h r e e p ot ent i al p r o b l e m s with such a relatively small m a t ­ ing p op ul a ti on . T h e first is inbreeding depression. I n b r e e d i n g d e p r es si on is a p h e n o m e n o n seen in a wide variety o f a ni ma l a n d p l a nt species. It is a loss o f Darwinian fitness in p o p u l a t i o n s t h a t have inc re ase d homozygosity for m a n y genes; t h a t is, bot h alleles for a given g e n e location arc identical. S o me t i m e s this homozygosity leads to valued p he n ot y p ic o u t c o me s , as can be attested to by p l an t a n d a n i ma l b r ee d er s . But this homozygosity also leads to inc re as e d re­ cessive geneti c diseases th at are d el et er i ou s to survival or r e p r o d u c t i o n . T h e p r o b l e m with homozygosity is t ha t m a n y recessive alleles arc lethal or del eter ious, b u t arc n o t pr ob l ema t ic al w h e n p ai r ed with a n o t h e r allele that is d o m i n a n t a n d n o t delet eri ous. T h e r e arc h u n d r e d s o f k nown h u m a n ge­ netic diseases caused by recessive alleles in a h o m o zy g o u s state, for e x a m ­ ple, Sickle cell a n e m i a , Tay Sachs, cystic fibrosis, p h e n y l k e t o n u r i a (PKU), h ypot hyr oidis m. It is believed t ha t h u m a n s carry, on average, at least t hr ee lethal recessive alleles. T hu s , close relatives who ma te are at i nc re ase d risk for homozygosity o f these h a r mf u l alleles a m o n g t he ir offspring. Let us a ssume that m a t i n g with very close relatives (e.g., b r o th e r- s i st e r, u n c l e - n i c c c ) was f o r b i d d e n in ancestral h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r gr ou p s, as it is in essentially all c o n t e m p o r a r y societies (some allow first cousin marriages, b u t in the U n i t e d States, a b o u t o n e h a l f o f the individual states p r o h i b i t i t ) . Because of the small size o f the m a t i n g p op u l at i o n, if m a t i n g only o c c u r r e d

G E N E F LOW AND O U T G R O U P AT T R ACT I VE NE S S

65

within the tribe, a n d if first- o r second-cousin ma rr ia ge was t he p r e f e r r e d n o r m , this wo ul d lead, over time, to p o p u l a t i o n increases in homozygosity at n u m e r o u s g e n e loci. Because s om e o f these alleles woul d be del eterious, this woul d lead to a loss o f Darwinian fitness for the tribe as a whole. Al­ t h o u g h we have n o studies o f the effects o f increases in homozygosity in h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r tribes, careful large-scale studies in Fr ance a n d J a p a n after Wor ld W a r II c o m p a r i n g offspring o f genetically rel at ed (primarily first a n d s e c o n d cousins) versus u n r e l a t e d p ar en ts showe d t h a t t he rates o f still­ b o r n s, ne on at al , a n d early infancy d e a t hs were m u c h g r e at e r for rel ated par ent s. Small p o pu l a t i o n s can n o t tolerate this mortality. Eventually they will b e c o m e extinct. W h a t can be d o n e to p r e v en t the i n b r e e d i n g p r o bl e m ? T h e answer is s impl e — g e n e flow. Gene flout is the i nt r o d u c t i o n o f new geneti c material from m e m b e r s o f ou ts id e gr oups. T h e usual way this occurs is t h r o u g h m i ­ gration o f s om e outsiders to the h o s t tribe, whe r e they set u p r es i de nc e a n d m a t e with o n e o r m o r e m e m b e r s o f the tribe. C o m p u t e r si mul at ions of the process i ndicate t h a t the n u m b e r s o f outsiders n e e d n o t be large in o r d e r to a ccompl is h the goal o f m a i n t a i n i n g genetic heterozygosity bo t h within a n d a m o n g m e m b e r s o f the p o p u l a t io n . T h e s e c o nd p r o bl e m with small m a t i n g p o pu l a t i on s is genetic drift. Even a ss umi ng r a n d o m m a t i n g in the p o p u l a t i o n , as c on t r a st e d with first- a n d second-cousi n p r ef er en ce s, o n e o r m o r e alleles at various p a rt i c ul a r gcnctic loci will be lost over g e n e r at io n s d u e to the r a n d o m effects o f small p o p u l a ­ tion size. T h u s o t h e r alleles will b e c o m e fixed in the p o p u l a t i o n , t he r eb y i n­ creasing homozygosity. Because this is a r a n d o m process, the alleles af­ fected were p r obably at a low f re q ue n cy in the p o p u la t io n to begin with a n d can never ge t passed on to t he offspring. If this r a n d o m loss o f s ome alleles oc cur s in m o s t g ene ra t io ns , t h e n m a n y o f t he m will eventually b e c o m e e li mi n at e d fr om the p o pu l a t i o n. Again, the fixing o f o t h e r alleles in the p op u l a t i o n m e a n s homozygosity at a n u m b e r of gcncti c loci in t he p o p u l a ­ tion. T h e r e m a y b e n o no ti c ea ble short-term effect o f this o c c u r r e n ce . H o w­ ever, t he p o p u l a t i o n g e n e pool loses variability a n d many, p e r h a p s m o s t i n­ dividuals b e c o m e less able to a d a p t to e n v i r o n m e n t a l c hanges. W h a t can be d o n e to p r e v en t t he genet ic drift p r o bl e m ? T h e answer is, again, s impl e — g e n e flow. I m m i gr a nt s b r i n g in new gcnctic material, p e r h a p s the lost al­ leles, b u t certainly dif fe re nt alleles, a n d this i ncreases genetic variability in the host tribe. T h e th ir d p r o b l e m has already b e e n n o t e d in the cases o f i n b r e e d i n g d e ­ pression a n d genet ic drift— r e d u c e d gcn ct i c variability associated with small m a t i ng popu la ti on s . Small p o p u l a t i o n s with limited variability in the g e n e pool may be well a d a p t e d to the n o r m a l r an ge o f e n v i r o n m e n t s to which they arc i mme di at el y e xpo se d. However, d u e to bo t h gcncti c drift a n d previous Darwinian selection in r esp on se to e n v i r o n m e n t a l c h a n ge ,

66

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

t he loss o f a significant n u m b e r o f alleles pr ob ab l y o c c u rr e d. I n d e e d evolu­ tion itself involves the w e e di n g o u t o f maladapti ve o r n o na d a p t i v e alleles a n d t h e ir r e p l a c e m e n t by alleles t h a t are m o r e adaptive. But as already n o t e d , o nc e those alleles are lost, t he n th ei r p o tent ial for f u t u r e a da p t at i o n is also lost. T h ey may be mal adapt ive in the p r e s e n t e n v i r o n m e n t , b u t highly adaptive in o t h e r e n v i r o nm e nt s . An i m p o r t a n t ba la nc e has to be struck bet ween the we ed i n g o u t o f c ur re nt ly n o n a d a p t i v e or mal adapt ive al­ leles, a n d thei r r et e n ti o n as a h e d g e against f ut ur e e n v i r o n m e n t a l c hanges. T h e obvious answer to the p r o b l e m o f limited genet ic variability is g e n e flow*. Ou t si de rs br i n g in a dd it iona l gcnct ic variation t h a t increases gcnctic variability o f the h os t tribe. This process also has the advant age t ha t it brings in s ome “t es te d” var iat ion— s o me d if fe re nt g en es t h a t already have s o m e selective value in t he o u t g r o u p p o p u l a t i on . It s ho ul d be p o i n t e d out t h a t too m u c h g e n e flow1, especially from o u t g r o u p s o p e r a t i n g u n d e r differ­ e n t selection pr essur es t han the ho st tribe, can be pr ob le ma ti ca l in t h a t it may d i s r u p t t he existing geneti c a da p ta t io n t ha t the hos t tribe has attained. T hu s , a b al a n c e has to be m a i n t a i n e d b etween r et a in in g the c u r r e n t g e n e pool o f a p o p u l a t i on a n d a dm i t t i ng new g en e s into t h a t pool. To s u m m a r iz e the a r g u m e n t just m a de , t h e re arc two significant a n d in­ t er r el at ed p r o b l e m s associated with small p op u l at i o n s , which have diff er ent effects. T h e first is an i ncrease in homozygosity b r o u g h t a b o u t by i n b r e e d ­ ing, l e a di ng to the e xpression o f d el et er i ou s genes. T h e s e c o n d is the loss o f g enetic variation b r o u g h t a b o u t by gcnct ic drift, le ad in g to the r e d u c e d ability of m e m b e r s of th e p o p u l a t i o n to a d a pt to new e n v i ro n me n t s. A d e ­ q u at e g e n e flow fr om mi gr an t s will c o u n t e r bo t h negative effects. Similar to the a r g u m e n t in t he discussion o f inclusive fitness, I assume t h a t t he r e arc psychological c o n s e q u e n c e s to the tribal n e e d for g e ne flow. In o r d e r to a c ce pt mi gr an t s into the host tribe, m e m b e r s o f t h a t tribe mu s t o ve r co me the wariness a n d hostility they feel toward out si der s a n d be will­ ing to b r i n g o n e o r m o r e o f t hem into t he g r o up . As is discussed in the next section, each o f us carries bridging mechanisms t ha t lead us to n o te differ­ e nces a n d similarities b et ween i n g r o u p a n d o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . W h e r e dif­ f erences are perceived, psychological processes arc a s s um ed to exist that evaluate these differences. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , positive evaluations lead to a decision to e i t h er inc lu de the outsiders into the i n g r o u p , o r to i n c o r p o r a t e s ome o f t he ir di f fe re nt characteristics into the i ng r ou p. It is obvious that this attractiveness occurs even in warri ng societies, w h e re s o m e m e m b e r s of o p p o s i n g g r o u p s m a r ry a n d have ch i ld r en . A n d certainly this m u t u a l a ttrac­ tiveness oc cur s bet ween i n g r o u p a n d o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s who arc n o t at war o r in a state o f conflict. W h e n these di f f er ent characteristics are valued, a n d t he re arc barri ers to mi gr at i o n, t h e n those characteristics may be a d o p t e d by t he h os t tribe, for e xa mp le , new tools or we ap o n s or o t h e r cult ural arti­ facts. O f course, as we take on the characteristics o f o u t g r o u p s , we b e c o m e

I D E N T I F I CA T I O N O F TRI BE ME MBERS AND M U L T I G R O U P ME MB E R S H I P

67

m o r e similar to t he m a n d this breaks down bar ri er s i o r f ri e nd s hi p a n d p e r ­ ha ps i nt e r m ar r i a g e. I n c o r p o r a t i n g valued characteristics into t he host tribe p r o d u c e s p h e n o t y pi c plasticity, b u t do cs n o t directly affect genet ic variabil­ ity. It is only w h en m a t i n g occurs t h a t gcnct ic variability is i nf luenced. T h e l on g term o u t c o m e o f i n c o r p o r a t i n g out si ders into the tribe is i n ­ c reased g e n e flow, which has the effect o f m a i n t a i n i n g a d e q u a t e gcnctic variability a n d r e d u c i n g homozygosity. But t he psychological m e c h a n i s m s p r o d u c e d by the adaptive n e e d for g e n e flow— o u t g r o u p a tt r ac t io n— are in­ c o mp a ti bl e with those p r o d u c e d by inclusive fitness a n d i n t c r g r o u p hostil­ ity— p r e j ud i c e a n d d i scr imi nati on d ir e ct e d toward the o u t g r o u p . We have l e a r n e d from F r e u d (1917) a n d o t h e r psychoanalysts ( H or ne y, 1945; Sul­ livan, 1953) that i nc o mp a ti b l e u n c o n sc i o u s motives o r urges can exist side by side in o u r m i nd . D e p e n d i n g on th ei r relative s tr engt h, o u r mo r al val­ ues, a n d e xt e r n a l reality, o n e or the o t h e r of these motives o r urges will win o ut in conscious t h o u g h t o r action. Based on the wi de sp r ea d p r eval ence o f i nt e rc ul tur a l conflict, I believe that the psychological forces u nd er l y i ng pr ej ud ic e a n d discr imi nat ion arc relatively s t r o ng e r t ha n those u nd er l y i ng ou t si de r attraction. However, g e n e flow docs n o t d e p e n d on every tribal m e m b e r m a t i n g with outsiders. It only takes a few p er so ns in each g e n e r a ­ tion to e n s u r e a d e q u a t e g e n e flow for m a i n t a i n i n g gcnct ic variability, a n d k e e p i n g homozygosity at an acc cp t abl e level. Despite t he relatively weaker role o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness in i n t c r g r o u p relations, it may be valuable to c on s i de r g e n e flow in fi nd in g ways to modify p r ej u d ic e a n d discri minat ion.

I D E N T I F I C A T I O N O F T RI BE MEMBERS AND M U L T I G R O U P M E M B E R S H I P From t he perspective o f the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re j ud i c e a n d di scr imi nati on in c o n t e m p o r a r y society, two rel ated issues m u s t be a ddr essed: identifica­ tion o f tribe m e m b e r s (or conversely, outsiders); a n d m u l t i g r o u p m e m b e r ­ ships. T h e issue o f identification o f tribe m e m b e r s relates to two o f the t h r ee evolutionary factors discussed in this ch ap t er : inclusive fitness a n d in­ tertribal hostility. It can be a ss u me d t h a t p r e a d o l e s c e n t h u n tc r - g a t h c r e r s know relatively few m e m b e r s o f the tribe outside t h e ir pr ima ry subsistence g r o up . IIow can t he y o u n g identify strangers wh o arc tribal m e m b e r s ( and thus, safe) as o p p o s e d to out si ders o f n ea rby tribes, wh o arc potentially d a n ­ gerous? Irwin (1987) suggest ed that this is a c co m p l i s h e d t h r o u g h t h e e vol ut ion­ ary m e c h a n i s m known as “b a d g i n g . ” Certain g r o u p s o f birds, for e xa mpl e, identify p ot enti al mat es t h r o u g h identification o f a pa rt i c ul ar s o n g t h a t only m e m b e r s o f th ei r b r e e d i n g p o p u l a t i o n have le ar n e d . Irwin plausibly a rgue s t ha t t he y o u n g in any tribe readily learn to identify a n d differentiate

68

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

mos t, if n o t all, o f t h e c ul tu r a l c h ar a ct er i s ti c s t h a t t he y a n d fellow t r i b e s m e n s h a r e. If t h e s t r a n g e r sp e ak s t h e s a m e l a n g u a g e , with t h e s a m e dialect, dr es ses t h e s a m e , c ar ri es t h e s a m e tools, f or e x a m p l e , as d o m e m b e r s o f t h e su b si s te n ce g r o u p , t h e n t h e s t r a n g e r is n o t se en as an o u t s i d e r , b u t r a t h e r a t r i b e s m a n . T h e issue o f tribal m e m b e r i d e n ti f ic a ti o n a n d inclusive fitness ha s b e e n extensively e x a m i n e d by Van d e n B e r g h e (1981) in t he c o n t e x t o f e t h n i c p r e j u d i c e . Van d e n B e r g h e discusses t h r e e c a t eg o ri e s o f ethnic mark­ ers t h a t can p o t e n t ia l ly serve to d e t e r m i n e g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p : (a) g e n e t i ­ cally t r a n s m i t t e d “r a ci a l” c ha r ac ter i st i c s s u ch as skin col or , s t a t u r e, facial f ea tu re s; (b) h u m a n - m a d e artifacts t h a t a r c “w o r n ” s u c h as c l o t h i n g , b o d y p a i n t i n g , t a t t o o i n g , o r c ir c u m c i s i on ; a n d (c) b e h a v i o r a l cha ra ct er is ti cs s uc h as s p e e c h , m a n n e r s , k n o w l e d g e o f p a r t i c u l a r myt hs, o r histories. Ma n y o f th es e a r e simi lar to I r w i n ’s (1987) b adg es . T h e m o s t b l a t a n t m a r k e r s ar e t h e ge ne tic al ly t r a n s m i t t e d racial d i ff er ­ e nc es . As Van d e n B e r g h e (1981) p o i n t e d o ut , f r om a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view, r ace d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n n e i g h b o r i n g tribes w e re r a r e o c c u r r e n c e s a n d c o u l d n o t have b e e n t h e basis for inclusive f itness c hoi ces . M e m b e r s o f n e a r b y tr ibes a r e usually racially t h e s a me , p ri ma r il y b e c a u s e t hey evolved in essentially t h e s a m e e n v i r o n m e n t a n d tribal i n t e r m a r r i a g e ( f o r c e d o r vol­ u n t a r y ) , o cc as ional l y o c c u r r e d . Fo r e x a m p l e , t h e r e is a g r a d i e n t in E u r o p e f ro m n o r t h to s o u t h , o f h a i r a n d eye col or . Re s id e n t s o f n e i g h b o r i n g t e r r i t o ­ ries show essentially t h e s a m e p a t t e r n , b u t S c a n d i n a v i a n ( b l u e a n d b l o n d ) a n d S o u t h e r n Italy ( b r o w n a n d b r o w n ) a r e very d if f er e nt . Inclusive fitness c h oi c es o c c u r r e d in r e la t io n to t h e n e a r b y tribes, n o t b e t w e e n S c a n d i n a ­ vians a n d Italians. Racial d i f f e r e n c e s as tribal m a r k e r s onl y b e c a m e i m p o r t a n t d u r i n g t h e p o s t a g r i c u l t u r a l p e r i o d , w h e n city-states w e r e f o u n d e d , a r m i e s w e r e f o r m e d , a n d t e rr it or ia l e x p a n s i o n o c c u r r e d . B l a c k - W h i t e host i le e n c o u n ­ ters a r c even m o r e r e c e n t , p e r h a p s onl y a b o u t 500 years. Van d e n B e r g h e (1981) i n d i c a t e d , h ow e ve r , t h a t with relatively few e x c e p t i o n s s u c h as in S o u t h Africa a n d t h e U n i t e d States, w h e r e t h e r e a rc s t r o n g b a r r i e r s to i n t e r ­ racial m a r r i a g e , r ac e as a basis f o r e t h n i c i den t it y was short-lived. Typically, wi thi n several g e n e r a t i o n s , e n o u g h i n t e r m a r r i a g e o c c u rs in a society to o b ­ sc ur e racial bases o f ethni ci ty. As a r e l a t e d aside, in hist or ical times, t h e first c o n t ac t s b e t w e e n m e m b e r s o f d i f f e r e n t r aces w e re o c casi onal ly fri endly, at least in t h e Ne w W o r l d . T h e Pilgrims in M as s a c hu s e t t s a n d t h e S p a n i a r d s in Me xi co a n d P e r u we re initially m e t with curiosity a n d n o t hostility by t h e va ri ous i n d i g e n o u s g r o u p s . It was o nl y w h e n t h e E u r o p e a n s w a g e d war t h a t t h e native A m e r i c a n s b e c a m e host il e a n d f o u g h t back. T h e Pilgrim stories even i n di c a t e t h a t t h e I n d i a n s w e r e f ri en dl y a n d saved t h e lives o f t h o s e first E u r o p e a n A m e r i c a n s . T h u s , it a p p e a r s t h a t racial d i f f e r e n c e s as a basis for p r e j u d i c e is p u r e l y c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l a n d n o t g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y .

D E V E L O P M E N T O F A G R O U P I DENT I T Y

69

In his discussion o f t he “w o r n ” a n d behavi oral e t h ni c mar ker s, Van de n Be rg he (1981) a r g u e d th at the behavioral dif fer ences were t he mos t reli­ able a n d m o s t difficult to fake. By d o n n i n g the clothes, h ai r style, a n d body p ai n t o f a n e i g h b o r i n g tribe, it was easy to look like a m e m b e r o f t h a t tribe. But to affect the m a n n e r i s m s o f the n e i g h b o r i n g tribe, especially th ei r l an ­ gua ge dialect, was often very difficult. Van de n Be rghe (1981) suggested, a n d I strongly c o n cu r , that l an g u a ge differences a n d similarities were p r o b ­ ably the p r i ma r y ways t h a t tribal m e m b e r s h i p was assessed. Thi s suggests t h a t t h e r e is a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y basis for s tr on g sensitivities to a n d r e ­ sponses to s peech. H u nt er - ga t he r er s are s imul t aneousl y m e m b e r s o f a n u m b e r o f gr oups: a tribe, a subsistence g r o u p , an e x t e n d e d family, an i m m e d i a t e family, an age-related g r o u p o f p e e r s (Eisenstadt, 1956), a n d a same-scx g r o u p (“We arc boys,” “We are girls”). Mu lt i g r ou p m e m b e r s h i p is m u c h m o r e extensive in h u nt c r - g a t h e r e r s t ha n in the African apes, pr ob ab l y even g r e a te r a m o n g u r b a n h u m a n s than h u n t e r -g a th e re rs . T h e existence o f m u l t i g r o u p m e m ­ be rs hi p raises two pr ob le ms. First, how are ch il dr en able to u n d e r s t a n d a n d act on m u l t i g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p ? Se co nd , wh a t h a p p e n s w he n conflict o c ­ curs b et ween g r o u ps o f which o n e is a m e m b e r ? R e g a rd in g t he first, it is likely th at the t r e m e n d o u s growth in cognitive abilities, especially symbolic ones, relative to the African apes, pe r mi t s adults as well as ch i ld re n to simul­ t aneously identify with several gr oups. Symbolic labeling is a very powerful social a n d i ntellectual tool, especially if it is r ei nf o rc e d by the b e ha vi or o f o t h e r persons. R e g ar d i ng the s e co nd q ue sti on, c hi ld r en a n d adults form a hi er ar chy of p r e f e r r e d g ro up s, o r a r a n k - or d e r in g o f g r o u p allegiances. If the g r o u p s are in f r e q u e n t conflict, a p er s on may have to cho os e to disaffiliate fr om o n e or m o r e o f the grou ps , a n d thus b e c o m e an o u t si d e r to t h e m. In h u n t e r g a t h e r e r societies, which are relatively closed to p e o pl e out si de t h e tribe, a n d wh er e t h e r e is a s t r o n g n e e d for social c oh es io n, these within-tribal conflicts are pr o b a b l y i n f r e q ue n t . But in u r b a n societies, they are m o r e c o m m o n . T o n n e s m a n n ( 1 98 7 ) s u g g e s t e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s g e t m o r e strongly a tt a c he d to g r o u p s wh er e mul tipl e m e m b e r s h i p s are n o t possible t h a n to those wh e r e m e m b e r s h i p conflicts may arise. E xa mpl es o f the f or ­ m e r arc g r o u p s based on race a n d g e n d e r w h e r e a p er s on c a n ’t si multa­ neously be a mal e a n d female or a Black a n d White.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F A G R O U P I D EN TI TY T h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d research a n d theor izing indicates t ha t t h r e e i n t e r c o n ­ n e c t ed evolutionary m e c h a n i s m s arc involved with o u r negative r eactions to i n g r o u p a n d o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . T he y arc: (a) inclusive fitness, which

70

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

leads to s t r on g i n g r o u p p r ef er en ce s; (b) p r i ma t e i n t e r g r o u p m e ch ani s ms , which lead to hostility toward o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s ; a n d (c) au t ho r it y a c c ep ­ tance, which often leads to i n g r o u p p r e f e r e nc es a n d o u t g r o u p hostility. Ac­ c o r d i n g to this m o d el , individuals who view themselves as m e m b e r s o f dif­ f e r e n t g r o u ps will r eact in the just d e sc r ib e d ways. If a child, for e x a mp l e, d oes n o t sec hi ms e lf or he r se l f as a m e m b e r o f a p ar ti c ula r d o m i n a n t g r o u p, t h e n the child will n o t r eact in p r e j u di c e d a n d di scr i minat or y ways t oward m e m b e r s o f g r o u p s who arc s u b o r d i n a t e to t h a t d o m i n a n t g r o up . In o t h e r words, individuals m u s t d evel op a g r o u p identity b ef or e they will d e ­ velop p re ju di ce a n d d is cr imi nat ion toward par ti cul ar o u t gr oup s. At what age d o c hi ld re n begin to identify with a grou p? This quest ion p r es e nt s issues d if fer ent from t hos e c o n c e r n e d with the age at which chil­ d r e n identify ccrtain self-characteristics such as g e n d e r . A child may view he rs e lf as b e i n g a girl, see he r se l f as b e i n g similar to o t h e r girls, a n d yet n o t identify he r se l f as a m e m b e r o f the girls’ g r o u p . To be a m e m b e r o f a g r ou p , at a m i n i m u m , entails the social coh esi on o f g r o u p m e m b e r s — b o n d i n g a n d i n g r o u p favoritism. T h e r e a p p e a r to be only t h r e e e x p e r i m e n t s in the English l an g ua g e that directly evaluate the age-related d e v e l o p m e n t o f g r o u p identity for y ou n g ch il dr en. A b r a m e n k o v a (1983) c o m p a r e d 5- to 6-year-olds with 6- to 7-ycarolds; Strayer a n d T r u d c l (1984) c o m p a r e d chi l d r en be twe en the ages o f 1 a n d 6; a n d Yee a n d Brown (1992) c o m p a r e d 5-, 7-, a n d 9-year-olds. T h e r e arc several o t h e r studies, however, dea l in g with the d e v e l o p m e n t of c h i l d r e n ’s k no wl ed ge o f g r o u p f u n c t i o n i n g t h a t b e a r indirectly on g r o u p identity. T h e a ss um pt io n is m a d e t h a t if c hi ld r en have k no wl edg e o f g r o u p processes, th en it is likely t ha t they have e x p e r i e n c e d g r o u p identification. Strayer a n d T r u d c l ’s (1984) r es e ar c h has its origin in the study o f pr i­ ma te g r o u p s in naturalistic settings. T h e i r subjects were 10 day care groups, whose average ages r a n g e d from a p pr o xi ma t e l y 1 Vi to 5 Vi years. T h e r e were two g r o u ps at each age level. T h e r e se ar ch er s f ocused on d o m i n a n c e a n d affiliative b eha vi or within the g r o u p because these are cent r al features of p r i m a t e g r o u p social c ohe sion. Affiliation i ncl udes close-in int er acti ons such as to u ch i n g , h o l d i n g a n d kissing, as well as m o r e d i st an t interactions; d o m i n a n c e i ncl udes attacks, threats, c o m p e t i t i o n, submi ssi on, a n d retreat. T h e cent r al idea o f the re se ar c h, from t he p r e s e n t view, is th at if c hi l d r e n i nt er a ct with each o t h e r in stable a n d systematic ways— ways t h a t s u p p o r t so­ cial c o h e s i o n — th en they are o p e r a t i n g as m e m b e r s o f a social g r o up . This i mplies th at they e x p e r i e n c e a g r o u p identity. If these d o m i n a n c e a n d affiliative int er ac ti ons arc u ns tabl e or unsystematic, the ch il dr en p r oba bl y have n o t a t ta i n e d a g r o u p identity. Strayer a n d T r u d e l (1984) m e a s u r e d several types o f behavioral i nt er ac ­ tions t ha t relate to this issue: (a) f r eq u e n cy o f conflict, (b) stability o f d o m i ­ n a n c e relations, (c) n u m b e r o f dyadic e n c o u n t e r s in whi ch d o m i n a n c e is

D E V E L O P M E N T O F A G R O U T I DENT I T Y

71

d e p i ct e d, (d) the relation be twe en d o m i n a n c e status a n d the a m o u n t o f af­ filiation d ir e ct e d toward the child, a n d (e) the rel at ion b etween d o m i n a n c e status a n d n u m b e r of u n r e c i p r o c a t e d affiliation behavi ors received. T h e re­ sults are straightforward: C hi l d r e n u n d e r age 3 do n o t o p e r a t e as if they were m e m b e r s o f gro u p s, for bo th d o m i n a n c e a n d affiliation. G r o u p s c o m ­ prised of 3-, 4-, o r 5-year-olds behave similarly r e g a r d i n g d o m i n a n c e rela­ tions, b u t t he re are m o r e conflicts a n d m o r e struggles over d o m i n a n c e within g r o u ps o f 3-year-olds t ha n within the o l d e r gr oups. This m e a n s that the d o m i n a n c e hi er ar ch y for 3-year-olds is n ot f u nc t i o n i n g as effectively as it is for 4- a n d 5-year-olds. For affiliation, t he re is a t r e n d from the 3-yearolds to t he 5-ycar-olds for affiliation to be m o r e f r eq u e nt ly d ir e ct e d towTard the hi gh status m e m b e r s . In stable h u m a n a n d n o n h u m a n p r i ma t e gr ou p s, high status m e m b e r s receive m o r e at te nt i o n a n d / o r affiliation t ha n low status m e m b e r s . T h e se p at te r ns o f results indi cat e t hat g r o u p identity starts to e m e r g e at age 3 a n d is well d ev e lo p e d by age 5. In ge ne ra l, the g r o u p in­ teract ions o f the 4- a n d 5-year-olds wTerc m o r e similar to each o t h e r t h a n to the y o u n g e r c hil dr en. A b r a m e n k o v a ’s (1983) study, car ri ed o u t in the Soviet U n i o n , assessed w h e t h e r 5- to 7-ycar-old c hi l d r en would work as h a r d o n a task w h e n only the g r o u p l e a d er would be p u n i s h e d for p o o r g r o u p p e r f o r m a n c e as c o m ­ p a r e d to wTh e n each individual would be p u n i s h e d . T h e a ss ump ti on m a d e is t h a t if individuals identify themselves as m e m b e r s o f a g r o u p , they will act in a “h u m a n e ” way toward o t h e r m e m b e r s o f the g r o u p — t h a t is, they will work as h a r d to p r o t ec t t he ir g r o u p l e a d er as to p r o t e c t themselves. Moreover, this h u m a n e at tit ude s h o u ld m o r e likely o c c ur w h en the m e m b e r s have to int er ac t cooperatively with each o t h er , as o p p o s e d to w h e n they work alone, parallel to e ac h o ther . T h e c hi ld r e n were pl aced into g r o u ps o f four, based on age a n d g e n d e r , a n d tested on e i t he r a br i ef interactive task o r a br i e f parallel task. For each task, two c on d i ti o n s were c o m p a r e d : Only the e x p e r i m e n t e r - a p p o i n t e d l e a d e r could be p u n i s h e d versus all m e m b e r s c oul d be p u n i s h e d . T h e m e as ­ u r e o f a h u m a n e at ti tude c o m p a r e d s p e e d a n d accuracy o f p e r f o r m a n c e w h e n only the l e a d er c oul d be p u n i s h e d relative to w h en the e nti r e g r o u p c ou l d be p u n i s h e d . T h e results indi cate t ha t a h u m a n e at ti t ude was m u c h m o r e likely to o c c ur o n the interactive t han parallel task; g r o u ps o f 6- to 7year-olds sh owe d m o r e o f this atti tude, a n d m o r e stably, t ha n g r o u p s o f 5- to 6-year-olds; b u t t he h u m a n e at ti tude wTas p r e s e n t in even t h e y o u n g e r gr ou ps . T h e se f i ndi ngs indicate t hat by 5 years o f age, c h i l d r e n readily d e ­ velop a n d identify with a g r o u p that is externally f o r m e d a n d lasts for only a b r i e f ti me p er i o d . It wro ul d n o t be sur pr i sing to find evidence o f a h u m a n e att itude in y o u n g e r c hi l d r e n , especially for long- st anding g r o u p s in n o n ­ labor ator y settings. In Yee a n d B r o w n ’s (1992) e x p e r i m e n t , c hi ld r en o f ages 3 V4, 5, 7, a n d 9 years were first tested on thei r ability to play the egg a n d s po on ga me . In

72

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

this g a m e , players are a sk e d to carry as m a n y eggs b a l a n c e d on s p o o n s as possible, in a fixed p e r i o d o f ti m e . T h e t i m i n g was r ig g e d s u c h t h a t e ach c hil d s u c c e e d e d in c a r ry in g exactly 3 eggs. T h e c h i l d r e n w er e t h e n a ss ig ne d as a m e m b e r to e i t h e r a “g r e e n ” te am o r a “b l u e ” te a m . T h e t h r e e o t h e r m e m b e r s o f th e g r e e n team e a c h c a r r i e d m o r e t h a n 3 eggs, w h e r e a s th e t h r e e m e m b e r s o f t h e b l u e te a m e a c h c a r r i e d only 1 o r 2 eggs. T h e c h i l d r e n were s h o w n t h e i r t e a m m a t e s ’ scores a n d h e n c e c o u l d readily n o t e t h a t th e g r e e n te am was fast a n d th e b l u e te am was slow. T h e c h i l d r e n w e re t h e n a sk e d to m a k e self a n d team e v a lu a tio n s , a n d to in d ic a te w h e t h e r they w o u ld like to switch te am s. C h i l d r e n d id n o t m e e t t h e i r “t e a m m a t e s ” n o r d id the y play t h e g a m e ag ain. T h e a u t h o r s a s s u m e d t h a t if c h i l d r e n i d e n t i ­ fied with t h e i r a ss ig ne d t e a m , th e y w o u ld t e n d to e val ua te it m o r e high ly t h a n the y w o u ld th e o t h e r te a m . H ow ev e r, it was p r e d i c t e d t h a t c h i l d r e n as­ s i g n e d to th e slow te am w o u ld in d ic a te a d e s ir e to switch teams. T h e results arc r a t h e r c o m p l e x , in t h a t boys a n d girls d i f f e r e d s o m e w h a t on th e va ri ous m e a s u r e s . In g e n e r a l , c h i l d r e n a t all age levels a n d on b o t h fast a n d slow t e a m s liked t h e i r te a m b e t t e r t h a n th e o p p o s i n g o n e . T h i s was c xpc cially p r o n o u n c e d for th e 5-year-olds. C h i l d r e n g e n e r a ll y w e re a c c u ­ rate in assessing t h e p e r f o r m a n c e cap abilities o f th e two te am s, a l t h o u g h t h e 5-year-olds on t h e slow te am o v e r e v a l u a t e d t h e i r t e a m ’s p e r f o r m a n c e capabilitcs. Finally, m o s t c h i l d r e n on t h e fast te am d id n o t w a n t to switch te am s, a n d with th e e x c e p t i o n o f th e 5-year-olds, m o s t c h i l d r e n o n slow t e a m s d i d w a n t to switch. T h e a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e t h a t c h i l d r e n as y o u n g as 314 years o f age can ide nti fy th e m s e lv e s as m e m b e r s o f i n g r o u p s a n d m a n i ­ fest s o m e i n t c r g r o u p pro ce sse s. A n o t a b l e c h a n g e o c c u r s a t a b o u t 5 years o f age in whic h c h i l d r e n show p a r t i c u l a r a t t a c h m e n t to t h e i r g ro u p s . T h e r e m a i n i n g s tu d ie s on ly in d ir ec tl y b e a r on th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a g r o u p identity. Sluckin a n d P. K. Sm i th (1977) w er e i n t e r e s t e d in t h e way 3a n d 4-year-olds in two p r e s c h o o l play g r o u p s f o r m e d a d o m i n a n c e h i e r a r ­ chy. Pairwise d o m i n a n c e was m e a s u r e d by o b s e r v i n g th e ability o f o n e ch ild to win in aggressive e n c o u n t e r s with a n o t h e r . C h i l d r e n ’s p e r c e p t i o n o f d o m i n a n c e was m e a s u r e d by as k in g e a c h ch il d to ev alu at e t h e “t o u g h n e s s ” o f e a c h m e m b e r in his o r h e r p l a y g r o u p by r a n k i n g p h o t o g r a p h s o f all th e pla yma tes. In b o t h g r o u p s , a c le a r d o m i n a n c e h i e r a r c h y was f o u n d , in t h e sen se tha t all d o m i n a n c e r e la ti o n s wer e transitive. T h a t is, if A was d o m i n a n t ov er B, a n d B ov er C, A was f o u n d to be d o m i n a n t ov er C. T h e t o u g h n e s s ra n k i n g s w e re c a r r i e d o u t twice in th e s a m e day, as a c h e c k on reliability. O n l y 8 o f t h e 20 c h i l d r e n w ere relia ble , t h a t is, c onsis te nt ly r a n k - o r d e r e d t h e i r p e e r s in t h e two ev alua tio ns . Seven o f th e se e i g h t c h i l d r e n w er e o v e r 4 years old. O n l y o n e o f th e te n 3-ycar-olds was c o n s i s t e n t in his ra n k in g s . Especially i m ­ p o r t a n t was th e validity o f th e r a n k i n g s , t h a t is, t h e statistical r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t o u g h n e s s r a n k i n g s ( t h e two reliability r a n k i n g s w e re a v e r a g e d )

D E VE L OP ME NT O F A G R O U P IDENTITY

73

a nd t he observed d o m i n a n c e hicrachy. If chi ld r en can accurately perceive this i m p o r t a n t di me ns i on o f g r o u p fun ct io ni ng , it may be i nferred t hat they bot h perceive their playmates as a g r o u p, a n d identify with that g roup. T h e data analyses showed t hat the chil dren who were reliable in their r ankings ( p r ed o m in a nt l y 4-year-olds) also h a d valid rankings a n d that the chi ldren unrel iable in their r ankings ( p r ed o mi n a n tl y 3-ycar-olds) did n o t have valid r ankings. These findings, consistent with the Straycr and T rude l (1984) findings, indicated that gr ou p identity emerges between 3 a nd 4 years of age. Th e study by Watson a n d Fischcr (1980) dealt with the d ev e l o p me nt of an u n d e rs ta n di n g of social roles in children between 1 'A a n d 714 years of age. In their research, children were p r e se nte d with a s equence o f eight dif­ ferent levels describing social u n d e rs ta n di n g in preschool play settings. O f particular imp or ta nc e is the distinction m a d e between the behavioral role a nd social role u nd er s ta n di n g levels. T h e f or me r c on c cp t me ans t hat a child can perform several actions in play that fit a particular social role, for e x am ­ ple, doctor, nurse. T h e latter c o nc cpt means that a child can do the same, b ut additionally und er st an ds the co mp l eme nt ar y nature o f social roles, for example, that doctors a n d nurses interact with each o t h e r in particular ways. A child who demonstr at es knowledge o f a behavioral role may n o t u n ­ derst and that the role coordinates with o t h e r roles. It can be a r gu e d t hat in o r de r for groups to function properly, social roles a nd n ot merely behav­ ioral roles must be u nder s tood. If a child u nd er s ta nds social roles, it may be i nferred that he or she has knowledge of g r oup functioning. It is further as­ s u m e d that the child has probably e x pe ri enc ed m e mb e rs h ip in a group. T h e basic t ec hni que used by Watson a n d Fischer (1980) to study these is­ sues was a mo de li ng a nd imitation pr oc ed ur e. T h e ex p e r i me n t e r would act o ut a brief story using dolls a nd then ask the child to act o ut h e r or his own similar story using the same dolls. T h e portrayed story reflected cach o f the eight levels in social un der st andi ng. If a child could successfully imitate the e x p er i m e nt e r s ’ story at a particular level, t hen it was assumed t hat the child h a d social u n d e r s t a n d i n g at that level. T he results were reliable a nd straightforward: T he ma x im um level attained by 3- a n d 314-ycar-olds was t hat o f behavioral roles, a n d for 4- a n d 4'/2-year-olds, social roles. Thus, c o n­ sistent with Sluckin a nd Smith (1977) a n d Straycr a n d Tr ude l (1984), 4 years o f age appears to be the age at which a gr o up identity emerges. T h e last research to be discussed was carried o u t by Piaget in the areas of symbolic play (1962) a nd games with rules ( 1932/ 1948). Piaget divides the d e ve l o p me nt o f symbolic play into two periods— from 1V* to 4 years, and from 4 to 7 years. T h e first peri od involves the simple a nd often haphazar d, b ut novel use of language a n d nonverbal symbols with objects. For e x am ­ ple, a child places a doll in a pan, covers it with a postcard a nd says “Baby, blanket, cold.” T he pan is symbolic of a bed, a n d the postcard, of a blanket.

74

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

In th e s e c o nd p e ri od , relative to t he first, the symbolic c o m b i n a t i o n s arc m o r e orderly; the ch ar a cter s a n d objects u se d arc m o r e realistic, a n d collec­ tive symbolism appears. T h a t is, ch il dr e n can now play t o g e t h e r using the s ame symbols, all taking on roles t h a t c o m p l e m e n t each o t h e r , such as that o f m o t h e r a n d father. T h u s, in this latter p e ri od , t h e r e is evi de nc e consis­ t e n t with the findings o f Wat son a n d Fischer (1980) t h a t the use o f c o m p l e ­ m e n t a r y roles e m e r g e s at a b o u t age 4 years. In the practice o f rules of games, Piaget ( 1 9 3 2 / 1 9 4 8 ) again distin­ gui shed between behavior characteristics of W i- to 4-year-olds a n d those o f 4to 7-ycar-olds. For the pur poses o f this discussion, the i m p or t a nc e o f games with rules is that they provide symbolic guides for g r o up interaction. To play a g ame with o t h e r children implies t hat each player secs the rules b i n d i ng in relation to their collective behavior. Because the rules are so me wh a t abstract, y oung children could be e xp e ct e d to have difficulty with t he m. An d they do. But Piaget points o u t substantial differences between the pre- a n d post-4year-olds in thei r use o f rules. Yo un g e r children evidence no u nd e r s t a n d i n g o f a g ame g over ned by rules. O l d e r chil dren play together, claim they are playing by the rules, a n d even state s ome o f the rules, b u t they d o n ’t play as if the rules were b i ndi ng, or even shar ed. It is n ot until chi ldren are a b o u t 7 years old t h a t rules r egul at e t h e i r play i nteractions. In all the m e n t i o n e d r es ear ch, t he age o f 4 c o n t i n u e s to a p p e a r as the age at which u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f g r o u p f u n c t i o n i n g clearly occurs. T h e se f indi ngs s u p p o r t the c oncl us ions based on t he Strayer a n d T r u d e l (1984) e x p e r i m e n t t hat a sense o f g r o u p identity e m e r g e s by t ha t age. Because u n ­ d e r s t a n d i n g o f g r o u p processes grows appr eciabl y over t he n e x t 3 years, it m i gh t be e x p e c t e d t h a t the n a t u r e o f g r o u p identity also c h a n ge s co n s i d e r ­ ably b etween the ages o f 4 a n d 7. Two p r e di c ti o ns arc t hu s m a d e b as ed on the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c o n c l u ­ sions: T h e a p p e a r a n c e o f p r e ju di ce a n d / o r di scr iminat ion against specific target g r o u p s will first reliably a p p e a r in 4-year-olds, a n d the n a t u r e of this p r e j u d i c e / d i s c r i m i n a t i o n will c h a n g e in systematic ways b et ween the ages o f 4 a n d 7.

I N T E R G R O U P B E HA VI OR In the previous section, wrc f o u n d t hat betwTcen the ages o f 3 a n d 4 years, ch il dr en are c apable of dev e lo pi ng a g r o u p identity. Based on evolutionary c ons ide ra ti ons, we c o n c l u d e d t h a t g r o u p identity is a pr e re qu i si te for the mani fest ati on o f certain i n t c r g r o u p processes, t h a t is, p re fe re nt ial tr eat ­ m e n t of i n g r o u p m e m b e r s a n d hostility toward o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . We fur­ t h e r a r g u e d t ha t genetically bas ed i n t e r g r o u p processes are o n e o f the t hr ee b u il di ng blocks o f pr e ju d i c e a n d discri minati on.

I N T E R G R O U P BEHAVI OR

75

Wh a t do we know a b o u t the d e ve l o p me n t of i ntcr gr oup behavior in chil­ dren? And how does this knowledge fit with what we would predi ct from primate int cr gr oup relations? Surprisingly, little research has been carried out in this area. Fortunately, the work that has been d o n e is considered clas­ sical in the field of social psychology. T h e Shcrifs’ ex p e ri me n ts (M. Sherif, Harvey, White, H o o d & C. W. Sherif, 1961; M. Sherif & C. W. Sherif, 1953) are a m o n g the most imaginative a n d i m p o r t a n t in the field of g ro u p devel­ o p m e n t a nd intcr gr oup relations. From the po in t o f view o f the subjects, they were n ot participants in experiments, b u t rather, participating in reallife experiences s ha re d with o t he r p rcadolcs ccnt or adolescent boys. In the first e x p e r i m e n t (M. Shcrif & C. W. Sherif, 1953) a n u m b e r o f middle-class boys were invited to att end an overnight camp. In the first phase, which lasted less than 1 week, the children participated in the usual camp activi­ ties, ate together, a n d were given great f reedom in choosing t heir friends. Th e c o u n s e l or s /c x pc r im en t e r s paid special attention to friendship pat­ terns a nd social networks. In the second phase, which also lasted less t han 1 week, close friends were placcd into two separate groups. T he g r oups were kept isolated from each o t he r as m u c h as possible, eating, sleeping, a n d carrying o ut activities in separate locations. O n e gr ou p n a m e d itself the Bulldogs, the other , the Blue Devils. F'ach o f the groups developed a set o f n or ms that distinguished it from the ot he r gr oup. For example, the Bulldogs refused to use the color blue, which they associated with the Blue Devils. Most of the boys talked in an “us versus t h e m ” fashion a nd d e pr ec at ed the o th e r group. Boys who at­ t e mp te d to socialize with m e m b e r s of the o t h e r groups were called “trai­ tors” by their own group. Within each group, status hierarchies emer ged. This system served to f ur t he r c n h a n c c g ro u p identification a n d cohcsiveness, a n d to p r o d u cc at least mild antagonism toward the o th er group. In the third phase, the two gr oups were b r o u g h t into competition with each o t h e r in o r d e r to win points for the g ro up as a whole an d prizes for its individual member s. T h e boys c o m p et e d in sports, t ou rna me nt s, a n d camp chores. During this phase, i nte rgr oup antagonism cscalatcd to such a d e ­ gree that the Sherifs ma de strong a ttempts to create i n t cr gr oup harmony. They accomplished this by assigning the groups cooperative tasks necessary for the b e t t e r m e n t o f the ca mp as a whole. In the s econd e x p er i m e nt (Sherif et al., 1961), two groups of boys were b r o u g h t into the camp separately, unaware of each o t h e r s ’ presence duri ng the first phase. As in the earlier expe ri me nt , status hierarchies emer ged, which included the d e ve l o p me nt o f gr ou p norms, c ooper at ion, g r o up i d e n­ tity, a n d gr ou p loyalty. In the sccond phase, the groups were b r o u g h t to­ g et he r for a n u m b e r of athletic competitions. As in the first study, strong negative attitudes a n d behaviors developed toward the o t he r gr oup. liven neutral contacts t u r ne d into conflict, such as a garbage-throwing war fol­

76

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

lowing a meal to ge th e r . At the s ame time, i n g r o u p feelings were s t r e n g t h ­ e n e d , often le ad in g to overestimates o f the g r o u p ’s compet it ive abilities. As in the first e x p e r i m e n t , the thir d p has e involved having the two g r ou p s work t o g e t h e r cooperatively, which h a d the effect o f i m p ro v in g i n t c r g r o u p relations. In s ummary, the results of these e xp e ri me n ts arc completely consistent with the findings o f the studies on pr ima te i n t c r g ro u p relations. In the p r oc ­ ess o f g r o u p f ormati on, p r ea d o l e s c en t a n d adolescent boys devel oped strong b o n d s with o t h e r g r o u p m e m b e rs . A status hier ar chy e m e rg e d, they devel­ o p e d a n d a d h e r e d to g r o u p no rm s , a n d t hen r eacted negatively to o u t g r o u p me mbe rs, s ome o f whom were previously friends. Comp et it io n between g r oups served to exaggerate these effects. T h e Sherifs’ research indicates that for pr eadol esccnt s a n d adolescents, antagonism toward o u t g r o u p m e m ­ bers is an integral p a rt of g r o u p formati on a n d g r o up f unctioning. T h es e results raise two i m p o r t a n t q ue st ions a b o u t g r o u p f o r ma t io n a n d i n t c r g r o u p relations. First, t he Sherifs built into th ei r c a m p situation a large n u m b e r o f social c o m p o n e n t s d e s ig ne d to creat e a s t ro n g sense o f g r o u p identity. Arc all these c o m p o n e n t s necessary? T o p h r a se it differently, what are the m i n i m u m r e q u i r e m e n t s for establishing a g r o u p identity (as as­ sessed by i n g r o u p pr ef e re nc es ) ? Se co nd , the c a m p e r s sho we d b o t h s trong i n g r o u p p r e f e r e nc es and o u t g r o u p hostility. Do t he two classes o f b e h a vi or always o c c ur t oge the r? If not , what d oc s it take to p r o d u c c both? T h e r es e ar ch by H e n r i Tajfcl a n d colleagues, for e xa mp l e , Tajfcl (1981), a n d Tajfel a n d T u r n e r (1986), known as “m i n i m a l ” g r o u p e x pe r ime n ts , were d es ig n ed to answer the first o f these questions. T h e i r results i ndicate t h a t for adolescents, i n g r o u p p r e f e r e n ce s arc p r o d u c e d even w h en g r o u p identification is bas ed on trivial characteristics a n d the m e m b e r s of the g r o u p s have never, n o r would ever, meet. In o n e o f the e x pe r i m e n t s , the adol escent s were individually shown slides o f p ai nt ings by Klee a n d Kan­ dinsky ( th e subjects were n o t a rt s tu d en t s ) , a n d asked for thei r p re fe re nce s. T h e y were t he n told t h a t they were b e i n g pl ac ed in the g r o u p who p r e ­ f er re d the s ame p a i n t e r t h a t they p r e f e rr ed . In a n o t h e r e x p e r i m e n t , the a d ­ olescents were shown pictures o f dots a n d asked to state thei r n u m b e r . T h e subjects were t he n told t h a t they were b e i n g pla ce d into a g r o u p t hat h a d ei­ t h e r u n d e r e s t i m a t e d or o ver es t imated the n u m b e r shown in the same m a n ­ n e r as they h a d d o n e . T h e adol escent s were t he n individually tested on a n u m b e r of tasks in which they h a d to d e t e r m i n e the m o n e t a r y r ewards for o n e o t h e r m e m b e r o f thei r g r o u p as well as for o n e m e m b e r in the o t h e r g r o up . In all the e x p e r i m e n t s (at least 30 h a d b e e n p e r f o r m e d ) , a c onsi st ent p r e f e r e n c e was shown to m o r e highly rewar d i n g r o u p as o p p o s e d to o u t ­ g r o u p m e m b e r s . Moreover, in o r d e r to di s c ri mi na te against the o u t g r o u p , the a doles cents f r eq ue nt l y m a d e choices t h a t were less t ha n op ti ma l for

I N T E R G R O U P B E H A V 10 R

77

t he ir own g r o up . T h a t is, in assigning rewards, they ma x imi z ed the differ­ e n c e b et ween what the i n g r o u p a n d o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s received r a t h er t h a n trying to give t he largest r eward possible to the i n g r o u p m e m b e r . T h e r eadi ness with which we identify ourselves with a g r o u p is a st oni shi ng as evi­ d e n c e d by the e x p e r i m e n t o f Locksley, Ortiz, a n d H e p b u r n (1980). T h e y c re a te d two g r o u ps on an explicitly r a n d o m basis, the m e m b e r s o f which were u n k n o w n to each o t h e r a n d woul d n ever meet. T h e r es ea rc her s still f o u n d s tr ong i n g r o u p p re fe re nce s. T hu s, the answer to the first questi on: T h e mi n i ma l r e q u i r e m e n t s for establishing a g r o u p identity is me re ly as­ signing p e o pl e to a g r o up . T h e results o f Yce a n d Brown (1992) were c o n ­ sistent with this concl usion. It s h ou l d be n o t e d th at in the mi n i ma l g r o u p e x p er i m en t s , t h e r e was no evi de nc e o f hostility toward o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . Di scrimi nati ng against o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s by s howi ng favoritism toward i n g r o u p m e m b e r s often oc cur s out side as well as inside the l aboratory. I n d e e d , we may even like a n d show p r e f e r en ce s on o t h e r occasions to o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s against whom we have just di scr i mi nat ed. This leads us to the se co n d , previous quest ion: U n d e r what c on d i ti o n s will o u t g r o u p discr imi nat ion involve hostility? T h e results from t he S h e r i f e x p e r i m e n t s suggest that c o m p e ti ti o n may be a key factor. Recall t ha t st ereotypi ng a n d hostility escalated wh e n the two g r oup s were pla cc d in h e ad- to- he ad c om pe t i t i o n . S u b s e q u e n t r es ear ch has shown, however, t h a t o n e critical factor is the legitimacy or fairness o f t he c o m p e t i ­ tion (Tajfel 8c T u r n e r , 198(5). If the losers feel t h a t they lost fairly, they may even elevate their positive feelings toward the winners. Roge r Brown (1986) suggested t ha t i n t c r g r o u p hostility is rel at ed to fair­ ness a n d places the issue into the c o n t e x t o f equity theory. If two gr ou ps , for e x a mp l e , feel t ha t t he actual o r pot ent ial distribution o f rewards o r r e ­ s ources between t h e m is fair, th en they will n o t feel hostility d u r i n g o r after c om pe t i t i o n. But if a g r o u p feels t h a t the distribution is unfair, t h e n that g r o u p will express hostility. T h e two key c o m p o n e n t s o f equity arc t he ac­ tual or po tent ial rewards g a i n ed in relation to the actual or p o tent ial costs involved in a tt ai ni ng the rewards. Rewards are any o u t c o m e s that g r ou p s find desirable, for e x a mp l e , w i nn i ng prizes, e n h a n c e m e n t s in r esp ec t or status, or new privileges. Cos Is involve two c o m p o n e n t s : (a) any u nd e s ir abl e o u t c o m e s , for e x a mp le , h a r d work, pai n, threat; a n d (b) the “assets” or e n t i t l e m e n t s g r o u p s br i ng with t h e m , for e x a mp l e , age, status, years o f e x ­ p er i e n ce , g e n d e r . H e n c e , an advant age given to o lde r , m o r e e x p e r i e n c e d t ee n ag e rs relative to y o u n g e r , less e x p e r i e n c e d ones, may be seen by bot h g r o u p s as justified, be ca us e the o l d er g r o u p has m o r e assets. W h e n rewards are scarce, for e xa mp l e , w i n n e r takes all, t h e n the pressure increases to closely evaluate equity. Co n se qu e n t ly , the li kel ihood o f perceiving un fa ir ­ ness also increases. T h e issue is n o t wh a t the real state o f affairs is, b u t r a th e r , the percei ved state o f affairs.

78

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

W h e n g r o u p s e n g a g e in c o mp e t i t i o n, for e x a mp le , the Bulldogs a n d the Blue Devils, they c o m p a r e themselves with each o t h e r in light o f the c o n d i ­ tions in which they arc placed. If they have negative stereotypes a b o u t each o t he r, if t h e r e is a winner-take-all c o mp e t i t i o n , if t h e r e is s o me ambiguity a b o u t the rules, they each may feel t h a t the c o mp e t i t i o n is u nf ai r a n d ini­ tially feel a nge r. T h e w in ne r , o f course, will likely c h a n g e views, a n d the loser may feel even m o r e wr on ge d. W h e n the equity analysis is e x t e n d e d into the realm o f p r e j ud i c e a n d dis­ c ri mi na ti on , s ome powerful insights e m e rg e . For e x a mp l e , m a n y in the u n ­ t o u c h a bl e castes feel t ha t t he distr ibut ion o f rewards, t h a t is, thei r tr eat ­ m e nt , is fair be ca us e the assets they have (thei r caste) justifies the t r e a t m e n t they receive. Parallel a r g u m e n t s can be m a d e for t he t r e a t m e n t o f Blacks, w o m e n , a n d the mentally r e t a r d e d or physically disabled in We st er n cul­ tures. W h e n t he u n t o u c h a b l e s , Blacks, w o m e n , or disabled c ha ll en ge the way t h e i r assets have b e e n evaluated, they t he n perceive the t r e a t m e n t r e ­ ceived as b e i n g p r e j u d i c e d a n d discriminatory. In o t h e r words, p r e ju di ce a n d d is cr i mi nat ion arc e x p e r i e n c e d if the t r e a t m e n t is per ceived as unfai r o r unjustified. W h a t often h a p p e n s is that the h i g h e r status g r o u p feels e nti ­ tled to the di st ributi on o f rewards they receive, for e x a mp l e , b e t t e r jobs, b e tt er pay, m o r e a n d b e t t e r h o u s i n g o p po r t un i ti e s; wh er ea s the lower status g r o u p feels c h e at e d , t h a t is, they rej ect the old views o f th ei r assets. T h e for­ m e r g r o u p believes th at they arc b e i n g fair, a n d h e n c e , act ing in an u n p r e j ­ u d i c e d m a n n e r ; wher eas the latter g r o u p feels the opposi te. Obviously, this is a potentially explosive state o f affairs, which all too often gets t r ans­ f o r m e d into violent actuality.

H U N T E R - G A T H E R E R M I ND S REVISITED T h e p r e c e d i n g material in this c h a p t e r leads to the c oncl us ion th at several of the processes u nd e rl y i n g p r e judic e a n d di scr imi nati on are g e n e t i c / evolutionarily, based on tribal a n d i ntertribal interactions. T h e s e processes g et triggered t h r o u g h “n o r m a l ” i nteractions, a n d arc i na pp r opr i at e ly a p ­ plied to g r o u p s within a cul ture. Why m i g h t this have o c c u r re d ? Stated a n ­ o t h e r way, why are i n g r ou p s a n d o u t g r o u p s within a c ul tur e p r e j u di c e d against each o t h e r ? T h e r e arc a n u m b e r o f possible, a n d n o t mut uall y e x ­ clusive e xpl anat ions . First, m e m b e r s o f a h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r tribe have a s tr ong identification with a n d c o m m i t m e n t to o t h e r m e m b e r s o f t he tribe. T h e s e cultural c o m ­ m i t m e n t s a n d identifications are generally lacking in industrial a n d post­ industrial societies e x c ep t in times o f war, or w h e n o n e is b e i n g mi st r e at ed in a foreign l a nd by t he locals. In o t h e r words, the pull o f nationalism is very wrcak relative to the pull o f tribal identity. S ec on d, m e m b e r s o f h u n t e r -

H U N T E R - G A T H E R E R MIND S REVISITED

79

g a t h e r e r tribes arc very h o m o g e n o u s in a p p e a r a n c e a n d behavior, which p r o m o t e s g r o u p identification. In industrial a n d posti ndust rial societies, t he re is usually co n s i de ra bl e h e t e r og e n e i t y in a p p e a r a n c e a n d b e h a vi or pr i­ marily be ca us e o f i mm i gr a ti o n a n d by the i n co r p o r a t i o n o f tribes residing g re at distances from each o t h e r . H e n c e , b a d gi n g m e c h a n i s m s le ad in g to a societal identity are very weak. T h i r d , the d if f er e nt g r o u ps (family a n d / o r task-related) within a h u n t e r g a t h e r e r tribe arc highly c o mp a t i b l e with each o t he r . If they d o n ’t pull to­ g e t h er , they will surely be pul le d apart. In industrial a n d posti ndust r ial soci­ eties, g r o u p s we identify with are often i n c o m p a t ib l e with each o t h e r in that they p u r s u e i n c o mp a t i bl e goals. Fo ur t h, h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r tribal m e m b e r s on a day-to-day basis are rarely in c o mp e t i t i o n with each o t he r. C o m p e t i ­ tion is antagonistic to the n o r m s o f s h a r in g a n d reciprocity. If o n e wins, eve­ ryone wins, for e x a mp l e , s o m e o n e killing a zebra. If o n e loses, t h e n all arc d i mi n i s h e d. In industrial a n d post indust ri al societies, c o mp e t i t i o n is the n o r m , b o th within a n d be twe e n groups. Fifth, h u n t e r - g a t h e r c r cul tur es arc highly egalitarian across families, a n d be twe en p a r e nt s within a family. Status a n d pow’cr di fferences between adults would likely be destructive to effective g r o u p func ti on i ng . T h e r e arc leaders for pa rt i c ul a r activities, for e xa mp le , h u n t i n g , religion, b u t this le ad er sh ip d oc s n o t c ut across all o t h e r activities, n o r d oe s it give the le ad ­ ers ge ne ra l p ow er advantages. In industrial a n d post industri al societies, t he re arc obvious p owe r a n d status differences. T h o s e in p ow er strive to ma int ai n it at the e x p e n s e o f t hos e in s u b o r d i n a t e positions. Sixth, c o m p e t i ­ tion a n d status di fferences in industrial a n d posti ndust rial societies arc m u ­ tually rei nf or cing. T h e y create “haves” a n d “havc-lesscs,” a n d by f o r mi n g al­ liances, m e m b e r s of these cul tur es form i n g r o u p s a n d o u t gr o up s . T h e i n g r ou p s arc d o m i n a n t a n d the o u t g r o u p s , su b or d in a te . Sevent h, in h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r tribes, t he goals o f socialization are to m a k e the c hi l d r e n similar to t he adults, wh o have e qu al status with each o th er , b u t h i g h e r status than the ch i ld r en . But if so me g r o up s o f adults have h i g h e r status t han o t h e r gr ou ps , as is the case in industrial a n d po st ­ industrial societies, t h e n the ch i ld re n will be d r awn to a n d i n f l u e nc e d by those h i g h e r status groups. Thi s differential attractiveness r ei nf or c es g r o u p status differences. Eight h, it is possible t ha t in h u n t c r - g a t h c r e r tribes o p p o ­ site-sex p r ej ud i ce a n d di scr imi nat i on do exist in ch il dr en. But these arc necessarily mo d if i ed a n d r e d i r e ct e d d u r i n g a d ol es ce nc e in o r d e r to m a i n ­ tain g r o u p cohesiveness a n d an egalitarian form o f fun ct io n i ng . In i n d u s­ trial a n d posti ndustri al societies, p ower di fferences in g e n d e r arc th e n o r m a n d would thus be r ei nf o rc e d in a dol es ce nc e. Racial differences do n o t ex­ ist in h u n t c r - g a t h c r c r tribes, a n d infants with obvious physical a b n o r m a l i ­ ties arc usually p u t to d ea th. T hu s , in h u n t c r - g a t h c r e r societies, t h e r e arc es­ sentially n o o p p o r t u n i t i e s for p r ej ud i ce bas ed on race or physical h a nd i ca p .

80

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

Finally, a uth ori ty a cc e p ta n c e in h u n t c r - g a t h c r e r tribes is based on a u ­ thority figures who arc the e ld e r m e m b e r s o f the family a n d tribe. They m ai n ta in the cultural values, a n d if necessary, re d ir e c t them to be n e f it the tribe. In industrial a n d postindustrial societies, th e re arc a large n u m b e r o f auth ority figures outside o f the family. W h e n chi ldr en go to school, the n u m b e r increases. Generally, a uth ori ty figures directly o r indirectly instruct the yo un g to a cce pt the values tha t sustain the status a n d power o f the d o m ­ in an t groups. Th e s e values thus re infor ce the existence o f i n g ro u p s a nd ou tgr oups .

SUMMARY O u r ge nes d e t e r m i n e s o m e aspects o f h u m a n social behavior. O n e likely ge­ netic process co ntro lli ng species-specific d e v e l o p m e n t o f this beh avi or is canalization. Ex pe riential canalization involves a hierarchical system of four mutually inte rac ti ng c o m p o n e n t s : genetic activity, neu ra l activity, b e ­ havior, a n d e n v i r o n m e n t . All fou r c o m p o n e n t s work to g e t h e r to e nsu r e tha t d e v e lo p m e n ta l targets arc attained, buf feri ng de vel opin g individuals from genetic a n d e n v i ro n m e n ta l abnormalities. H u m a n s arc a cultural species. O u r ge nes m ak e culture inevitable, bu t genes a n d cultu re co-evolved. Systematic c h an ge s in h u m a n genetic struc­ ture led to systematic c ha ng c s in the n a tu r e o f h u m a n c ul tu re a n d vice versa. At the h e a r t o f this co-evolution are epig ene tic rules th a t transform e x p er ie n c e s into behavior. Gen etic fitness can be assigned to different rules. So me sets o f rules led to culture-specific, canalized behavioral c h a r a c ­ teristics. W h e r e th e culture-specific characteristics h a d high genetic fitness across all cultures, they ultimately b e c a m e universally species-specific. Behavior genetics research at te m p ts to a c c o u n t for the c o n t ri b u ti o n of genetic a n d e n v i ro n m e n ta l variations to individual differences in behavior. In a sense, this research is the opposite o f canalization, which is c o n c e r n e d with the gcnctic bases o f similarities across peo ple . T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f b e ­ havior genetics for the p r e s e n t a r g u m e n t is th a t it clearly d e m o n s t r a t e s the role o f ge nes in cont rol lin g social beh avi or a n d prejudice. T h e essential a r g u m e n t in the c h a p t e r is th a t th re e sets o f g e n e t i c / e v o l u ­ tionary processes th a t lead to pr e ju di c e a n d dis crimination evolved in h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r tribes. Th e y were a p p r o p r i a t e a n d necessary for th a t subsis­ tence m o d e , which characterizes 99% o f h u m a n existence. T h e s e th re e sets o f processes arc p u t into m o tio n in n o n h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r contexts because they have b e en i n c o r p o r a t e d into o u r e pige ne tic systems. A fou rt h set of processes, o u t g r o u p attractiveness, which is based on the necessity o f ge ne flow, to so me e x t e n t c ou nte r ac ts those processes leadi ng to pre ju di c e a nd discrimination.

S UMMARY

81

T h e th e or y o f inclusive fitness leads to t he p r edi ct ion t ha t m e m b e r s o f a b r e e d i n g c o m m u n i t y will show p r e f e r e n c e s toward t h e i r relatives c o m p a r e d to nonrelatives. In p r i m at e evolution, “close relatives” is nearly s ynonymous with “m e m b e r s of the subsistence g r o u p . ” T h a t is, in ge ne ra l, a p r i m at e has m o r e close relatives in his o r h e r subsistence g r o u p t han in o t h e r groups. T hu s , p ri ma t es are evolutionarily p re d is p o se d to show i n g r o u p favoritism. T h e existence o f scarce re sour ce s may, in add it io n , lead to o u t g r o u p a n t a g ­ onism . Owing to the gr eat c omplexi ty o f tribal cultures, h u m a n s d e v e l op e d authority-bearing systems for readily t r a nsmi tt i ng i nf or ma ti on to the young. T h e se systems are pr ob a b l y based on the p r i m a t e g r o u p characteristic of d o m i n a n c e hier ar chi es , b u t e x t e n d into the realm o f c o n c ep t s a n d values. In a ut hor it y- bear ing systems, we n o t only a c ce p t as valid what aut hori ti es tell us b u t also i nternalize this i n f o r ma t i o n. T h e r e may be a d e v e l o pm e nt a l t r e n d in d ec re as in g a ut hor it y a c c e p t an c e t ha t is relat ed to the increasing a u t o n o m y associated with adole sc en c e. Obviously, aut hor it y a c c e p t an c e is o n e m a j or basis for the cul tural transmission o f pr ej ud i c e a n d d is cr imin a­ tion. Pr imat e i n t e r g r o u p relations are usually tense a n d fr e qu en tl y hostile. T h e evolutionary bases o f this hostility arc closely l inked with p r o t e c t i n g the y ou ng a n d females from h a r m by o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , a n d s econdari ly with co n tr ol lin g food r es our ce s a n d m a i n t a i n i n g g r o u p c ohe si on . Close e x a m i ­ nati on o f i n t c r g r o u p relations a m o n g the African apes a n d h u m a n h u n t c r ga th e re r s suggests t ha t males may be p r e d i sp o s e d to devel op s tr o ng e r o u t g r o u p pr ej udi ces than females. T h e r e is also a suggestion t ha t preadol escent s will devel op weaker pr ej udices t ha n adolescents. Owing to t he often d el et er i ou s effects o f gcnctic drift a n d i n b r e ed i ng , t he re is a necessity for g e n e flow into the tribe in o r d e r to m ai nt a in its viabil­ ity, especially in times o f m a r k e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l c hangcs . T h e m o s t likely s our ce o f g e n e flow is mi gr at ion from o t h e r tribes. In o r d e r to psychologi­ cally s u p p o r t this mig ra tio n, processes m u s t have d ev e lo p e d t ha t m a d e as­ pects o f t he o ut s i de r seem attractive to the h os t tribe. This led to e i t he r ac­ c e p t an c e o f the o ut s i de r into the tribe, or occasionally, i nc o r p o r a t i o n of specific at tri butes o f the ou ts id e r into the tribe. T h e n e t effect o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness is to mitigate o u t g r o u p hostility. Unlike t he African apes, for h u n t c r - ga t h e r er s , the tribe a n d n o t the su b ­ sistence g r o u p is the i n g r ou p . Tr ibe s differ from each o t h e r culturally a n d ch il dr en acquir e kno wl ed ge o f t h e i r own c ul t u r e t h r o u g h “b a d g i n g ” m e c h ­ anisms. T h e se m e c h a n i s m s readily allow ch i ld re n to identify o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . It is very unlikely from a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view that race dif­ ferences were significant. Unlike o t h e r pr ima te s, individual h u n t cr -g a t hcrers are m e m b e r s o f several gro u p s, which no rma ll y o p e r a t e in a n on conflictual m a n n e r .

82

2.

AN E V O L U T I O N A R Y M O D E L

T h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r e j ud i c e a n d d i sc ri mi na ti on is tied to the d e ve l op ­ m e n t of a g r o u p identity. T h e psychological lit er atur e suggests that a g r o u p identity e m e r g e s b et ween t he ages o f 3 a n d 4 years a n d increases for at least several years. T h e social psychological study of i n t c r g r o u p relations in p r ea do l e s ce nt s a n d a dol es cent s indicates that identification with a g r o u p , as m e a s u r e d by i n g r o u p p r ef er en ce s, can o c c ur me re ly by r a n d o m a ss ig n me n t o f i ndi vi du­ als to g r o u p s th at have n o functi on. I n t e r g r o u p hostility, however, is based o n the existence o f u nf air c om p e t i t i on . An equity m o d e l seems to c a p t ur e the essential f eat ur es o f this p h e n o m e n o n a n d leads to valuable insights into the n a t u r e o f p r ej ud i ce a n d d iscr imi nat ion. Finally, several possible e xp l a n at i o ns were given as to why the g e n e t i c / e volutionary processes u nd e rl yi ng a p p r o p r i a t e tribal a n d i nt er tr ibal i n t e r ­ actions are i n a p pr o p r ia t el y a pp li e d to g r o u ps within a cul tur e. All t he ex­ pl an ati on s ac kn owl ed ge the fact th at industrial a n d post i ndust ri al societies differ in very significant ways from tribal cultures.

C hapter

Discrim ination Tow ard D eaf Individuals'

T he r e are three goals o f this chapter. T he first is to un d e r st a nd the m e t h o d ­ ological issues involved in the study of prejudice a nd discrimination. As noted in c ha pt cr 1, prejudice a nd negative stereotypes arc n o t equivalent. To what e xt e nt can they be distinguished in the published research? Re­ garding discrimination, several techni ques have b ee n empl oyed in its study. Wh a t arc the u ni qu e characteristics of these techniques, a nd how is gcneralizability affected? How arc prcjudicc a nd discrimination me asur e d, and what met hodol ogical conccrns characterize their study? The second goal is to s ummari ze the cultural history o f discrimination toward the d e a f in the U ni te d States. Much o f this discrimination has arisen in the ar ena of education, where for m u c h o f two ccnturies, the hearing no rm governed the design of pedagogical systems. This discussion is prcccded by a theoretical overview illustrating the necessity of historical p e r ­ spective in assessing prcjudicc a n d discrimination toward minority groups. We will see that societal norms, which i nfluence normative behavior a n d es­ tablish power-conflict relations, are i m po r t an t c o mp o n e n t s o f prejudice a nd discrimination a nd develop over time. Historical tradition itself can be drawn on as a sourcc of cultural authority for prejudice a n d discrimination. So cultural history will be the starting point o f o u r e xami nati on of discrimi­ nation toward the d ea f a nd will comprise a similarly p r o m i n e n t place in consideration of ot he r culture g r oups in later chapters.

In t h e r e c e n t l i t e r a t u r e o n h e a r i n g i m p a i r m e n t , t h e w o r d d e a f is q u i t e a c c e p t a b l e , as is hear­ in g im paired. H e a rin g is p r e f e r r e d t o n o rm a l , b u t is e q u i v a l e n t in m e a n i n g to n o rm a l h earin g.

83

84

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

T h e t h i r d goal is to e x a m i n e t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f di sc ri mi na ti on toward the deaf. S u c c ee d i ng c ha p te r s will ad d r e ss the mental ly r e t a r d e d , t he o p p o ­ site sex, a n d African Amer icans . In c o m p a r i so n with studies o f o t h e r such Ame ri ca n minorities, the d e a f have received little at t en ti on in the psycho­ logical literature. Most studies have b e en c o n d u c t e d in school settings; c o n ­ sequently, m o st o f wh at we know o f discr imi nat ion toward the d e a f has p e r ­ t aine d to c hi ld r en . This bias is w a r r a n t e d in p a r t b ecause the e d uc at io na l c o n t e xt has b e e n an i m p o r t a n t site o f d e v e l o p m e n t o f societal n o r m s r e ­ g a r d i n g t he i nt er acti on o f d e a f a n d h e a r i n g cul t ur e. Moreover, studying di scr imi nati on a m o n g c hi l d r e n will allow us to sec its earliest d e v e l o p m e n t a n d to track its l ikel ihood for various age gro u ps . What , we will wa nt to ask, are the p a rt ic ul a r c on d i ti o n s t ha t lead to di scr i minat ion toward the deaf. W h a t arc the co nd iti on s , if any, o f its absence? T h e se q u e sti ons will f rame o u r discussion of di scr imi nat i on in this ch a pt er .

M ET HO DO LOG ICA L CONSIDERATIONS P re judi c e As was n o t e d in c h a p t e r 1, pr ej ud i ce , as d e f i n ed in t h a t c h ap t e r, has rarely b e e n m e a s u r e d . In virtually every study in which t he at ti t udes o f ch i ld r en a n d a dol escent s were assessed n o a t t e m p t wTas m a d e to d e t e r m i n e their “u n ­ r e a so n a bl en es s, ” t h a t is, the resistcnce o f the negative attitudes to new a n d conflicting i n fo r ma t i o n . T hu s , it is n o t clear w h e t h e r the “p r e j u d i c e ” r e ­ search is a b o u t p r ej u d ic e o r a b o u t negative stereotypes, or s o me c o m b i n a ­ tion o f t he two. O n theoreti cal g r o u n d s , this m e t h o d o l o gi c a l issue is i m p o r ­ tant; on p r a gma t ic g r o u n d s , it may o r may n o t be. Related to this c on s id er a ti on is the s t r o ng bias in the l iterature towrard the assessment o f “beliefs” as c on t r a st e d with the “affective” a n d “behavioral d isp o si t i on ” c o m p o n e n t s o f attitudes. Prejudicial beliefs a n d negative ster­ eotypes closely r es e mb le o n e a n o t h e r , as j u s t n ot ed . If all t h r e e at titudinal c o m p o n e n t s were highly i n t e r c or r cl at c d a n d relatively stable across age, t he n the b el ief bias would n o t be a serious issue. Mc Gu ir e (1985) i ndic at e d t h a t w rith adults, t he t hr ee c o m p o n e n t s are m o d e r at e l y c or rel at ed. I l o o v e r a n d Fishbein (1999) f o u n d for gay a n d lesbian p re ju di ce , assessed with j u ni or a n d se ni or high school s tu d e n ts a n d y o u ng adults t ha t t he t h r e e c o m p o n e n t s were highly cor r el at ed . Apparent ly, n o o t h e r c o m p a r a b l e d e ­ v e lo pm en t a l research has b e e n car ried out. However, a n u m b e r o f d e ve l op ­ me nt a l studies have c on t ra s te d several similar me a su r es of p r ej ud i ce (e.g., Brand, Ruiz, 8c Padilla, 1974; P. A. Katz, S o hn , 8c Zalk, 1975) a n d have f o u n d the i n te r co r re l at i o n s a m o n g t h e m to be lowT. A b o u d ’s (1988) review c o n c u r s in this j u d g m e n t . T h e m a j or implication o f these findings is that

M E TH O I) OI -O GI C AI . C O N $11) KRATI O N $

85

d ev e l o p m e n t a l p a t t er n s across a variety o f studies s h o u ld be e x a m i n e d , with relatively little weight given to any p a rt ic ul ar e x p e r i m e n t . A third m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n is t ha t the testing c o n t e x t has b e e n shown to i nf l ue nc e c h i l d r e n ’s e xp r es s e d attitudes. For e xa mp l e , P. A. Katz et al. (1975) f o u n d that the race o f the e x a m i n e r (Black vs. Wh it e) , the age o f the child, a n d the race o f the child (Black vs. Whi te ) h a d i nte ra cti ona l ef­ fects on c h i l d r e n ’s assessed pr ej udi ce. H e n c e , even e x p e r i m e n t s t h a t have u se d the s ame testing materials with the same-age chi l d r en , car ri ed o u t in school settings, may have r e a c h e d d i ff er en t c oncl us ions b ecaus e the race of the e x a m i n e r s was different. Analogously, B r a nd ct al. (1974) sh o we d that d if f er e nt results may o c c ur as a f unct ion o f g e o g ra p hi c region, social class of t h e c hi l d r e n , a n d c on s tr uc ti on o f t he test materials, for e xa mp le , i n t e n ­ sity o f skin color di fferences b et ween “W h i t e ” dolls or pi ct ures a n d “Black” dolls or pictures. T hu s , caut ion mu st be observed in i nt e r p r e t i n g conflict­ ing results from highly similar e xp e ri me nt s. A f ou rt h me t ho d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n is t ha t “f or ce d c h o i c e ” materials a n d m e t h o d s have typically b e e n used in assessing pr ej udi ce , for e xa mp l e , the Projective Prejudice Test d e v e l op e d by P. A. Katz et al. (1975) a n d the Pr e­ school Racial Attitude Measure, S e c o nd Version ( P R A M II) d e v e l op e d by Williams a n d M o r l a n d (1976). With these m e t h o d s , c hi ld r en m u s t cho o se be twe en two stimulus materials, for e xa mp l e , a dr awi ng o f a Whi t e child versus t ha t o f a Black child c o n c e r n i n g s o me physical or psychological at­ tributes (“Whi ch is the ugly chi ld?”, “Which is the n a u g h t y chil d?”). A b o u d (1988) identified t hr ee p r o b l e m s with these m e t h od s : (a) No i nd e x o f i n ­ tensity o f p r e ju di ce can reliably be i nf e rr e d from di fferences in p r e f e r ­ ences; (b) g r o u p f re q ue n ci es o r p e r c e n t ag es arc often i n t e r p r e t e d as if they were m e a n scores o f individuals; a n d (c) m o st critically, f orced c hoi c e c o n ­ f o u n d s p r e f e r e n c e of o n e g r o u p with rejection o f t he o th er . C h i l dr e n may like b o t h Whit e a n d Black c hi ld r en , b u t showing a consi st ent p r e f e r e n c e for o n e race will give the i mpr es si on o f p re ju d i ce toward the o the r. A fifth me t ho d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n was raised by S odc r (1990) a b o u t tests assessing pr ej ud ic e toward the disabled; however, this c o n c e r n readily g e n ­ eralizes to o t h e r gr oups. Specifically, the tests fail to distinguish be twe en re­ actions to the disability, for e xa mp l e , deafness, versus re ac tions to disabled per s ons , for e x am p l e , deaf p e op le . N o n d i sa b l cd individuals do n o t wa nt to be disabled a n d do n o t envy those who a r e — disabilities as such arc deval­ ue d. Research shows th a t disabled p e o p l e evoke s tr ong feelings o f sympathy a n d altruism a m o n g t he n o nd i s ab l c d, which indicates t ha t disabled persons are n o t deval ued. Analogously, given the history o f African Amer icans , it is highly unlikely t ha t m a n y E u r o p e a n A me ri ca ns wa nt to tr ade places with t h e m. As was n o t e d in I. Katz’s (1981) r es ear ch in c h a p t e r 1, Whi te adults often show s t r o n g e r sympathy for Blacks t ha n for Whites, similar to findings r e g a r d i n g disabled individuals. S o d c r (1990) suggested, c ons is te nt with I.

86

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

Katz’s views, t h a t “a m b i v a l e n c e ” may be a m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e d es cr ipti on of d o m i n a n c e / s u b o r d i n a t e attitudes th an “p r e j ud i c e . ” A sixth m e th o d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n , raised by S p e n c e r a n d Mar kstr omA d a m s (1990) dealt with the issue as to w h e t h e r tests o f p r ej u d ic e assess c h i l d r e n ’s attitudes toward various t arget g r o u p s as o p p o s e d to th ei r knowl­ e d ge o f social stereotypes. In N o r th America, Whites have h i g h e r status than Blacks. If c hi l d r en , Black o r White, c hoo se t he Whi te doll as s mar ter , m o r e helpful, less ugly t ha n the Black doll, they may mer ely be i ndi cat ing to the e x a m i n e r t h a t they know the socially c o r r e c t answer. T h e last m e t h o d ol o g i c a l c o n c e r n , s o me w ha t rel at ed to t he a f o r e m e n ­ ti o n e d , is t h a t a p p a r e n t d e ve l o p m e n t a l d ecr eases in pr ej ud i c e may reflect c h a n g cs in k no wl ed ge o f social desirability a n d n o t c h a n ge s in p r c ju di cc (Ab ou d , 1988; P. A. Katz ct al., 1975). Research findings suggest t h a t p r e j u ­ dice assessments t ha t arc relatively t r a n s p a r e n t in p u r p o s e indicate gr e at e r age-related de cr ea ses in p r ej u d ic e th an do less t r a n s p a r e n t measur es. H o w ­ ever, all the dat a arc n o t consi st ent with these findings, especially those that show t h a t o l d e r ch il d r e n arc less likely t han y o u n g e r o ne s to be c o n c e r n e d with social approval on a ge ne r al m e a s u r e o f social desirability. T h u s, as with the o t h e r m e t ho d o l og i c al c on c er n s, caut ion s h o u l d be used in dr aw­ ing c oncl us i ons a b o u t d e ve l o p m e n t a l trends. Discrimination Discr imi nat ion was d e f i ne d in c h a p t e r 1 as “i n v o l v i n g ] h a r m f u l actions to­ ward o t he rs b ecause of thei r m e m b e r s h i p in a p a rt ic ul ar g r o u p . ” As far as I can d e t e r m i n e , this has n ever b e e n systematically assessed in N o r t h A m e r i ­ can c hi ld r en or adolescents. W h a t has b e e n m e a s u r e d a n d used as a “p r o xy ” for d i scr i mi nat ion is pl aymate o r f ri e nd s h ip choices. It has b e e n a s s u me d if c hi l d r e n of o n e g e n d e r , for e x a mp le , e xc l ud e chi l d r en o f a n o t h e r g e n d e r from thei r circle o f friends, t ha t the exclusion was based on g e n d e r differ­ ences. T h e exclusion is c o n s i d e r e d h a r mf ul , a n d h e n c e , discriminatory. Obviously, any p ar ti cula r child for a variety o f n o n d i sc r i m i n a t o r y reasons, may have a circle o f friends restricted to the s ame race, g e n d e r , or ab se nc e o f disability. However, wTh e n o p p o r t u n i t i e s for f ri en d sh ip exist for a large g r o u p with other-race, cross-sex, or disabled individuals, a n d statistical data show a systematic bias toward s a me -g ro up relations, t he n di scri mi nat ory processes may r eas onabl y be i nf er red. This r e a s on i ng i nf or ms m u c h o f the l it erature on school-age di scr iminat ion b e ca use deepl y e n t r e n c h e d n o r m s a n d also explicit pr ejudicial discourse can be absent, particularly for the y ou ng es t age groups. Basically six d if fer ent p r o c e d u r e s have b e e n u se d to m a k e these m e as ­ u r e m en t s : p e e r n o m i n a t i o n s , p e e r ratings, t e a c h e r n o m i n a t i o n s , t e a c he r ratings, b e ha vi or observations, a n d p e e r assessments ( Ilal l inan, 1981; Me-

M E TH O I) OI -O GI C AI . C O N $11) KRAT I O N $

87

C o n n e l l 8c O d o m , 1986; Ter ry 8c Coic, 1991). In virtually all t he r esearch, the dat a were collected in s chool contexts, a n d c h i l d r e n ’s fr ie nd sh ip s or playmate p r e f e r e nc es with thei r classmates were assessed. T h u s, we know very little a b o u t f ri endshi p di scr imi nat i on outside o f school settings. This is a very serious m e t h o d o l o gi c a l c o n c e r n be ca us e f ri en ds hi p choices have b e e n s hown to be ma rk ed ly i n f l u e nc e d by struct ural characteristics of the school a n d classroom. For e x a mp l e , in t raditional classrooms, f r ie nd sh ip choices arc largely b as ed on a ca d e mi c a c h ie v e me nt , wh e re as in o p e n class­ r oo ms , this is n o t t he case (Ha lli na n, 1981). In t h a t African-American stu­ dent s, for e x a mp l e, typically p e r f or m m o r e poorly t h a n E ur op ca n- Am cr ican s tudents, traditional classrooms relative to o p e n o n e s woul d m o r e likely lead to an a bs e nc e o f cross-racial fri endshi ps. T h e p r o bl e m is e x ag g er a te d in schools t ha t have ability tracking. T h e se classroom struct ural effects may n o t be mer el y m e t h o d ol o g i c a l , o f course; s ome e d uc a t or s believe t hat tradi­ tional classroom st ru c tu r e as well as ability-tracking i n s t r u m e n t s (e.g., apt i­ t u de tests) articulate t he bias o f the d o m i n a n t c ul t ur e a n d arc themselves discriminatory. R e t u r n i n g to the six p r o c e d u r e s , t h e t h r e e m o s t c o m m o n l y used arc p e e r n o mi n a t i o n s , p e e r ratings (these two are known as “s o c i o me t r i c ” p r o ­ c e d u re s ) , a n d behavioral observations. T h e r e arc two types of p e e r n o m i n a ­ tions, fixed choice a n d free choice. In fixed choice methods, chi l d r en a n d a d o ­ lescents are given a list o f thei r classmates, o r th ei r p h o t o g r a p h s , a n d asked to n a m e their t h r e e best friends, the t h r e e individuals they like the most, or s o m e o t h e r characteristic. Of ten they arc also asked to list t he t hr ee p e o pl e they like the least. In free choice, n o restriction o f n u m b e r s is given. T h e r e arc several p r o b l e m s with these two p r o c e d u r e s . First, in fixed choice, s ome i n ­ dividuals may be e rr o ne o us l y e x c l u d e d o r i n c l ud e d, for e xa mp l e, the r e ­ s p o n d e n t only has o n e best friend, or has five best friends b u t is asked to list t hr ee na me s . S e co nd , in free choice, too ma ny choices may be i na dv e r ­ tently e n c o u r a g c d , s ome of which do n o t really fit t he criteria the r e s e a r c h ­ ers h a d in m i n d . T h i r d , for bo th types, it is also possible t h a t f r iends hi ps are n o t b e i ng evaluated, b u t r a t h e r est eem o r a d mi r a t i o n . Fo u rt h , it is highly likely th at di ff er en t age ch il dr e n i n t e r p r e t the tasks differently. Finally, for b o t h types, reliability in n o m i n a t i o n s is m o d e r a t e , a n d improves if negative n o m i n a t i o n s arc used. In p e e r ratings, c hi l d r e n a n d adol escent s arc given a list of thei r class­ ma te s a n d asked to m a ke the same j u d g m e n t a b o u t each o n e , usually on a 3- to 5-point scalc, for e x a mp l e , “H ow m u c h do you like each classmate— a lot, a little, n o t at all?” “Is this classmate a g o o d f ri e nd, a friend, o r n o t a f r i e n d? ” P e e r ratings arc fairly sensitive to d i ff er en ces in the c h a r ac t er i s ­ tics b e i n g r a te d, for e x a m p l e , t he rat ings for “play w i t h” are d i f f e re n t fr om t h os e for “work wi th .” T h e m a j o r p r o b l e m with this p r o c e d u r e is t h at mo st classmates ge t r a t e d in t he m i d d l e category. Mo re o ve r , y o u n g c h i l d re n

88

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

t e n d to rate everyone the s ame, pr ob ab ly reflecting an u n c l e a r u n d e r s t a n d ­ ing o f the task. Generally, p e e r ratings have a h i g h e r reliability th an p e e r n o m i n a t i o ns . Resear chers wh o f r eq u e nt ly use soci omctri c t e c h n i q u e s believe t h a t p e e r n o m i n a t i o n s a n d p e e r ratings assess d if fer ent types of r elationships. T h e f o r m e r pr ob a bl y m e a s ur e s f ri e nd sh ip s or popularity, wh er ea s the latter m e a s u r es social acceptability. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , c onclusi ons drawn a b o u t di scr imi nati on may differ dramatically as a f u n c t i on o f the type o f socio­ metric t e c h n i q u e emp lo y e d. Behavioral observations o f i nt e r ac ti ons are the m o s t d ir ect way o f assess­ i ng discr imi nat ion o r f ri ends hi p. If n on d i s a b l c d c hi ld r en , for e xa mp l e, arc rarely seen positively in te ra cti ng with mentally r e t a r d e d c hi ld r en , t h e n it is likely t ha t they have n o mentally r e t a r d e d friends. T h e two pri nci pal p r o b ­ lems with behavi or al observations arc the limited o p po r t u n i t i e s in school settings for m a k i n g the observations a n d the large a m o u n t o f ti me n e e d e d for m a k in g reliable assessments. O n c e they are past p r esc ho ol , ch i ld re n a n d a doles cent s have nearly all thei r school time st r uc tu r ed . T h e t h r e e ex­ c ep t io ns are l u nc h , recess, a n d walking to a n d from school. T h e se provide a limited s a mp le o f f ri e nd sh i p activities. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , b e y on d p r e ­ school, relatively few studies use observations as the p r i nc ipa l m e t h o d o f as­ sessing f r ie nds hi p choices. T c a c h c r n o m i n a t i o n s a n d t e a c h e r ratings parallel p e e r n o m i n a t i o n s a n d ratings. T he y arc m o s t often used with pr eschool- a n d k i nd cr ga rt cn - ag c c h il dr e n, usually as m e t h o d s to validate p e e r r e po rt s or behaviors. T h e two m a j o r p r o b l e m s with t e a c h e r s ’ dat a arc th at the t eacher s do n o t know all the c hi l d r e n in thei r classes equally well, a n d they use s o m e w h a t diff er ent criteria t ha n the ch i ld re n themselves for d e t e r m i n i n g friendships. Ho w­ ever, e x p e r i e n c e d t eacher s can provide very valuable i n f o r m a ti o n a b o u t thei r s t u d e n t s ’ p e e r i nteractions. If the five p r o c e d u r e s just discussed were all assessing f r ie nds hi p p a t t e rn s in e quiva le nt ways, t h e n o n e woul d e x p ec t t h a t t he i nt c rc o rr e la ti o ns a m o n g t he m woul d be m o d e r a t e to high. In their l i terat ure review, M cCo n ne l l a n d O d o m (1986) f o u n d the i nt cr cor r el at i o n s to r a n g e from low to m o d e r a t e . This is p r ob le ma t ic a n d indicates that o n e s h o u l d be caut ious in i n t e r p r e t ­ ing the results o f any single study. Finally, we c on s id e r p e e r assessments. Strictly speaki ng, this is n o t a t e c h­ n i q u e for assessing f r iends hi p, b u t is used to assess the behavi or s th at may u n d e r l i e f ri e n d s hi p choices. In this p r o c e d u r e , ch il dr en a n d adol escent s are given a list o f behavioral characteristics, for e x a mp l e , smart, athletic, u n h a p p y , bully, a n d arc asked to identify t h r e e classmates who best fit each descr ipt ion. In Ter r y a n d C o i c ’s (1991) study, p e e r assessments o f eight characteristics were e x a m i n e d in relation to bo t h p e e r n o m i n a t i o n s a n d p e e r ratings o f popularity. T h e y f o u n d that the d if f er ent po pu la ri ty catego-

C U L T U R A L A N D H I S T O R I C A L BASES O F P RE J UDI CE AN D D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

89

rics, for e x a mp l e , p o p u l a r , average, rejected, were associated with u n i q u e pa t te r ns o f p e e r assessments. Additionally, they f o u n d t ha t p e e r n o m i n a ­ tions were m o r e strongly rel ated to p e e r assessment than were p e e r ratings. This last finding is consi st ent with the c onclusi on t h a t ratings a n d n o m i n a ­ tions m e a su r e d if f er e nt aspects o f i n t e r p e r so n a l relationships. As with t he m e a s u r e m e n t o f pr ejudi ce, w he n the just m e n t i o n e d discus­ sion is c o n s i de r ed as a whole, caut ion m u s t be ex h i bi te d w h e n evaluating r es e ar c h c o n c e r n i n g t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f d iscr imi nat ion. T h e various m e a s­ ures a p p ar e n t l y assess di f fe re nt things. T h e wise cour s e woul d be to look for d ev e l o p m e n t a l p at t e r ns across studies t h a t utilize various assessment p r o c e ­ dures.

OVERVIEW O F T H E C U L T U R A L AND H I S T O R I C A L BASES O F P RE J U D I C E AND D I S C R I M I N A T I O N T h e assessment was m a d e in the p r e c e d i n g c ha pt e rs t h a t t h e r e arc four types o f causes u n de r l yi n g the d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ej ud ic e a n d d is cr i mi na ­ tion: g e n et i c / e vo l u t i o na ry , psychological, nor ma tiv e, a n d powcr -conf li ct . Al th ou gh these sets o f causes arc i nt er r el at ed , they are n o t static. T h e ge­ n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y o n e s arc t he m o s t stable, a n d the psychological, the least. T h e no rma ti ve a n d powrc r -c o nf l ic t causes arc i n t e r m e d i a t e a n d may c h a n g e t h r o u g h relatively s h o r t historical periods. T hu s , in o r d e r to assess no rma ti ve a n d p o w c r- c on f l i c t in fl ue nc es in the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p e e r p r ej ud ic e a n d di scr imi na ti on , it is essential to have a historical perspective. A “s n a p s h o t ” o f the c o n t e m p o r a r y p e r i o d may give a distor ted pi ct ur e o f t he r el at ions hip b et ween d o m i n a n t a n d s ub o r d i n a t e gr ou ps . For e x a mp le , in 1948, the U n i t e d States a r m e d forces were first ra­ cially i n te g ra t e d by Pr e si d e n t H ar r y T r u m a n . But it is highly unlikely that d is cr i mi nat or y practices by Whi tes towra rd Blacks i mm ed ia te ly sto p pe d . To u n d e r s t a n d this racial i nt e gr at io n, o n e m u s t e x a m i n e it in the c o n t e x t of pre- a n d post-Civil W a r military practices. In addi t i on to b e i n g “n e e d e d ” to assess t he c u r r e n t situation, a historical a p p r o a c h is r e q u i r e d to u n d e r s t a n d the d e v e l o p m e n t o f social no rm s . We stated t ha t historical tr adi tions arc used to buttress these n o r m s . A n d the tradi tions can only be known by studying t h e m , r a t h e r t h a n by infer ring t h e m fr om the c u r r e n t situation. As n o t e d earlier, f o u r categories o f p e e r p re j ud ic e a n d di scr imi nat i on arc dealt with in this book: p rc ju d i cc a n d di scri mi nat ion toward m e m b e r s o f the op po si t e sex, individuals o f a di f f er en t race, a n d d e a f a n d mentally r e t a r d e d persons. T he se categories were selected be ca us e o f b o t h thei r im­ p o r t a n c e in U.S. c ul tu re a n d the existence o f a pp r ec i ab l e d e v el o p me n t al dat a for t h e m . T h u s, for t he r easons given, we begin o u r e x a mi n a t i o n of

90

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

e ach g r o u p with a b r i e f cult ural history o f t he g r o u p in t he U n i t e d States, surveying its e m e r g e n c e as a s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p . This history will identify the social n o r m s a n d p ow er - co n f l i c t practiccs o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u ps of the U n i t e d States toward these s u b o r d i n a t e groups. Yet, w it hou t d e ny in g t he overall i m p o r t a n c e o f historical c omp a ri s on , t he re are two c aut ions th at s h o ul d be n o t e d . T h e first c o n c e r n s the age g r o u p s a n d c o n t e n t historians emph asi ze . W h e n studying females a n d Afri­ can Amer i cans, historians generally focus on the adults a n d on a wide r an ge of c o n t e n t areas. W h e n e x a m i n i n g deaf a n d mentally r e t a r d e d individuals, historians e mp h a s iz e bo t h ch i ld re n a n d adults a n d primarily focus on e d u ­ cation, s econdaril y on e m p l o y m e n t . T h u s the histories o f the f o u r g r o u p s will be bas ed on s o m e w h a t di ff er ent da ta sets. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , we have to be s o m e w h a t cauti ous a b o u t the con cl usi ons we draw. T h e s e c on d cauti on is t ha t within e ac h history, t h e re is t r e m e n d o u s di­ versity a m o n g m e m b e r s o f the target g r o u p . Fo r e x a mp l e , historians have s tu d ie d females fr om h u n d r e d s o f ma jo r Native-American tribes, as wrcll as females of African-American d es cent, Asian descent , a n d E u r o p e a n d e ­ scent. Research has b e e n d o n e on r e c e n t i mmi g ra n ts a n d on f emal es whose families have b e e n in the U n i t e d States for gen e ra ti on s . Females across t hese g r o u ps were t r ea te d differently, a n d , o f course, t h e r e were substantial w’i thi n- gr oup differences. African-American e x p e r i en c es were ma r ke dl y af­ fected by r egion o f re side nc e (South vs. N o r t h ) , w h e t h e r the h o m e e n v i r o n ­ m e n t was u r b a n o r rural, a n d , o f course, w h e t h e r o r n o t the subjects or thei r r e c e n t ancest ors h a d b e e n slaves. Similarly, t he re arc m a n y levels of i m p a i r m e n t a m o n g the d e a f a n d mental ly r e t a rd e d. Historically, the two g r o u p s may have received similar t r e a t m e n t , b u t obviously t h e r e wTas a n d is great diversity o f e x p e r i e n c e within a n d be twe en these groups. A c ha lle nge t ha t any study of the issue o f diversity faces is the fact that historians do n o t write a b o u t all s u bg ro up i ng s . Implicitly o r explicitly, they m a ke choices a b o u t w h o m to focus on. A n d as a psychologist writing a b o u t these histories, I m u st m a k e a ddi t i on a l choices. Fortunately, from this wr it er ’s p o i n t o f view, historical t r en ds can be observed in each o f these four m a j o r g r o u p i n g s t ha t a p p e a r to have wide, wi t hi n- g r o u p i ng applicabil­ ity. T h e r e seems to be a “forest” we can observe a n d discuss, even t h o u g h lots o f individual trees will be u n s e e n as we write a b o u t t h a t forest.

BRI EF E D U C A T I O N A L H I S T O R Y O F AMERICAN DEAF C H I L D R E N Individual cultural histories o f t he d e a f usually start with a family t ragedy— h e a r i n g p a r e nt s learn t h a t their child was b o r n deaf, o r t h r o u g h illness or a cc i de n t has b e c o m e deaf. In this respect, the e m e r g e n c e o f the cultural identity of the d e a f is similar to t h e me ntal l y r e t a r d e d b u t unl i ke t h a t of

BRI EF E D U C A T I O N A L HI S T O R Y O F AMERI CA N DEAF C H I L D R E N

91

g e n d e r o r race. For these pa re nt s, a n o r m a l child t hus b e c o m e s t r ans­ f o r m e d into an a b n o r m a l o n e , or in c o n t e m p o r a r y p a r l a nc e, a h a n d i ­ c a p p e d o r disabled o n e . T o a large ext ent , it is the psychological c o n s e ­ q u e n c e s o f t h a t t r a ge dy t h a t have d e t e r m i n e d t h e s oci ali zat ion a n d e d u c a t i o n o f the d e a f (Bcndcrly, 1980; Lane, 1984; Sacks, 1989). Nearly all par ent s , everywhere, wa nt wh a t is best for the ir child. T h a t typ­ ically involves lea di ng a life similar to theirs, getting m a r r ie d , having chil­ d r e n , b e i n g eco n o mi ca ll y self-sufficient, a n d staying involved with the family o f origin. Physically a n d mentally h a n d i c a p p i n g c on di ti on s often i n­ terfere with o n e o r m o r e of these desi red o ut co me s. Historically, deafness a n d its c o nc o m i t a n t , the a bs e n c e o f spe ec h, i n t er f er ed m o r e p r o f ou nd l y t h a n o t h e r co n d it ion s, in cl u d i n g b l in dn e ss a n d l ameness. De af p e o p l e with­ o ut speech in a h e a r i n g society were p e r h a p s the m os t isolated o f disabled individuals. Because of an ab se nc e o f s p o k e n l angua ge , t he ir social in te ra c ­ tions were limited, as was th ei r kno wl e d g e o f the i m m e d i a t e e n v i r o n m e n t . W i t h o u t an a d e q u a t e symbol system, deaf, n o n s p e a k i n g p e o p l e arc u n a bl e to a de qu at el y u n d e r s t a n d m a n y social a n d physical events s u r r o u n d i n g t he m ( La ne , 1984; Moores, 1982). However, in N o r th Amer ica, t h e re has b e e n a n o t h e r g r o u p o f families o f d e a f ch i ld re n who did n o t e x p e r i e n c e this t ragedy— families in which o n e o r bo t h p a r e n t s were d e a f a n d u se d sign l angua ge . T h e i r ch i ld re n were n o t p e rc ei ve d as a b n o r m a l , n o r wer e they socially o r intellectually h a n d i ­ c a p p e d . T h e s e ch i ld r en readily l e a r n e d to c o m m u n i c a t e fully with their p a r e n t s a n d easily b e c a m e p a r t o f a d e a f c o m m un it y . T h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t was usually n o r m a l in all ways (e xc ep t h ea r in g , o f cour se) a n d they e v e n t u ­ ally m a r r i e d ( a b o u t 80% ma rr yi ng o t h e r d e a f p e o p l e ) , b e c a m e e c o n o m i ­ cally i n d e p e n d e n t , h a d ch il dr e n ( a b o u t 80% o f wh om h a d n o r m a l h e a r ­ ing), a n d in s ome cases even e a r n e d PhDs ( G a n n o n , 1981; P a d d c n & H u m p h r i e s , 1988). Remarkably, t h e r e is n o evi dence whatsoever to i n d i ­ cate t h a t deafness by itself necessarily int er f er es with any aspect o f a c h i l d ’s d ev e l o p m e n t . This, o f course, is consist ent with “exp e ri en t ia l canali zat i on, ” the process by which the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the ne rv ou s system (genetic influ­ ences, e.g., l a ng ua g e- i nd uc i ng processes) establishes adaptive c o n n e c t i o n s to the d e v e l o p m e n t a l setting ( e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences, e.g., l ea r ni ng E n g ­ lish, ASL, o r b o t h ) . T h e c o m m u n i t y in which the n on v e rb a l d e a f fully par ticipate n e e d n o t consist o f even a majority of deaf p e op le . But they m u s t be a “sig ni ng ” c o m ­ munity. N o r a Ellen G ro c e (1985) d e sc ri be d a large networ k o f villages on M a r t h a ’s Vineyard, a Massachusetts island, from a p pr o xi ma t el y 1700 to 1952, in which everyone signed. It t u r n s o u t th at t h e r e was a g re at deal o f in­ t e r m ar r i ag e on the island th at fr eq u e nt ly e x p o se d a recessive g e n e for de af ­ ness. In s ome villages, as ma ny as o n e f our th o f the p e o p l e were deaf, a n d nearl y every p e r so n on the island h a d d e a f relatives. In these villages, every­

92

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

o n e s igned a n d thus freely c o m m u n i c a t e d with each o t he r. Of ten the h e a r ­ ing would c o m m u n i c a t e a m o n g themselves by signing r a t h e r t h a n speech. T h e last d e a f m e m b e r o f this c o m m u n i t y di ed in 1952. In interviews with p e o p l e wh o h a d grown up with the deaf, the latter were never r e m e m b e r e d as h a n d i c a p p e d , a n d i n d e e d , w i t h ou t p r o d d i n g , were n o t even r e m e m ­ b e r e d as deaf. Alt h ou g h the e x a m p l e o f M a r t h a ’s Vineyard illustrates the e x t e n t to which the a bsence o f the h e a r i n g n o r m leads to the ab sc nc e o f d is cr imi na ­ tion, it is also an e xc ep t io n in a history o f Ame ri c an d e a f that is n o t nearly so b e n i g n . T h e r e arc s o m e parallels with the history o f Ame ri ca n females a n d African A me ri ca ns in t ha t two o f the m a j or foci a n d s t um bl i n g blocks for t he d e a f have b e e n e d u c a t i o n a n d e m p l o y m e n t . T h e t h e m e o f s e p a r a ­ tism versus pluralism versus i ntegr at ion has played a c o n t i n u o u s role in the t r e a t m e n t o f the deaf, as it has for femal es a n d Blacks. Also, all t h r e e g r o up s have h a d to c o m b a t pr ej udices a n d d is cr imi nat i on c o n c e r n i n g their “h a n d ­ icaps,” th at is, deafness, femininity, a n d race; yet the h a n d i c a p o f deafness feels d if fe re nt than the o t h e r two. T h e r e is a quality o f “correctability” a b o u t it t h a t ’s quite di ff er ent from the characteristics o f g e n d e r a n d race. H e a r i n g p a r e n ts of d e a f c hi ld r en , especially those from the m i d d l e a n d u p ­ p e r social classes, have always s o u g h t ways to ma ke t h e ir c hi ld re n as n o r m a l as possible, t ha t is, as m u c h like h e a r i n g c hi ld r en as possible, a n d to lead “n o r m a l ” lives, t ha t is, like theirs. However, in this process o f a t t e m p t e d n o r ­ malization, they often o v e r p r ot c c t ed a n d stigmatized thei r ch i ld re n. H e a r ­ ing p a r e nt s fr eq ue ntl y isolated thei r d e a f offspring from certain kinds o f e x ­ p er i e n c es , for e xa mp le , ri di ng bikes in the n e i g h b o r h o o d , playing sports with h e a r i n g ch i ld re n. O v c r p r ot e ct i on may be a form o f stigmatization in t h a t it assumes “i n c o mp l e t e n e s s . ” But stigmatization was often m o r e overt, such as di sc ou ra gi ng “si g n in g” as well as disguising h e a r i n g aids (Bcndcrly, 1980; G a n n o n , 1981; Higgins, 1980; L ane, 1984). W h a t is deafness? T h e answer is very co mp le x, involving historical per iod, particularly w h e t h e r or n o t useful h e a r i n g aids were available, d e g r e e o f r e ­ sidual h e a ri n g , age o f onset, a n d w h e t h e r o n e ’s p a r e nt s were d e a f ( P a dd c n Sc H u m p h r i e s , 1988; Quigley Sc Paul, 1986). T o go t h r o u g h all the c o m b i n a ­ tions o f these variables woul d n o t be very prod uc ti v e for the p r e s e n t p u r ­ poses, so we c o n s i d e r only a few o f t h e m. De gr ee of h e a r i n g loss is o n e start­ ing poi nt. Can t he individual process s p o k e n l an gu a ge readily? Can h e or she process it readily with an e xc el le nt h e a r i n g aid? T h e severe a n d the p r o ­ f oundl y d e a f c a n n o t do so, b ut they do have s o me residual he ar in g ; “S t o n e ” deafness is rare. H e a r i n g aids for the lesser i m p a i r e d may be useful in qu ie t settings for one-t o-one conversations; b u t in noisy settings o r with two or m o r e p e o p l e talking, ch i ld re n ( a n d adults) often t u r n t he m off. Portable h e a r i n g aids started to b e c o m e widely available in 1900, so t ha t da te is an i m p o r t a n t historical d e ma r c a t i o n .

BRIEF E DUC AT I ON AL HI STORY O F AMERI CAN DEAF C HI L DRE N

93

Historically, approximately 1 in 2,000 American children arc profoundl y or severely prelingual d ea f ( Ga n no n , 1981; I.anc, 1984). However, the total n u m b e r o f hard-of-hearing a nd d ea f children is closer to 1 in 300 (Moores, 1982). T he crucial question c o nc cr ni ng age of onset (prior to ab o u t 1950, most d e a f c hil dr en ac qu i r e d their i m p a i r m e n t from illness) was w h e t he r t he loss o c c u r r e d bef or e (prelingual) or after (postlingual) the d evel op­ m e n t of s poken l anguage. Most writers p o i nt to age 3 as a useful marker, b u t clearly a child d e af e n e d at 16 years has very different l anguage skills a nd knowledge than o ne d e a f e n e d at 3 years. Finally, d e a f ch il dr e n of signing d e a f p a r e nt s start to acquire a useful language a n d c o m m u n i c a ­ tion system d u r i n g their first year o f life. Deaf chil dr en o f n onsi gning, hear ing parent s usually mu st wait a considerably longer time until they start to acquire any language. This delay can have dramatic intellectual and social consequenccs. It is useful to consider four periods in the history of education of the d eaf (Lou, 1988): 1817-1860, Manual Approaches; 1860-1900, Growth of Oralism; 1900-1960, Domination o f Oralism; a nd 1960-thc present, Total C o mmu ni ca ti on Approaches. T h e ccntral dispute t h r o u g h o u t the entire history was wh e th er d e a f children should be edu ca te d by ma nu a l met hods, t hat is, some form of h a n d signing, or by oral met hods, that is, speaking English. Until the most r cc cnt period, this was usually a rgue d as an “eit h c r - o r ” issue. However, those who strongly advocated m an ua l ap pr oa ch e s acknowledged that for some postlingually impaired children, spccch in­ struction would be useful. At the he ar t o f the dispute was a set of wishes and beliefs ab ou t d ea f children a n d sign language. Those who advocated oral me t ho ds wished that the children could be n or ma l a nd be fully integrated into the n or mal (hearing) society. They believed that sign language, at best, was a primitive a nd i na dequate version of spoken language. They f u r t h e r believed that exclusive reliance on sign l anguage would interfere with chil­ d r e n ’s d e ve l op me nt a nd t h o u g h t processes, make t hem unempl oyabl e for skilled work, socially isolate them from their family, a n d forcc them into an inferior d ea f c o mmu n i ty (Lane, 1984). T h e a r gu m e nt s against sign lan­ guage, especially between 1860 a n d 1900 were often virulent a nd n ot f o u n de d on fact. As will be seen, the a rg ume nt s were wrong in many ways. T h e a m o u n t o f h ea t gen er at e d by many of the oralists without she ddi ng light was still a n o t h e r tragedy for the deaf. C hance plays a major part in the story of the first period. In 1815, T h o m a s H. Gallaudet was hired by some wealthy New F'nglandcrs to go to E ur ope to learn the m e t ho d s for teaching d ea f so that a school for them could be set up in Connecticut. He first went to F'ngland to learn oral m e t h ­ ods from the Braidwood family, who apparently were r u n n i n g successful schools there. For financial reasons, the Braidwoods r efused to teach him, and by cha nc e Gallaudct was told a b o u t the highly successful French m a n ­

94

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

ual m e t h o d s i n t r o d u c e d by Abbe de 1’E pc e in 1755. G a l l a u de t we nt to France, was w e l c om e d by l’E p c e ’s successors, a n d started to learn the Fr en c h m e t h o d s a n d sign l angua ge . H e p e r s u a d e d L a u r e n t Clerc, a d e a f t e a c he r o f the d e a f in the F r e nc h schools to leave Paris to he lp him set up his school. T he y r e t u r n e d to Amer ica in 1816, a n d in 1817, o p e n e d thei r public school, t he first in America. Ame r ic a n Sign L a n g ua g e (ASL) is a d ir ec t o ut gr owth o f Fr enc h Sign L a n g ua g e with a b o u t a 50% vocabulary overlap today. ASL is not, however, s igned English, b u t r a t h e r has a dif fe re nt g r amma ti ca l st ruct ur e. For e x a m ­ ple, an ASL translation o f “I gave a m a n a b o o k ” is “I-givc-him m a n b o o k ” ( P a d d c n 8c H u m p h r i e s , 1988). In o r d e r to m ak e English s pe ec h a n d sign l a ng u a ge nearly identical, a dd it io n a l signs have to be e m p lo y e d , for e x a m ­ ple, to m a r k tense a n d n u m b e r . Initially, in the Am e r ic a n school, as in the Fr en c h schools, these a ddit iona l signs were used in the classroom, th us p a r ­ alleling the relation be twe en spo k e n a n d written English. A ma j o r p r o bl e m with s igned English is t ha t the a dd it iona l g r amma ti ca l signs arc n o t really necessary for u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d i n d e e d , may i nt er fer e with it. As in the Fr en c h schools, t he s t u de nt s out si de o f class “t a lk ed ” to each o t h e r in the m o r e n at ur al sign l a n g u a ge (ASL). By 1835, s igned English was d r o p p e d a n d inst ruct ion o c c u r r e d in ASL (Lane, 1984). In 1818, the New York School for the D e a f o p e n e d , a n d b et ween t h e n a n d 1860, m o r e t ha n two d oz en o t he rs followed t h r o u g h o u t the country. All used ASL as the pr ima ry m o d e o f instruct ion, a n d m o s t o f the principals a n d c h i ef t eacher s h a d b e e n st ud e nt s o f L a u r e n t Glerc (Lou, 1988). In this p er i o d , a b o u t 60% o f the t eacher s were h e a r i n g male college g r ad u a t e s wh o l e a r n e d thei r craft on the j o b . A b o u t 40% o f the t ea ch e r s were d e a f themselves a n d h a d b e e n st ud e nt s in o n e o f t he schools for t he deaf. With few e xcept i ons , these schools were residential, t h a t is, b o a r d i n g schools, a n d s tu de nt s r e t u r n e d h o m e on we ek e nd s a n d / o r vacation periods. Mini­ m u m age o f e n r o l l m e n t was never lower than age 8 years, a n d the average age o f e n r o l l m e n t was a b o u t 11 o r 12 years o f age. For t he ov e rwh el mi ng majority o f c hi ld r en , these schools were th ei r first i n t r o d u c t i o n to the d e a f c o m m u n i t y a n d t h e ir first fully social lives. Given that nearly all o f the p rc li n g ua l d e a f were wi th o u t s po ke n l a ng u ag e a n d illiterate, it is difficult to i ma gi ne what t he ir prer esi dent ial-s chool lives were like. T h e s e c o nd p e r i od from 1860 to 1900 involved the b e g i n n i n g a n d growth o f strictly oral i nst ruct ion in No r t h America. Al th o ug h the m a nu al ists h a d a clear field until this time, t hr ee factors wTo r k c d against thei r c o n ­ t in ui n g exclusivity. First, t h e r e were s tr ong a n d a pp a re n tl y highly success­ ful, strictly oralist schools in G e r m a n y a n d E n gl a nd , two c ou n t r i e s in which m a ny A me ri ca n s h a d thei r cultural roots, a n d all h a d t he ir intellectual roots. S e co nd , several p r o m i n e n t Ame ri ca n e d u c a t o r s a n d scientists, as early as H o r a ce Ma n n in 1844, w e nt to E n g l a n d a n d G e r m a n y to learn

BRIEF E DUC AT I ON AL HI STORY O F AMERI CAN DEAF C HI L DRE N

95

a bo u t oral m e t h od s a n d came back h o m e enthusiastic a b o u t them. Third, many teachcrs o f the d ea f a n d most parents of postlingual deaf believed that speech training would be highly desirable. In 1867, two purely oral schools o p e n ed , o ne in New York a nd one in Massachusetts. They were n ot necessarily ant imanual, b u t rat her enrol led postlingual d ea f who did not have p r o f o u n d or severe hearing losses. In 1865, the National Deaf-Mute College (in 1894, r e n a m e d Gallaudet College) was o p e n e d with Gal l audet’s son, Edward Miner Gallaudct, as its chief executive. Although instruction was primarily in ASI., Edward a r gu e d strongly that oral met hods, including spccch reading, should be emphasi zed for those who could benefit by it (Lane, 1984; Lou, 1988). In 1869, Horace Mann o p e n e d the first p e r m a ­ n e n t day school, a n d p ur e oral me th o ds were used. Between 1870 a nd 1890, Al exander Gr aham Bell (the inventor) carried o ut an active campaign p r o mo t i ng purely oral m e t h o d s a n d disparaging ma nu al ones. Although his wife was deaf, he developed a set o f gcnctic principles whose goal was to prevent i nherit ed deafness. T ha t he persisted in the latter is amazing given the then available knowledge that d ea f pa r ­ ents primarily have heari ng offspring a n d that m o r e than 90% of d ea f chil­ dr en have he ar ing parent s (Lane, 1984). In 1880, the Int ernati onal C o n ­ gress on Education of the Deaf m e t in Milan, Italy. T he dcck was stackcd against ma nu al me t ho ds and, overwhelmingly, the participants voted to suppress these me t ho ds a nd a d o p t strictly oral m e t h od s o f teaching. T h e five Americans att ending voted against these r esolutions (Lane, 1984). Th e i mpact in Eu r op e was almost i mme di a te — teaching in sign was abolished— a nd of course, the voting su pp or te d those Americans pressing for p ur e oralism. By 1900, approximately 50% of d e a f students were t a ught by oral met hods. Two o t h e r significant educational changcs oc cu rr ed d u r i ng this period. First, the per centage o f both h ear ing me n, a nd de a f me n a n d women tcachcrs declined markedly. By the e n d of the century, approximately two thirds o f the teachers were hearing, noncollege edu c at ed w omen a n d only a bo ut 20% o f all teachers were d ea f (down from 40% prior to 1860). Second, many of the day schools, all of which used p u r e oral me th od s , started ac­ cepting young children, some 3 years old. Thus, h ear ing parents could mor e readily participate in their c h i l d r e n ’s early education. T h e reduction in d ea f teachers is explained by the growth o f oral met hods; whereas the in­ crease in w ome n teachers was likely caused by their rc du c c d pay relative to men. Th e next period, 1900-1960, b r o u g h t to an e nd pur e ma nua l instruc­ tion, a n d in almost all schools, instruction by ASL was prohibited. By the e n d of World War I, Lane (1984) estimated that 95% o f d ea f students were receiving instruction in spoken English. Thus, the ccntral goal of schools for the d e af be came the teaching o f F'nglish skills. Students sp en t an cnor-

96

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

m o u s p a r t o f th ei r clay in listening, speaking, a n d s pe ec h r eading. W h e r e m a n u a l m e t h o d s were used, these m e t h o d s served to a u g m e n t u n d e r s t a n d ­ ing o f English, t h a t is, finger spelling, si gned English, as c on t r a st e d with t r an s mi tt i n g i nf o rm at io n or p r o m o t i n g t hi n k in g skills. P r o f o u n d o r se­ verely pr c li ng ua l d e a f st ud ent s received even m o r e o f this i ns tr ucti on th an o t h e r s b ecause they h a d so m u c h m o r e to learn. T h r e e factors c o n t r i b u t e d to the nearly c o m p l e t e victory o f oralism. First, battery o p e r a t e d h e a r i n g aids b e c a m e available in 1900, followed by v ac uu m t u b e h e a r i n g aids in 1921, a n d transistor h e a r i n g aids in 1950. T h e s e were dr a ma t i c i m p r o v e m e n t s bo th in amplification a n d portability over the earlier s o u n d - c a p t u r i n g devices. With h e a r i n g aids, a na l og o u s to pr escr ipti on glasses, ch il dr en c ou l d be n o r ma li ze d. Se co nd , a m o r e i n t eg ra ­ tive, scientific a p p r o a c h e m e r g e d to u n d e r s t a n d deafness a n d teach spo ke n l an gu a ge to the deaf. T h e l e a d er in this new a p p r o a c h was Dr. Max G o l d ­ stein, who f o u n d e d the Centr al Institute for the D e af in 1914. His “acoustic m e t h o d ” was appl i cabl e for a n yon e wh o h a d any r esidual h e ar i ng , a n d n o t just the mi l d or m o d e r a t e h a r d o f h e a r i n g ( G a n n o n , 1981; Lou, 1988). T h e thi rd factor was the a c cu m u l a t i o n o f r es ea r ch c o m p a r i n g a ca d emi c achieve­ m e n t b etween those t a u g h t by p r e d o m i n a n t l y m a n u a l m e t h o d s versus those t a u gh t by p r e d o m i n a n t l y oral m e t h o ds . Quigley a n d Paul (1986) s u m m a ­ rized m u c h of the significant da ta collected b et ween 1916 a n d 1927. In these studies, s t u d e n t s t a u g h t by pur el y oral m e t h o d s , especially those in day schools, on average, h a d a b o u t 1 year h i g h e r r e a d i n g skills a n d English l a ng u a ge u n d e r s t a n d i n g t ha n those t a ug h t by m a n u a l m e t h o d s . However, these s ame studies sh owe d t h a t d e a f high school g ra d ua t es were p e r f o r m ­ ing at a b o u t only the fourth- or fifth-grade level. Fu r th e r, gains in r e a d in g a n d la ng u ag e for the d e a f were quite small after a b o u t age 15. T h e c u r r e n t per i od, 1960 to the present, is witness to the di sc nt hr one m c n t o f p u r e oralism in favor o f “total c o m m u n i c a t i o n ” me th o ds . Thes e pri­ marily consist o f the si mul taneous use o f spoken a n d signed English d u r i ng instruction as well as the t eachi ng o f Finger spelling, s pc ec hr ead in g, a n d m a n ua l signing. T h e two central goals o f total c o mm u n i c a t i o n arc t eachi ng English a n d teaching educat ional con te n t . Current ly only a minority of schools still a d h e r e to p u r e oralism (Bcndcrly, 1980; Moores, 1982). Several factors c o n t r i b u t e d to t he de mi s e o f oralism. First, as n o t e d in the previous p a r a g r a p h , oralism was an a ca d em ic failure. T h e da ta f or the early p a r t o f the 20th century, unf or t un a te ly , were r epl icat ed in studies ca r­ ried o u t 50 years later (Quigley 8c Paul, 1986). N o t only were d e a f st ud ent s far b e h i n d in English, they lagged b e h i n d the h e a r i n g in all c o n t e n t areas. Moreover, only a small p e r c e n t a g e o f pr cl i n g ua l d e a f ever d ev e lo p e d u n ­ d er s t a n d a b l e spe ec h, a n d only a minor it y c ou l d “r e a d ” spe ec h effectively. S e co n d , a wealth o f r es e ar ch c ame available d u r i n g t he 1960s t ha t clearly sh owe d t h a t d e a f ch il dr e n o f d e a f p a r e nt s (i.e., they knew ASL well), p e r ­

BRI EF E D U C A T I O N A L HI S T O R Y O F AMERI CA N DEAF C H I L D R E N

97

f o r m e d m u c h b e t t e r academically t h a n those o f h e a r i n g p a r e nt s (i.e., they d i d n ’t know ASL), a n d often p e r f o r m e d as well as h e a r i n g c hi l d r e n . Mo or es (1982) n o t e d th at a far gr e a t er p e r c e n t a g e o f d e a f chi l d r e n o f d e a f p a r e n t s go to college t h a n t he d e a f o f h e a r i n g parents. T h i r d , a series o f studies by William Stokoc, starting in 1960, con v i nc ­ ingly s h o we d w h a t m o s t signi ng d e a f knew all a l o n g — t h a t ASL was a g e n u ­ i ne n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e c a p a b l e o f all t h e s ubt let y a n d p r o f o u n d i t y o f t h o u g h t m a n i f e s t e d by s p o k e n English. T hi s l e g i ti ma ti on o f ASL h e l p e d r e m o v e m u c h o f t h e st igma t oward ASL h e l d by b o t h the h e a r i n g a n d d e a f communities. Fo u rt h , the a ca d em i c failures o f oralism led to an in cr e as e d e mph asi s on, a n d e n r o l l m e n t in, p re s ch oo l e d u c a t i o n for t he deaf. T h e r ea s on i ng was that oralism failed b ecause it was n o t started early e n o u g h . Moor es (1982) s u m m a r i z e d research i ndi cat ing t h a t n o positive lasting effects have b e e n f o u n d on the a ca d emi c a c hi e ve me nt s o f those receiving p r es c h o o l oral e du c a ti on. Fifth, a reanalysis o f the earlier research favoring oral over m a n u a l i n­ s truction showe d t ha t t h e ch il dr en receiving oral i nst ruct ion h a d h i g h e r IQs a n d b e t t e r e n t e r i n g l an g ua g e skills t ha n those receiving m a n u a l in­ st ruction. In short , the studies were biased to favor oralism (Quigley Sc Paul, 1986). At the p r e s e n t time, t h e r e is n o o n e m e t h o d o f “total c o m m u n i c a t i o n . ” T h e field is in flux, b u t o n g o i n g research s h o ul d i ndicate how best to ma tc h type o f t e a c hi n g m e t h o d s with type o f d e a f child (Schlesinger, 1986). Two o t h e r types o f c h a n g c s have o c c u r r e d in the c u r r e n t historical p e ­ riod t h a t arc at least partially rel at ed to the civil rights m o v e m e n t o f the 1960s. First, pluralism as an a c c e p t ed m o d e o f mi nor it y status started b e ­ c o m i n g appl icable to the deaf. In this re ga rd , the Nat ional T h e a t e r o f the D e af was c re a te d in 1966 a n d b egan t o u r i n g the n e x t year. Si gning a n d c a p ­ t i on e d speech started to o c c u r on television a n d are p r o m i n e n t at political conventions. T h e c h i l d r e n ’s p r o g r a m , Sesame Street, has a cha ra ct cr who uses ASL. Local d e a f clubs a n d d e a f athletic competi t ion have b e c o m e c o m m o n ­ place. T h e r e are several deaf national organizations. T h e r e is a d e a f culture relying on ASL that is different than the h e a r in g culture. T h e m e m b e r s of this cul tur e usually have a history o f residential e ducat ion, a n d o t h e r e xpe ri ­ ences u n i q u e to the d e a f ( P ad d e n Sc H u m p h r i e s , 1988). Some d e a f c omf or t ­ ably move in a n d o u t o f this culture to periodically join with the h ear ing, but ot hers do n o t because of their incapacities with spoken English. T h e s e c o n d c h a n g e involves the types o f s cho ol i n g available to the deaf. Federal legislation g u a r a n t e e i n g e qual e d u ca t i o na l access a n d f r e e do m of choice for “least restrictive” e du c at i o n a l e n v i r o n m e n t s have c aus ed d r a ­ matic shifts in p a t t e rn s o f school e n r o l l m e n t . College e d u ca t i o n o p p o r t u n i ­ ties, i nc l ud in g t ec hni cal e d u c at io n , are now m o r e w ide sp re ad t ha n Gallau-

98

3.

D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUAL S

clct College in W a sh i n g t on , DC. T h e r e arc o t h e r p r o g r a m s on bo t h coasts a n d in the h e a rt l a n d . T h e “least restrictive” law has r e q u i r e d local public school districts to provide a d e q u a t e “i n- h ou se ” sc hoo li ng for d e a f c hi ldr en residing in thei r c o m m u ni t i e s. This has r es ul ted in a dr a ma t i c d ec r ea se in residential school e n r o l l m e n t a n d a d r a ma t ic increase in i n te g ra t ed class­ r oo ms , t ha t is, mainstreaming. It is n o t at all clear w h e t h e r t he effects o f these latter c h a n gc s will in the lo ng r un be positive or negative for e i t h er the so­ cial o r intellectual a c h ie v eme nt s o f the deaf. Lo ok in g back over this 175-year history, we can sec civil rights gains for the d e a f a n d a decl ine in the stigmatization o f deafness. However, it is n ot yet clear w h e t h e r t he re have b e e n a pp r ec i a b le e du c at i o n a l gains for p r o ­ foundl y a n d severely pr el in gu al d e a f c hi ld re n o f h e a r i n g par ent s . T h e chi ef s t u m bl i n g block a p p e ar s to be thei r relative depr ivat ion o f a wo r k i ng l an­ gua ge rel at i on sh ip with t h e ir pa re nt s, which may in p a r t be b r o u g h t a b o u t by stigmatization. Many o f these p a r e nt s arc unwilling o r u n a bl e to learn ASL a n d to c o nt in uo u s ly use it with t he ir pr eli ng u a l d e a f child. As a c o n se ­ q u e n c e , these c hi ld r en often have m a r k e d l an gu a ge a n d c o n c e p t u a l defi­ cits, which h a m p e r pr ogr es s in formal e du c at i o n a l settings. Many have ar­ g u e d t ha t bilingualism s hou ld be the goal o f d e a f e d u c a t i o n — using ASL a n d r e a d i n g / w r i t i n g English. But until p ar en ts c o m m i t to l e a r ni n g a n d us­ ing ASL themselves, the bilingual goal will be achieved with difficulty a n d with possible c o n s e q u e n t a ca d em i c deficits o f the ch il dr en. For ch il dr e n who can readily be ne f it from the use of h e a r i n g aids or who were d e a f e n e d well after s p o ke n la ng ua g e was a cq u ir e d, the p ic tur e is m o r e optimistic. Many o f t he m d o well academically a n d have well-adjusted social lives.

DEVELOPMENT OF DISCRIMINATION T O WA R D DEAF I NDIVIDUALS This section reviews practically all the r e c e n t research involving h ear ingi m p a i r e d (deaf) a n d n o r m a l - h e a r i n g ( he a ri n g ) c hi ld r en a n d adolescent s in i nt e gr a te d settings. T h e s e studies utilized c i t h er behavi oral observations o r soci omet ri c t e c h n i q u e s for c o m p a r i n g t he two gr oups. N o n e o f the st ud ­ ies evaluated p re j u d i c e o f n o r m a l - h e a r i n g ch i ld re n towra rd hcaring-imp a i re d ch i ld re n. T h e r e is so me liter at ur e b e a r i n g on this issue, b u t the atti­ t ud e m ea su re s are e m b e d d e d in scales d ea l in g with p r ej u d ic e toward the “physically h a n d i c a p p e d . ” In that resear ch, little i nf o rm at io n is given a b o u t the e x p e r i en c es the h e a r i n g ch i ld re n have h a d with the deaf. As a c o n se ­ q u e n c e , the research is o f li mited value for p r e s e n t pur poses. All o f t he g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y processes have p ote nt ia l applicability in u n d e r s t a n d i n g t he results in this section. Badging m e c h a n i s m s play the ini­ tial p ri ma r y role. From the h e a r i n g p e r s o n s ’ view, the e x t e n t to which the

D E V E L O P M E N T O F D I S C R I M I N A T I O N T O W A R D DE AF I N D I V I D U A L S

99

d e a f a r e p e r c e i v e d as b e i n g e i t h e r visually o r b c ha vi or al l y d i f f é r e n t will d e ­ t e r m i n e th e e x t e n t to w h ic h th e y a r c seen as ou ts id e rs . T h e p r e s e n c e o f h e a r i n g aids to s o m e e x t e n t has this effect, b u t m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e d e a f a r e usually c o n s i d e r a b l y d i f f e r e n t t h a n th e h e a r i n g in t h e i r s p e e c h a n d in c e r t a i n classes o f inte ra ct iv e be h av io r s. T h u s , given t h e factors o f inclusive fitness a n d i n t c r g r o u p hostility, th e h e a r i n g s h o u l d show favoritism to o t h e r h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n o r a d o l e s c e n t s , a n d p e r h a p s s o m e hostility t ow a rd th e deaf. S y m m e t r y o f r e a c t i o n s fr o m t h e d e a f t ow a rd th e h e a r i n g w o u l d be e x ­ p e c t e d for th e s a m e re a so n s . T h e g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y m e c h a n i s m o f a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e m ay have i n c o n s i s t e n t in fl u e n c e s . O n o n e h a n d , t h e d e a f ar c viewed as s u b o r d i n a t e to t h e h e a r i n g — th ey a r c h a n d i c a p p e d a n d n e e d special c o m p e n s a t i n g t r e a t m e n t . In a sen se , the y a r c clie nts o f t h e “n o r m a l ” h e a r i n g society. Thi s view leads to th e h e a r i n g t r e a t i n g th e d e a f in s u b o r d i n a t i n g ways. O n th e o t h e r h a n d , t h r o u g h m a i n s t r e a m i n g a n d laws l e a d i n g to special positive t r e a t m e n t o f th e d e a f by th e s c h o o l system a n d t h e i r t e a c h e r s , t h e view is p r e s e n t e d t h a t th e d e a f a r c to b e positively v a lu ed , t r e a t e d as d i f f e r e n t , b u t e q u al . It is n o t cl ear w h ic h view will win o u t in a ny given a c a d e m i c setting. Finally, it is p o s s i b l e t h a t o u t g r o u p a t t r a c t i v e n e s s will play a r o l e in d e a f - h e a r i n g i n t e r a c t i o n s . T h i s w o u ld take th e for m o f c i t h e r o r b o t h g r o u p s e m u l a t i n g e a c h o t h e r ’s b e h a v io r . Fo r e x a m p l e , o n e m i g h t ob ser ve t h e h e a r i n g class mat es u s i n g sign l a n g u a g e . It is n o t c le a r w h a t re c i p r o c a l b e h a v i o r s w o u ld b e sh own by th e deaf. T h e c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l i n f l u e n c e s p a ra lle l th o s e cite d for a u t h o r i t y ac ­ c e p t a n c e . In N o r t h A m e r i c a n c u l t u r e , t h e d e a f have always b e e n t r e a t e d as a low er status g r o u p t h a n th e h e a r i n g . T h e i r l a n g u a g e d i f f e r e n c e s have b e e n viewed as deficits, a n d t h r o u g h “b e n e v o l e n t ” a t t e m p t s to m a k e t h e m like t h e i r h e a r i n g c o u n t e r p a r t s , t h e i m p o s e d oralism ha s usually le d to th e i r p e r f o r m i n g at lo w er a c a d e m i c levels t h a n th e h e a r i n g . Th is , o f c o u r s e , r e i n ­ for ces t h e i r p e r c e i v e d lo w er status. W h a t is n o t c le a r f r o m this history is w h e t h e r th e p e r c e p t i o n by the h e a r i n g o f t h e low er status o f t h e d e a f is agcrc l a t c d . It is pos sible t h a t as a c a d e m i c p e r f o r m a n c e ga ins i m p o r t a n c e with i n c r e a s i n g a ge, th e status effects will be m o r e p r o n o u n c e d . H e n c e , d is c r im i­ n a t i o n w o u ld be e x p e c t e d to inc re as e . H o w e v e r, a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e a n d b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s play i n d e t e r m i n a t e roles, a n d the m a t t e r will have to b e sett led empirically. T h e m a j o r p r o b l e m with this r e s e a r c h a r e a is the rarity of m o r e t h a n o n e d e a f ch ild o r a d o l e s c e n t b e i n g i n t e g r a t e d in th e s a m e c la s s ro o m s with th e h e a r i n g . T h e m a i n e x c e p t i o n s ar e th e p r e s c h o o l s tu di e s a n d th e two e x p e r i ­ m e n t s involving co lle ge s t u d e n t s at th e R o c h e s t e r In s tit ute o f T e c h n o l o g y . T h u s , fo r c h i l d r e n b e t w e e n th e ages o f 6 a n d 18 years, n e a r ly all th e r e ­ s ea rc h deal s with th e r e a c t i o n s o f h e a r i n g s t u d e n t s to th e single d e a f stu ­ d e n t in t h e i r cl as s ro o m . A s e c o n d p r o b l e m involves t h e effects of d e g r e e o f

100

3.

DI SCRI MI NATI ON T OWARD DEAF I NDIVIDUALS

i m p a i r m e n t of the d ea f children. Across a nd within the studies t here was a great range o f he ar ing disability— from mild to profoundl y deaf. This me ans that even with hear ing aids, the range of u n de r st a n d i ng a n d using speech was quite varied. Children with only mild h ear ing i mp a i r m e n t can readily u n d e r st a nd a nd use spccch with he ar ing aids; those with p r of ou n d losses can generally do neither. Given the centrality o f spccch to interac­ tions, generalizations may be limited. Six of the papers using observational methods deal with preschool children aged 3'A to 6 years. O ne additional paper deals with first and second graders (R. W. McCauley, Bruininks, & Kennedy, 1976), and one with first through sixth graders (Antia, 1982). Age effects arc not r eported in any of these stud­ ies, primarily because of the small n u m b e r of deaf children involved. In the Brackett a n d Hcnni ges (1976) study, all the d e a f preschool chil­ dr en used hearing aids an d ha d mild to p r o fo u n d h ear i ng losses. Both the d ea f a n d heari ng children s p e nt par t of each day in a st ruct ured language learning class a nd part in a free play setting. Each ch il d’s behavior was o b ­ served in both settings. For purposes of analysis, t he deaf children were di­ vided into two groups based on their l anguage abilities. T h e major finding relative to discrimination was that the h ear ing children interacted mo re with d ea f children having good language abilities than with those having p o o r l anguage abilities. T he latter children intcractcd mainly with their teachers a n d with o t h e r hearing-impaired children. T he results of research by Arnold a nd Tr emblay (1979) a nd Levy-Shiff a n d Hoffman (1985) arc consistent with these findings: Preschool h ear i ng a n d d ea f children inter­ act primarily with children o f similar h ear ing status. Cause-effect relationships arc difficult to d e te r mi n e in this research. Do h ear ing children rcjcct the d ea f with p o o r language abilities, or do the lat­ ter only seek o ut teachcrs a n d o the r d e a f children with whom to interact? Brackctt a n d Henni ges (1976) did not provide e n o u g h clues for an answer. The Vandell a nd George (1981) a n d Vandell, Ander son, Eh r ha rd t, and Wilson (1982) exper iments do help with this question. These studies took placc in the same setting— an integrated preschool focuscd on hearingimpaired children. Equal n u m b e r s o f d e a f a nd h ear ing children were in­ volved a nd spent part of each day together. T h e children were systemati­ cally observed in pairs in a separate playroom. In the Vandell a nd George ex p e r ime nt, the focus was on c h i l d r e n ’s interaction initiatives— their fre­ quency, type, a nd success. T he maj or findings were that pairs o f hearing children h a d the highest levels of interaction, a nd mi xed pairs— that is, heari ng with deaf — the lowest levels. Deaf children initiated mo r e interac­ tions with h ear i ng children than the reverse; however, the d ea f children were mo re likely to be i gnor ed or rejected by the h ear ing children than were the h ear ing by the deaf. Both gr oups o f children used the same kinds o f social initiatives, a n d the d ea f children were m o re persistent in their at­

D E V E L O P M E N T O F D I S C R I MI N A T I O N T O W A R D DEAF I NDI VI DUALS

101

t e mp t s to interact. Finally, m ix ed pairs were m o r e likely to use i n a p p r o p r i ­ ate initiatives— for e x a mp l e , si gnaling to a p e e r w h e n his back was t u r n e d — t h a n were pairs o f h e a r i n g o r pairs o f d e a f ch il dr en. T h e s e results indicate t h a t n o r m a l - h e a r i n g c hi l d r en woul d r a t h e r i nt er act with o t h e r h e a r i n g chil­ d r e n t h a n with d e a f c hi l dr e n, despite the persi st ence o f t he latter in initiat­ ing interactions. T h e Vandcll et al. (1982) e x p e r i m e n t dealt with a t t e mp t s to modify the f r e q u e n t a n d p er si ste nt refusal o f n o r m a l c hi l d r e n to int er ac t with p r o ­ fou n d l y d e a f peers. T h e r es ea rc her s s p e n t 15 to 30 mi n a day for 15 c o n s ec ­ utive days with h alf o f the h e a r i n g ch il dr en , t raining t he m to be m o r e k no wl ed g e a bl e a b o u t a n d to devel op m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e c o m m u n i c a t i o n skills for i nt e ra ct in g with h e a r i n g- i mp a i re d ch il dr en . T h e o t h e r h al f o f the h e a r i n g c hi l d r e n received n o special training. T h e results were striking. In virtually every m e a s u r e c o n c e r n i n g i nter acti on success b et ween d e a f a n d h e a r i n g c hi ld r en , the t r ai ne d h e a r i n g ch il dr e n p e r f o r m e d m o r e poorly than t hos e who were u n t r a i n e d . It a p p e ar s t h a t sensitizing n o r m a l - h e a r i n g chil­ d r e n to the n e e ds o f d e a f peer s ma ke s t he m less willing to i n t e r a ct with the latter. T h e r es ear ch by L c d c r b c r g , Ryan, a n d Robbi ns (1986) pr ov id ed s ome insight into t he j u s t m e n t i o n e d findings. L e d c r b c r g et al. p ai r ed d e a f 5 - a n d 6-year-olds o n c e with each o f f o u r dif fe re nt play pa rtne rs . T h e pairs were p l a c ed a l one in a small pl ayroom with a ge -a pp ro p r i at e toys. O n e o f the p a r t n e rs was a familiar d e a f playmate; o n e , a familiar h e a r i n g playmate; o n e , an u n f ami li ar b u t “e x p e r i e n c e d ” h e a r i n g pl aymate wTh o was a f ri end o f a n o t h e r d e a f child; a n d on e, an u nf ami li ar h e a r i n g pl aymate wh o was “in­ e x p e r i e n c e d ” with d e a f chi l d r en . N o n e o f the d e a f ch i ld re n h a d d ev e l o p e d s p o k e n language. A variety o f m e a s ur e s o f social int eracti ons, c o m m u n i c a t i o n styles, a n d type o f play were c o d e d. S o me o f the m a j o r results were as follows: Deaf c hi l d r e n i nt er ac te d m o s t f r eq u e nt ly a n d effectively with o t h e r d e a f chil­ d r e n , a n d n e x t m o s t effectively a n d f r eque ntl y with a familiar h e a r i n g play­ mates. Familiar h e a r i n g playmates were m o r e likely t han u nf ami li ar o n e s to modify t h e ir c o m m u n i c a t i o n style to a c c o m m o d a t e t he ir d e a f playmate. For e x a mp le , t he familiar playmates were m o r e likely to use visual c o m m u ­ nication t e c h n i q u e s t h a n were the two u n f a mi li a r ones. In ge ne ra l, t he re were few dif fer ences b et ween unf ami li ar e x p e r i e n c e d a n d i n e x p e r i e n c e d h e a r i n g playmates— b ot h h a d c o ns i d e ra bl e difficulty i n te ra cti n g with their d e a f playmate. Thi s p at te rn o f results indicates t ha t for p r es c ho ol c hi ldr en, i nt er act ion success with a d e a f pl aymate stems fr om k nowing a n d having e x ­ p e r i e n c e with t he p a rt i c ul a r playmate, a n d n o t from the use o f ge ne ra liz ed skills a c q u i r e d in inte ra ct io n s with o t h e r d e a f chi ldr en. McCauley et al. (1976) obser ved first a n d s e c o nd g ra d er s in the class­ r o o m , with o n e d e a f child p e r class. T h e d e a f ch il dr e n h a d m o d e r a t e to

102

3.

D I S C R I M I N A T I O N T O W A R D D E AF I N D I V I D U A L S

p r o f o u n d h e a r i n g losses, all w o re h e a r i n g aids, a n d all w er e re cei vin g s p e e c h th e r a p y . M cC a ule y et al. d id n o t r e p o r t th e relative f r e q u e n c y with w h ic h h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n i n t e r a c t e d with th e d e a f child. R a t h e r , th e y r e ­ p o r t e d on t h e type o f i n t e r a c t i o n s b o t h g r o u p s h a d — t h a t is, positive versus neg ati ve, ve rba l versus n o n v e r b a l — a n d with w h o m the y i n t e r a c t e d — t h a t is, p e e r s versus te a c h e rs . T h e h e a r i n g a n d d e a f c h i l d r e n w ere similar in all ways b u t o n e : T h e h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n i n t e r a c t e d m o r e with t h e i r p e e r s t h a n with t h e t e a c h e r , w h e r e a s t h e reverse was th e case for th e d e a f c h i l d r e n . T h e a u t h o r s s u g g e s t e d t h a t th e d e a f c h i l d r e n seek o u t t e a c h e r s b e c a u s e i n ­ te r a c t i o n s with t h e m a r e m o r e r e w a r d i n g t h a n th o s e with n o r m a l - h e a r i n g children. A n ti a (1982) o b s e r v e d d e a f a n d n o r m a l - h e a r i n g first t h r o u g h sixth g r a d ­ ers in i n t e g r a t e d classes a n d t h e s a m e d e a f c h i l d r e n in special s e g r e g a t e d clas sr oom s. A n ti a to o k essentially th e s a m e k in ds o f m e a s u r e s as M cC a u ley et al. (1 976) . T h e m a j o r f in d i n g s w e re these: H e a r i n g a n d d e a f c h i l d r e n w’cre rarely is ola ted within th e cl as s ro o m , a n d th u s h a d a m p l e o p p o r t u n i t y for p e e r i n t e r a c t i o n s . As in M cC a u le y c t al. (1 97 6) , th e d e a f c h i l d r e n w er e m o r e likely to i n t e r a c t with t e a c h e r s t h a n w e re th e h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n , a n d less likely to i n t e r a c t with p e er s. T h e h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n also i n t e r a c t e d m o r e f r e q u e n t l y with o t h e r n o r m a l - h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n t h a n with t h e i r d e a f pe ers . In the special classes, the d e a f c h i l d r e n i n c r e a s e d t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s with t e a c h e r s , b u t n o t t h e f r e q u e n c y o f p e e r i n t e ra c t io n s . T h e e x p e r i m e n t s just m e n t i o n e d p o i n t to t h e following c o n c lu s io n s . N o r m a l - h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n fr om p r e s c h o o l t h r o u g h sixth g r a d e p r e f e r i n t e r ­ a c ti n g with o t h e r n o r m a l - h e a r i n g p e e r s r a t h e r th a n with d e a f c h i l d r e n . T h e l a tte r c h i l d r e n p r e f e r i n t e r a c t i n g with t e a c h e r s a n d with o t h e r h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d p e e r s r a t h e r t h a n with h e a r i n g p e er s. T h e m oti v a ti o n b e h i n d th e se c h o i c e s s e e m s to be b a s e d o n ease o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d t h e re w ar ds of t h e i n t e r a c t i o n . In a sense, b o t h g r o u p s of c h i l d r e n follow th e p a t h o f least effort. T h e s e results ar e c o n s i s t e n t with th e g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o c ­ esses o f b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s a n d of i n g r o u p favoritism b a s e d on inclusive fitness. T h e r e is l im it e d s u p p o r t fo r t h e effects of i n t e r g r o u p hostility— e x ­ c lusion o f t h e d e a f by th e h e a r i n g in c e r t a i n play i n t e r a c t i o n s . T h e r e is n o e v i d e n c e of d ir e c t hostility. T h e m i x e d m e ss a g es given by a u t h o r i t i e s s u p ­ p o r t th e s ep a ra ti s m o f t h e two g r o u p s as wTell as th e p r e f e r e n c e for th e d e a f to i n t e r a c t with th e i r t e a c h e r s . Finally, t h e r e is n o e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i n g th e i n f l u e n c e s o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness. O t h e r r e s e a r c h inve st igati ng c o m m u n i c a t i o n styles in d e a f a n d h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n s u p p o r t th e se c o n c l u s i o n s . J o n e s (1 985 ) , w h o o b s e r v e d 6- to 8year-old d e a f a n d h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n fr om s e g r e g a t e d schools, f o u n d t h a t in face-to-face in t e r a c t i o n s , d e a f c h i l d r e n k e e p a b o u t 25% m o r e d is ta n c e fr o m e a c h o t h e r t h a n d o h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . M u s s e l m a n , Lindsay, a n d A. K. Wil­ son (1988) f o u n d t h a t a m o n g d e a f 3- to 9-year-old c h i l d r e n in s e g r e g a t e d

D E V E L O P M E N T O F D I S C R I M I N A T I O N T O W A R D D E AF I N D I V I D U A L S

103

settings, t h o s e with th e g r e a t e s t h e a r i n g losses h a d t h e g r e a t e s t difficulty in p e e r i n t e r a c t i o n s . Finally, McKirdy a n d Blank (1982) s t u d i e d th e verbal “d i ­ a l o g u e s ” a m o n g d e a f a n d h e a r i n g 5-year-old c h i l d r e n in s e g r e g a t e d set­ tings. All h a d IQs in th e n o r m a l r a n g e . T h e d i a l o g u e s a m o n g th e d e a f w er e m u c h m o r e r e s t r i c t e d t h a n a m o n g th e h e a r i n g . Level o f c o m p l e x i t y b o t h as in it ia to r s of i n t e r a c t i o n s a n d as r e s p o n d e r s was m u c h low er fo r t h e d e a f than the hearing. We n o w e x a m i n e r e s e a r c h u s i n g s o c i o m c t r i c m e t h o d s fo r e v a lu a ti n g ac­ c e p t a n c e by h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n of t h e i r d e a f pe ers. T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s in th e se e x p e r i m e n t s w e re b e t w e e n th e ages o f 7 a n d 18. F o u r s tu d ie s wer e c a r r i e d o u t in s c h o o l settings, a n d o n e , by H u s ( 1 9 7 9 ) , in a s u m m e r day c a m p . H u s ’s p a p e r assessed only five d e a f a n d f o u r n o r m a l - h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . Age effects w e re n o t r e p o r t e d o r f o u n d in a ny o f t h e r e s e a r c h . K e n n e d y a n d B r u i n i n k s (1974) s t u d i e d first a n d s e c o n d g r a d e d e a f chi l­ d r e n e n r o l l e d in i n t e g r a t e d c la s s ro o m s . T h e i r d e g r e e o f h e a r i n g loss r a n g e d fr om m o d e r a t e to p r o f o u n d , with th e ma jor ity falling in th e s e v e r e / p r o f o u n d ca te go rie s . All w o re h e a r i n g aids full-time a n d h a d b e e n pre vi­ ously e n r o l l e d in p r e s c h o o l s with h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . Best-friends a n d rostera n d - r a t i n g s m e a s u r e s w e re u s e d to assess s o c i o m c t r i c status. T h e p r i n c i p l e resu lts w er e t h a t th e scores for d e a f a n d h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n o n all m e a s u r e s were essentially th e sa m e . H o w e v e r , t h e r e was a s t r o n g t r e n d f o r th e chil­ d r e n with p r o f o u n d / s e v e r e losses to b e m o r e p o p u l a r t h a n t h e a ve rag e h e a r i n g ch il d in t h e i r classes. T h o s e with m o d e r a t e losses t e n d e d to be less p o p u l a r th a n t h e i r n o r m a l - h e a r i n g p e er s. T h e n u m b e r o f m u t u a l c hoic e s for b e s t f r i e n d s was e q u i v a l e n t fo r d e a f a n d h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . T h u s , th e h i g h e r s o c i o m e t r i c scores for th o s e with p r o f o u n d / s e v e r e losses ca n n o t readily be a t t r i b u t e d to u n i d i r e c t i o n a l (i.e., h e a r i n g to d e af ) symp ath y. O n e possible e x p l a n a t i o n for t h e s e s u r p r i s i n g fi n d i n g s is t h a t th e c h i l d r e n with p r o f o u n d / s e v e r e losses r e q u i r e d positive special a t t e n t i o n fr om t h e i r t e a c h ­ ers a n d classmates, w hic h h a d th e ef fect of m a k i n g t h e m b e t t e r k n o w n a n d m o r e likable. T h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s a r c c o n s i s t e n t with t h e o u t g r o u p a t t r a c ­ tiveness hy poth e si s. K e n n e d y , N o r t h c o t t , McC au ley, a n d W illiams (1976) followe d 11 o f th e severely to p r o f o u n d l y d e a f c h i l d r e n fr o m K e n n e d y a n d B ru in in k s (1974) for 2 years. T h e y a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e s a m e tests as in th e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d study, a n d a d d it io n a ll y c a r r i e d o u t o b s e r v a ti o n s o f p e e r a n d t e a c h e r i n t e r ­ acti ons. F o c u s i n g on t h e s e c o n d year of t h e fo ll ow up, w h e n n i n e o f t h e s tu ­ d e n t s w e re in t h i r d g r a d e , a very d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n o f resu lts e m e r g e d : T h e s e s t u d e n t s w e re no w c i t h e r less p o p u l a r (o n o n e m e a s u r e ) o r e q ua ll y p o p u l a r ( on a n o t h e r m e a s u r e ) as th e a verage n o r m a l - h e a r i n g ch il d in t h e i r class. T h e n u m b e r o f m u t u a l f r i e n d s h i p c h o i c e s was e q u i v a l e n t in th e h e a r i n g a n d d e a f g r o u p s . R e g a r d i n g b e h a v i o r a l i n t e r a c t i o n s , t h e quality of th e se i n ­ t e r a c t i o n s (i.e., positive, n e ga ti ve , verbal, n o n v e r b a l ) was e q u i v a l e n t fo r th e

104

3.

D IS C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D DEAF IN D IV ID U A L S

two gr oups; b u t similar to the previous research r e p o r t e d , the d e a f c hi ldr en i n t e r a ct e d m o r e with their t eacher s a n d less with their peer s t h a n d id the h e a r i n g ch il dr en . T h e e x p e r i m e n t by Elser (1959) helps us u n d e r s t a n d w h e t h e r t he rela­ tive popul ar ity o f d e a f c h i l dr e n is relat ed to age a n d / o r d e g r e e o f i m p a i r ­ m e nt . Elser m e a s u r e d bo t h fr iendship choices a n d r e p u t at io n (status a n d personality) in 9- to 12-year-olds ( Gr a de 3 t h r o u g h G r a de 7) with p r e d o m i ­ nantly m o d e r a t e h e a r i n g loss, in fully i n t e g ra t e d classes. N o n e o f the chil­ d r e n h a d p r o f o u n d losses. Elser, for the p u r p o s e s o f da ta analysis divided the d e a f ch i ld re n into two groups: those with losses less t han 50 d b (mild a n d m o d e r a t e ) , a n d thos e with g r e a te r losses. Virtually n o n e o f t he chil­ d r e n in the f o r m e r g r o u p wore h e a r i n g aids full time. Generally, consistent with Ke nn e dy et al. (1976), bo th g r o u p s o f d e a f chi ld re n were perceived by thei r h e a r i n g peer s as b e i n g in the lower thi r d o f t he class in b o t h f r i e nd ­ ship choices a n d positive r e p u t a t i o n . T h e r e were n o differences in p e r s o n ­ ality traits. S o m e w h a t consistent with K e n ne d y a n d Bruininks (1974), chil­ d r e n who did n o t wear h e a r i n g aids ( h a d a m i l d e r i m p a i r m e n t ) were less a c ce p te d t ha n those who did wear h e a r i n g aids. Elser suggest ed t h a t the lower popul ar it y o f ch il dr e n w i t h o u t h e a r i n g aids may be d u e to thei r a p p e a r a n c e o f having n o r m a l - h e a r i n g ability, which p r e d i s po s e s o t h e r s to a ss um e they will b e h a ve similarly to the n o n i mp a ir ed. T h a t they socially int er ac t differently, for n o a p p a r e n t r e a ­ son, may have led n or m a l - h e a r i n g c hi ld r en to reject t h e m s omewhat. T h e overall r e d uc t i o n in p op ula ri ty o f d e a f ch il dr e n relative to the first a n d s e c on d gr a de r s in K e nn ed y a n d Br uininks (1974) is b utt re ss ed by the f indi ngs o f Hus (1979). In the s u m m e r c a m p study, severe to p r o f ou nd l y d e a f 8- to 10-ycar-olds were liked far less t ha n t he ir h e a r i n g peers. We s u m m a r i z e the results o f the f ou r e x p e r i m e n t s as follows. Six- a n d 7year-old d e a f c hi ld re n with severe to p r o f o u n d losses are m o r e p o p u l a r than their h e a r i n g peers, whereas, those with m o d e r a t e losses arc less p o p u ­ lar. From a b o u t age 8 a n d ol der, d e a f c h i l d r en decl ine in popularity, e s p e­ cially those with less severe i m pa i r me n t s. By age 12, the d e a f are now r at ed as less p o p u l a r t h a n thei r h e a r i n g peers. T h e s e results are c onsi st ent with the c u l t u r a l/ hi s t o r i c a l view t h a t as a ca de mi c p e r f o r m a n c e increases in im­ p o r t a n c e , the h e a r i n g c h i ld r en will view their d e a f p eer s m o r e negatively. T h e y arc also c ons ist ent with the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y e x p l a n a ti o ns given for the behavioral dat a just p r e se n te d . S e l m a n ’s (1980) analysis o f f r i e n ds hi p s a n d p e e r g r o u p s also h e lp s us u n d e r s t a n d t hes e p h e n o m e n a . Six- a n d 7-year-olds t e n d to view f r i e n d s h i p as one-way assistance r a t h e r t h a n reciprocity. T h e latter is an i m p o r t a n t as­ p e c t o f 9- to 12-year-olds’ c o n c e p t i o n o f f r i e nd s h i p. Six- a n d 7-ycar-olds view p e e r g r o u p s as c onsi st ing o f un i la te ra l rel at ions, n o t involving c o m ­ m o n goals. Ni ne- to 12-year-olds sec p e e r g r o u p s as consisti ng o f bilateral

D E V E L O P M E N T O F D IS C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D DEAF INDIV ID UALS

105

rel ati ons a n d c o m m o n goals. T h u s, t he assistance t h a t h e a r i n g 6- a n d 7year-olds give to d e a f peer s m i g h t lead to the d e v e l o p m e n t o f friendship. But that same assistance by 9- to 12-year-olds woul d n o t be ca use it is n o t r e ­ c i pr oc at ed o r bilateral. L add, M u n s on , a n d Miller (1984), in a 2-year l o ng it ud in al e x p e r i m e n t , st ud i ed h e a r i n g a n d d e a f juniors a n d seniors in public high s chool o c c u p a ­ tional e d u ca t i o n p ro g ra ms . In these p r o g ra m s, d e a f a n d h e a r i n g s tudent s f requentl y wo rk e d closely t o g e t h e r on l abor at or y projects. T h e d e a f stu­ d en t s were m a i n s t r e a m e d into these schools w h e n they were juniors, typi­ cally o n e o r two st ud en ts p e r class. T h e h e a r i n g st u de nt s h a d b e e n e n r ol l e d since at least t he ir s o p h o m o r e year. T h e r e se ar ch er s used soci omct ri c scales, qualitative observations, a n d p a r e nt , te ac he r, a n d s t u d e n t interviews to assess how successfully the d e a f were socially i nt eg ra te d. Unf or t unat el y, for the p r e s e n t p ur po s e s, no da ta were p r e s e n t e d for the h e a r i n g students, a n d few c o m p a r i so n s were m a d e b etween the d e a f a n d the he a ri ng. S o m e o f the pri nci pal findings were: De af s t u de n ts socially i nt er ac te d m o r e with h e a r i n g st ud e nt s d u r i n g thei r s en io r t han thei r j u n i o r years; p e e r ratings by h e a r i n g s tu de nt s o f several personality characteristics o f the d e a f — for e x a mp l e , social ability, c on si de r at e ne s s— yielded n o a p pr ec ia bl e dif fer ences b et ween the h e a r i n g a n d the deaf. Interviews with p ar en t s of d e a f adol escent s i nd ic at ed t h a t few h e a r i n g p e e r s from school ever visited th ei r h o m e . T h e t eacher s o f these a dol es cent s r e p o r t e d f r e q u e n t in-school f ri en ds hi ps b etween the h e a r i n g a n d deaf, b u t were aware o f few out-ofschool friendshi ps. T h e o ve r wh el mi ng majority o f d e a f a n d h e a r i n g stu­ de nt s r e p o r t e d having in-school fri endshi ps with s tu d en t s o f a diff er ent h e a r i n g status, t ha t is, h e a r i n g a n d deaf. T he se results indi cat e t h a t i n ­ school f ri ends hi ps a m o n g o l d e r d e a f a n d h e a r i n g s tu d e n t s readily occur, es­ pecially after bo t h g r o u p s have h a d extensive e xp e r i e n c e with each ot her . T h e last two e x p e r i m e n t s arc c o n c e r n e d with n o r m a l - h e a r i n g s t u d e n t s ’ r eacti ons to d e a f college s t u d e n t s who were in t e g ra t ed in bot h classrooms a n d r e si de nc e halls. E m e r t o n a n d R o t h m a n (1978) gave a q u e s t i o n n a i r e to h e a r i n g f r e s h m e n a n d t ransfer s tu de nt s at the R oc he st er Institute o f T e c h ­ nology (RIT) c o n c e r n i n g att it udes toward the deaf. RIT is also the h o m e of the Nat ional Te c hn i c a l Institute for the D ea f ( NT ID ), which e n r ol l e d a p ­ p roxi ma t e l y 1,200 (in 1990) d e a f college st udent s. St u d e n t s at NTID have the choi ce o f taking s o m e or all thei r courses at RIT, with full s u p p o r t ser­ vices available. T h e h e a r i n g st ud ent s were given the q u e s t i o n n a i r e be for e e n t e r i n g college, a n d 6 m o n t h s later. In ge ne ra l, t he ir at tit udes were posi­ tive, t h a t is, they r ej ected a b o u t 80% o f stereotypes a b o u t the deaf, but these attitudes b e c a m e slightly m o r e negative after 6 m o n t h s . T h e latter scores were u na ff ec ted by w h e t h e r the h e a r i n g s tu de nt s lived in i nt eg r at ed d o r m s ( d e a f a n d h e ar i ng ) o r s e g r eg a te d d or ms . T h e majority of the h e a r ­ ing s tu d e n ts on the sixth m o n t h q u es t i o n n a i r e saw the d e a f relative to the

106

3.

D IS C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D DEAF IN D IV ID U A L S

h e a r i n g as i m m a t u r e , with m o r e psychological p r o b l e m s a n d passive a b o u t taking l e a de rs hi p roles. T h e study by P. M. Brown a n d Foster (1991) d e a lt with the same two p o p ­ ulations o f s t u de nt s at RIT a n d NTID. T he ir s was a qualitative r es ear ch pr oj­ ect in which the h e a r i n g st udents, who h a d b e e n at RIT for an average of 214 years, were interviewed, using in -de pt h, o p e n - e n d e d strategics. Ha lf were m e n , h a l f h a d lived in i n te g ra t e d r es id e nc e halls, a n d all b u t o n e h a d taken at least o n e cour se with a d e a f stu de nt . Some o f t he pri nci pal findings were as follows. T h e h e a r i n g s tu d e n t s felt t ha t the d e a f were equally capable o f p e r f o r m i n g well in class, a n d were u n c o n c e r n e d by t he special instr uc­ tional a n d s u p p o r t services the d e a f were given. But, the s t ru ct ur e o f the classroom essentially p r e c l u d e d positive i n t e r a c t i o n s b et we e n t h e two g roups. T h e d e a f always sat close to the f r o n t w he re they c ou l d readily sec the t e a c he r a n d the i n t e r pr e t er . T h e h e a r i n g sat in o t h e r locations, a n d f o r m e d a c q u a i nt a n ce s t h r o u g h casual conversat ions with th ei r h e a r i n g n e igh bo rs . Any out-of-class c o m m u n i c a t i o n s the h e a r i n g h a d were with these a c qu a i nt ance s. However, several h e a r i n g s tu de nt s r e p o r t e d m u c h m o r e positive social e x pe r ie n ce s with d e a f p a r t n e r s in labor ator y settings. T h e h e a r i n g r e p o r t e d a fair a m o u n t o f difficulty living in th e s ame resi­ d e n c e halls as the deaf. T h e y usually spoke in c i t h e r negative t er ms a b o ut the d e a f o r identi fied a small n u m b e r o f d e a f as “e xc e pt io n al . ” S o me o f the negative behavi or s were m a k i n g too m u c h noise, p u s h i n g in line, blocking the hallway. So me o f the negative attitudes m e n t i o n e d were r ud e ne ss , cock­ iness, a r r o g an c e, a n d self-centeredness. T h e “e x c e p t i o n a l ” d e a f usually h a d g o o d spe ec h, r e a d lips, b e h a ve d similarly to the h e a ri n g , a n d showed a d e ­ sire to i nt er ac t with h e a r i n g st udent s. Very few h e a r i n g s tu d e n t s r e p o r t e d any l ong- s tanding f rie nd sh ip s with d e a f peers. O n those explicitly social oc­ casions to which d e a f a n d h e a r i n g st ude nt s were invited, the two g r ou p s rarely mi xed. Generally, the d e a f a n d h e a r i n g j o i n e d s epar at e clubs a n d e n ­ j o y e d s epar at e social networks. Brown a n d Foster (1991) u n d e r s t o o d these findings as reflecting a c o n ­ flict b et ween t he c ul tu r e o f the d e a f a n d t he s o m e w h a t i n a p p r o p r i a t e e x ­ p ec ta ti o n s o f the h ea r in g . For exam pie, t he d e a f often get s o m e o n e ’s a t t e n ­ tion by p o u n d i n g on a table. W h e n conversing, they establish a “sign visibility di st anc e, ” which, as previously n o t e d , is g r e a t e r than the usual dis­ t ance b et ween h e a r i n g speakers. Both e xa mp le s arc disruptive to the h e a r ­ i ng— the f o r m e r is seen as in co ns i de r at e a n d the latter as r u d e w h e n the deaf block a stairway or hallway. Because the d e a f look like the h ea r in g, at­ t e n d the s ame college, a n d have equival ent intellectual abilities, the h e a r ­ ing e x p ec t t he m to act like h e a r i n g students. In o t h e r words, t he h e a r i n g evaluate the d e a f “with r e f e r e nc e to a h e a r i n g n o r m . ” It can be c o n c l u d e d from the L ad d ct al. (1984) a n d Brown a n d Foster (1991) research t ha t fri endships b etween d e a f a n d h e a r i n g o l d e r a dole s­

SUMM ARY

107

cents a n d y o u ng adults can o c c ur within ccrtain types o f classroom situa­ tions. T h e se arc mo st likely f o u n d in l abor at or y settings w he re the d e a f a n d h e a r i ng work t og et he r closely a n d collaborativcly. But the friendships rarely go b e y o nd the classroom. Foster a n d Brown (1989), bas ed on i n-dept h in­ terviews with d e a f s t u d e nt s at RIT, suggest ed that n e i t h e r the d e a f n o r the h e a r i n g arc strongly moti vat ed to develop f ri en ds h ip s with each o th er . Sim­ ply put , it takes a gr ea t deal o f effort a n d pa ti en ce to attain c o mf o rt a bl e so­ cial i nteractions. Given o t h e r available o pt i o ns for d ev e lo pi ng satisfying re­ lationships, i n te ns e i nvo lve me nt b etween those o f a dif f er en t h e a r i n g status is n o t p u r s u e d . From bo th g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c ul t ur a l/ h i st o ri c a l views, these r e ­ sults i ndicate t ha t b a d gi n g m e c h a n i s m s a n d status di fferences c o n t i n u e to play significant roles in the i nt er act ions o f these two groups. Additionally, i n t c r g r o u p hostility e m e r g e s in the college s tude nts , especially in situations w he re a ut h or it ie s arc n o t pr es ent. In classroom settings, friendly relations often exist, b u t these arc rarely c o n t i n u e d on the outside. As with research with y o u n g e r ch il dr e n a n d adol escent s, t he re is little evi dence for o u t g r o u p attractiveness. Ra th er , behavioral di fferences are usually viewed negatively by b o t h groups.

SUMMARY Seven m e t h od o l og i c a l c o n c e r n s a b o u t research on pr ej udi ce d e v e l o p m e n t were discussed. 1. N o clear distinction exists in the lit er atur e be twe en “p r e j u d i c e ” a n d “negative st ereotypes. ” 2. Dif fer ent m e as ur es o f p r e ju di ce often lead to dif fe re nt conclusions. 3. T h e testing c o n t e x t ( per sons a n d materials) has b e e n shown to influ­ e n c e c h i l d r e n ’s expr essed attitudes. 4. F o r ced- choi ce t e c h n i q u e s may c o n f o u n d p r e f e r e n c e o f o n e g r o u p with r ejection o f t h e o ther . 5. Tests assessing p r ej u d ic e fail to distinguish b et ween r eactions to s ome characteristic o f t he target g r o u p versus react ions to t he m e m b e r s themselves. 6. Tests o f p re ju d i ce fail to distinguish be twe en c h i l d r e n ’s att it udes to­ ward t ar get g r o u p s as o p p o s e d to t he ir knowl ed ge of social s t e r eo ­ types. 7. A p p a r e n t d e v e l o p m e n t a l decr eas es in p re jud ic e may reflect c ha nge s in knowle dg e o f social desirability a n d n o t c ha ng es in prcj udi cc.

108

3.

D IS C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D DEAF IN D IV ID U A L S

Six dif fe re nt p r o c e d u r e s have b e e n used to infer level o f di scrimi nati on: p e e r n o m i n a t i o n s , p e e r ratings, t e a c h e r n o m i n a t i o n s , t e a c h e r ratings, b e ­ havior observations, a n d p e e r assessments. In m os t cases, dat a were col­ l ected in school settings. T h u s, relatively little is k n own a b o u t d is cr imi na ­ tion out si de o f these settings. Additionally, various classroom st ruct ures have b e e n f o u n d to have differential effects on f r ie nd sh i p choices. C o n ­ c e r n i n g t he d i ff er e nt me as u r es, c hi l d r e n o f varying ages may i n t e r p r e t the tasks differently. T e a c h e r s a n d ch i ld r en may i n t e r p r e t t he m differently from each ot he r . Moreover, the cor re la ti on s a m o n g the m e a s ur e s arc typi­ cally low’ to m o d e r a t e . In o ut li n in g the history o f the e d u ca t i o n o f the deaf, f ou r p er i od s with distinctive t heoretical a p p r o a c h e s were descri bed: 1817-1860, Ma nu a l Ap­ pr oa che s; 1860- 1900, Growth o f Oralism; 1900-1960, D o mi n a t i o n of O r a l ­ ism; a n d 1960 to the pr ese nt , Total C o m m u n i c a t i o n A pp r oa c he s. P e r ha ps the central issue o f this history has b e e n a tt e m p ts by adults to m a k e thei r c hil dr en “n o r m a l , ” t ha t is, just like thei r n o n h e a r i n g - i m p a i r e d parent s. Deafness has b e e n r e g a r d e d by the d o m i n a n t c ul tu r e as “h a n d i c a p p i n g ” r a t h e r t ha n as “d is a bl ing”— in o t h e r words, d e a f p e o p l e were viewed as i n­ c o m p l e t e a n d def ici ent instead o f different. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , the e d u c a ­ tional a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n battles have b e e n over the role o f sign language. Initially a c a d em i c i nst ruct ion o c c u r r e d primarily in ASL. Efforts by A l ex an­ d e r G r a h a m Bell a n d l i ke- minded oralists eventually led to the p ro h ib i t io n of its use. S u b s e q u e n t r esear ch sh o we d that exclusive reliance on oral m e t h ­ ods was associated with p o o r a ca d emi c progress, a n d for the p r o f ou n d l y a n d severely deaf, p o o r social a d j u s t m e n t with the n o n - i m p a i r c d. Currently, ASL has r e g a i n e d a cc e pt an c e in e du c at i o n a l settings, a n d i ns tr uct ion oc­ curs in it a n d various oral m e t h od s. O u r e x a m i na t io n o f d is cr imi nat i on toward the d e a f a m o n g school-aged c hil dr en revealed its d e v e l o p m e n t even in the earliest age gr oups. Research using observational m e t h o d s indicates t ha t n o r m a l - h e a r i n g c hi ld r en from p r es c ho o l t h r o u g h sixth g r a de p r e f er i n te ra ct in g with o t h e r h e a r i n g peers than with the deaf. De af ch i ld re n p r e f er i nt e ra ct in g with t ea ch er s a n d d e a f p ee rs than with h e a r i n g chi l d r en . T h e motivation b e h i n d these choices seems to be based on ease of c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d the rewards of i nt e ra c­ tion. Research using soci omctri c m e t h o d s indicates t h a t 6- a n d 7-year-old deaf ch i ld r en with severe to p r o f o u n d losses are m o r e p o p u l a r t ha n their h e a r i n g peers, wh er ea s those with m o d e r a t e losses are less p op u l a r. From a b o u t age 8 a n d older, deaf ch i ld re n decli ne in popularity. By age 12, the deaf are now r at ed as less p o p u l a r t han thei r h e a r i n g peers. Many of these results are c ons ist ent with b o t h g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i ­ cal analyses. However, t he re is little evi de nc e for the existence o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness.

SUMM ARY

109

Research with o l d e r a doles cent s a n d y o u n g adults in a c ad e mi c e n v i r o n ­ m e n ts i ndicates th a t f ri endships b et ween d e a f a n d h e a r i n g st ude nt s can oc­ c u r within ccrtain types o f classroom settings. However, social distance is the n o r m outside o f the classroom primarily be ca use it is too effortful for m e m b e r s o f the two g r o u p s to attain r ewa rdi ng a n d c o mf o r t a b le i n t e r p e r ­ sonal i nteractions. T h e s e results arc also c ons i st ent with ccrtain g e n e t i c / evolutionary a n d c u l t u ra l /h i st o ri c al analyses. In g ener al , observations o f i nt er a ct io n s b et ween d e a f a n d h e a r i n g chil­ d r e n in school settings illustrates the e x t e n t to which p ra gma ti c choice, s u p ­ p o r t e d by g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c ul t u r a l /h i s to r ic a l processes, can lead to p a t te r ns o f d i scr imi nat i on. T h e di st anci ng b et ween the gr ou ps , based largely on t hei r differing m e a n s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n , can lead to m i s u n d e r ­ s t andi ng, s tereotyping, a n d distrust. T h e r e is n o t h i n g i n h e r e n t in deafness t h a t leads to di scr imi na ti on , as was s hown in the c u l t u ra l /h i st o ri c al ac­ c o un t, b u t t he social separ ati on i n h e r e n t in establishing a c o mmu n ic a ti v e n o r m is a critical factor that c a n n o t easily be o ve rc ome .

C h a p te r

Prejudice an d Discrim ination Tow ard Mentally R eta rd ed Individuals

This c ha p t e r exami nes prejudice a n d discrimination toward mentally re­ tarded people with thr ee goals in mind. T he first is to give an overview of the history o f prejudice a nd discrimination toward the mentally r etarded, with a focus on mentally r e ta rd e d children in educati onal settings. I ndeed, m u c h of this prejudice a nd discrimination has involved the way e ducators have g rappl ed with pedagogical issues, that is, with the de gr ee to which and the me t h o d by which r et ar ded children can be t a ught to f unction in m a i n­ stream American society. This is n o t to say that such prejudice and discrimi­ nation did not exist in the Uni te d States before the advent in the mid-19th century o f spccial schooling for mentally re ta rd e d children. Rather, it was this broadly defined pedagogical imperative that set the t one for residential asylums, a eugenics mo vement , spccial educati on classes, a n d eventually “ma in st r e ami ng” mentally r et ar ded people in regular school classrooms. And beyond this, it gave institutional stature to the role mentally r et ar ded people would play in American society. The second a nd third goals o f the c ha p tc r involve the devel opment , r e­ spectively, of prejudice a nd discrimination a m o n g individuals with mental retardation. In particular, we look at interactional preferences, friendship preferences, a nd expressed attitudes to assess the de v el o p me n t o f prejudice a nd discrimination in various age g roups a nd in school settings where m e n ­ tally r et ar ded children spe nd time in integrated classrooms or o t h e r inte­ grated social a n d instructional activities. Wh a t factors, we ask, t end to exac­ erbate or diminish prejudice a nd discrimination? Wh a t is the effect of labeling, such that in an integrated classroom, mentally re ta rd e d children are known a nd identified as such? Arc prcjudicc a nd discrimination di110

BRIEF E D U C A T IO N A L HISTORY

111

rcctcd toward the person or merely toward the u n c onvent ional behaviors the person exhibits? Finally, to what ext ent do genct ic/ evol ut ionary a nd cultural/historical analyses help us u n d e r st a n d the results o f rcscarch in this area? These questions will guide o u r examination of prejudice a n d dis­ crimination in this chapter.

BRIEF E DUCATI ONAL H I ST O RY O F AMERICAN CHI LDREN WI TH MENTAL RETARDATION Al though there are some similarities between the educational histories of the deaf a nd the mentally ret arded, the differences are m o r e p r o n o u n c e d . T h e r e has rarely b ee n a pr oblem in identifying a young child as normally h ea ri ng versus h ear ing impaired. Certainly there are degrees of i mpai r­ me nt, a nd occasionally deafness a nd ment al retardation have been c on­ fused. But, in nearly all cases, children who a pp e a r to be n or mal b ut who c a n no t speak a nd c a n n o t u n de r st a nd spoken language are he ar ing im­ paired. T h e degree of i mp a ir me n t has its main effect on ease of teaching the child lo speak a nd to u nd e r s ta nd speech. Identification of mental retar­ dation has usually b ee n m u c h mo r e difficult— its definition has varied c on­ siderably with the historical period. Moreover, the degree of retardation has dramatically affected how children are edu ca t e d a nd cared for. Al­ t h ou gh deafness a n d sign l anguage have been a nd still are stigmatizing, these are mild c omp a re d to the fr eq ue nt compulsory segregation a nd the history of sterilization of the retarded. As noted earlier, the incidence of d ea f and hard-of-hearing children is ab o ut 1 in 300. T he incidence of mental r et ar dat ion— from mild to p r o ­ f o u n d — is a bout 3 in 100, nine times greater t han h ear ing i mp a ir me nt (Patton, Payne, & Beirne-Smith, 1990). Those who are mildly ret arded ge n­ erally look a nd act like normally developing children, b ut progress socially a nd intellectually at a slower rale, a nd reach a lower level of final develop­ ment . This retardation is often nol identified until they are 5 or 6 years old. Many marry and have children. Those who are profoundly retarded look different and act very differently from normally developing children, d e ­ velop at a far slower a nd different rate, a nd have m u c h lower social a nd intelleciual attainments. Many in this gr oup never learn to talk or to gain bowel control. Approximately 75% of menially retarded fall in the mild range, ab ou l 20% in the m o d e r a t e range (the “trainable”), a nd ab ou t 5% in the p r o fo u n d range (Patton et al. 1990; Zigler & H o da p p, 1986). T h e r e are three basic types of causes of mental retardation. T h e first, Zigler a nd H o d a p p (1986) referred to as familial. This is most often mild re­ t ardation genetically transmitted from one or bot h parents who are t h e m ­ selves mildly retarded. T h e second type is genetically transmitted by n o n ­

112

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RE TA RDE D

r e t a r d e d p a r e nt s (97% o f those p a r e nt s are n o t r e t a r d e d ) , a n d usually involves brain d a m a g e p r o d u c e d by s o m e gcncti c anomaly, for exa mp l e, Down S y n d r o m e o r Fragile X s y nd r om e . T h e ch il dr en are usually m o d e r ­ ately to severely r e t a rd e d. T h e thi rd type is p r o d u c e d by environmental in ­ sults d u r i n g fetal d e v e l o p m e n t at birth (e.g., oxygen depr ivat ion) o r in early c h i l d h o o d (e.g., lead p oi so n in g ). T h e chi l d r en may be severely, m o d e r ­ ately, or mildly r e t a r d e d . Zigler a n d H o d a p p (1986) suggested t h a t a f our th possible type, r e t a r d a t i o n p r o d u c e d by environm ental deprivationy is rar e. It is i m p o r t a n t to not e, t h a t wh at ever the causes, the level o f r et ar da ti on r e a c h e d can be positively or negatively affected by the social, e mo t io n a l, a n d intellectual e n v i r o n m e n t in which the ch il dr e n are re ar e d. Based on a r e a d i n g o f the following books, which in whol e o r p a r t deal with the history o f t he e d u c a t i o n o f the mentally r e t a r d e d in N o r th A m e r ­ ica, f o u r ma jo r historical pe rio ds can usefully be identi fied ( Ka n nc r , 1964; Pasanel la Sc V o l k mo n , 1981; Patton ct al., 1990; P r e s i d e n t ’s C o m m i t t e e on Mental Re ta rd at io n, 1976, 1977; Rotatori, S ch we nn , Sc Fox, 1985; Wallin, 1955). T h e first p e r i o d is 1 848- 1896, Residential Care; t he s e c o n d is 1896-1950, Spccial E d uc a t i on a n d Sterilization; the t hi r d is 1950- 1975, Ad­ vocacy a n d E x p a n d e d E du ca ti on ; a n d t he f ou rt h is 1975 to the pr es e n t , Deinstitutionalization, Ma in st r e ami ng , a n d Inclusion. A cent r al u nd e rl y i ng t h e m e , which cuts across all f o u r periods, is the questi on o f how m u c h c h a n g c toward n o r m a l d e v e l o p m e n t can be p r o ­ d u c e d by e du c at io n al interventions. Al th ou g h the E u r o p e a n p i o n e er s in this field in the early 1800s initially believed that the r e t a r d e d c ou ld be co mplet el y n or ma li ze d, this gave way by 1850 to the belief that at best, only substantial gains c ou ld be o bt a in e d. At certain points in this history m a n y m a i n t a i n e d t ha t n o gains were possible, a n d i n d ee d , t h a t t he ment al ly r e ­ t a r d ed were d a n g e r o u s to socicty. Few p e o pl e h o l d t he “d a n g e r ” view any­ m o r e , b u t it subtly b e c a m e t r a n s f o r m e d into a belief t h a t m e n ta l r e t a r d a ­ tion is h a r m f u l to society, at least in financial costs, b u t pr ob a b l y also in social costs. In 1818 s o m e me nt al ly r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n wer e t e m p o r a r i l y p l a c ed in t he H a r t f o r d Sc ho ol for t he Deaf, a n d the first historical p e r i o d , R e s i d e n ­ tial Car e, st ar te d in 1848. In t h a t year, t he state o f Massachusett s, at t he u r g i n g o f S a m u e l Gridley Howe p ai d for t he r esi de nt i a l e d u c a t i o n o f 10 c h i l d r e n in a w i n g o f t h e Pe r ki ns Inst itut e for t he Blind. Several o t h e r p u b ­ lic r es id en ti a l in st it ut i on s wer e o p e n e d in t h e n e x t 10 years, a n d by 1898, 24 i ns tit ut ions existed in 19 d i f f e r e n t states. T h e r e wTer e also a n u m b e r o f private inst it uti ons, b u t t hes e c o m p r i s e d less t h a n 10% o f t he r esi dent ial p o p u l a t i o n . In 1876, t he me di c al d i r e c to r s o f thes e p ub l ic a n d private s chools f o r m e d a n a t i o n a l association a n d p u b l i s h e d a j o u r n a l . T h a t asso­ ciation exists t oday as the A m e ri c a n Association o n Me nta l Re t ar d at i o n (Patton ct al., 1990).

BR IEF E D U C A T I O N A L HIS TO R Y

113

W h o were the resident s o f these early institutions? As previously stated, the defi ni tion o f m e n t a l r et ar da t io n has c h a n g e d consi der abl y with histori­ cal pe rio d. Because intell i gence tests did n o t e m e r g e in the U n i t e d States until 1910, o t h e r m e a n s o f identification were e mp l oy e d , mainly in the c o n ­ text o f medi cal diagnosis a n d social f un ct ioni ng. T h e first st ud e n t s were generally 7 to 14 years old a n d primarily cretins ( chi ldr en with severe m e n ­ tal deficiency causcd by severe t hyroid deficiency), those with Down Syn­ d r o m e ( t he n k nown as “m o n g o l i s m ”), thos e with very slow l a ng u a g e devel­ o p m e n t , a n d chi l d r en with serious b e ha vi or c o n tr ol p r obl ems . E xc lu de d from these schools were all ch il dr en w h o m t he di rect or s believed coul d n o t be d e ve lo pmc nt al ly i mpr ov ed . T h e se i n c l u d e d those c o n s i d e r e d “i n s a n e ”; c hi l d r e n who were epileptic, paralyzed, o r severely brain i nj ured; a n d chil­ d r e n with hypoencephaly ( ma rke dl y e n l a r g e d h ea ds ) . From the p o i n t o f view o f mild, m o d e r a t e , p r o f o u n d , a n d severe r e ta r da t io n , it a pp ea r s th at mo st o f the residents were mo d er a te l y r e t a r d e d , with a small p r o p o r t i o n in the mild r a n ge ( some o f those with b eh av i or p r o b l e m s ) , a n d a small p r o p o r ­ tion in the p r o f o u n d a n d severe range. W ol f e n sb c rg c r (1976) divided this first historical p e r i o d into t hr ee p a r ­ tially o ve rl ap pi ng stages. In the first, from 1848 to 1880, the goals o f t he res­ idential schools were to c d u c at e t hese ch i ld re n so t ha t they would devel op (in W i l b u r ’s w’ords, in 1852) . . n e a r e r the c o m m o n s t a n d a r d o f h u m a n ­ ity, in all respects, m o r e capabl e o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d obeyi ng h u m a n laws; o f pcrcciving a n d yielding to m or al obligations; m o r e ca pa b le o f self­ assistance, o f self-support, o f self-respect, a n d o f o b t a i n i n g the gr eat es t d e ­ gree o f c o m f o r t a n d h a p p i ne s s with t h e ir small m e a n s ” (Wol f cnsbcr ger , 1976, p. 49). T h e institutions in this first stage were small, typically c o n t a i n i n g 10 to 20 c hi l d r en . T h e y were seen as a n a lo g ou s to b o a r d i n g schools, from which the s tu d en t s woul d be r e t u r n e d to society to carry o u t useful roles. T h e d ir ec ­ tors o f these schools believed t ha t by s egr egat ing the r e t a r d e d chi ld re n a n d giving t he m loving carc a n d e d u ca t i o n in a family-type con t ex t, this c oul d cause the desi r ed o u t c o m e s to occur. By 1870, s ome dat a c o n c e r n i n g success were in. Probably n o m o r e than 20% o f resi dent s were able to r e t u r n to their c o m m u n i t i e s a n d b e c o m e selfsufficient. Moreover, the n a t u r e o f the institutions h a d c h a n g e d d r a m a t i ­ cally. T he y h a d b e c o m e m u c h l arger a n d a d m i t t e d m a n y c hi l d r en wh o were unlikely to ever attain self-sufficiency. L on g waiting lists deve lo pe d. T h e s e p r o b l e m s w or s en e d over the n e x t 10 years. In this s e c on d stage, from 1870 to 1890, the institutions b e c a m c t r a n s f o r m e d f ro m schools into asylums, whose m a i n goal was p e r m a n e n t custodial care. Given this goal, t h r e e t r e n ds o c c u r r e d in the d e v e l o p m e n t of these insti­ tutions ( Wol f cns bcr gcr , 1976). T h e y were buil t in isolated locations, far from u r b a n cent ers, p re s um ab l y to increase t he h ap p i ne s s o f the inmates.

114

4.

PREJUDICE AND DI SCRIMINATIO N TOW ARD T H E RETARDED

Second, they were substantially enlarged, presumabl y for the benefit o f the residents— for example, they could be pr otected m o r e easily, they would have mo r e o f their own kind with whom to associate. Thi rd, the institutions were run in increasingly economical ways. T h e i ncreased size he lpe d to ac­ complish this, b u t also costly educational pr ogr ams were eliminated. In many cases, the institutions ran farms, a nd occasionally the most able resi­ dents were kept on the farm to work (with no wages) r a th e r t han being re­ t u r ne d to the community. In Wol fensbcr gcr ’s third stage, 1880 to 1900, mentally r et ar ded individu­ als were progressively seen as a social m e n ac e that shoul d be controlled. Not only were the institutions a financial drain, bu t many started to believe that re ta rd ed individuals ha d criminal instincts, were sexually promiscuous, were p r o n e to alcoholism, a n d generally lowered the moral standards o f the community. Many directors o f institutions a n d politicians a rgue d that those who were r etar ded s h ould n ot be allowed to marry, should be sexually seg­ regated within institutions, a n d should even be sterilized. At least three events occur red that s up po rt ed these attitudes. A famous study of the Jukes family was published in 1877 that “s howed” the elose links over many generations between criminality, immorality, a n d mental retar­ dation (the well-known c ompar abl e study on the Kallikaks was publi shed in 1912). Second, many young mentally re ta rde d criminals were, in fact, being sent to these institutions for custodial care. Third, a strong eugenics move­ m e n t (i.e., control o f h u m a n mating) e m e r g e d in the 1870s, based on Dar­ win’s theory. Recall that Al exander Graham Bell was then advocating eugcnic control o f the deaf. Thus, in this first historical period, h op e b e came t ransf or med into fear. T h e next historical period, 1896 to 1950, was characterized by three m a ­ jor events that sha pe d the way mentally r et ar ded peopl e were treated in the Unit ed States. T he first event was the establishment of the first spccial class for the mentally re ta rde d in a day school in Providence, Rhode Island (Kanncr, 1964). T h e idea of spccial classes (as opp o se d to residential care) spread rapidly in the next 10 years to many maj or cities. With few ex ce p­ tions, d ur i n g this entire period, these spccial classes were for children who were mildly retarded. T h e first training school for teachers o f special classes o p e n e d in 1905. As not ed, p la c eme nt in residential asylums was based on medical d i a gn o ­ sis a nd social behavior. These criteria excluded the vast majority of mentally ret arded, who behaved acceptably a nd ha d a n or mal a p p ear ance. So, what h a p p e n e d when special classes were established for these latter children? Basically, compulsory education created a new gr oup o f children with social p r ob le ms— they l earned very slowly a nd could n o t keep u p with their mor e intelligent peers. They were n o t mu ch o f a problem initially because in 1880, only 6% o f adolescents over the age of 13 were enrolled in school.

BRIEF E D U C A T IO N A L HISTORY

115

Moreover, the younger children (90% o f wh o m were enrolled) at t en de d class a b ou t half as many days as do children today (Fishbein, 1984). As school terms l e n g t h e n e d a n d m o r e adolescents went to high school ( about 30% in 1920) the mildly re ta rd ed b ccamc a greater social problem. T h e n u m b e r o f special education classes grew rapidly until a b o u t 1920 a nd then r e ma i ne d stable until ab ou t 1950. Although most educators saw the potential benefits o f special educat i on for the mildly mentally ret arded, state legislatures were rcluctant to increase f unding for them. I ndeed, legis­ lation was frequently passed to cxcludc many moderately, severely, a nd p r o ­ foundly r et ar de d children from school altogether. Thus, the overwhelming majority of these children ha d essentially no educational opportunities. T h e s econd major event d u r in g the 1896 to 1950 per i od was the a d a pt a­ tion for Nor th Americans in 1911 of the Binct-Simon intelligence tests (Binet & Simon, 1905). Binet a n d Simon were two French scientists who were asked by the French g o v er n me n t to devise a test to d e t e rm in e the most a ppr opr i at e type o f schooling for r et ar d e d children. Th ei r scale, which me as u r ed mental age, first a p pe a r e d in 1905 in France. In the Unit ed States, as in o t he r countries, educat ors for the first time h a d an o b­ jective me a ns for assessing the educability of its children. T h e term mildly re­ tarded eventually e m e r ge d from this test a nd described children whose IQ, (intelligence q uo ti e nt — mental age divided by chronological age) was b e ­ tween 2 a nd 3 standard deviations below average, that is, IQs between 55 a nd 70. School systems a nd state legislatures started to make educational a nd fun di ng decisions for the r et ar ded based on their IQscorcs. Social a d­ aptation level still was used to assess degree o f retardation, b u t it took a dis­ t ant second place to IQ. The third major event d ur i ng this period was the widespread e n a ct m e n t o f eugenics laws. Indiana passed the first sterilization law for the mentally re ta rd e d in 1907. By 1926, 23 states ha d them, a nd by 1930, 30 states had passed laws permit ting involuntary sterilization of the retarded. In 1927, the Uni ted States S up r eme Co u rt in an 8 to 1 vote dcclarcd these laws c o n­ stitutional. T h e great jurist, Oliver Wendell Holmes, wrote the majority o p i n i o n in which h e d c cl a rc d , “T h r e e g e n e r a t i o n s o f imbeciles are e n o u g h , ” referring to the gcnctic transmission o f ment al retardation. It is estimated that as many as 40,000 “mentally r e t a r d e d ” individuals were steril­ ized, the last probably in Virginia in 1972. It appears from the diatribes in favor of involuntary sterilization that a high per centage o f the “r e t a r d e d ” were criminals, prostitutes, never-married mot her s, a nd pauper s who were residents of the asylums. They were sterilized to prevent f ur the r r e p r o d u c ­ tion of “morally inferior” citizens. After ab o ut 1935, involuntary sterilization slowed down considerably. Many of the early a r d e n t advocates c ha ng c d their minds. Some did so for huma ni ta ri an reasons, b u t most did so because sterilization did n o t seem to

116

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RETA RDED

work. On ly a small p c r c c n t a g c o f those eligible were actually b e i n g steril­ ized, a n d r e c e n t scientific evidence h a d i nd ic a te d t h a t the links bet ween criminality a n d m e n t a l r et ar da ti on were weak. T h u s c o n c l u d e d quite an ex­ t r a or di n a ry historical p e r i o d in the t r e a t m e n t o f the mentally r e t a r d e d , o n e t h a t i nd i ca te d the i n h u m a n e n e s s a n d the destructive p o w e r o f p r c ju di cc a n d ign o r an ce . T h e t hi r d p e r i o d ( 1 95 0- 19 7 5) , Advocacy a n d E x p e n d e d Edu ca tio n, s t a r t e d with t h e f o u n d i n g o f t h e N a t i o n a l Associ ati on for R e t a r d e d C h i ld r en , a g r o u p mainly c o m p o s e d o f p a r e nt s o f ment all y r e t a r d e d chil­ d r e n . By 1959, it h a d a b o u t 50,000 m e m b e r s , in cl ud i ng a large n u m b e r of professional workers involved with r es ear ch a n d t e ac hi ng in m e nt a l r e t a r­ dat ion. This g r o u p has strongly a n d persistently a dvoc ate d for m o r e r e ­ search on, m o r e a n d b e t t e r e du c at i o n a l o p po r t u n i t i e s for, a n d a m o r e h u ­ m a n e t r e a t m e n t o f the mentally r e t a r de d . Two o t h e r or ga ni z ati ons m a d e up p r e d o m i n a n t l y o f professionals also h a d a s t r o ng i m p a c t on c h a n g i n g a tt it u de s a n d pr act ices to wa rd the r e ­ t a rd e d: t he A m e r i c a n Association on Me nta l Deficiency (AAMD) a n d the C o u n c i l f or E x c ep t i o n a l C h i l d r e n ( CEC) . T h e AAMD m e m b e r s h i p grew f ro m 664 in 1940 to a p p r o x i m a t e l y 12,000 in 1975. T h e y t ook very active p os iti ons on set ti ng s t a n d a r d s f or facilities a n d delivery o f services, litiga­ tion on b e h a l f o f t he r e t a r d e d , d e v e l o p m e n t o f social policy, a n d s u p p o r t o f r es e ar c h. T h e CEC is c o n c e r n e d with all e x c e p t i o n a l c h i l d r e n . Its m e m ­ b e r s h i p grew from 3,500 in 1938 to 67,000 in 1975. In 1963 it c r e a t e d a di ­ vision on m e n t a l r e t a r d a t i o n . Its goals ar e similar to t hose o f t h e AAMD, b u t it places m o r e e m p h a s i s on p r o m o t i n g r es e ar c h c o n c e r n i n g e d u c a ­ tion o f r e t a r d e d individuals a n d on d e v el o p i n g legislation to b e ne f it r e ­ t a r d ed persons. A f our th m a j or n o n g o v e r n m e n t a l or gani zat ion t h a t strongly advocated for the mentally r e t a r d e d was the Joseph P. Ke nne dy, Jr. F ou n d a t i o n , f o u n d e d in 1946. T h e f o u n d a t i o n was n a m e d for t he o l d e r b r o t h e r o f the t h e n -f u tu r e p r e s i d e n t o f the U n i t e d States. It b e c a m e a powerful inf luence on the field after John F. K e n ne d y a s s um e d t he Presidency in 1961. I m p o r ­ t a nt legislation c reat ing r es ear ch cent er s a n d the Nat i onal Institute o f Child a n d H u m a n D e v e l o p m e n t were affected by efforts o f this f o u nd a t i o n. T h e f o u n d a t i o n c i t h er gave substantial m o n i e s o r h e l p e d raise m o n e y for re se ar ch, e d uc a t i on , a n d clinical t r e a t m e n t . It was also i n st r u me n t al in cr e ­ ating the Special Olympics a n d o t h e r physical fitness p r o g r a m s for r e t a r d e d pe op l e . T h r o u g h its c o n t r i b u t i o n to the P r e s i d e n t ’s Panel on Mental Retar­ dat ion o f 1962, it h e l p e d d e t e r m i n e the f ut ur e c ourse o f g o v e r n m e n t action on b e h a l f o f r e t a r d e d individuals. Th us , in a t r e n d starting in 1950 a n d greatly e n h a n c e d by t he election of a strongly s upport ive U.S. p r e s i d e n t in 1961, m e n t a l r et a rd a ti on c ame o u t o f t h e closet a n d started to occ up y a m o r e ccnt ral stage in the e du c at i o n a l

BRIEF E D U C A T IO N A L HISTORY

117

arena. T h e most dramatic changes occur red in special educat ion programs, pr ed omi na nt ly for the mildly retarded. In 1950, fewer than 100,000 chil­ dr en were enrolled in these programs. This n u m b e r rose to a b o u t 250,000 in 1962, 750,000 in 1970, a nd 1,250,000 in 1975. Public advocacy provided the push, bu t federal a nd state legislatures provided the money, and teachcrs colleges and school systems provided the personnel. During this same histor­ ical period, the moderately retarded (with IQs from ab ou t 30 to 55) received e xp a nd e d educational opportunities. In some states, separate schools for the h an di ca p p e d were crcated. These acco mmo da tcd small nu mb e r s o f m o d e r ­ ately retarded children who could n ot be taught in the public schools. For the profoundly a nd severely mentally retarded, little change in residential treat ment occurred. Th e re was a growing sentiment, however, in favor of ei­ ther e nha nc in g educational programs in these institutions or bringing the children h o m e to be edu ca t e d in their own communities. In the last historical peri od (1975 to the present) the signal event was the passage in 1975 o f Public Law 94-142, the Education for All H a nd ic ap p e d Children Act. T h e r e were at least four major provisions of this law affecting education of the mentally retarded: 1. T h a t free a ppr opr i at e public educati on be provided for every h a n d i ­ c a pp e d child; 2. that this education occur in a “least restrictive e n v i r o nm e nt , ” which m e a n t that h a n d i c a p p e d children be educ at e d in regular classes with n o n h a n d i c a p p e d children to the greatest e xt e nt possible a nd a p p r o ­ priate; 3. that an individualized education program be written for each h a n d i ­ c a pp e d child in conjunction with that ch il d’s parents; 4. that due process legal p r ocedur es on behalf of the h a n d i c ap p e d child be followed if parents a n d educators c an no t agree on the a ppr opr iat e educat ion for that child. This law also m a n d a t e d that states provide educational services for h a n d i ­ c ap pe d individuals between the ages of 3 a n d 21 years. During the n ext few years after 1975, o t h e r legislation was enact ed that both clarified a n d ex­ p a n d e d this law. Th e c on se q ue n t changcs in residential t r e at m e n t a n d educational pr ac­ ticcs were marked. First, what started as a trickle in deinstitutionalization in the 1970s be came a flood. T he n u m b e r a n d size of asylums for the retarded were dramatically r educed. Currently only the most profoundl y retarded a nd multiply h a n d i c a pp e d arc in institutional care. All the rest arc being eared for in the h o m e a n d edu ca te d in the community. Second, moderat el y re ta rd e d children arc being edu c at ed in public schools in “inclusion” or “m ai ns t re am in g” p r ogr ams — spe nd in g some o f the time in the same class­

118

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RE TA RDE D

r o o m s with n or mall y d ev e l op i ng ch i ld re n. T h i r d , m a ny mildly r e t a r d e d c hi l d r e n are b e i ng i n c l u d e d in classrooms with n o n d i s a b l c d students; if t r e n d s c o n t i n u e , m os t will be i nt e gr a te d into r e gu la r classrooms in t he fu­ ture. This m e a n s t ha t the n u m b e r o f r e t a r d e d c h il dr e n in spccial e d uc a t i on classes has d ec l i ne d since 1975. Ma i ns tr e am i ng of the mildly r e t a r d e d has b e e n s u p p o r t e d by c o n s i d e r ­ able research s howi ng t ha t s eg r eg a t ed r e t a r d e d st ud ent s (i.e., in special classes) p e r f or m n o b e t te r academically t ha n r e t a r d e d st ud en ts wh o arc t a u gh t in in t eg r at e d classrooms, a n d who receive t u to ri ng services (Pasanclla 8c V o l k m o n , 1981). Moreover, r e c c n t r es e ar ch has shown t h a t social a c c ep t a nc e by t h e i r no rma ll y d e v e lo p in g p ee rs is g r ea te r for i nt eg r at ed than for s eg re ga te d r e t a r d e d c hil dr en; a n d that self-esteem is h i g h e r for i n ­ t e gr at ed t han for seg re ga te d r e t a r d e d chi l d r en (Strain 8c Kerr, 1981). From this 145 year history it is clear t ha t e du c at i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s for ment al ly r e t a r d e d p e r s o n s have u n d e r g o n e m a r k e d positive c hanges . T h e starting p o i n t was t he reco g n i ti on th at r e ta r da t io n takes m a n y f o r ms a n d t h a t these f or ms r e q u i r e di ff er ent e d u ca t i on a l e xpe ri enc es . Progress was set back by the u n f o r t u n a t e bel ief t h a t i mmor ali ty a n d r et a rd a ti o n were closely linked. Parent al advocacy m ov ed t hings f orward again, a n d pr ogress g ai ne d t r e m e n d o u s m o m e n t u m t h r o u g h the efforts of a chari smati c p r e s i d e n t who h a d a ment all y r e t a r d e d sister. At the p r e s e n t time, ch il dr e n with m e nt a l re­ tar dati on arc increasingly b e i n g educat i onal ly in t e g ra t ed with thei r n o r ­ mally d ev e lo pi ng peers. No r mal izat ion processes for ment all y r e t a r d e d are now in high gear, a n d these p r o mi s e to ultimately p r o d u c e a r e d u c t i o n in pr ej udi ce a n d stigmatization.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F P RE J U D I C E T OW AR D P E O P L E W I T H M EN TA L R E T A R DA T I ON Unlike r es ear ch c o n c e r n e d with h e a r i n g- i m pa i r ed persons, t h e re is a s u b ­ stantial l iterature dea li ng with p re ju d i ce o f n o n r c t a r d c d c hi ld r en a n d a d o ­ lescents toward thei r ment all y r e t a r d e d peers. As we n o t e d already, t he re are basically t h r e e levels o f m e n t a l r e t a r d a t i o n — mild, m o d e r a t e , a n d p r o ­ f ou nd . T h o s e with mild r e t ar d at io n ( a b o u t 75% o f all r e t a r d e d persons) generally look like n or ma lly d e ve lo p i ng ch il dr en b u t are s o m e w h a t differ­ e n t in behavi or. T h o s e with m o d e r a t e r e t a rd a t i on ( a b o u t 20% of r e t a r d e d per sons ; e.g., those with Down S yn d r o m e ) generally look a n d act differ­ ently t han n o n r c t a r d c d persons. Ch i ld r en with mil d a n d m o d e r a t e r e t a r d a ­ tion arc often m a i n s t r e a m e d in classes writh n o n r c t a r d c d c h i l d re n for p ar t o f the school day. T h o s e with p r o f o u n d r et a rd a ti o n ( a b o u t 5% o f r e t a r d e d per s ons ) arc ma r ke dl y dif f er en t tha n n o n r c t a r d c d p e r s on s a n d arc usually s e gr eg at ed from t he m.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F P R E JU D IC E

119

P redi cti ons bas ed on g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c u l t u ra l / h i st o r i c a l c o n ­ s iderat ions parallel t hose stated for the deaf. Ba dg in g m e c h a n i s m s play a m a jo r role in the p re j ud ic e re se ar ch. For those ch i ld re n a n d adol escents with m o d e r a t e a n d p r o f o u n d r e t a r da t io n , physical a p p e a r a n c e s h o ul d lead to clear o u t g r o u p identification by n or ma lly dev e lo p in g chi l d r en ; a n d h e n c e , t h r o u g h the factors o f inclusive fitness a n d o u t g r o u p hostility, bo th i n g r o u p favoritism a n d o u t g r o u p p rc ju di cc will be displayed by the n o n ­ r c t a r d c d ch il dr en . For these g r o u ps a n d the mild ment al ly r e t a r d e d , b eh av ­ ioral differences will lead to o u t g r o u p identification by t h e n o n r c t a r d e d , with the c o n s e q u e n t i n g r o u p favoritism a n d o u t g r o u p p r ej udic e. Symmetr y o f r eactions from the mental l y r e t a r d e d toward t he n o n r e t a r d c d woul d be c x p c c t c d for t he sa me reasons. Additionally, a n d unli ke t he l iterature de al ­ ing with t he deaf, g e n d e r dif fer ences in p re j ud i c e are assessed in this litera­ ture. Based on g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y c on s ider at ions , m o r e p re ju d i ce is cx­ p c c t c d from males th an females. As with o u r discussion o f d i scr imi nati on toward the deaf, t he g c n c t i c / evolutionary m e c h a n i s m o f au t ho r i ty a c c cp t an c c may have i nc on s is t e nt ef­ fects. O n o n e h a n d , all g r o u p s o f ment al ly r e t a r d e d arc viewed as h a n d i ­ c a p p e d a n d in n e e d o f special t r e at m e nt . This is especially the case for the m o d e r a t e a n d severely r e t a r de d , a n d woul d be c x p c c t c d to lead to p r e j u ­ dice. O n th e o t h e r h a n d , t h r o u g h m a i n s t r e a m i n g a n d special positive tr eat ­ m e n t o f the ment al ly r e t a r d e d by the schools, t he aut hor it ies p r e s e n t t he m as pe rso ns to be valued a n d t r ea te d equally to the n o n r c t a r d c d . This s h o ul d mi ni mi ze p r e j u d i c e d reactions. If t h e two effects cancel o n e a n o t h e r , t he n the o t h e r g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y factors will h o ld sway. Finally, it’s n o t d e a r h ow o u t g r o u p attractiveness woul d play a role in p r e j ud i ce be t we en these two gr oups. It is possible t h a t o u t g r o u p favoritism woul d be shown by c i t he r g r o u p in s ome c ir cumst ances, which woul d be an i ndi c at or o f this at tr a c­ tiveness. T h e c ul t u r a l /h i s to r ic a l i nf lue nc es have consistently viewed the mentally r e t a r d e d as having lower status t han the n o n r c t a r d c d . As was previously shown, th ei r t r e a t m e n t by the n o n r c t a r d c d was often very negative, i n c l u d ­ ing f orced sterilization. T hu s, we e x pc ct p r e j u di c ed react ions by the n o r ­ mally d ev e lo pi ng toward the mentally r e t ar d e d. It is n o t clear fr om the his­ tory w h e t h e r p e r c e p t i o n s of lower status o f ment all y r e t a r d e d p e r so ns is age-rclatcd. It is possible t h a t as a ca d cm ic p e r f o r m a n c e b e c o m c s m o r e i m­ p o r t a n t with in c re as in g age, status effects a n d the c o n s e q u e n t p re j ud i ce will b e c o m e m o r e p r o n o u n c c d . However, a uthor ity a c c e p t an c e plays an i n d e ­ t e r mi n a t e role a n d t he issue will have to be d e t e r m i n e d empirically. T h e studies by C o n d o n , York, Heal, a n d F o r t s c h n c i d c r (1986), J. Go tt ­ lieb a n d Switsky (1982), Graffi a n d Mi nn e s (1988), a n d Voeltz (1980, 1982) in p a r t deal with the effects o f n o n r c t a r d c d c h i l d r e n ’s age a n d the a m o u n t o f p r e ju d ic e e xpressed. U nf or t un a t e l y, the yo u n g e st age g r o u p st u di ed was

120

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RETA RDED

k i n d e r g a r t e n aged ch i ld r en (only by Graffi 8c Mi nnes , 1988) a n d n o n e o f the r es ear ch i n c l ud e d adolescents. T he se e x p e r i m e n t s primarily in c lu d e c hi l d r e n be twe en s e c o n d a n d sixth grade. Across the studies, several differ­ e n t kinds o f at ti t ude m e a s ur e s were used. T he se in c lu de an adjective c h e ck ­ list, an a c c e p t an c e scalc o f the mentally r e t a rd e d, a n d various f orms of f ri en ds hi p scales t ha t assess the types o f activities t h a t n o n r c t a r d e d chi ldr en w oul d be willing to carry o u t with mentally r e t a r d e d peers. With o n e e xc e pt i on , in all these e x pe r i m e n t s , o l d e r n o n r c t a r d c d peers sh owe d in cr ea si n g positive attitudes a n d d ec re as i n g negative attitudes towar d the mentally r e t a rd e d. T he se results are c onsistent with an aut hori ty a c c e p t a nc e view o f t he positive characteristics o f me nt all y r e t a r d e d chil­ d r e n . In t he Graffi a n d Mi nn e s (1988) study, thi rd g r a d er s h a d m o r e posi­ tive attitudes th an k i n d e r g a r t e n c hi l d r e n toward peer s who were de sc ri be d as mentally r e t a r d e d , in results c onsi st ent with the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d . Ho w­ ever, the k i n d e r g a r t n e r s h a d m o r e positive attitudes toward p e er s who were shown in p h o t o g r a p h s to have Down Sy nd r om e . T h e s e results are p ar t i cu ­ larly puzzling because, in co nt ra st to all t he o t h e r r es e ar ch findings, the kin­ d e r g a r t e n ch i ld r en h a d m o r e positive attitudes toward ch il dr en with Down S y n d r o m e t ha n toward n o r m a l - a p p e a r i n g chi l d r en . Al t ho u gh this is only o n e finding, it is consi st ent with the o u t g r o u p attraction hypothesis. In add i ti on to these studies, the e x p e r i m e n t s by Bak a n d Sipcrstcin (1987b), Elam a n d Si gel man (1983), H e m p h i l l a n d Sipcrstein (1990), Siperstein a n d Chatillon (1982), a n d Siperstcin, Budoff, a n d Bak (1980) evaluated g e n d e r effects. In these studies, n o n r c t a r d c d ch il dr en were p r e ­ s e n t ed with e i t h er a u d i o t a p e s o r videotapes o f mentally r e t a r d e d c hil dr en r e a d i n g a lone o r in te ra ct in g with a n o n r e t a r d c d same-sex child. T h e y were t he n a d mi n i s t e r e d at ti t ude me a s ur e s similar to those just n ot ed . In mo st o f the r esear ch girls were f o u n d to c it he r have m o r e positive atti­ tudes o r less negative attitudes toward mentally r e t a r d e d peer s than did boys. Graffi a n d Mi nn e s (1988) r e p o r t e d n o g e n d e r effects, a n d b ot h Elam a n d Sigelman (1983) a n d H e m p h i l l a n d Sipcrstcin (1990) f o u n d girls to be m o r e negative wh en the mentally r e t a r d e d child was label ed as r e t a r d e d in a ddit i on to mer el y ma ni f e st in g s o m e behavioral deficiencies. T h e t e n d en c y for girls to have m o r e positive at tit udes th an boys toward mentally r e t a r d e d p eer s is c ons is te nt with the hypot hesi s of e n h a n c e d male p rc j ud i cc based on g c n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y c onsi der ati ons. An alternative hypothesis is t h a t in all cultures, girls are socialized to be m o r e n u r t u r a n t a n d responsi bl e tow’ard d e p e n d e n t individuals than arc boys (Fishbein, 1984). Mentally r e ­ t a r d ed peer s pr oba bl y fall into this category, a n d h e n c e woul d elicit m o r e positive feelings from girls than fr om boys. In co nt ra st to the d e a f who c omp r i se less th an o n e h a lf o f 1% o f all chil­ d r e n , a p pr o xi ma t e l y 3% are classified as mentally r e t a rd e d. T h u s , it is likely t h a t m o st n o n r e t a r d c d c hi ld r en have h a d s o m e c o n t a c t with r e t a r d e d

D E V E L O P M E N T O F P R E JU D IC E

121

peers. Docs the a m o u n t o f c on t a c t in f lu e nc e attitudes? T h e studies by C o n ­ d o n ct al. (1986), Sipcrstcin a n d Chatillon (1982), a n d Voeltz (1980, 1982) c o m p a r e d ch i ld re n who h a d c i t h er n o school c o nt ac t with mentally r e ­ t a r d ed peers; low c o n t a c t with t he m (classes for the r e t a r d e d were l oeated in the school, b u t t h e r e was n o m a i n s t r e a m i n g ) ; o r substantial c on t a c t with t he m ( m a i n s t r e a m i n g a n d / o r spccial p r o g r a m s involving n o n r c t a r d c d a n d r e t a r d e d peer s) . T h e results consistently show t h a t the g r ea t er the c u r r e n t c o n t ac t t ha t n o n r c t a r d c d chi l d r en have with r e t a r d e d peers, th e m o r e posi­ tive a n d / o r less negative arc thei r attitudes toward the r e t a r d e d c hi ldr e n. However, research t h a t e x a m i n e d self-reports by n o n r c t a r d c d ch il dr en o f p r i o r n o n s c h o o l c o n t a c t with mentally r e t a r d e d p ee rs gives a s o m e w ha t dif­ f e r e n t pi ctur e ( C o n d o n ct al., 1986; Graffi &: Minnes, 1988; Van Bou rg on dien, 1987). Van B o u r g o n d i c n f o u n d t ha t positive atti t udes toward m e n ­ tally r e t a r d e d ch i ld r en c or r el at ed with the a m o u n t o f p r i o r cont act, b u t Graffi a n d Mi nn e s a n d C o n d o n et al. f o u n d n o effects. T h e results o f school-based c o n t ac t arc c ons ist ent with the view t h a t the m o r e t h a t auth or it i e s (i.e., the school) a p pr ov e o f o r sanction c on t a c t b e ­ tween r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r e t a r d c d peers, the m o r e positive will be the chil­ d r e n ’s attitudes. Being in t he s ame classroom reflects g r e at e r a ut hor it y a p ­ proval t h a n mer el y b e i ng in the same school. For the self-report data, we have no idea a b o u t the c ont exts a n d qualities o f p r i o r contact, a n d h e n c e can m a k e n o clear s ta t em en t s a b o u t t he inconsi st ent results. As has b e e n e m ph a s i z e d in o u r previous discussions, a cent r al factor i n ­ volved with the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re ju di ce a n d d is c ri mi na ti o n is the p e r ­ ceived behavioral dif fer ences bet ween m e m b e r s o f i n g r o u p s a n d those of ou tg r ou p s. T h e se dif fer ences were well d e f i ne d in d is c ri mi na ti on toward the d e a f ( an d its conver se) . Several imaginative e x p e r i m e n t s have a d ­ d ressed this issue as it pe rt ai ns to the mentally r e t a rd e d. In these studies, r e ­ sea rc he rs investigated the effects o f the social skills m a n i f e st ed by mentally r e t a r d e d peer s on the att itudes o f n o n r c t a r d c d c hi ldr en. Van B o u r g o n d i c n (1987) sh o we d vi deot apes to n o n r c t a r d c d girls o f two n o r m a l - a p p e a r i n g girls i nt eracting. In o n e tape, o n e o f t he girls a ct ed i n a p ­ pr opr iat el y— for e x a mp l e , she s poke too loud, st ared m o r e , m o v ed too close to the o t h e r girl; in the o t h e r tape, b ot h girls a ct cd appr opr iat ely. Hal f the par tici pant s were told t ha t the i n a pp r op r ia t e l y acting girl was in a s pe ­ cial class for the r e t a r d e d , a n d the o t h e r h a lf were only told t ha t she wTas in the s ame g ra de as they. In the Bak a n d Sipcrstcin (1987b) study, n o n ­ r c t a r d c d c h i l d re n were s hown v i d e ot ap es o f n o r m a l - a p p e a r i n g n o n r c ­ t a r d cd peers, n o r m a l - a p p e a r i n g b u t mildly r e t a r d e d peers, a n d p e e rs with Down S yn d r o m e . T h e ch il dr en were shown first re ad i ng , a n d t h e n discuss­ ing p e r so n a l interests. T h e n o n r c t a r d c d ch i ld re n r ea d with ease, t he mildly r e t a r d e d m a d e s o m e errors, a n d those with Down S y n d r o m e showe d s ome difficulty r e a d i n g a m u c h lower level text. In Siperstein ct al. (1980) n o n ­

122

4.

PREJUDICE AND DI SCRIMINATIO N TOW ARD T H E RETARDED

ret ar ded children listened to an audi ot ape of two children participating in a spelling bee. O n e child (the control) was always a c o m p e t e n t speller, whereas the o t he r child (the target child) was either c o m p e t e n t with diffi­ cult words or i nc o m p e t e n t with easy words. T he subjects were shown p h o t o ­ graphs of the spellers. T h e control speller was always n or ma l appearing, whereas the target child was cither n or ma l a pp ea r i n g or ha d Down Syn­ d ro me . In addition, the target child was ei ther labeled as “mentally re­ t a r d e d ” or as a “r eta rd, ” which would e n h a n c e the operati on of badging mechanisms. Finally, in Hemphi ll a nd Siperstein’s (1990) study, a normal-appearing, mentally re ta rd ed child was paired in conversation with a same-age n o n ­ r etar dcd child. T h r o u g h coaching o f the mentally r etar ded child a n d skill­ ful editing o f the conversations, two videotapes were p r od u c e d. In one, the mentally r et ar ded child showed age-appropriate conversational abilities, a nd in the other, the child showed deficits characteristic of mentally re­ tarded chi ld re n— for example, u n e x p e ct e d topic “leaps,” repeat ing a small set o f conversational topics, long pauses. As in the a fo r eme n ti on ed studies, for half the participants, the target child was labeled as being in a spccial class for learning problems, a n d for the o t h e r half, the child was referred to as being in a “classroom like yours.” In all these experi ment s, irrespective o f the label given the depict ed chil­ dr en by the researchers, n o n r e t a r d c d children showed mo re positive atti­ tudes toward the c o m p e t e n t a n d / o r socially app ro pr ia t e p ee r than toward the i n c om p e t e nt a n d / o r i nappr opr iat e peer. In the Van Bour gondicn (1987) study, t he labeling of the target child as r et ar ded ha d no effect on a measure o f willingness by n o n r e t a r d c d children to interact with the child. In Bak a nd Sipcrstein’s (1987b) study, n o n r e t a r d e d children showed simi­ lar attitudes toward a mildly re ta rd ed a nd a child with Down Syndrome, both less positive than toward a n or mal a p p e ar i ng child. In the Sipcrstein ct al. (1980) study, labeling a n or mal a ppe ar i ng child a “r e t a r d ” ha d negative effects on c h i l d r e n ’s attitudes, b u t labeling a child with Down Syndrome a “r et a rd ” ha d no differential effects as c o m p a r e d to labeling him “mentally r et ar de d. ” In Hemphil l a nd Siperstein’s (1990) study, the conversationally defi­ cient target was viewed less positively than the non de fi ci en t target a n d as m o r e likely to be rejected or isolated by peers. Labeling generally h a d no ef­ fects, with the exception m e n t i o n e d before involving sex of rater. These studies indicate that n o n r c t a r d c d c h i l d r e n ’s negative attitudes toward their mentally r et ar ded peers arc based primarily on the intellectually i n c o m p e ­ tent, socially i nappropri at e, or conversationally deficient behaviors o f the retarded. Ap pear ance differences from the “n o r m a l ” seem secondary to be ­ havior differences. This entire pattern of results is consistent with the badging m e c h a n i s m / i n g r o u p favoritism hypothesis, as well as the c u lt ur al /

I) EV EI .P M E N T O F I) ISC RIMIN AT IO N

123

historical view o f l ower status dif fer ences for mental l y r e t a r d e d individuals. T h e r e a p p e ar s to be little s u p p o r t for the o u t g r o u p hostility hypothesi s or for o u t g r o u p attraction.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F D I S C R I M I N A T I O N T OW ARD P E O P L E W I T H M EN TA L R E TA RD A T I O N Two types o f studies arc discussed in this section: those based on observa­ tions o f i nt er act i ons b et ween mentally r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r c t a r d c d peers, a n d those bas ed on soci omct r ic ratings. Re ga r di n g observations, which we discuss first, the majority o f e x p e r i m e n t s t ha t have b e e n c ar ri ed o u t deal with preschool - age c hi ldr en; a n d the r e m a i n d e r with j u n i o r a n d s eni or high school students. T h e r e are a p p ar e n t l y n o observational studies with ch il dr en in k i nd e r g a r t e n t h r o u g h G r a d e 6. P r edi ct ions b as ed on g e n e t i c / e vol ut ionary a n d c u l t ur a l/ h is t o r ic a l factors arc exactly t he same as those d e v el o p e d for prej udice. G ur alnic k (1980) obser ved n o n r c t a r d c d a n d mildly, mode r at el y, a n d se­ verely r e t a r d e d 4- to 6-ycar-old ch i ld re n d u r i n g frec-play p er i od s in in te ­ g r at ed p r e s ch o o l classrooms. M e a s u r e m e n t s were taken o f playmate p r e f e r ­ ences at the b e g i n n i n g a n d e n d o f the a c a de m i c year. T h e pri nci pal findings were th at the n o n r c t a r d c d a n d mildly r e t a r d e d c h i l dr e n i nt er ac te d m o r e with o n e a n o t h e r t ha n they d id with t he o t h e r two gr oups. Moreover, this di scr imi nati on inc re as e d from the b e g i n n i n g to e n d o f t he year. T h e m o d e ra t e l y a n d severely r e t a r d e d ch il dr en sh o we d n o i nt er ac ti ona l p r e f e r ­ ences a m o n g the f o u r gr o u p s. It is i m p o r t a n t to n o te t h a t t he mildly r e ­ t a r d ed ch i ld re n were, on average, 1 year o l d e r t han thei r n o n r e t a r d c d peers. T hu s, it is possible that t h e principal factor d e t e r m i n i n g playmate p r e f e r e n c e s for t he n o n r e t a r d c d a n d mildly r e t a r d e d g r o u ps was d e ve l op ­ m e n t a l level, for e xa mp l e , m e nt a l age, a n d n o t relative d e v el o pm e nt a l level, for e x a mp le , IQ. T h e e x p e r i m e n t by Gu ra ln i ck a n d G r o o m (1987) a ns we re d the a fo re ­ m e n t i o n e d q uest ion a n d p r o v i de d i m p o r t a n t i n f o rma t io n a b o u t the social c o m p e t e n c i e s o f mildly r e t a r d e d 4-year-olds. In thei r study, ei ght i n d e p e n d ­ e n t p re s ch o ol play g r o u p s were c o n s t r u c t e d for a 4-week p e ri od , each c o n ­ sisting o f t h r e e n o n r c t a r d c d 4-ycar-olds, t h r e e n o n r c t a r d e d 3-year-olds, a n d two mildly r e t a r d e d 4-year-olds who were m a t c h e d in d e ve l o p m e n t a l level with the n o n r e t a r d c d 3-year-olds. However, the 3-year-olds h a d s u p e ri or l a ng u a ge ability relative to the r e t a r d e d c hi ldr e n. Overall, n o n r e t a r d c d 4-year-olds mo st p r e f e r r e d playing with o t h e r n o n ­ r c t a r d e d 4-ycar-olds a n d relatively avoi ded playing with ch il dr e n in the o t h e r two gr oups. T h e n o n r c t a r d e d 3-year-olds p r e f e r r e d playing with o t h e r n o n r e t a r d c d 3- a n d 4-ycar-olds a n d relatively avoided playing with

124

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D IS C R IM IN A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RE TA RDE D

t he ir r e t a r d e d peers. T h e r e t a r d e d c hi ld r en m o s t p r e f e r r e d playing with 4year-old n o n r c t a r d c d peers, a n d relatively avoi ded playing with 3-year-old n o n r e t a r d c d peers. T h e r e t a r d e d ch i ld re n e n g a g e d in m o r e solitary play than t he o t h e r two gr oups. In m o s t o f the o t h e r behavi ors (e.g., leadi ng p e e r s in activities, m o d e l i n g behaviors, following activities wi th ou t in st r u c ­ tions), the hi gh est level o f social c o m p e t e n c e was shown by 4-year-old n o n r c t a r d c d , th en 3-year-old n o n r c t a r d c d , a n d finally 4-ycar-old r e t a r d e d c hil dr en. In co nt ra st to t hei r n o n r c t a r d c d peers, the r e t a r d e d ch il dr en w’cre i nf r eq ue nt l y used as a r es o ur c e by thei r peers, for e x a mp l e , in seeking i n f o rm a t i o n or e x p l a n a ti o ns from t h e m . Finally, over t he c ourse o f the 4w’eek pe riod, only the c hi ld r en in the r e t a r d e d g r o u p s ho we d a decl ine in thei r ability to positively e nga ge p ee rs in social i nteractions. T h e s e findings are consistent with the b a d gi n g m e c h a n i s m / i n g r o u p favoritism hypothesis for the n o n r c t a r d c d c hi l d r en , a n d with the o u t g r o u p attractiveness h y p o t h ­ esis f or the mentally r e t a r d e d c hi l d r en . T h e r e is l imited evidence in s u p ­ p o r t o f o u t g r o u p hostility, which consists o f exclusion o f the ment all y r e ­ t a r d ed by the n o n r c t a r d c d . T h e dat a indicate t h a t mildly r e t a r d e d c hi ldr en are def icient in social skills. Does this deficiency also affect e n d u r i n g social i nte ra ct ions such as friendships? T h e e x p e r i m e n t by Gur al ni ck a n d G r o o m (1988a) a dd r es s ed this q u e s­ tion. Th ey e x a m i n e d bo th unilateral a n d r eciprocal fr ie nd sh ip s in the same g r o u p o f ch i ld re n they s tu d ie d in 1987. A unilateral friendship was d e f i ne d as o n e in which a child directs at least o n e t hi r d o f positive pe er -r el ate d i n t er ­ actions to a specific playmate. A reciprocal friendship involved two chi l d r en , each di r ec ti ng at least o n e t hi r d o f these i nt e ra ct ions toward the ot he r . Re­ g a r d i n g unilateral friendships, t h e r e were essentially no dif f er ences b e ­ tween t he t hr ee g r o u p s in f re q ue n cy o f o c c u r r e n c e . However, in a p at te rn c onsistent with t he 1987 results, ch i ld r en in all t h r e e g r o u ps mo st p r e f e r r e d the 4-year-old n o n r e t a r d c d chi l dr e n for this type o f fr ie nds hi p . T h e p a t te r n for reci procal f ri ends hi ps was quite different. T h e 4-ycar-old n o n r c t a r d e d c hi l d r e n h a d the m o s t reciprocal fri endshi ps, followed by the 3-year-old n o n r e t a r d c d , a n d th en the r e t a r d e d chi l d r en . T h e n o n r c t a r d c d c hil dr en p r e f e r r e d same-age pe er s on this me a sur e . Onl y two o f the 16 r e t a r d e d chil­ d r e n h a d r e ci p r o ca te d fri endshi ps, so n o p a t t e r n c ould be established for t h e m. T h e s e results indicat e t h a t a tt e mp t s at r e c i p r oc at e d f ri endships arc far less successful w h e n m a d e by r e t a r d e d than n o n r c t a r d c d peer s m a t c h e d for c it he r ch ro no l og i ca l or d e ve l o p m e n t a l age. T h e n e x t study, by Ryndcrs, R. T. J o h n s o n , D. W. J o h n s o n , a n d S c h m i d t (1980) f ocused on the effects o f cooperat ive, individualistic, a n d c o m p e t i ­ tive st ruc t ur es on t he i nter acti ons betw’cen a dol escent s with Down Syn­ d r o m e a n d same-age (13 to 15 years) n o n r c t a r d e d peers. T h e two g r ou ps a t t e n d e d di f f er ent schools b u t were b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r 1 h o u r a week for 8 weeks to bowl t oge the r. In the cooper at ive c o n d it io n , t he adol es c en ts were

D E V EL O P M E N T O F DI SCRIMINATIO N

125

instructed to help each o t h e r improve their bowling scores in o r d e r to m a x ­ imize the g r o u p ’s score. In the competitive condition, they were instructed to try to get the best score in the gr oup. In the individualistic condition, they were instructed to try to improve their scorcs by a ccrtain a m o u n t cach week. T h e a uthor s c o d ed n u m b e r s of positive p ee r interactions, for e x am ­ ple, praising, e ncour agi ng, u n d e r all three conditions. T he results were striking. Both re ta rd ed a n d n o n r e t a r d c d adolescents in the cooperative condition directed a bo u t 10 times as many positive acts toward both catego­ ries of peers than did adolescents in the o t h e r two conditions. These results indicate that positive interactions can occur between r et ar ded a nd n o n ­ re ta rd c d peers who arc at very different developmental levels. Moreover, the findings arc consistent with the hypothesis that positive authority acccptancc will rc duc e discrimination toward r et ar ded by n o n r c t a r d c d peers. Th e study by Zctlin a nd Murt augh (1988) used e x p e r im e nt e r participant observation m e t h o d s to investigate the n a tur e of friendships a m o n g n o n ­ re ta rd c d a nd very mildly r etar ded (i.e., IQs averaged 73) adolescents at­ t e n d i n g the s ame s eni or high school. R e ta rd ed s tudent s were m a i n ­ st reamed into several classes cach day. T he researchers a t te n de d classcs with the students, h u n g o u t with t hem at lunch, between classes, a nd after school, a nd occasionally interviewed t hem. T h e study lasted an entire school year. Although the a uthors do n o t tell us the extent o f friendship segregation a m on g these students, it is clear from their discussion t hat very few friendships occur rcd between r etar ded a nd n o n r c t a r d c d peers. Although friendship patterns within cach gr ou p overlapped somewhat, there were substantial differences that would lead to friendship segregation between the two groups. Some of the most salient differences arc as follows. N o n r e t a r d c d relative to re ta rd e d students were mu ch m o r e likely to form large, mixed-sex friendship groups. For ab ou t half o f the r etar ded students (but few of t he n o n r c t a r d c d ones), interactions with friends were mainly limited to the school setting a nd t el ep ho ne conversations. Relative to those a m o n g n o n r c t a r d c d students, friendships a m o n g r et ar ded relative to n o n ­ re ta rd c d students were generally less intimate, that is, they self-disclosed fewer personal issues, exhibited less empat hy to pr obl ems e x pe ri en ced by a close friend, a n d were often characterized by f r e q ue n t a nd intense c o n­ flicts. T he latter characteristic led to less e n d u r i n g friendships. T he a uthors suggest that many of these differences are based on the relatively restricted experiences that re ta rd e d adolescents have had, a nd arc probably u n r e ­ lated to their retardation as such. T he two main sourccs of restriction are classroom segregation a n d close parental supervision of their time o ut of school. These studies indicate that discrimination by n o n r c t a r d c d toward re­ tarded peers is at least partially based on the lower level of social skills m a ni ­ fested by the latter group. For those children a nd adolcsccnts with m o d e r ­

126

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RE TA RDE D

ate a n d severe r e ta r da t io n , it is unlikely that these skills, even with training, c ould r each levels at t ai ne d by n o n r c t a r d c d persons. For ma ny mildly r e ­ t a r d ed pe rs on s (who c om p r is e the majority of those with m e n t a l r e t a r d a ­ ti on), however, e n h a n c e d social skills arc at tainable. T h e Rynders et al. (1980) e x p e r i m e n t i nd ic at ed t h a t i n te ra ct io ns be twe en m o d e r a t e l y r e ­ t a r d ed a n d n o n r e t a r d c d p e er s can be positive, even if f ri ends hi ps do n o t oc­ cur. As with the j u s t m e n t i o n e d studies, these results are consistent with the b a d g i ng m e c h a n i s m / i n g r o u p favoritism hypothesis. T h e r e is s ome evi­ d e n c e of o u t g r o u p hostility— exclusion from f ri ends hi ps a n d social inte ra c­ tions— a n d no e vi dence s u p p o r t i n g o u t g r o u p attractiveness. T u r n i n g now to the soci omct ri c studies, all b u t o n e used t he rostcr-andr at ing m e t h o d (Stager & Young, 1981). Un f o r tu na te ly , t ha t e x p e r i m e n t was the only o n e dea li ng with s eni or high school s tudent s. With t h e e xc ep t io n o f the Gu ra ln ic k a n d G r o o m (1987) a n d Strain (1985) e x p e r i m e n t s involv­ ing p r es c ho ol ch i ld r en , all the r e m a i n i n g e x p e r i m e n t s were c o n c e r n e d with ch il dr en bet ween G ra de s 2 a n d 7. Recall that in the G ur al ni ck a n d G r o o m (1987) e x p e r i m e n t , i n d e p e n d ­ e n t g r o up s consisting o f 3- a n d 4-year-old n o n r c t a r d c d a n d 4-ycar-old mildly r e t a r d e d ch i ld re n were observed. At the e n d o f t he 4-weck p er i od , all the ch i ld re n were asked to rate each of thei r classmates on how m u c h they like playing with t h e m. T h e r e t a r d e d c hi ld re n received lower average rat­ ings a n d lower n u m b e r s o f positive ratings t han the o t h e r two gro up s , who received equ iv a le nt ratings. T h e se results a gr ee with the observational scores r e g a r d i n g t he r e t a r d e d ch il dr en , b u t arc s o m e w h a t d is c r e pa n t r e ­ g a r d i n g the two n o n r c t a r d c d groups. Recall t h a t observations i ndic at e d t h a t chi ld re n in the 4-ycar-old n o n r c t a r d c d g r o u p were the most pr e fe r re d. Strain (1985) m e a s u r e d various social a n d n ons oc ia l behavi ors o f two g r o u p s o f m o de r at e l y r e t a r d e d pr es c hool e rs . O n e g r o u p received relatively high soci omctri c ratings fr om th ei r n o n r c t a r d e d peers, a n d the o t h e r g r o u p, relatively low ratings. C hi ld re n in the h i g h e r r at ed g r o u p were often observed to organi ze play, share, show affection, help, a n d act less n e g a ­ tively t h a n c hi l d r e n in the lower r at ed g r o u p . Thus , social c o m p e t e n c e leads to relatively high soci omct r i c ratings. T h e e x p e r i m e n t s by J. Gottlieb, S e mm e l , a n d V e l d m a n (1978), Roberts a n d Zubr ick (1992), a n d A. R. Taylor, Asher, a n d Williams (1987) e x a m ­ i n e d the r el ati ons hi p b etween n o n r c t a r d c d p e e r s ’ evaluations o f t he b eh a v ­ i o r / p e r s o n a l i t y o f m a i n s t r e a m e d mildly r e t a r d e d peer s a n d liking of those peers. In all t hr ee studies, the ch i ld re n were in m i dd l e school, bet ween Gr a de s 3 a n d 7. T h e specific me as u re s e m p l o ye d by Gottlieb ct al. a n d Ro b ­ erts a n d Zubrick were similar a n d h e n c e arc discussed first. In all these e x ­ p e r im e n t s, r e t a r d e d chi l d r e n received lower f r ie nds hi p ratings t ha n n o n r c ­ t a r d cd c hil dr en.

D E V EL O P M E N T O F DI SCRIMINATIO N

127

In the Gottlieb et al. (1978) study, the social acccptance and social rejec­ tion of mildly r etar ded mai ns t re ame d children were c o m p ar e d with p e er s ’ and t eachcr s’ percept i ons o f the r e ta rd e d c h i l d r e n ’s cognitive a nd di srup­ tive behavior, a n d with the a m o u n t of time they were integrated into r eg u­ lar classes. Statistical analyses indicated that social accept ance was related to p ee r a n d teachcr ratings o f cognitive c omp c te n cc a n d unr el at ed to di srup­ tive behavior. Social rejection was related to p e e r a n d teacher ratings of dis­ ruptive behavior a nd t eacher s’ ratings o f cognitive ability. T he a m o u n t of time ret ar ded children were integrated was unr elat ed to either social acccp­ tance or rejection. T he results are consistent with the badging mcchan is m s / i n g r o u p favoritism hypothesis, b ut n ot with o ut gr ou p hostility. The fact that a m o u n t o f time o f integration was unr el at ed to ratings indicates that authority acceptance played no role in these findings. Roberts a n d Zubrick (1992) replicated a n d e x t e n de d the Gottlieb ct al. (1978) research by using very mildly re ta rd ed children (average IQs were 73). Statistical analyses indicated that social acccptancc of re ta rd e d chil­ dren was positively related to t eacher s ’ a nd p e er s ’ per cepti ons of their aca­ demic abilities a n d negatively related to p e er s ’ percept i ons of their disrup­ tive behavior. Social acceptance o f n o n r e t a r d c d children was only related to t eacher s’ a nd p e e rs ’ percept ions o f academic abilities. Different patterns e me r ge d for social rejection. For r etar ded children, p e er s ’ percepti ons of disruptive behavior was the only significant prcdictor. For n o n r c t a r d c d children, both p e er s ’ percept ions of academic abilities a nd disruptive b e ­ havior were significant prcdictors of social rejection. T h e results of these two studies arc n o t completely in a gr eement . How­ ever, they do poi nt to two i m p or t an t conclusions. First, the bases of social acccptancc a n d social rejection o f r et ar ded chi dren by n o n r c t a r d c d peers arc different, consistent with a b adgi ng mechanism hypothesis. Being posi­ tively liked appears to d e p e n d on being academically comp et en t, b ut being disliked d e p e nd s on being disruptive. Second, n o n r c t a r d e d children seem to use different criteria in evaluating social acccptancc a n d rejection when assessing r et ar de d a n d n o n r c t a r d c d peers. This implies that identifying peers as mentally r et ar ded (badging mechani s m) influences s ubs equent j udgme nt s ab o ut them, a nd the ext ent o f their perceived differences d e t e r ­ mines the ext ent o f i ngr oup favoritism a n d o ut g ro u p hostility. In the A. R. Taylor et al. (1987) ex pe ri me nt , mai ns tr ea me d mildly re­ tarded a n d n o n r c t a r d c d children were c o m p ar e d on p ee r assessments of c oopération, disruptive behavior, shyness, fighting, a nd leadership, and on t eachcr assessments o f friendliness, a voidance behavior, bossiness, a nd ag­ gressiveness. These two lists arc similar, b u t n o t equivalent. This research helps us u nd e rs ta n d the o ut c om e of badgi ng mechanisms in the p e r c e p ­ tion o f mildly r etar ded a n d n o n r c t a r d c d children. Retarded children, rcla-

128

4.

PREJUDICE AND DI SCRIMINATIO N TOW ARD T H E RETARDED

tivc to n o n r c t a r d c d ones, were seen by their peers as less cooperative, mor e shy, a nd less likely to be n a m e d as leaders. They were n o t seen to differ in disruptive or aggressive behavior. Tcachcrs perceived r et ar ded children as less friendly a n d mo re avoidant than n o n r e t a r d c d ones. No differences were fo un d for bossiness or aggressiveness. Recall, that the re ta rd ed chil­ dr en received lower friendship sociomctric ratings than their n on r c t a r d c d peers. These results indicate that perccivcd bossiness or aggressiveness do not underl i e the relative dislike of r et a rd e d children by t heir n o n r c t a r d c d peers. Rather, in interactions with n o n r c t a r d c d peers, r et ar ded children are shy or withdrawn a n d arc lacking in cooperative a nd l eadership social skills. These characteristics were seen by Guralnick a nd Gr oom (1987) for mildly r et ar ded preschool children, suggesting that they are deeply cnt r c nc hc d patterns that e me rg e when r et ar ded children interact with n o n ­ r ctar dcd peers. T h e previously m e n t i o n e d research indicates that various social a n d aca­ demic deficiencies underl ie the low sociomctric friendship ratings given by n o n r c t a r d c d children to their mildly re ta rd ed peers. T h e ex pe ri me nt s by Bak a n d Siperstcin (1987a) a n d Acton a nd Zarbatany (1988) addressed the issue o f wh e th e r c o m p ct c nc e in a specific g ame situation can modify socio­ mctric ratings. In the Bak a n d Siperstcin expe r ime nt , gr oups of one mildly ret ar ded a nd two n o n r c t a r d c d peers from the same classes (Grades 4 to 6) were asked to play a bcanbag-tossing game. T h e children were instructed to focus on the t e a m ’s score because they were in competition with o t h e r teams. T he scoring was “rigged” such that the e x p e r im e n te r d et e rm i ne d cach player’s p e rf or ma nc e out c ome . For half of the game, the retarded player “p e r f o r m e d ” the best, a n d for the o t he r half, he or she “p e r f o r m e d ” as an average player. O n days prior to a n d after the game playing, various sociomctric measures were taken. T h e a ut hor s f ou n d that n o n r c t a r d c d children were m u c h mo re likely to choose a highly successful ret arded child as a p a r t n e r in future games than to choosc one who only ha d an aver­ age per for mance. However, game pe rf or ma n c e ha d n o influence on n o n ­ ret ar dcd c h i l d r e n ’s willingness to engage in o t h e r friendship-related activi­ ties with the r et ar de d children. Thus, the specific positive compet enci es did n ot carry over into o th e r interactional realms. This finding is similar to that seen for d ea f a nd h ear ing individuals, where friendships could occur in the restricted classroom setting, b ut n ot outside o f the school. Authority acccp­ tancc o f positive attributes of the su b or di na te d gr o u p m e m b e r may be the basis for both sets of findings. Acton a nd Zarbatany (1988) used the same rigged game with children in Grades 2 to 6 as Bak a nd Sipcrstcin (1987a) used. T h e children played in pairs— o n e mildly r et ar ded child a n d one n o n r c t a r d c d o n e — a nd the re­ tarded chi ld’s scorcs were rigged to be average or poor. Additionally, half of the pairs were instructed to e nc ou ra ge or coach each o th er because they

I) EV EI .P M E N T O F I) ISC RIMIN AT IO N

129

were o p e r a t i n g as a team (high i nt er ac ti on ) , wh er e as the o t h e r h a lf were asked to sit quietly while thei r p a r t n e r p e r f o r m e d (low i nt er ac ti on) . A vari­ ety o f soci omct r ic m e a s ur e s were taken on days b ef or e a n d after the ga me . A lt ho u gh the ch il dr en a t t e n d e d the s ame school, they did n o t a t t e n d the s ame classes, unlike the c hi l d r e n in t he Bak a n d Siperstcin (1987a) study. T h e princi pal results, similar to Bak a n d Sipcrstcin, were t ha t g a m e playing c o m p e t e n c e h a d no effect on soci ometri c ratings. However, n o n r c t a r d c d ch il dr en r at ed t he ir g a m e p a r t n e r s m o r e positively th an they r at ed o t h e r r e ­ t a r d ed ch il dr en in t h e ir grades. Additionally, p a r t n e r s in the high-intcraction c on d it i o n were m o r e positively r at ed by th ei r n o n r c t a r d c d peers t h a n were ch il dr en in t h e low-interaction c ond it io n . T h e se two findings arc d if f er e nt from those o f Bak a n d Sipcrstcin, a n d lead to t he following c o n ­ clusion. For relatively u n a c q u a i n t e d r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r c t a r d c d ch i ld re n, a positive social e x p e r i e n c e will have g e ne ra li zed positive effects on how the r e t a r d e d ch il dr e n are viewed by thei r n o n r e t a r d c d peers. But for ch i ld r en wh o are relatively well-known to cach o t h e r , o n e pa rti cula r e x p e r i e n c e will have essentially no ge ne ra li zed effects. T h e s e results arc c onsi st ent with the b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s / i n g r o u p fa­ voritism hypothesis. W h e r e r e t a r d e d c hi ld re n arc already k nown by thei r n o n r e t a r d c d peers, the new i n f o rm a t i o n a dd s only a little to the perceived att ribut es o f t he r e t a r d e d peers. W h e r e the r e t a r d e d ch il dr en are n o t well kno wn, the new i n f o r ma t io n c on tr i bu t e s significantly a n d positively to the p er c e p t i o n s o f n o n r e t a r d e d peers. In Stager a n d Y o u n g ’s (1981) e x p e r i m e n t , m a i n s t r e a m e d mildly r e ­ t a r d ed s en i or hi gh school s t u de n t s were sociomctrically rat ed ( “best-friends t e c h n i q u e ”) by th ei r n o n r c t a r d c d classmates a n d by o t h e r r e t a r d e d peers from t he ir special e d u ca t i o n classes. Qu e st i o ns were also asked a b o u t the types o f social c o n t ac t th at o c c u r r e d with the m a i n s t r e a m e d students. T h e pri ncipal results were t ha t r e t a r d e d peer s fr om special e d u ca t i on classes were m u c h m o r e likely than n o n r c t a r d c d p ee rs to be best fr iends with the m a i n s t r e a m e d students. Similarly, p e er s from spccial e d u ca t i o n classes h a d significantly m o r e social contact s with th ei r m a i n s t r e a m e d peer s t ha n did n o n r e t a r d c d peers. I n d e e d , t h e re was virtually no social c o nt ac t be twe en r e ­ t a r d ed a n d n o n r c t a r d c d peers. M e a s u r e m e n t s taken at the b e g i n n i n g a n d e n d o f t he se me s te r were essentially the same. T h u s , the p i c t ur e seen o f so­ cial s egregation in y o u n g e r chi ld re n strongly persists a m o n g o l de r a dole s­ cents, c onsi st ent with g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c ul tu r al /h i s to r ic a l e xp la ­ nat io ns previously given. W h e n the observational research is c o m p a r e d with t h e soci ometr ic r e ­ search, the m a jo r results are in c o m p l e t e accord: (a) n o n r c t a r d c d c hil dr en a n d adol escents p r e f er in te ra cti n g with a n d f o r mi n g fr iends hi ps with o t h e r n o n r e t a r d c d individuals; (b) these p r e f e r e nc es are bas ed on social a n d b e ­ havioral deficiencies o f r e t a r d e d peers; a n d (c) positive inte ra cti ons a n d

130

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RE TA RDE D

p r e f e r e n c e s by n o n r e t a r d e d toward r e t a r d e d peer s can readily o c c ur in highly specific situat ions such as game-playing. Fr i en ds hi ps can i nf r e­ que nt l y o c c ur b etween n o n r e t a r d c d a n d r e t a r d e d peers, especially if the latter have a d e q u a t e social skills. T he se results a n d t he e xp l a n a t io n s for t he m arc highly consistent with o u r c oncl us i ons involving di scr imi nat i on t oward t he d e a f by n o r m a l h e a r i n g c h i ld r en , adol escent s, a n d y o u n g adults. In c o m p a r i n g the pr ej ud i c e a n d d i scr i mi nat ion r es ear ch, two inconsis­ tencies e m e rg e . First, n o n e o f the d is cr imi nat i on r esear ch p oi nt s to reliable sex o r age effects, wher eas these do t e n d to o c c ur in the p r ej u d ic e litera­ ture. O n e plausible e xp l a n a t io n is t ha t social desirability issues c o n c e r n i n g u n k n o w n p e e r s i nf luences p r ej udi ce b ut n o t di scr imi nat i on j u d g m e n t s . T h e underlying processes likely involve positive social obligations expressed by au t ho r it y figures t ha t arc a cc c pt cd as beliefs by o l d e r t ha n y o u n g e r chil­ d r en . Females arc m o r e likely to r e s p o n d positively to r e t a r d e d p e er s t han are mal es be ca us e o f a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y predi sposi ti on to do so. Ho w­ ever, it s eems t ha t with females a n d o l d e r ch il dr en , generosit y o f spirit o c ­ curs relatively easily at a distance. T h e c ho o s i ng o f fr iends has i mm e d i a t e a n d c o n c re t e effects. S e co n d , in the p r e ju di ce r ese ar ch , i nc re ase d c on t a c t leads to d ec r ea s e d pr ej udi ce , whe re as in d is cr iminati on, l engt h o f co nt a ct a p p e a rs to have no affect on f ri en ds h i p choices. A b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m e xp l an a ti on may be rel­ evant. T h e l o n g e r the contact, the m o r e likely t h a t c o m m o n e l e m e n t s will be obser ved betw’e en outsiders ( the mental ly r e t a r d e d ) a n d i n g r o u p m e m ­ bers (the no rma ll y deve lo p i ng ) . This s h o ul d lead to a d ec r ea se in p r e j u ­ dice. But having less p rc j ud i cc toward ment all y r e t a r d e d individuals is obvi­ ously n o t e n o u g h to cause a n o n r c t a r d c d child to have t he m as friends. Both the p re ju d i ce a n d the di scr imi nati on l iteratures are in a g r e e m e n t that per ceived social c o m p e t e n c e me d ia t es positive choices a n d attitudes o f the r e t a r d e d by t he n o n r e t a r d c d . T h u s s o m e socially c o m p e t e n t r e t a r d e d chil­ d r e n will be valued positively a n d c ho se n as fr iends by their n o n r e t a r d c d peers. But t he l i terature i ndicates t ha t this is an u n c o m m o n o c c u r r en ce .

SUMMARY This c h a p t e r e x a m i n e d pr cj ud ic c a n d d i scr i mi nat ion toward ment all y r e ­ t a r d ed individuals, b e g i n n i n g with an overview o f the goals a n d m e t h o d s of U.S. e d u c a t o r s in d e si gn i ng a p p r o p r i a t e p r o g r a m s for t he m. In particular, fo ur p er i od s in the history o f t h e e d u c at io n o f c hi ld r en with m e n t a l r e t a r d a ­ tion were discussed: 1848-1896, Residential Care; 1896-1950, Special E d u ­ cation a n d Sterilization; 1950-1975, Advocacy a n d E x p a n d e d Educati on; a n d 1975 to the p re s en t, Dei ns titutionalization, M a in st r ea mi ng , a n d I ncl u­

SUMM ARY

131

sion. A c ent r al u n d e r l y i n g t h e m e cutt i ng across all f o u r pe ri od s is the q u e s­ tion o f how m u c h c h a n g e toward n o r m a l be ha vi or can be p r o d u c e d by e d u ­ cational intervent ions. In the first p er i od , t h e re was wi de sp r ea d bel i ef that with small, family-like residential care a n d i nst ruct ion, substantial progress toward no r ma l it y c ou ld be a cc om p l is he d. D u r i n g t h e n e x t p er iod, e d u c a ­ tional efforts started to shift toward special classes for mildly r e t a r d e d chil­ d r e n a n d custodial care only for severely a n d p r o f o u n d l y r e t a r d e d c hi ldr en. Many r e t a r d e d adults were involuntarily sterilized be ca u s e o f t he p r e s u m e d link between r et ar da ti on a n d cri mi nal activity. D u r i ng the n e x t two periods, p ar e nt a l advocacy a n d a sympat het i c p r e s i d e n t o f the U n i t e d States paved the way for e x p a n d e d e d u ca t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d m o r e c om p a s s io na t e t r ea t me n t. We t h e n t u r n e d to the d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ej ud i c e a n d di scr imi nati on a m o n g ch il dr en, e x a m i n i n g school settings wh e r e me nt al ly r e t a r d e d i nd i ­ viduals were i n t e g ra t e d o r m a i n s t r e a m e d into c o n ve nt i o n a l e n v i r o n m e n t s to various de gr e es a n d in various ways. General ly these were soci omet r ic or observational studies t h a t l o o ke d to e xp re s se d attitudes as a m e a s u r e of p re ju di ce a n d i nt er acti on or fr ie nd sh ip choices as a m e a s u r e o f d is cr imin a­ tion. Pr ejudice by n o n r e t a r d c d individuals toward th ei r mentally r e t a r d e d p ee rs to s o m e e x t e n t d e p e n d s on t he level o f r e ta r da t io n. T h e y o un g es t age g r o u p st udied was in k in d e r g a r t e n . Between k i n d e r g a r t e n a n d G r a de 6, o l d e r n o n r e t a r d c d ch il dr en arc less p r e j u d i c e d t ha n y o u n g e r ones. G e n ­ erally, girls show less p re ju d i ce t h a n boys, which is c ons is te nt with the spec­ ulation b ased on g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y c on si der at ions . As was the case with the o t h e r discussions o f p re j udi c e, behavioral differences were f o u n d to be the pr ima r y basis of n o n r c t a r d c d c h i l d r e n ’s negative attitudes. Finally, in­ creasing the a m o u n t o f school c o n t ac t bet ween r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r e t a r d c d ch il dr en de cr ea ses the a m o u n t o f p r ej u d ic e of t he latter g r o u p toward the f o r m e r o ne . T he se findings were e x p l ai n e d by the p ow er o f b a d g i n g m e c h ­ ani sms le ad i ng to b o t h i n g r o u p favoritism a n d to a lesser ext ent , o u t g r o u p hostility. T h e s e g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y processes arc s u p p o r t e d by c u l t u r a l / historical t r e a t m e n t o f t he ment al ly r et a r d ed . O bs er vat ional studies o f d is cr imi nat i on o f n o n r e t a r d c d toward their me ntal l y r e t a r d e d p ee rs is at least partially bas ed on the lower level o f social skills ma ni f e st e d by t he latter g r o up . Mildly r e t a r d e d ch i ld r en a n d adol es­ cents with c o m p e t e n t skills do occasionally form f riendships with n o n ­ r c t a r d e d peers. All b u t o n e o f the sociomctr ic studies used the roster-andrat ing m e t h o d . Various social a n d a ca de mi c deficiencies u n d e r l i e the low sociometr ic ratings given mildly r e t a r d e d c hi ld r en by th ei r n o n r e t a r d c d peers. Specific positive c o m p e t e n c i e s d e m o n s t r a t e d by r e t a r d e d ch i ld re n positively i nf lue nc e the i nt er act ions o f n o n r c t a r d c d peer s toward t he m. However, these effects do n o t carry over into areas o t h e r t ha n t h a t o f the

132

4.

P RE JU D ICE AND D I S C R I M I N A T IO N T O W A R D T H E RE TA RDE D

specific c o m pe t e nc y . In s en io r high school, n o n r c t a r d c d adolescent s re­ p o r t virtually n o social contact s with t h e i r m a i n s t r e a m e d , mildly r e t a r d e d peers. E x pl an at io ns o f the d isc ri mi na tio n l i terat ure generally parallel those given for u n d e r s t a n d i n g d e a f - h e a r i n g i nt eract ions. Additionally, it a pp ea r s t h a t g e n c t i c / c v o l u l t i o n a r y a n d c ul t u r al /h i st o ri c a l e xp la n at io n s arc m o r e a pplicable to p re j ud i c e d e v e l o p m e n t t ha n to d is cr imi na ti on. As n o t e d in c h a p t e r 1, the c or rel ati on b et ween p rc j ud i c c a n d di scr iminat ion is rela­ tively low. Pr ejudice is just o n e a m o n g m a ny factors t h a t i nf l ue nc e discrimi­ n at i on . Finally, behavioral dif f er ences co mp r is e f o rm i da b le obstacles to so­ cial i nteract i on b et ween mental l y r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r e t a r d c d individuals, t h u s p rc ju di cc a n d discr imi nat ion toward this g r o u p may be a m o n g the mo st i ntractable in Ame ric an society.

C h a p te r

Prejudice an d Discrimination Against the O p po site Sex

This c h a pt er examines prejudice a nd discrimination related to gender, with particular attention to the role o f females in American society. We be ­ gin with a historical overview o f American g e n d e r relations, exami ni ng the way E ur op ea n Americans, from the earliest colonial settlements, estab­ lished a cultural no rm in which w o m e n were subor dinat e to m en. T h e his­ tory traced from that po i nt involved largely a struggle by w ome n for an expansion of legal rights, social a nd cultural roles, e m pl oy m en t a nd e du c a­ tional opportunities, position in domestic life, a nd control over sexuality a nd childbirth. Beyond these cultural/historical roots o f g e n d e r inequity arc the pr oc­ esses that e m e rg e d d ur i n g the period in which o u r ancestors lived in tribally based, hu n tc r- ga th c rcr societies. Will the operative devices in o ur g e ne ti c/ evol ut iona ry history have a role in c o n te m po r ar y scx-rolc acquisi­ tion? For example, we want to know the relative influcncc o f fathers versus m o t he r s on the scx-rolc predispositions o f their children a nd the differen­ tial acquisition by males a n d females, with increasing age, of knowledge of opposite-sex-role stereotypes, o f opposite sex-typed behaviors, a nd of selfesteem. O u r ccntral goal is to e xamine prejudice a nd discrimination arising from g e nd e r, a nd we summar ize as completely a n d accurately as possible the two designated literatures. I previously a tt emp t ed a brief summary (Fishbein, 1992), b ut many i mp o r t a n t details were omitted in that effort. This survey helps d e t er m i n e mor e precisely the sources of influcnccs of g e n d e r differentiation. Woul d we cxpcct to find, for example, mor e or less scx-rolc differential in traditional versus n on c onve nt iona l family types? 133

134

5.

OPPOSIT E-SEX PRE JUDICE AND DI SCRIMINATIO N

Wh a t is the influence of peers a nd teachers a nd how does it differ from that o f parents? Wh at is the relative influence of boys versus girls? Wh a t role do oppositc-scx beliefs— particularly countcrstcrcotypcs— play in resisting or a c c o m m od a t i ng scx-rolc acquisition? Arc t here discernible age shifts where particular social a n d development al factors govern attitudes toward a nd so­ cialization with the opposite sex? This c hapt cr takes a focused look at the socialization o f sex-typing, which plays an i m p o r t a n t role in c h i l d r e n ’s d ev el op me nt of opposite-scx pr eju­ dice a n d discrimination. Sex-typing refers to concepts, preferences, behav­ iors, a n d a personal identity related to maleness a nd femaleness. These characteristics i ncor por ate the differential cultural values a bo ut males and females, which in large pa rt form the basis of how peers interact with and evaluate cach other. In all these matters, we bear in mi nd o u r f undament al question: Wh a t is the relation between sex-rolc acquisition a n d the develop­ m e n t of the cultural n o r ms that arc manifested so vividly as opposite-scx prejudice a n d discrimination? We arc also attentive to the e xt e nt that b e­ havioral differences under lie g e n d e r prejudice a n d discrimination.

BRIEF CULTURAL H I S T O RY OF T H E ROLE O F FEMALES IN AMERICAN SOCIETY The focus in this section, owing to space limitations, is primarily on Eu r o­ p ea n Americans. T he w o m e n ’s histories by C. L. Evans (1989) a nd Ryan (1975), various African-American histories, a nd the general history of the United Slates by Nash, Jeffrey, Howe, Frederick, Davis, and Winkler (1990) suggested the existence of six major cultural periods between 1607, the English settlement of Jamestown, Virginia, a nd the present time. Not sur­ prisingly, most of the periods are identified by the wars that m ar ke d them. These periods are as follows: 1607-1770, Colonization; 1770-1825, Revolu­ tion a nd Consolidation; 1825-1865, Expansion a nd the Civil War; 18651920, Reconstruction, World War I, a nd Suffrage; 1920-1945, Prosperity, Depression, a nd World War II; 1945 to the present, Postwar Growth and Change. To a large extent, the changes in female roles and w o m e n ’s rights from 1607 to the present have involved the social rewriting of the biblical Fifth C o m m a n d m e n t ( h o n or i n g your m o t h e r and father), and the T e n t h C o m­ m a n d m e n t (wives are property of their husbands) . In a nutshell, women have gained substantial legal, political, economi c, military, sexual, a nd e d u ­ cational rights since the colonists settled in Jamestown. T h e changes have not b ee n equivalent in all these areas, the paths of im pr o v e me n t have often b ee n circuitous, with setbacks along the way, a nd functional equality with m e n as contrasted with relative legal equality has still not been attained in

C U L T U R A L H IS T O R Y O F T H E R O L E O F FEM ALES

IN A M ERICA N

SO C IET Y

135

any o f these areas. W o m e n arc no l o n g e r m e n ’s “p r o p e r t y , ” b u t they still h o ld s u bo r d i n a t e social roles. A l t h o u g h o u r t r e a t m e n t mu st be highly abbreviat ed, it is useful to i nd i­ cate s ome o f the mo s t significant findings a b o u t w o m e n ’s history in each of the m e n t i o n e d six periods. This discussion relies primarily o n the b oo k s by S. M. Evans (1989) a n d Ryan (1975). In the first, Col oni zati on p e r i od (1 60 7- 17 70 ), w o m e n ’s lives c ou ld be c a p t u r e d by t he i mage o f cycles of preg n a nc y, bi rt h, a n d child care. T h e average n u m b e r o f live births was eight. W o m e n a n d their d a u g h t e r s wor ke d very h a r d in the h o m e a n d in t he ir gar dens . Families were generally e conomi cal ly self-reliant, a n d m e n a n d w o m e n h a d nearly e qui va le nt e c o n o m i c roles in the h o m e . But despite this e c o n o m i c equality, w o m e n d e p e n d e d on t he ir h u s b a n d s ’ status outside t he h o m e in almost every o t h e r aspect o f life. Females were less literate t ha n males; m a n y schools were closed to girls; m a r r i e d w o m e n usually could n o t own la nd a n d businesses i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f th e ir h u s b a n d s ( a lt h ou gh wid­ ows c ou ld own la nd a n d businesses); w o m e n could n o t vote, sit on j ur i es (al­ t h o u g h they c oul d sue for divorce), h o l d public office, n o r parti ci pat e in the religious hierarchy. A l t h o u g h c ou rt sh ip a n d f emininity were d ownpla ye d, w o m e n ’s sexual e n j o y m e n t was n o t sup pr es s e d . Pr ema rit al sex following e n g a g e m e n t for ma r ri a ge was f r e q u e n t a n d c xp c ct c d. However, a d o u b l e sexual s t a n d ar d existed; m a r r i e d m e n s o me t ime s “f o r n i c a t e d ” with o t h e r w o me n , b u t m a r ­ ri ed w o m e n c o m m i t t e d “a d u l t e r y” with o t h e r m e n . T h e c ha nc e s o f a w o m a n successfully suing for divorce be c aus e of h e r h u s b a n d ’s infidelity were slim ( t h o u g h she woul d be successful o n a c ha r ge o f wife be at in g) , w he re as h e r h u s b a n d ’s suit woul d be successful on a similar char ge. T h e socialization o f girls a p p e ar s to have b e e n relatively straightforward d u r i n g this p e ri od . T he y wor ke d closely with t he ir m o t h e r s a n d were heavily involved in child care, h o m c m a k i n g , a n d e c o n o m i c activities r e ­ lated to what could be m a d e at h o m e o r grown in the g a r d e n . Relatively few h a d an extensive f or ma l e du c at io n , a n d ma ny were illiterate. T h e r e were scarce o pp o r t u n i t i e s a n d no role m o de l s for a life n o t intimately tied to ma r ri a ge a n d the family. T h e n e x t p e ri od , Revolution a n d Co nsoli dat ion ( 1770- 1825) p r o d u c e d a n u m b e r o f short-term a n d s ome long-term c h a n ge s in w o m e n ’s roles. Prior to a n d d u r i n g the war, the c o u n tr y w’as politicized. W o m e n were f o rc ed to l ook b e y on d bo th the h o m e a n d the n ea r by c o m m u n i t y a n d to b e ­ c o m e actively involved in o n g o i n g issues a n d events. T h e i r sons, h u s ba n ds , or fathers we nt to war against the British, o r took pro-British stances. No o n e c ould be n eu tr al o r uninvolved. M e m b e r s o f the s ame c h u r c h were of­ ten in o ppos it ion. W h e n h u s b a n d s w e nt to war, w o m e n often h a d to take ch a r ge o f the family as wTell as t he family business. W i d o w h o o d m a d e these c h a ng c s p e r m a n e n t . In s o me citics, nearl y 10% o f the small s h o p s were o w ne d by w o me n .

136

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

Substantial social class dif fer ences e m e r g e d d u r i n g this p e r i od , in p ar t d u e to ur ba ni z at io n, in p a r t to i mmi gr at i on , a n d in p a r t to inc r ea se d trade. Social roles for w o m e n varied, thus pr ovi di ng a wider r a n ge o f m o d e l s t h a n h a d b e e n available in the p r e c e d i n g pe ri o d . Upper-class w o m e n did little e c o n o m i c work a n d h a d c o n s id er a bl e free time for social activities, s h o p ­ ping, a n d vol unt eer ism in b e n e v o l e n t a n d religious societies. Middle-class w o m en were still heavily involved in family life, i n c l ud i ng e c o n o m i c activi­ ties, b u t they also e n g a g e d in v o l u n t e e r work. W o m e n o f t he lowest social classes h a d the great est a u t o n o m y in m o s t aspects o f life, b u t str uggl ed the mo st for e c o n o m i c survival. Many were e m p l o ye d in textile i ndustries, r e ­ ceiving consi der abl y lower pay t h a n m e n . Many lived off welfare p r ovi de d by the local g o v e r n m e n t a n d by b e n e v o l e n t societies f o u n d e d by middl ca n d upper-class w o m e n. U p pe r - a n d middle-class girls received a fair a m o u n t o f formal e d u c a ­ tion, p r e s um a bl y to e n a bl e t he m to b e c o m e b e t t e r wives a n d m o t h e r s . An d an i nc re as e d n u m b e r o f w o m e n b e c a m e sc ho ol te a ch e rs d u r i n g this per iod. M e m b er s o f lower-class families received little formal e du c at i o n . T h e r ep u b li c an spirit o f equality p r o d u c e d by t he i n d e p e n d e n c e mov e­ m e n t h a d two pri nci pl e long-term effects on w o m e n ’s roles: It led to the f or ma t io n o f m a n y w o m e n ’s vol untary or gani zati ons d ir e ct e d toward p r o ­ m o t i n g social well-being, a n d it led to g r e a t er esteem for the role o f m o t h e r ­ h o o d for p r o d u c i n g virtuous citizens. M o t h e r h o o d was c e l eb r at ed in the first chi ld-rearing m a n u a l , which a p p e a r e d d u r i n g this p e ri od . Sc hool ing was t h o u g h t to serve this f uncti on, too. But w o m e n were c a u t i o n e d to c o n ­ trol t he ir displays o f e d u ca t i o n a n d i ntelligence lest m e n feel m a n i p u l a t e d by t h e m. Birthrates fell d u r i n g this time, fr om eight live births to a b o u t six, s uggesting a m o r e p l a n n e d a p p r o a c h to p a r e n t h o o d . Despite these c ha ng cs, w o m e n ’s f or ma l political, legal, a n d p r o p e r ty right s r e m a i n e d relatively u n c h a n g e d . A n d d e s p it e s o m e c h a n g e s in c hu rc h- r el at ed activities, the religious hi er ar ch y was still c on tr o ll e d by m e n . Socialization o f girls b e c a m e m o r e c o mp l i c a t e d d u r i n g this p e riod. T h e r e were t r e m e n d o u s social class differences, r ur al versus u r b a n differences, a n d s ch oo li ng b e c a m e very influential. An active social, religious, a n d e c o ­ n o m i c life outside t he h o m e b e c a m e a l ikeli hood for many. T h e n e x t p e r i od , E x pa nsi on a n d Civil Wa r ( 1 82 5- 186 5) , involved a m a r k e d polarization of w o m e n ’s roles. Thi s is m o st clearly seen in the estab­ l i s h me n t o f two “u t o p i a n ” societies, the Shakers a n d the O n e i d a C o m m u ­ nity. Both were e c onomi ca ll y self-contained, with m e n a n d w o m e n taking o n egalitarian roles. T h e y were c o m m u n a l , a n d profits from ex te rn a l sales were sh a re d. In the S h a k e r c o mm u n i t i e s , t h e r e was rigid sex-segregation, with sexual a bs t in en ce the go ve rn in g rule. Within t he O n e i d a C o m m u n i t y , m o n o g a m y was a bol is he d a n d sexual i n t e r c ou r se with several c o n c u r r e n t

C U L T U R A L H IS T O R Y O F T H E R O L E O F FEM ALES

IN A M ERICA N

SO C IET Y

137

p a r t n e r s was e n c o u r a g e d . Many m e n a n d w o m e n f o r m e d “c o m p l e x ” m a r ­ riages, which c ou ld be readily dissolved. A l t h o u g h w o m e n ’s sexuality was n o t / ¿ ¿c e nt r al issue in this p er i od , it was i m p o r t a n t . Magazines, literature, a n d ma r ri a g e m a n ua l s d ir e ct e d toward mi ddle- a n d upper-class w o m e n d e f i ne d t h e m as g u a r di a n s o f t he h e a r t h — as p u r e, pious, a n d e m b o d y i n g the best m o r a l values o f the nati on. They were e n c o u r a g e d to reign in the h o m e as q u e e n s a n d care for t he ir chil­ d r e n a n d t he ir h u s ba n ds , who str uggl ed in the workpl ace a n d t he political a r en a . Despite appeal s to their r o m a n t i c n a t u re , despite the glorification of r o m a n t i c love le ad in g to ma r ri age , w o m e n were seen as a pp r opr i at e ly lack­ ing in sexual passion a n d m e n as often b ei ng too passionate. W o m e n were responsible for “c o o l in g ” th ei r h us b a n ds . T h o s e w o m e n with s t r ong sexual ur ges wer e c o n s i d e r e d a b n o r m a l a n d surgical r emoval o f the clitoris was oc­ casionally r e c o m m e n d e d . L o n g p e r i od s o f sexual a bs t i ne nc e in ma r ri a ge was the n o r m , partially a c c o u n t i n g for a f u r t h e r d r o p in t he birth rate in this pe ri o d , from six live births to five. W o m e n ’s m o r a l roles were dramatically e x t e n d e d outside the family to the l ar ger society, w he re they were viewed as the “m o t h e r s o f civilization.” Large n u m b e r s o f mi ddle- a n d upper-class w o m e n f o r m e d m o r a l r ef or m, t e m p e r a n c e , antislavery, a n d religious evangelistic societies. T h e se c o n ­ c er ns e n h a n c e d thei r awareness o f the m a r k e d g e n d e r inequities in the so­ ciety, which, in t ur n, gave f eminism a large boost. Whi te, n o n p r o p e r t i e d m e n g a i n ed voting rights in mo st states in the 1820s, whi ch f u r t h e r h i g h ­ lighted g e n d e r di fferences in voting rights a n d o t h e r legal e nt itl eme nts . However, within the n e x t 10 years, m a n y states e n a c t e d laws g u a r a n t e e i n g w o m e n ’s p r o p e r t y rights i n d e p e n d e n t o f th ei r h u s b a n d s ’. In the early p a r t o f this p er i od , middl e- a n d upper-class w o m e n rarely were e m p l o y e d outside the h o m e . With Wes ter n e x p a ns i on a n d inc re as ed e d uc a t i on for girls, t h e r e wTas a d r a m at ic growth in the n e e d for w o m e n teachers, whose pay was typically far less t ha n thei r male c o u n t e r pa r t s. I n ­ creasingly large n u m b e r s o f working-class w o m e n a n d female i mm i g r a nt s e n t e r e d the m a r k et p l a ce whe r e their pay was usually o n e h a l f to o n e third t h a t o f m e n . As a c o n s e q u e n c e o f near-starvation wages, m a ny w o m e n ’s la­ b o r or gani zat ions were f o u n d e d . A n u m b e r o f l ab or strikes by w o m e n o c ­ c u r r e d d u r i n g this p er i o d , with limited success. T h e Civil Wa r b r o u g h t new work o p p o r t u n i t i e s for e d u c a t e d w o m e n to fill t he j o b s m e n h a d a n d to di­ rectly aid the wrar effort. T h e two m a j o r oc cu p a t i on s were office clerk a n d nu rs in g. T h e professional hi er ar ch y was cr acked by w om en : In 1849, the first w o m a n received a medi cal d e g r e e in t he U n i t e d States, a n d in 1852, the first w o m a n was o r d a i n e d as a minis ter in a ma i ns tr e am Christian d e ­ n o m i n a t i o n . Subsequentl y, medical schools quickly closed t he i r d oo r s to w o m e n , who, in r es p on se , f o u n d e d several w o m e n ’s med i ca l colleges in the 1850s a n d 1860s.

138

5.

O P P O S I T E - S E X P RE JU DI CE A N D D IS C R I MI N A T I O N

Socialization o f girls b e c a m e m u c h m o r e c om pl e x tha n it h a d b e en in the previous pe rio d, owing to the wide variety o f social roles o p e n to the m. Books a n d magazines o r i e n t e d toward girls from the m id dl e a n d u p p e r class e m p h a s iz e d their roles as wives a n d m o th e rs . But ma ny a d u lt females were highly involved in social action a n d in jobs outside the h o m e . Some were moving into work traditionally he ld by m e n , albeit with lower wages. Feminism as a phi los oph y o f equal o p p o r t u n i t y a n d equal t r e a t m e n t of w om en a n d m e n b e c a m e e m b o d i e d in formal organizations, thus c h al l en g ­ ing traditional social roles. T h e n e x t pe rio d, R eco ns tru ction , Wo rld War I, a n d Suffrage (1 865 1920) involved an acceleration a n d resolution o f some o f the issues tha t h a d b e en p r o m i n e n t in the p r e c e d i n g p e rio d. U pp e r- a n d middle-class w om e n c o n t i n u e d to be seen as “m o t h e r s o f civilization,” the mor al carriers o f society, a n d they f o u n d e d na tionwide societies to carry o u t this role. Th e y started the W o m e n ’s Christian T e m p e r a n c e U n io n (WCTU) in 1874 a n d the Young W o m e n ’s Christian Association (YWCA) shortly afterward. T h e WCTU h a d co ns id er ab le inf lu enc e d u r i n g the r e m a i n d e r o f the c e n ­ tury a n d was an i m p o r t a n t training g r o u n d for female political activists. A national alcohol p r ohib it io n act was passed by Congress in 1917. T h e YWCA focused on h e lp in g im m ig r a n t s a n d working-class w om e n get settled in th e ir new u r b a n e n vi ro nm e nts . Hull H ous e, a large s e tt le m e n t ho us e for im m i g r a n t families, was f o u n d e d by w om e n in 1889. It was very successful a n d led to the s p re ad o f o t h e r se tt le m e n t houses t h r o u g h o u t the country. T h e n u m b e r s of im mi gra nt s a n d working-class w om en e m p lo y e d in low paid, unsafe, a n d u n h e a lt h y e n v i r o n m e n t s c o n t i n u e d to increase. Thes e g ro up s f o r m e d labor u n io n s a n d periodically w e nt on strike for im pr oved wages a n d working co nditions. So me limited c han ge s o c c u r r e d , th o u g h ul­ timately child a n d w o m e n ’s la bor laws were passed th a t did impr ove work life. C orr es pon din gly , middle-class w o m e n increasingly established t h e m ­ selves professionally in teachin g, nursing, a n d the newly cre ate d field of so­ cial work. So me w o m e n even b e c a m e lawyers, a n d in 1879, won the right to argue cases be fo re the U n it e d States S u p r e m e Court. W o m e n ’s cultural organizations, known as “w o m e n ’s clubs,” started to flourish a m o n g middle- a n d upper-class w o m e n . W o m e n ’s college o r g a n i­ zations were f o r m e d tha t kept w o m e n ’s social a n d intellectual networks alive. At a b o u t the same time, toward the e n d of the 19th century, w om en f o u n d e d national et hn ic associations, in c lu di ng the National Council of Jewish W o m e n a n d the National Association for C o lo re d W o m e n . O th e rs followed in the early 20th century. Shortly after the passage in 1869 o f the F o u r t e e n t h a n d Fifteenth A m e n d m e n t s to the U n i t e d States C o nst it ut io n g r a n t i n g voting rights to all males, i n c l u d i n g the re c en tly fr eed slaves, the w o m e n ’s suffrage m o v e ­ m e n t g a i n e d m o m e n t u m . Ultimately, nearly every w o m e n ’s org an iz ati on

C U L T U R A L H IS T O R Y O F T H E R O L E O F FEM ALES IN A M ERICA N SO C IET Y

139

to ok up its cause. A l t h o u g h c o ns t i t u t i o n a l laws c o n c e r n i n g w o m e n ’s suf­ frage wer e first p r o p o s e d in 1868, it was n o t until 1910 t h a t w o m e n c o u l d vote in any state elections. By 1914, n i n e west er n states h a d g r a n t e d w o m e n voti ng rights, a n d in M o n t a n a , t he first w o m a n in th e c o u n t r y was el e ct e d to C on g r e ss . U.S. i n v o l v e m e n t in W o rl d W a r I in 1917 a n d 1918, a fight f or E u r o p e a n f r e e d o m , c o n t r i b u t e d to t he passage o f t he N i n e t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t . It was ratified in 1920, g r a n t i n g all voting-age w o m e n the right to vote. Birthrates d e c l i ne d f u r t h e r in this p e r i o d , to f o u r live births p e r wo ma n . Men c o n t i n u e d to be c o n c e r n e d a b o u t w o m e n ’s sexuality. S o m e mal e ph y ­ sicians writing in the 19th c e nt ur y said t ha t w o m e n s h o u l d be d i s c ou ra ge d from r idi ng bicycles lest they be sexually o v e ra r ou s e d by the seats (J. S. Hall er 8c R. M. Haller, 1974). By t he s e c o nd d e c a d e o f the 20th century, however, sexual f r e e do m increased, a n d single w o m e n c a m e to be known in the press a n d magazi nes as “b a c h e l o r girls” instead o f “spinsters.” O n e e n d u r i n g 20th ce nt ur y d i l e m m a for w o m e n solidified d u r i n g this p e r i o d — c a r e er versus ma rr i a g e . Many working-class w o m e n h a d jobs to h e lp s u p p o r t th ei r families. Many mi dd le - a n d upper-class w o m e n e n t e r e d professions b ef or e get ting m a r ri e d . O t h e r s, b ecaus e o f s maller family size, n o l o n g e r h a d to s p e n d a lifetime raising ch i ld re n a n d chos e to work outside the h o m e . In the years 1890 to 1920, appr oxi mat el y 60% o f profes­ sional w o m e n were u n m a r r i e d a n d r e m a i n e d so. T h u s , for m o st collegee d u c a t e d w o m e n inte re st e d in a profession, the choi ce o f a c a r e er p r e ­ c l u d e d mar riage. T h e n e x t p e r i od , Prosperity, De pr es si on, a n d Wo r l d Wa r II ( 1 9 2 0 1945), involves m a r k e d swings in w o m e n ’s roles. T h e central issues a p p e a r to have b e e n w o m e n ’s sexuality, w o m e n ’s a u t o n o m y , w o m e n ’s work, politi­ cal activism, a n d c a r e er versus mar ri age. T h e e n d o f Wor ld Wa r I a n d the passage o f the N i n e t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t led to in c re as in g feelings of a u t o n ­ omy a n d f r ee d om in w o m e n . T h e s e feelings j oine d with the p r e c e d i n g “b a c h e l o r girl” d e c a d e a n d the growth o f the film industry to creat e an i n­ c reased e m p h as is on a n d o p e n n e s s a b o u t w o m e n ’s sexuality. T h e 1920s were the d e c a d e o f the “f l a p p e r ”— the bubbly, sexy, o ut g oi ng , a n d funloving w o m a n . T h r o u g h new d a n c e crazes, new levels o f physical intimacy a n d self-exposure b e c a m e acceptabl e. C on s u m e r i s m was on the rise a n d with it the growth of advertising. Sex, especially sexy w o m e n , sold p r o d uc t s to m e n a n d w o m e n . Single w o m e n were wor king in increasi ng n u m b e r s a n d h a d m o n e y to s p e n d on themselves, instead o f having to h e l p s u p p o r t t he ir p a r e nt s a n d y o u n g e r siblings. Books a n d magazines di r e c te d toward femal e a d ol escent s b e c a m e p r o m i n e n t . T h e y e m p h a s i z e d the desirability a n d p e r h a p s even the necessity of a p p e a r i n g a n d b e i n g sexy in o r d e r to get a m a n . Marriage was still seen as the p r i m a r y goal o f these activities, a m a r ­ riage involving r o m a n t i c love, sexual pleasur e, a n d c o m p a n i o n s h i p .

140

5.

O PP O S IT E -S E X PREJU D ICE AND D IS C R IM IN A T IO N

Was t h e r e s o m e t h i n g w r o n g a b o u t w o m e n ’s sexuality? F r e u d a n d b o t h his m a l e a n d f e m a l e f ollowers f o u n d f au lt with it. A c c o r d i n g to t h e i r p s y c h o ­ analytic t h e o r i e s, n o t on ly d i d little girls s uf f er f ro m p e n i s envy, b u t w o m e n a c hi e v e d o r ga s m t h r o u g h clitoral i n s t e a d o f t h e all egedl y m o r e m a t u r e vagi­ nal s t i mu l a t i o n . T h u s w o m e n ’s s e xu a l e n j o y m e n t , t he y m a i n t a i n e d , was i n ­ a p p r o p r i a t e l y i m m a t u r e . O f c o u r s e , t he s e p r o n o u n c e m e n t s flew in t h e face o f k n o w n b iol ogi cal facts, b u t t h e facts we re t h r o w n o u t to s u p p o r t t h e n ew th eo ry . O t h e r p syc hoa na lyt ic d o c t r i n e , p r e s u m a b l y b a s e d o n bi ologi cal c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , l ed to t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e m o s t a p p r o p r i a t e r ole for w o m e n was t h a t o f a relatively passive wife a n d m o t h e r . A n e w f e m a l e dis­ ease e m e r g e d in t h e 1940s— frigidity. W o m e n ’s success with t h e pa ss a ge o f a l c o h o l p r o h i b i t i o n laws a n d t h e s uffrage a m e n d m e n t h a d l o ng - te r m costs in t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f f e ma l e e q u a l ­ ity. T h e st ea m was t a k e n o u t o f collective efforts o n b e h a l f o f f e m i n i s m . In 1923, an e q u a l ri ghts a m e n d m e n t was d e f e a t e d in C o n g r es s . Ma n y w o m e n f o u g h t a g ai ns t it b e c a u s e t h e a m e n d m e n t t h r e a t e n e d s o m e o f t h e privileges w o m e n h a d a t t a i n e d in p r ev i o u s legislation. Wi th t h e r igh t to vote, w o m e n j o i n e d t h e m a i n s t r e a m o f A m e r i c a n political life. But t h e m a i n s t r e a m was c o n t r o l l e d by m e n a n d m e n ’s values. W o m e n ’s o r g a n i z a t i o n s d u r i n g t h e D ep r e s s i o n a n d W o r l d W a r II we re c o n c e r n e d with n a t i o n a l issues, n o t f e m ­ inist o n e s . I n d e e d , f e m i n i s m c a m e to b e se en as se lf - ce nt e re d a n d selfish. Ma n y o f t h e gai ns in w o m e n ’s e m p l o y m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s in t h e 1920s we re lost in t h e 1930s b e c a u s e o f t h e D e p r e s s i o n . J o b s we re usually sex seg­ r e g a t e d , t h a t is, t h e r e we re “w o m e n ’s j o b s ” t h a t we re l owe r pay i ng b u t of ten p r o t e c t e d by legislation. Ma n y states p a s s e d laws r es t r i c t i ng m a r r i e d w o m e n to c e rt a in types o f e m p l o y m e n t . Ho we v er , t h e New Deal o f P r e s i d e n t R o o s e ­ velt b r o u g h t n e w e m p l o y m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r h i g h l y e d u c a t e d w o m e n with a d mi n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . R o o s e v el t ’s Se c re t ar y o f L a b o r for 12 years was a w o m a n ; s he a n d E l e a n o r Roos evelt we re i n s t r u m e n t a l in b r i n g i n g m a n y w o m e n i n t o r e s p o n s i b l e g o v e r n m e n t a l jobs. Fo r m o s t w o m e n , t he D e p r e s s i o n h a d p r o d u c e d a loss in a u t o n o m y . W o r l d W a r II b r o u g h t it ba ck, a l o n g with n ew wor k o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d a s o­ cial p a r t n e r s h i p with m e n . W o m e n we re b a r r e d f ro m few t radi t i on a ll y m a s ­ cu l in e o c c u p a t i o n s , a n d w o r k e d side by side with m e n . T h e y re c ei v ed e q u a l pay f o r e q u a l wo rk , f or wh ic h t he u n i o n s h a d f o u g h t . B u t t h e r e was a c l o u d h a n g i n g o v e r this f lo we ri ng o f w o m e n ’s r i g h t s — t h a t t h e c h a n g c s w e re only for “t h e d u r a t i o n . ” W a r ’s e n d , wh i ch e v er y on e d r e a m e d of, m i g h t also b r i n g to a n e n d w o m a n ’s r e c e n t gains. T h e last p e r i o d , Pos twar G r o w t h a n d C h a n g e (1945 to t h e p r e s e n t ) s t a rt e d with e x t r a o r d i n a r y joy a n d o p t i m i s m . T h e e c o n o m y wras in full swing, d e l ay e d m a r r i a g e s we re c o n s u m m a t e d , a n d t h e b i r t h o f b ab ie s b o o m e d . W h i t e m a r r i e d c o u p l e s st a rt e d m o v i n g to t h e s u b u r b s in large n u m b e r s , a n d t h e t r e n d f or Black families m o v i n g f r om t h e S o u t h i n t o t h e

C U L T U R A L H IS T O R Y O F T H E R O L E O F FEM ALES IN A M ERICA N SO C IET Y

141

n o r t h e r n cities c o n t i n u e d . C o n s u m e r i s m prevailed, a n d this was e n c o u r ­ a ge d in the 1950s by the w id es pr ea d own er s hi p o f television sets. A lt h ou g h m a n y w o m e n lost t he ir j o b s to r e t u r n i n g vet erans after t he war e n d e d in 1945, the p e r c e n t a g e o f wor king w o m e n steadily i nc re as e d from the late 1940s to the pr es ent . Most o f t he ir j o b s were in the service i n d u s ­ tries a n d in tr aditional female professions— t ea chi ng, nur si ng, librarian, a n d social work. Shortly after the e n d o f Wor ld Wa r II, s o me laws restricting m a r r i e d w o m e n ’s e m p l o y m e n t were e n a ct e d , b u t all these laws were r e ­ s c in de d by the m i dd l e 1960s. J o b s were still highly se gr eg ate d by sex t h r o u g h the 1970s, a n d to s o me e x t e n t still are. Until the passage o f the Civil Rights Act in 1964, w o m e n were often pai d less th an m e n for the same j o b; a n d o f cour se, w o m e n ’s j o b s in ge ne ra l pai d far less th an those h e l d by m e n . It was n o t until the 1980s t ha t f ederal a n d state g o v e r n m e n t s started j o b reclassification p r o g r a m s assigning e qual pay for j o b s o f c o m p a r a b l e wort h. T he s e p r o g r a m s are still in process, a n d a l t h o u g h w o m e n ’s pay rel a­ tive to m e n ’s has i nc re as ed over t he past 20 years, parity has n o t yet b e e n achieved. T h e a p p a r e n t expansiveness o f the move to the s u b u r b s b r o u g h t with it the i nc r ea s ed isolation o f w o m e n fr om the political, e c o no mi c , a n d social aspects o f society. T h e t h e m e o f the “w o m a n ’s place is in the h o m e ” strongly r c - e m c r g c d after 1945, a n d this was s u p p o r t e d by the sociological studies o f Talcot t Parsons, by the child r e ar i ng books o f Dr. Spock, a n d by m a ga zi ne s d ir e ct e d to w o m e n a n d a d o l e sc e nt females. Many w o m e n b e ­ c a m e involved in c o m m u n i t y organizat ions, b u t these were typically childc e n t e r e d , for e x a mp l e, the PTA o r the Scouts, a n d h e n c e o r i e n t e d toward the family, as o p p o s e d to the out side world. T h e w o m e n ’s m o v e m e n t was d o r m a n t until the mid-1960s. T h e National O r g an i za ti on o f W o m e n ( NO W) was f o u n d e d t h e n , a n d m a ny “w o m e n ’s l i b e r at i o n ” g r o u ps e m e r g e d . T h e focus o f m o s t o f those g r o u ps was on e qual e c o n o m i c a n d , by impl icat i on, ed u ca t io na l o pp or t un it i e s . Many antidi scr imi nati on laws were passed, i n f lu e nc e d by w o m e n ’s gr oups, a n d new professional e d u c a t i on o p p o r t u n i t i e s arose in law’ a n d me d ic i ne . T h e n u m ­ b e r of w o m e n el ect ed to local a n d state offices started to incr eas e markedly, b u t in the 1990s, the p e r c e n t a g e of w o m e n in public office was well below the p e r c e n t a g e o f m e n . T h e i nve nt ion a n d w i d e s pr e ad use o f “t he Pill” as a c on t r a c ep ti ve m e t h o d b r o u g h t with it co n s i de ra bl e sexual f r e e d o m . A b or ti on rights were g u a r a n t e e d in 1973 in the Roe v. Wade U.S. S u p r e m e C o u r t decision. W o m e n ’s o rganizat ions also gave co ns id er a bl e s u p p o r t to lesbianism as a vi­ able a n d valuable lifestyle. T h e s e events gave rise to s t ro ng a nti f emi ni st r e ­ actions a m o n g m a n y g r o u p s o f m e n a n d w o m e n . Conservative U n i te d States pr es id e nt s were el ected in the 1980s, b ot h o f w h o m e sp o u s e d tradi­ tional (i.e., “p a t r i a r c h a l ”) roles for m e n a n d w o m e n . S tr on g ant i-abort ion,

142

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

anti-lesbian, a n d anti-“pro mi sc ui ty ” c a m p ai g ns e m e r g e d t h a t t h r e a t e n e d the p er s on a l f r e e d o m s w o m e n h a d g a i ne d in t he postwar pe ri od . At the p r e s e n t time (early 2000s), the socialization o f females is very c o m p l ex a n d often cont radi ct ory. T h e f or ce d c hoi c e o f c a r e er versus m a r ­ riage is still p r o bl e m a t i c for m o s t w o me n . Equality o f effort a n d r esponsibil­ ity in m a n a g i n g a h o m e a n d family life is rarely the n o r m for p a r e nt s who b ot h h o ld full-time j o b s — w o m e n do m u c h m o r e than t h e ir h u s ba n ds . Ad­ ditionally, the pr os pe ct s o f e n d u r i n g ma rr i a ge s have progressively grown sl immer. Many w o m e n arc c ho os i ng to n o t b e a r c hi l d r en , a n d c h o o si n g n o t to marry. In pre-suffrage days, s o m e w o m e n f o u n d c a r e cr to be a pr ima ry s our ce o f self-worth. T h e y r e m a i n e d u n m a r r i e d a n d also were involved in social causes. T o d a y m a n y w o m e n arc c hoo s in g a similar path. A m a jo r vehi­ cle for i nc re a se d p o w e r a n d a u t o n o m y in Ame ri ca n society is t h r o u g h e d u ­ cation. But, as Valerie Wa l k e rd in e (1990) convincingly a r g u ed , a n d as we saw in c h a p t e r 1, o u r e du c at io n al systems place roa db l oc ks in f r o n t o f that vehicle by socializing y o u n g girls to be i n c o m p e t e n t in p u r s u i n g e d u c a ­ tional goals. Additionally, c a r e cr a n d work a d v a n c e m e n t is usually c o n ­ trolled by m e n who typically value m o r e highly the c o nt r i b u t i o n s a n d p ros ­ pects o f o t h e r m e n than those o f w o m e n . Finally, t he issue is still b ei ng d e b a t e d by m e n a n d w o m e n as to w h e t h e r females have “a di ff er en t voice” b ecaus e o f the way they are socialized, o r b ecause they are genetically p r e ­ disposed to be different.

A N T E C E D E N T S O F O P P OS I TE - SE X P R EJ U DI C E AND D I S C R I M I N A T I O N We have seen in the previous section that A m e ri c a n c ult ur e bears a legacy o f p r o f o u n d g e n d e r differenti ati on in its E u r o p e a n roots. Cul t ural n o r m s deeply e m b e d d e d in the most f u n d a m e n t a l A m e r i c an institutions— for ex­ a mpl e , the family, the wor kpl ace, religious b od ie s — all have c o n t r i b u t e d to the s u b o r d i n a t i o n of w o m e n . Yet we know that these cultural n o r m s are b ut o n e c o m p o n e n t o f opposite-sex p r ej ud ic e a n d d is cr imina tion, which are the o u t c o m e o f t h r e e factors: (a) the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y predi sposi t ion to form a n d differentially evaluate i n g r o u p s a n d o ut g r o u p s ; (b) cultural n o r m s, whi ch attach h i g h e r status a n d d o m i n a n c e to mal es t h a n females; a n d (c) the socialization o f sex-typing. In this section I briefly discuss the implications o f the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n ­ ary a n d c u l t ur a l/ h is t o r ic a l perspectives o n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f opposite-sex p r ej ud i ce a n d d iscr imi nati on. In the n e x t section, I p r e s e n t an extensive d e ­ scription o f the socialization o f sex-typing. T o a large d e g re e , socialization practices e n c o m p a s s a n d are built on these two factors. In the following sec­ tion, I discuss the relevant li terature on opposite-sex pr ej udi ce. It s h o u l d be

G E N E T IC /E V O L U T IO N A R Y P RE DIS P OS ITIONS

143

no te d that little of this literature was p r o d u c e d from the viewpoint o f pr eju­ dice, bu t r at h er the focus was primarily on stereotyping. Recall that stereo­ typing may differ from prcjudicc by (a) the reasonableness o f its generaliza­ tions, (b) the abscnce of an affectivc c o m p o n e n t , a n d (c) the lack of predisposition to behavior. Finally, I conclude with a discussion o f oppositescx discrimination.

G E N ET I C / E V O L U T I O N A R Y P RE D I SPO SI TI ON S As was noted in c ha p te r 2, the geneti c/evol ut ionary bases of prejudice and discrimination evolved in a tribal context for which protection of group m e m b e r s from o th e r tribes a nd competition for scarce resources with those tribes was the no rm. Two of the genet ic/evoluti onary processes most perti­ n e n t to the present discussion are authority— acceptance and the acquisi­ tion o f badging mechanisms, that is, behavioral a nd nonbehavioral c harac­ teristics that differentiate groups from one an o t he r. In c o nt emp or ar y No rt h American cultures, unlike hu nt e r- ga th er er tribal cultures, a large n u m b e r of different gr oups exist that are in competi tion with o n e a n ot h e r and have different power a nd status. Authority figures in No r t h America c o n d o n e these differentiations, which include gr oupings by gender. Infant boys a nd girls are extremely similar physically a nd behaviorally. However, their parents p r o d uc e g e n d e r differences in a p pe ar an ce and e n ­ courage behavioral differences. These provide badges for distinguishing the two sexes, for example, pink for girls, blue for boys, long hair a nd bows for girls, short, u n a d o r n e d hair for boys (the behavioral effects are dis­ cussed u n d e r sex-typing). Badging differences are maintai ned t h r o u g h o u t c hil dhood a nd adul thood. The geneti c/ evol ut ionary m od el predicts ingr oup (i.e., same-sex favorit­ ism) a nd o ut g ro u p (i.e., opposite-sex) hostility. T he historical survey of American females earlier in this c h a pt er confirms these predictions for male attitudes and behavior, but is mu te ab ou t females. T he re ma in i ng sec­ tions o f this c ha pt er r emedy that gap. We observed in c ha p te r 2 that fe­ males a nd males in h u m a n a nd n o n h u m a n p r imate societies engage o ut gr oup s differently— females migrate to o t he r gr oups whereas males h a r ­ b or considerable inter gr oup hostility. This led us to speculate that males would develop s tronger prejudices t han females. This speculation can be evaluated here. T h e discussion in c ha pt er 2 of the genetics of prejudice co n c l ud e d that within-family influences relative to nonfamily influences were small. This leads to the prediction that family influences relative to broad cultural influences on the socialization of sex-lyping will be small. It is n ot clear how ou t gr o u p attractiveness will i nfluence the a f or e me n ti on ed effects, especially in light of the role of authority a cceptance in c o nd o n i n g ma le- femal e differentiation.

144

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

Finally, t he discussion o f t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f g r o u p identity in c h a p t e r 2 led to the pr ed i ct i o n t ha t p re ju d i ce a n d d is cr imi nat i on would e m e r g e b e ­ tween t he ages o f 3 a n d 4 years, a n d u n d e r g o a m a r k e d c h a n g e at a b o u t 7 years o f age. T h e s e age-related c h a n ge s are c onsi st ent with the concl usi ons o f Fischer a n d Bullock (1984), bas ed on a t h o r o u g h review o f the r es ear ch li terature on cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t . T he y identify f ou r large-scale, ager elated reo rga ni zat io ns o f t h o u g h t , which o c c ur at ages 4, 6 to 7, 10 to 12, a n d 14 to 16 years. O t h e r research in social cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t in di ­ cates t ha t a f u r t h e r reor ga ni zat io n occurs at a b o u t age 18 or 19 (Colby, Kohl ber g, Gibbs, Sc L i e b e r m a n , 1983, for m o r a l d e v el o p m e n t ; D a m o n Sc Hart, 1988, for d e v e l o p m e n t o f self-knowledge; Ko hl b er g Sc Ullian, 1974, for d e v e l o p m e n t o f scx-rolc k n owl edge; Sel man, 1980, for d e v e l o p m e n t of i n t e r p er s on a l knowledge; a n d Turiel, 1983, for the d e v e l o p m e n t o f social c on ve nt i o ns ). T h e se findings lead to t he pr edi ct io n that a ddi t iona l c ha ng es in p re j u d i c e a n d di scr iminat ion s h o u l d also o cc ur at these o l d e r age p e r i­ ods, t h a t is, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a n d 18 to 19 years.

CULTURAL NORMS O n e o f the ce ntr al a r g u m e n t s m a d e in c h a p t e r 1 was t h a t pr ejudi c e a n d dis­ c r i mi na ti on were n o r ma ti ve in a c ul tu r e owing in part, to the differential p owe r a n d status o f i n g r o u p s a n d o u t g r ou p s . T h e d o m i n a n t g r o u p s a t t e m p t to mai nt ai n thei r s u p e r i o r position t h r o u g h prejudicial a n d di scri mi nat ory acts di re ct ed toward s u b o r d i n a t e gr oups. M e m b e r s o f s u b o r d i n a t e gr oups, owing in p ar t to th ei r u nf ai r t r e a t m e n t by d o m i n a n t gro up s, r e s p o n d to the l atter in p r e j u di c ed ways, a n d wh e r e possible, in a di scr imi nat or y m a n n e r also. We saw in the historical survey earl ier in this c h a p t e r t ha t A m e r i c a n fe­ males from colonial days to the p r e se nt have b e e n di sc ri mi na te d against by the d o m i n a n t males, whose prejudicial att it udes have u n d e r g i r d e d that dis­ c ri mi na ti on . W h at is n o t clear from that historical research is the e x t e n t to which status differences o c c u r r e d be twe en y o u n g boys a n d girls ( the differ­ ences were obvious in a d ol es ce n c e as reflected in a ca d e mi c a n d o c cu p a t io n o p p or t u n i t i e s ) . It is possible t h a t ch i ld r en r ecognize m a l e - f e m a l e status dif­ f erences a m o n g a doles cents a n d adults, b u t n o t a m o n g themselves ( t he re are a n u m b e r of p e r m u t a t i o n s on this t h e m e , of course.) T h e r e are several likely c o n s e q u e n c e s of the c u l t u r al /h i st o ri c al differ­ ences be twe en males a n d females. 1. Fathers, who have m o r e at stake than m o t h e r s in m a i n t a i n i n g the d o m i n a n c e status q u o will show g r e a te r dif f er ent iat i on than m o t h e r s in socializing t he ir sons a n d d au g ht e r s . T h a t is, fathers s h o ul d be

S O C I A L IZ A T I O N O F SEX-TYPING

145

m o r e likely t ha n m o t h e r s to e n c o u r a g e t r aditional sex-typed be havior in t h e ir c hi ldr en. 2. Owi ng to g e n d e r e d status differences, girls s h o ul d acqui re kno wl ed ge o f opposite-scx-rolc stereotypes earlier t h a n boys. 3. Boys s h o ul d show m o r e tr aditional sex-typing t ha n girls a n d this dif­ fe re nc e s h ou l d increase with age, owing to t he ir increasing awareness o f cultural values. 4. Owi ng to self-perceived lower status, f emales s ho ul d be m o r e likely to a d o p t mal e sex-typed behaviors a n d values t h a n the converse. This dif fer ence s ho ul d increase with i ncr eas ing age. 5. Owi ng to g e n d e r e d status differences, self-esteem in mal es a n d fe­ males s h o ul d be m o r e highly rel at ed to ma sc uli ne r a t h e r t ha n f emi ­ n i n e characteristics. 6. Owi ng to g e n d e r e d status differences, with increasi ng age, oppositesex p re ju d i ce s h o ul d be d im i n i s h e d for females m o r e so t ha n for males.

SO CI A LI Z A T IO N O F SEX-TYPING As n o t e d in the i n t r o du c t i on , to a large ex t e n t, opposite-sex p r ej udi ce a n d di scr iminati on are built on t he differential sex-typed socialization e x p e r i ­ e n c e d by males a n d females. With i ncr easing maturity, the “b a d g e s ” o f m a s ­ culinity a n d femini nit y b e c o m e m o r e p r o n o u n c e d , i ns u r i ng th at g r o u p i n g on t he basis o f g e n d e r will strongly occur. Sex-typing, however, is mu l t id i ­ m e ns i on a l, as H u s t on (1983, 1985) clearly d o c u m e n t e d . T ab l e 5.1 is H u s ­ t o n ’s a t t e m p t to visually indi cat e s o m e o f this complexity. T h e table displays a matri x consisting o f twTo factors, sex-typed constructs a n d sex-typed content. T h e const ruct s involve f o u r d i ff er e nt ways, a p p r o a c h e s , o r c on s tr uc ti on s of sex-typing. T h e se f ou r ways are the following: (a) g e n d e r e d c on c e p ts or b e ­ liefs, which in clu de sex stereotypes; (b) g e n d e r identity o r self-perception; (c) g e n d e r p r ef er en ce s, attitudes a n d values toward self o r ot her s; a n d (d) g e n d e r e d behavior. H u s t on identifies five c o n t e n t areas to whi ch each of these construct s apply: biological g e n d e r , activities a n d interests, p e r s o n a l social attributes, ge nd e r -b as e d social rel ati onshi ps, a n d stylistic a n d sym­ bolic c on t en t . For e xa mp le , personality tests assessing masculinity a n d / o r femi ni ni ty wo uld deal with o n e ’s g e n d e r identity ( cons tr uct ) of p e r s o n a l social at tri butes ( c o n t en t ) . As seen, we can n o t simply talk a b o u t the socialization o f sex-typing. T h e various cells o f the ma tr ix may involve di f fe re nt d e v e l o p m e n t a l paths a n d different d e ve l o p m e n t a l levels a tt ained. S o me o f the ge ne r al a t ta i nm e n ts may even be cont r adi ctor y, for e x a mp l e , a girl pref er s playing with dolls

T A B L E 5.1 A M a trix o f S e x -T y p in g C o n s tru c ts by S e x -T y p e d C o n te n t Construct

Con ten I Area

A . Concepts or beliefs

1. Biological g e n d e r

A l. G e n d e r C onstancy

2. Activities an d interests: Toys / Play activities O ccu p atio n s H o u seh o ld roles Tasks A chievem ent areas 3. P ersonal-social attributes: Personality/ characteristics Social behavior

A2. K now ledge o f sex ster­ eotypes o r sex ro le c o n ­ cepts o r attrib u tio n s a b o u t o th e rs ’ success a n d failure.

A3. C o n cep ts a b o u t sex ster­ eotypes o r sex-appro­ p ria te social behavior.

B. Identity or Self-Perceplion

B l. G e n d e r id en tity as in n e r sense o f m ale ness o r fe­ m aleness. Sex ro le id en ­ tity as p e rc e p tio n o f own m asculinity o r fem inity B2. S elf-perception o f in ter­ ests abilities; o r sextyped a ttrib u tio n s a b o u t own success a n d failure

B3. P e rc e p tio n o f own p e r­ sonality (e.g., o n selfra t in g q u est ion n ai res)

C. Preferences, Attitudes, Values (For Self or Others)

1). Behavioral Enactment, Adoption

C l. W ish to b e m ale o r fe­ m ale o r g e n d e r bias d e ­ fined as g re a te r value a tta c h e d to o n e g e n d e r th an th e o th e r.

D l. D isplaying bodily a ttri­ bu tes o f g e n d e r (in­ clu d in g clo th in g , body type, hair, etc.).

C2. P referen ce for toys, gam es, activities, attain ­ m e n t value for achieve­ m e n t areas: attitudes ab o u t sex-typed activities by o th ers (e.g., ab o u t traditional o r nontraditional roles for w om en). C3. P referen ce o r wish to have personal-social at­ tributes o r attitudes ab o u t o th e rs’ personality a n d behavior patterns.

D2. E ngaging in gam es, toy play, activities, occupa­ tions, o r ach iev em en t tasks th a t a re sex-typed,

D3. D isplaying sex-typed p e rso n a l-so cial behav­ ior (e.g., aggression, d e ­ p e n d e n c e ).

4. G ender-based social relationships: G e n d e r o f peers, friends, lovers, p re fe rre d p a re n t, m odels, a ttac h ­ m e n t figures 5. Stylistic an d sym bolic co n ten t: G estures N onverbal behavior S peech a n d language p attern s, Styles o f play, Fantasy, Draw ing, T em po, Loudness, Size, Pitch /

/

A4. C o n cep ts a b o u t sextyped n o rm s fo r g en d erbased social relations.

B4. S elf-perception o f own p a tte rn s o r frien d sh ip , relatio n sh ip , o r sexual o rie n ta tio n

C4. P re fe ren c e fo r m ale o r fem ale frien d s, lovers, a tta c h m e n t figures, o r wish to h e like m ale o r fem ale, o r a ttitu d es a b o u t o th e rs ’ p attern s.

D4. E n g ag in g in social or sexual activity/ with others o n th e basis o f g e n ­ d e r (e.g., sam e-sex p eer ch o ice).

A5. A w areness of sex-typed symbols o r styles. / /

B5. S elf-perception o f n o n ­ verbal, stylistic c h a rac te r­ istics

G5. P re fe ren c e fo r stylistic o r sym bolic objects o r p erso n al characteristics o r a ttitu d es a b o u t o th ­ ers' n o n v erb al a n d lan ­ guage p attern s.

D5. Man ifesting sex-typed verbal a n d n o n v erb al behavior, fantasy, draw­ ing p attern s.

Note. F rom “S ex -T y p in g ” by A. C. H u sto n , 1983, in P. IL M ussen (Ed.), Handbook o f Child Psychology, Vol. 4, p p . 3 9 0 -3 9 1 . C o p y rig h t €> 1983 by J o h n Wiley & Sons, Inc. T h is m a te ria l is u se d by p e rm issio n o f J o h n Wiley & Sons, Inc.

148

5.

OPPOSIT E-SEX PRE JUDICE AND DI SCRIMINATIO N

r at h e r than trucks, b u t thinks it ap pr op ri a te for women to be doctors. Thus, when wc discuss sex-typing, we have to specify the particular measures e m ­ ployed. Huston points o u t that in general, the research indicates greater m a l e / f e ma l e overlap in the personality traits a n d social behavioral areas than in play activities, peer preferences, a n d occupations. Socialization of sex-typing starts shortly after birth (Hust on, 1983; P. A. Katz, 1983). Research has f o u n d that parents of day-old boys sec their ba­ bies as “big” to a greater e xt e nt than do parent s of day-old girls, despite equivalence o f length or weight. Boys are seen as “st ro ng e r” a n d “firmer,” girls as “softer” a nd “finer.” In an experi ment al study with the same 3month-ol d infant, adults unfamiliar with the child treated it differently d e ­ p e n d i n g on w he t he r the infant was identified with a boy’s or girl’s name. Wh en they believed it was a girl, for example, they used a doll mo re fre­ quently in play interactions. Wh e n they t h o u g h t it was a boy, they talked a bo u t “his” absence o f hair a nd strong grip. Analogous findings oc cu r re d in research with 6-month-old a n d 9-month-old infants. T h e h o m e physical e n v i r on m en t o f boys a n d girls is also markedly differ­ e nt d ur i n g infancy (Katz, 1983; Pomerl cau, Bolduc, Maleint, & Cossctte, 1990). T h e quality a n d quantity o f toys, colors, types of clothing, a nd motifs o f rooms vary considerably by i nf ant ’s sex. Boys are provided with mor e sports e qu ip me n t, tools, a nd vehicles; girls arc given m o r e dolls, fictional characters, a n d furniture. Thus, parent s strongly proclaim to the c o m m u ­ nity at large, to themselves, a nd to the child, that “he is a boy” or “she is a girl.” T h e stakes arc obviously high. Socialization of sex-typing occurs in films, television, a nd books, a nd is p e r fo r me d by teachers, peers, parents, a nd o t he r adults. Regarding televi­ sion, where differential g e n d e r stereotyping o f males a nd females is very marked, Hust on (1983) a n d Signorielli a nd Lears (1992) suggested that its influence on socialization o f sex-typing of children may be even greater than that o f parents. In television, males are mu c h mo r e highly developed behaviorally a n d psychologically t han are females. Usually females do little mor e than follow the lead o f t heir m or e central male compani ons. Men have the most prestigious a nd interesting jobs, and are nearly always s up er ­ visors o f women. As we no t ed in c hapt er 1, the chief players in history books are me n, a n d H u s t on (1983) points o ut that this is typical in c h i l d r e n ’s storybooks a nd textbooks. Pa re nt s’ Socialization of Sex-Typing In this section, we address the following three questions: (a) Do parents treat their sons a n d d au gh t e r s differently? (b) Are fathers mo r e likely than m o t he r s to differentiate their tr e at me n t of sons a nd daughters? (c) How do m o t he r s a nd fathers affect the sex-typed behavior o f their children? For all

S O C I A L IZ A T I O N O F SEX-TYPING

149

these questions, we focus on t r aditional, Whit e, middle-class families, on which m o s t o f the research has b e e n car ried out. In the n e x t section, we ex­ a m i n e t he i m p a c t o f family type on socialization. T h e r e arc t h r e e extensive reviews by H u s to n (1983), Lytton a n d R o m n c y ( 1991 ), a n d Sicgal ( 1987), a n d a r e c e n t e x p e r i m e n t by Kerig, P. A. Cowan, a n d C. P. Cowan (1993), de ali ng with the first two questions. T h e c o n c l u ­ sions o f all are quite similar. Lytton a n d R o mn c y c ar ri e d o u t a meta-analysis o f 1 72 p u b l i s he d a n d u n p u b l i s h e d studies de ali ng with p a r e n t s ’ differential socialization o f boys a n d girls. T h e i r analyses e n c o m p a s s e d t h r e e age ranges, 0 to 5 years, 6 to 12 years, a n d 13 years to a d u l t h o o d — a n d ei ght m a ­ j o r socialization areas, in cl u d i n g “e n c o u r a g e d sex-typed activities.” T h e o t h e r areas were: inter act ion, e n c o u r a g e a c h ie v em e n t , w a r mt h , e n c o u r a g e d e p e n d e n c y , restrictiveness, discipline, a n d c l ar i ty / r e as on ing . With the e xc e pt i o n o f sex-typing, t h e re was a g r e at deal o f variation o f ef­ fects in all the socialization areas. T h e statistical meta-analyses sh owe d that overall di fferences bet ween par ent s , a n d differential t r e a t m e n t o f boys a n d girls at any age, were very small a n d statistically insignificant. In t he a re a of sex-typing, t h o u g h , at all ages m o t h e r s a n d fathers did significantly treat th ei r sons a n d d a u g h t e r s differently. For e x a mp l e , bo t h p a r e nt s e n c o u r ­ a ge d sex-typed toys, activities, a n d h o u s e h o l d chores. Generally, p ar e nt s were similar in thei r sex-typing; however, fathers were m o r e likely t ha n m o t h e r s to bo t h e n c o u r a g e male sex-tvped be ha vi or in boys, a n d to d i sc ou r­ age male sex-typed b eha vi or in girls. T h e r e was also a t e n d e n c y for fathers to i nt er ac t m o r e with sons t ha n with d a u g ht e r s , with the converse h o l d i n g for m o t h e r s a n d d au g h t er s. T h e research in this area indicates that p a r e nt s do t re a t t h e i r sons a n d d a u g h t e r s differently as it relates to socialization o f sex-typing. Sons arc e n ­ c o u r a g e d by m o t h e r s a n d fathers to be active, assertive, a n d c o m p e t e n t , d a u g h t e r s to be d e p e n d e n t a n d c omp l ia nt . In g ener al , fathers are m o r e likely than m o t h e r s to differentially socialize boys a n d girls. This s u p po r ts the p re di ct ion m a d e in the section on cultural n o r m s th at fathers, as m e m ­ bers o f the d o m i n a n t mal e g r o up , have m o r e at stake in m a in t a i n i n g cul­ tural values a n d n o r m s t ha n do mo t he r s, who arc m e m b e r s o f the s u b o r d i ­ n at e g r oup . How do fathers a n d m o t he r s i nfluence the sex-typing o f their children? We e x a mi n e two categories o f e x pe r ime n ts in answering this question. T h e first category briefly deals with fine-grain analyses o f interactions between pa re nt s a n d their VA- to 214-year-old children. This is the age r ange in which children arc developing a verbal g e n d e r identity a n d a p r ef er en ce for sextyped toys. T h e s e cond category briefly deals with the effects o f m o t h e r s ’ e m ­ pl oy me n t outside the h o m e on o l de r c h i l d r e n ’s sex-role stereotyping. T h r e e r e c e n t e x p e r i m e n t s deal with fine-grain analyses. In t he first, Ei scnberg, W'olchik, H e r n a n d e z , a n d Past ernack (1985) st ud i ed 114- to 2-

150

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AN D D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

year-old boys a n d girls in t he ir h o m e , separately i n te ra cti n g with thei r m o t h e r s a n d fathers. T h e e x p e r i m e n t e r s r e t u r n e d a p pr o x im at e ly 6 m o n t h s later to r e p e a t their observations. In the s e c on d, Fagot a n d Le in ba ch (1989) observed 1 14- to 2-year-old boys a n d girls i nt er ac ti ng at h o m e with b ot h p a r e nt s pr es e n t . T h e r ese ar cher s r e t u r n e d 9 m o n t h s later for a d d i ­ tional observations. In the third, Ca lder a, H us to n, a n d O ' B r i e n (1989) o b ­ served 114- to 2-year-old boys a n d girls i nt er act i ng separately with their m o t h e r s a n d fathers in a la bor at o r y setting. S o m e o f t he principal results were as follows. Ei se n be r g et al. (1985) a n d Fagot a n d Le inb ac h (1989) f o u n d t h a t p a r e nt s o f boys generally selected masculine-type toys for t h e m , a n d p ar en ts o f girls selected g e n de r - n eu t r al toys. Because o f t h e ir g re at er availability, boys were m o r e likely to play with masculi ne t ha n f e m i ni n e o r n eu t r a l toys, a n d girls were m o r e likely to play with n e u t r a l t ha n with f e m i ni n e or ma sc ul i ne toys. E ise nbe rg et al. (1985) observed t h a t p a r e nt s o f dif fe re nt families varied s o me w ha t in how m u c h they differentially r e i n f o rc e d same-sex versus opposite-sex toy play. T h e ex­ t e nt o f this di f ferentiation d u r i n g the c h i l d ’s thi r d year o f life ( b u t n o t sec­ o n d year) was positively rel at ed to t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f g e n d e r identity. Fagot a n d Le inba ch f o u n d , however, t ha t p a r e n t s ’ high affective involve­ m e n t (positively a n d negatively) with t hei r c h i l d ’s same-sex a n d oppositcsex toy play d u r i n g the s e c on d year o f life ( b u t n o t the thi rd year) led to the d e v e l o p m e n t o f early g e n d e r identity. Ca ld er a et al. (1989) f o u n d t h a t fathers were initially m o s t int er es te d in masculi ne toys w h en they were with t h e ir son, a n d m o t h e r s were initially mo st i nt er es t ed in f e m i n i n e toys w h e n they were with t h e ir d a u g h t e r . H o w­ ever, after this initial react ion, p a r e n t s ’ n on v er b al i n vol ve me nt in play, ver­ bal behavi or , a n d pr oxi mit y to th e i r child were i n f l u en c ed by t he type o f toy played with, i n d e p e n d e n t o f sex o f p a r e n t o r sex o f child. In co nt ra st to the just m e n t i o n e d two studies, 114- to 2-year-old ch il dr en were m o r e e n g a g e d with same-sex t h a n with opposite-sex toys, cont ro l li ng for any systematic dif­ ferences in p a r e n t s ’ behaviors. This fi n d in g p r oba bl y reflects b o th p a r e n t s ’ initial react ions to sex-typed toys a n d the differential e x p e r i e nc es with sextyped toys t h a t boys a n d girls b r i n g to the laboratory. T a ke n t o ge th e r, these t h r e e e x p e r i m e n t s indicate t h a t two factors largely d e t e r m i n e the early d e v e l o p m e n t of g e n d e r identity in c hi ldr e n: p a r e n t s ’ differential selection of toys for th ei r sons a n d d au gh te rs ; a n d the e x t e n t to which p a re n ts arc involved with or c o n c e r n e d a b o u t their c h i l d ’s sex-typed play. T he se factors start ma ni f est ing thei r effects as early as 114 years, a n d have taken ho l d by age 214. T u r n i n g now to the effects of m o t h e r ’s e m p l o y m e n t outsi de the h o m e , Fishbein (1984) a n d H u s t o n (1983) e x a m i n e d m u c h o f the relevant litera­ ture, a n d arrived at similar conclusions. However, two m o r e r e c e n t e x p e ri ­ ments, by Baruch a n d Ba rn ett (1986) a n d McHale, Bartko, C r o u t e r , a n d

SO CIALIZ ATION O F SEX-TYPING

151

Perry-Jenkins (1990) indicated that the issue is quite complicated, with no clear answer. Fishbein a n d Huston f ou n d for two-parent, middle-class fami­ lies, that children between the ages o f 5 a nd 12 years with externally e m ­ ployed mo th er s held fewer sex-role stereotypes than those whose mother s were primarily housewives. T he effects were somewhat larger for girls than for boys. For children in working-class families, some research showed simi­ lar effects, b u t o t h e r research showed no effccts of mat ernal empl oyment. Fishbein expl ai ned the social-class differences in terms o f working by choice in satisfying jobs versus working to help s u pp o rt the family in less d e ­ sirable jobs. Baruch a n d Barnett (1986) f ound that for middle-class families, m o t h ­ e rs’ external e m p lo y me n t ha d no effect on their c h i l d r e n ’s scx-role stereo­ types. However, mot he r s who held nontraditional attitudes toward the male role ha d children with relatively nontradi tional sex-typed attitudes. McHale ct al. (1990), for middle-class children, fo u nd that sons’ ( but not d a u g h ­ ters’) evaluation o f their own participation in male a n d female sex-typed h o us e ho l d chorcs was influenced by m o t h e r ’s work status a n d f at h er ’s atti­ tudes a nd behaviors. If mo th e rs worked externally a n d fathers h el pe d with chorcs, then sons evaluated their own carrying o ut of chores positively. If m o t he r s ha d n o external e m p lo y me n t a nd fathers h el pe d little with chores, then sons evaluated t heir carrying o ut o f chores negatively. Girls were u naf ­ fected by any of these factors.

Influence o f Family Type on Socialization We now look at three studies t hat e xami ne the effects of n o n c onve nti ona l family structures a n d / o r orientations on the sex-typing of children. A con­ ventional/(unity is one in which children are reared by male a nd female m a r ­ ried parents who hold traditional sex-tvped attitudes a nd generally accept prevailing cultural norms. Mothers may o r may n ot be employed outside the h o m e in conventional families, but they do carry out most of the d om e s ­ tic a n d feminine-typed ho us eh ol d tasks. Obviously, being conventional is n ot an all-or-none category; there is some variation a m o n g conventional families in the de gr ee to which they hold traditional beliefs. Weisner a n d Wilson-Mitchell (1990) re po rt ed on the sex-typing of 6year-old boys a nd girls who were raised in either a conventional family or in one o f five categories of n o n c onve nti ona l types of families. T h e latter var­ ied considerably in terms of their c o m m i t m e n t to a stable nucl ear family lifestyle, for example, one of these five categories involved a c o m m u n a l liv­ ing setting. They also differed somewhat in their practice of gender-egali­ tarian beliefs a n d activities as well as their opposition to o t h e r conventional cultural norms.

152

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

T h e ma jo r f i ndi ngs were as follows. O n me a su r es o f obser ved free play a n d c h i l d r e n ’s stated play p r e f e r e nc es with toys a n d with friends, n o differ­ e nces in c h i l d r e n ’s sex-typing were f o u n d as a fu n c ti on o f type o f family in which the child was r ea r ed . Similarly, t h e r e were n o family-type r el at ed dif­ f erences in psychologists’ ratings o f c h i l d r e n ’s g e n d e r - a p p r o p r i a t e a p p e a r ­ a n ce or behavior; n o r were t he re differences as a f unct ion o f family cate­ gory in p a r e n t s ’ ratings o f c h i l d r e n ’s sex-typed personal it y characteristics. However, family category did i nf lue nc e c h i l d r e n ’s sex-typing o f o c c u p a ­ tional classifications a n d p r e f e r e n c e s as well as sex-typed knowl ed ge of toys a n d objects. Specifically, ch i ld re n from the n o n t r a d i t i o n a l family categories gave m o r e non-sex-typcd res p o ns es t han those from con v e n t io na l families. T h e e x t e n t o f this di f f er ence was relat ed to the d e g r e e o f family n o n conventionality. Finally, all c hi ld r en showed c o ns i d e ra bl e k no wl ed g e of sex-typing a n d sex roles, with girls b ei ng less tr aditional in t h e ir r esponses than boys. C ons is te nt with the genetics o f pr ej ud ic e literature, these results indicate t h a t m a r k e d dif f er ences in family o r i e nt at io n a n d s t ru ct ur e have mi n i ma l effects in d e v e l o p m e n t of sex-typing by 6-ycar-old chi l d r en . T h e pr ima ry i n­ f luence was on c h i l d r e n ’s beliefs a b o u t o c c u pa t i o n s a n d objects, which were c ons i st ent with the n o n t r a d i t i o n a l g e n d e r be li e f systems o f t he ir p a r ­ ents. As the a u t h o r s o f this research indicate, all families arc e m b e d d e d in essentially the s ame Am er i ca n cult ur e, a n d the g e n d e r e d cultural n o r m s p er vade m o s t areas o f c h i l d r e n ’s lives. T h e values o f an individual family can only have a small i m p a c t on modifying cultural m e a n i n g s a n d no rm s . T h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d c onclusi ons arc strongly s u p p o r t e d by the results from Stevenson a n d Black’s (1988) l iterat ure review on the effects o f p a t e r ­ nal ab se nc e a n d c h i l d r e n ’s sex-rolc d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d P a t t e r s o n ’s (1992) l it erature review on t he sex-rolc d e v e l o p m e n t o f ch il dr e n r e a r e d by lesbian a n d gay par ent s. T h e ge ne r al co ncl us ions o f Stevenson a n d Black were that on a variety of me a su r es o f sex-typing as a f unct ion o f f at he r a bs ence, the ef­ fects on boys were small, a n d the effects on girls were generally absent. T h e typical findings for boys were t h a t those living with bo t h p a r e nt s he ld slightly g r e at e r scx-rolc stereotypes a n d chose slightly gr e at e r male sextyped activities a n d p r e f e r en ce s t h a n those raised by only th ei r mo t h e rs . However t e a c h e r s ’ a n d m o t h e r s ’ ratings of aggressive be ha vi or show fathera b s e nt boys to score h i g h e r th an f at he r- pr es en t boys. For all these findings, the largest effects were f o u n d for boys whose f a t h er was away on military ser­ vice, as c on t r a st e d with a b s e n t fat her s d u e to divorce o r d ea t h. Age, race, a n d s o c i o ec o no mi c status (SES) effects were generally small, a n d s o m e w ha t q ue st io na bl e, on m e th o d o l o g i c a l g r o u nd s . Patterson (1992) i nd i ca te d t ha t owing to t r e m e n d o u s societal a n d m e t h ­ odological p ro bl e ms , the research with lesbian a n d gay p ar e nt s is n o t cxtcn-

S O C I A L IZ A T I O N O F SEX-TYPING

153

sive a n d sa mple sizes arc generally small. A m o n g th e societal p ro b le ms , for e x a mp l e , arc the legal thr eats to h om o s e x u a l s m a i n t a i n i n g custody o f their ch il dr en. Thus , mo st lesbian a n d gay p a r e nt s will n o t o pe nl y a gr ee to be st ud i ed in the c o n t e x t o f their homosexual it y. Most of the r es ear ch c o m p a r e s boys a n d girls r e a r e d by divorced lesbian m o t h e r s with c h i l dr e n r e a r e d by divorced h et e ro s e x ua l m o th e rs . T h e s e m o t h e r s wer e the h o u s e h o l d he ads , a l t h o u g h s o m e c u r re nt l y lived with a n ­ o t h e r w o m a n (lesbian m o t h e r s ) o r with a m a n ( he t er o se x ua l m o t h e r s ) . T h e f o r m e r was m u c h m o r e f r e q u e n t t han the latter. A n o t h e r potentially i m p o r t a n t di f fer ence be twe en the two g r o u p s was t ha t c h i ld r en of lesbian m o t h e r s were m o r e likely to have c o nt ac t with their biological fathers t ha n c hi l d r e n o f divorced h e t e r os e xu a l mo t he rs . In g ener al, the boys a n d girls stu di ed were in the pr ima ry grades. For these c hi l d r e n (ages 5 to 12), re se a rc her s, using projective t e c h n iq u e s a n d interviews, f o u n d n o di fferences in same-sex g e n d e r i dentity be twe e n those raised by lesbian m o t h e r s a n d those raised by h e t e r os e xu a l mo t h e rs . Using q ue s ti on n ai r es a n d observations, n o g r o u p dif fer ences were f o u n d for chil­ d r e n ’s sex-typed interests, activities, b e ha vi or , or p e e r relationships. Re­ g a r d i n g a dol escent s a n d adults, the male a n d female ch il dr en o f lesbians a n d gays were n o m o r e likely to r e p o r t having h o m o s e x u a l p r ef e re n ce s t h a n c omp a r ab l e -a g e individuals in t he p o p u l a t i o n as a whole. O n t he surface, t he P a tt er so n (1992) fi nd ing s ar e r e m a r k a b l e — chi l­ d r e n rai sed by lesbian a n d gay p a r e n t s d e ve l op n o r m a l / t r a d i t i o n a l sextyped beliefs a n d behavi ors. T h e fact t h a t t he f indi ngs a p p e a r to be r e m a r k a b l e h i n g e s on the l i n ke d a s su m p t i o n s t h a t p a r e n t s wh o are h o m o ­ sexual will also be n o n t r a d i t i o n a l l y sex-typed in o t h e r i m p o r t a n t ways a n d , m o r e o v e r , they will consci ously o r u nc o ns c io u s ly a t t e m p t to t r a n s m i t t h os e n o n t r a d i t i o n a l values a n d b eh a v i or s to t h e i r c h i l d r e n . Both a s s u m p ­ tions may be false. I n d e e d , lesbians a n d gays ma y try e x t r a h a r d to t r a n s m i t t r ad it i o n a l sex-typing to t h e i r c h i l d r e n in o r d e r to p r o t e c t t h e m fr om a hostile society. T a k e n as a whole, these t h r ee studies indicat e t h a t variations in sex-typed family structures, beliefs, values, a n d behavi ors have only a l imited effect on the d e v e l o p m e n t o f c h i l d r e n ’s t raditional sex-typing. Thi s is also consi st ent with t he genetics of pr ej ud ic e l it erat ure th at f o u n d extrafamilial influences to be m u c h s t r o n g e r t han within-family social i nfluences. As previously ar­ g u e d, c ul tu re is powerful, a n d it is difficult for families to n o t expose their ch il dr en to a n d involve their ch i ld re n in the n o r m s of their cult ure. Many do try, o f cour se, a n d t urn to institutions such as h o m e school ing, a l t e r na ­ tive schools, c o n t r o l li ng access to the m e d i a in the h o m e , a n d i nvol ve me nt in exclusive social circles such as religious sects in o r d e r to stem the influ­ e n c e of ma i n s t r e a m social n o r ms . C o n t r o ll i n g societal i nf lu e nc e is a d a u n t ­

154

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AN D D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

ing a mb i t io n , however — n o t only the me di a , b u t peers, teachers, a n d o t h e r adults t r a ns mi t a n d r ei nf or ce t r aditional sex-typed n o r ms . I nf l u e nc e o f P e e r s an d T e a c h e r s on Socialization Several r e c e n t e x p e r i m e n t s have e x p l o r e d the role o f t ea ch e rs a n d peer s in s h a p i ng tradit i onal sex-typed b e ha vi or in infants, toddlers, a n d y o u n g chil­ d r en . Two classes o f b e ha vi or are e x a m i n e d : the d e v e l o p m e n t o f assertive/ aggressive acts, a n d the choi ce o f sex-typed toy play. Fagot a n d colleagues provide i m p o r t a n t i n f o rm a t i o n of the first class (Fagot 8c H a g an , 1985; Fagot, H a g an , L e i n ba c h, 8c Kro ns b e r g, 1985). Fagot et al. (1985) st ud i ed 13-month-old infants in i nf ant play gro up s , a n d the s ame c hi ld r en 10 m o n t h s later, w h e n they were in t o d d l e r play gr ou ps . D u r i ng infancy, no sex di fferences were observed in f re q ue n c y of c o mm u n i c a t i ve behaviors (e.g., gesturing, talking) o r assertive/aggressive behavi ors (e.g., hitting, g r a b bi n g objects fr om a p e e r) . However, t eacher s p u n i s h e d a n d r ewa rd ed boys’ assertive/aggressive behavi ors m o r e t ha n they did girls’ behaviors, with t he converse h o l d i n g for c o mm u n i c a t iv e b e ­ haviors. Peers did n o t differentially r e s p o n d to boys a n d girls for ei t h e r cat­ egory o f behaviors. D u r i n g t o d d l e r h o o d , boys a n d girls sh owe d s o me w ha t d if f er ent p at t e r ns o f c om mu n i c a t i ve a n d assertive/aggressive acts. T e a c h ­ ers r e s p o n d e d equivalently to boys a n d girls for b o t h categories o f behavior. But for assertive/aggressive acts, boys received m o r e negative r eactions from p ee rs t h a n did girls, a n d girls were i g n o r e d m o r e t ha n boys. Fagot ct al. (1985) i n t e r p r e t e d these results as follows. T e a c h e r s ho ld stereotypic views a b o u t sex-typed b e ha v io r predispositions. Boys are as­ s u m e d to be m o r e aggressive than girls, a n d girls arc a s s um e d to seek a t t e n ­ tion t h r o u g h lower intensity c o mm un i ca t iv e acts. D u r i ng infancy, w h e r e t he re were, in reality, n o behavi oral di fferences b etween boys a n d girls for these categories, teachers r e s p o n d e d as if t her e were, a n d essentially s ha pe d sex-typed behavior. D u r in g t o d d l e r h o o d , boys’ a n d girls’ sex-typed b eh a v­ iors c o n f o r m e d to stereotypes, a n d t eacher s t he n r e s p o n d e d to c h i l d r e n ’s behavi ors a n d n o t to t h e ir g e n d e r . Peers r e s p o n d e d to a c o mb i n a t i o n of g e n d e r a n d behavi or , a c i r cu ms t a n c e t h a t may f u r t h e r have s h a p e d sextyped g e n d e r differences. Fagot a n d I l ag an (1985) t h e n f ocused on assertive/aggressive b eh a vi or ( h e re a ft er r ef e rr ed to as “agg r e ss io n”) a n d s o u g h t to e x t e n d the already m e n t i o n e d results. T h e y st udi ed t h r ee age g r o u p s o f to dd le rs in multi-age play groups: ch il dr e n who were 20 m o n t h s , 27 m o n t h s , a n d 33 m o n t h s old. T h e q ues tion they a d d r e ss e d was the i m p a c t o f te a c h e r s ’ a n d p e e r s ’ r e ac ­ tions on the c o nt i n u a t i o n of aggressive acts. T h e first fi nd i ng was t h a t t h e r e were no sex di fferences in these effects. S e c on d, for the y o u n ge s t g r o u p , re­ warding, p un i sh i ng , or i g n o r i ng the child h a d no differential effect on t er ­

S O C I A L IZ A T I O N O F SEX-TYPING

155

m i n a t i n g or sustai ni ng the aggressive behavior. For the two ol dest groups, however, negative p e e r a n d t e a c h e r reacti ons p r o l o n g e d aggression relative to positive react ions o r i g no r i n g the aggression. Given that girls’ aggression is m o r e likely to be i g n o r e d, a n d boys’ aggression m o r e likely to be r e ­ s p o n d e d to negatively, these results i ndicate t ha t boys’, b u t n o t girls’ a ggres­ sion, is indirectly e n c o u r a g e d by t ea ch er s a n d peers. W h a t effects do p ee rs a n d t eacher s have on m o r e br oadly de fi ne d sextyped activities t ha n aggression? Fagot (1985) a dd r es s e d this issue for 2year-old ch il dr en in multi-age nu rse ry school play gr oups. Male-typed play i n c l u d e d r o ug h - a n d - t u m b l e activity a n d play with large blocks. Femaletyped play i n c l u d e d play with dolls a n d dressi ng up; g e nd e r - n e u t r a l play i n ­ c l u de d c limbi ng a n d sliding, playing with clay, a n d d o i n g puzzles. C o n t i n u ­ ation or t e r m i na t i on o f play following t e a c h e r o r p e e r reacti ons were used as the m e a s u r e o f t he effect o f the r eaction. T h e results arc s o m e w h a t surprising. W h e n male p ee rs r e wa r de d boys’ activities, irrespective o f ge nder-typing, boys c o n t i n u e d the activity longer. T e a c h e r s ’ a n d femal e p e e r s ’ differential react ions h a d no n ot i ceabl e effect on the c o nt i n u a t i o n of boys’ activities. W h e n t ea ch e rs a n d female peer s r e ­ w ar de d girls’ activities (relative to p u n i s h i n g o r i g no r i ng t h e m ) , i r r es pec­ tive o f gender-typing, girls c o n t i n u e d the activity longer . Boys’ differential r eacti ons h a d no no tic ea bl e effect on girls’ activities. Addi ti onal analyses i n­ d i cat ed that boys, b u t n o t girls, periodically received p e e r sex-typed p u n i s h ­ m e n t — for e x a mp le , “T h a t ’s d u m b , boys d o n ’t play with dolls,” w h e n they e n g a g e d in female sex-typed play. Fagot (1985) i n t e r p r e t e d these results as follows. Boys’ male peer s e n ­ c o u r ag e t he m to stay away fr om female-typed activities a n d to play with o t h e r boys. Girls’ femal e peer s e n c o u r a g e t he m to play with o t h e r girls b ut do n o t dis cou ra ge t he m from e n g a gi n g in male-typed activities. T e a c h e rs a p p e a r to e n c o u r a g e in boys a n d girls the ki nd of classroom calmness th at is associated with female-typed a n d g e n d e r - n e u t r a l activities. Thi s i n t e r p r e t a ­ tion of boy-girl dif f er ences is c ons is te nt with the cultural n o r m o f h i g h e r ma le t han femal e status. Boys a t t e m p t to mai nt ai n status differences, b u t girls d o not. L a m b a n d colleagues (M. E. L amb , Easter br ooks, 8c H o l d e n , 1980; M. E. L a m b 8c R o o p n a r i n c , 1979) e x a m i n e d the effects of p e e r r eact ions to sext yped play in 3- a n d 4- year-old n u r s e ry school chi ld re n ( L a mb 8c Roopn a ri ne , 1979) a n d in n ur se ry school a n d k i n d e r g a r t e n ch il dr e n ( L a mb et al., 1980). T h e i r categories o f male a n d female sex-typed activities, p e e r r e ­ actions of reward a n d p u n i s h m e n t , a n d effects o f t he latter on c o nt i n ua t i o n o f play activity were all similar to those assessed by Fagot (1985). T h e ma jo r results were as follows. In b o t h studies boys a n d girls generally e n g a g e d in sex - ap pr op ri at e activities. Both ma le a n d femal e p ee rs r e ­ w ar de d boys m o r e t han girls for mal e sex-typed play, a n d r e w a rd e d girls

156

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AN D D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

m o r e t ha n boys for female sex-typed play. P u n i s h m e n t for sex-typed play in­ f r e q u en t l y o c c u r r e d , b u t it h a d t he effect o f t e r m i n a t i n g play. Finally, boys c o n t i n u e d to r ew ar d male- typed play m o r e t h a n girls did, a n d girls c o n t i n ­ u e d to r ew ar d f emal e- typed play m o r e t h a n boys did. Addi tional ly, L a m b et al. (1980) f o u n d t h a t following p u n i s h m e n t , boys t e r m i n a t e d f emalet yped play m o r e r apidly t h an girls d id a n d girls t e r m i n a t e d m a l e sex-typed play m o r e rapidly t h a n boys did. T h e r e were n o age dif fer ences in any of these results. T h e s e fin di ng s suggest to the a u t h o r s t h a t 3- to 5-year-old c h i l d r e n have a c q u i r e d the k n o w l e d g e o f s e x - ap p r o p r i a t e a n d s e x - i n a p p r o p r i a t e activi­ ties, a n d t he mot i va ti on to carry o u t these activities. C h i l d r e n r ew ar d a n d p u n i s h p e e r s for a d h e r e n c e to o r devi at ion fr om the g e n d e r n o r m s . T h e s e results f u r t h e r suggest, as c o m p a r e d to the fin di ng s o f Fagot (1985) t h a t o n e m a j o r d evelopment, t h a t oc cur s b e tw ee n t he ages o f 2 a n d 3 years is boys’ a n d girls’ susceptibility to g e n d e r role e n f o r c e m e n t s (rewards a n d p u n i s h m e n t s ) by bo th male a n d female peers. T a k e n to g et h e r , the data on the socialization o f sex-typing i ndicate that from a very early age, par ent s, peers, teachers, the me di a , a n d all f or ms of cult ural n o r m t r ansmission o p e r a t e to e n s u r e t ha t males a n d females will develop very d if fe re nt g e n d e r identities a n d behaviors. T h a t even 2-yearolds c o n t r i b u t e to this dif ferentiation is r em a r ka bl e. Nearly every o n e in the c ult ur e b e c o m e s invested in these identities. T h e c hi ld r en themselves m a n ­ ifest a variety o f “b a d g e s ” to e n s u r e t h a t the two g e n d e r g r o u p s will n o t be c onf use d. T h e a d o p t i n g o f a n o t h e r ’s b a d ge is readily n o t e d , a n d p ee r s arc likely to take corrective me as u re s to get t hings straight. T h e r e may be a ge­ netic c o m p o n e n t to g e n d e r roles, b u t even if t he re is not , sex-typing seems to devel op like canalized behaviors. Even such a p p ar e n t l y n o n t r a d i t i o na l types as having two h o m o s e x u a l p a r e nt s have little effect on the d e ve l op ­ m e n t o f g e n d e r . As is seen in the n e x t two sections, t he o u t c o m e s ar e signifi­ cant for males a n d females a n d for the c ul tu re as a whole.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F O P P OS I T E - S EX P RE J UD IC E I nd ir ec t M ea sur es In an earlier section o f this c h a pt e r , Cult ural No rms, six p r ed ic ti o ns were m a d e bas ed on t he c o n s e q u e n c e s o f status a n d d o m i n a n c e di fferences b e ­ tween mal es a n d females in No rt h Ame ri ca n societies. Onl y o n e o f t h e p r e ­ dictions directly d ea l t with d e ve l o p m e n t a l c ha nge s in opposite-sex p r e j u ­ dice. T h e o t h e r five indirectly dealt with p re j ud ic e in t h a t they involved e i t h e r a femal e sex-rolc devaluat ion or a mal e sex-rolc e n h a n c e m e n t . T h e first p re di ct io n, c o n f i r m e d in the section Socialization of Sex-Tvping, stated

DEVEI.O P M E N T O F OI ’POSITK-SEX PRKJUI)ICE

157

that fathers would be more involved than mothers in traditional sex-typing of their children because they had more to gain by the status quo. T h e ef­ fect of encouraging compliance in girls and assertiveness in boys is likely to work against females in a society where males make an d enforce the rules. This first prediction dealt with parents, whereas the others dealt with children. The second prediction was that owing to ge n de re d status differ­ ences, girls should acquire knowledge of opposite-scx stereotypes earlier than boys. On the surface, there is noth ing prejudiced about this. However, given a theory that links knowledge acquisition to the social value of that knowledge, a ge n d er ed sequence of opposite-sex knowledge acquisition would suggest a higher value for the stereotype first acquired. Th a t is, if girls acquire oppositc-sex knowledge before boys do, this implies that male sex-typing is mor e valuable social knowledge than female sex-typing. Is this no t merely a restatement of the cultural norm that males have highe r status than females? O f course it is. In this way, female and male children essen­ tially acknowledge the higher valuing of male roles over female roles. But it is an indirect measure of prejudice. In the re m a in de r of this section we ex­ amine the research relevant to the four predictions dealing with indirect measures of opposite-scx prejudice in children. O ’Brien (1992) and Levy and Fivush (1993) reviewed literature relevant to the just covered prediction concerning the acquisition of knowledge about opposite-sex stereotypes. In the typical experiments, boys and girls are shown pictures of objects or activities associated with male and female children, and adults and arc asked to identify with which sex the object or activity is usually associated. Preschool boys and girls age 2 and older have greater knowledge of same-sex than other-scx, gender-typed knowledge. However, the discrepancy is greater for boys than for girls. Indeed, in some studies, girls showed equivalent knowledge of the two sex-typed categories that was equaled only by the same-sex knowledge attained by boys. Thus, the second prediction is confirmed. The third prediction made was that boys should show mor e traditional sex-typed preferences than girls, and, owing to increasing awareness of cul­ tural values, the difference should increase with age. This prediction differs from the second one in two ways: It focuses on preferences rather than on knowledge and it predicts age-related developmental changes. T he re­ search literature strongly confirms this prediction (Huston, 1983; P. A. Katz, 1983; P. A. Katz 8c Boswell, 1986; O ’Brien, 1992; Signorella, Bigler, 8c Libcn, 1993). Interestingly, most researchers refer to the shift to more opposite-sex preferences by girls as evidencing their increased “flexibility” rel­ ative to boys. The ex pe ri me nt by Serbin and Sprafkin (1986) is an excellent example of research in this area. The authors tested boys and girls from five age groups between 3 and 7 years old on various measures of sex-typed knowl-

158

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

e d ge a n d sex-typed p re fe r en ce s. T h e a u t h o r s f o u n d essentially n o differ­ e nces b etween boys a n d girls in t h e ir ability to identify c h i l d r e n ’s a n d a d u l t s ’ sex-typed objects a n d activities. Re g a r di n g pr e f er e nc es , o n e o f thei r tests, “affiliation,” involved pict ur es o f m e n a n d w o m e n , with the same-sex a du l t d o i n g n o t h i n g , a n d the opposite-sex adu lt d o i n g s o m e t h i n g i nt er est ­ ing. T h e ch il dr e n were asked with which a dul t they woul d like to be. Girls c ho os e females a b o u t h a l f the time at cach age level (40% at age 3). Boys, on the o t h e r h a n d , sh owe d a p r o n o u n c e d increase in c h o o s i ng males, from 30% at age 3 to 75% at age 7. T h e f our th pr ed i c t io n m a d e was that, owing to t he ir self-perceived lower status, females s h o u l d be m o r e likely to a d o p t mal e sex-typed be ha v i o r a n d values than the converse. This p re di ct io n is similar to the thir d o n e e x c ep t t h a t the focus h e r e is bo t h m o r e specific (i.e., on behaviors) a n d m o r e g e n ­ eral (i.e., on values). Al th ou g h we woul d c x p cc t similar p r ed ic ti o ns to have similar o ut c ome s , H u s t on (1983) t a u g h t us t h a t sex-typing is m u l t i d i m e n ­ sional a n d th at d e v e l o p m e n t of the various sex-typed c o m p o n e n t s arc n o t necessarily c o rr e la t ed with o n e a n o t h e r . H u s t o n (1983) a n d O ’Brien (1992) s u m m a r i z e d lit er at ur e t h a t s u p po r ts this p re di ct io n . Baruch a n d Ba r ne t t (1986) a n d o th er s have f o u n d t h a t girls are m o r e likely t ha n boys to p e r f or m opposite-sex-typed h o u s e h o l d chores. S m e t a n a (1986), in studying p r e s c h o o l e r s ’ c o nc e p t i o n s o f scx-rolc t rans­ gressions, f o u n d t h a t b o t h boys a n d girls j u d g e d mal e scx-role t ransgres­ sions m o r e severely th an female scx-rolc transgressions. In the a re a o f o c c u ­ p a t i o na l aspi rat ions, E t a u g h a n d Liss (19 92 ), st ud yi ng c h i l d r e n fr om k i n d e r g a r t e n t h r o u g h ei ght h gr ade , f o u n d girls, b u t n o t boys, increasingly i nt e re st ed in opposite-sex-typed o cc upa t ions . Finally, in reviewing litera­ t ure on c h i l d r e n ’s p r e f e r e n c e s for b e i n g like various television c har act er s when they grew up, boys almost never chose a w o m a n b u t a b o u t o n e f ourth o f girls c hos e a m a n (Fishbein, 1984). T h e fifth pr e di c tio n m a d e was t hat owing to g e n d e r e d status differences, self-esteem in males a n d females s h ou l d be m o r e highly rel at ed to m a s c u ­ line t ha n to f e m i ni n e characteristics. T h e r e is a corollary p re dic ti on that, owing to t he c o n n e c t i o n b etween self-esteem a n d dep re ss io n ( Ha rt er , 1993), females s h o ul d be m o r e likely th an males to suffer fr om d epr es sion. Al th o u g h the dat a are s o m e w h a t l imited c o n c c r n i n g the fifth p re di ct io n , two large studies with high s chool st ud e nt s conf ir m it (Massad, 1981; S pe nc e 8c H e l m r e i c h , 1978). In b o t h studies c o n c e r n e d with self-esteem, the Personal Attributes Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( P A Q) d e v e lo p ed by S p e nc e a n d H c l m r c i c h (1978) was u sed to assess ma sc ul ine a n d f e mi ni ne personality traits. T h e as s umpt io n u n de r ly i n g the d e v e l o p m e n t o f t he PAQ was th at masculinity a n d f e m i n i n ­ ity were i n d e p e n d e n t personality d im en s i on s , t h a t is, a hi gh score on o n e d i m e n s i o n did n o t imply a low score on the o th er . In d ev el op i ng the PAQ,

D E V E I .O P M E N T O F O I ’P OS IT K- SE X P R K J U D I C E

159

the y i n c l u d e d only th o s e c h a r a c te ri s ti c s t h a t w e re positively v a l u e d by b o t h m a l e a n d f e m a le a d o l e s c e n t s . S p c n c c a n d H c l m r c i c h (1978) f o u n d fo r b o t h m a le s a n d f e m a le s t h a t self-esteem was m o d e r a t e l y to s tr ong ly pos i­ tively c o r r e l a t e d with m a s c u li n it y scores, t h a t is, h i g h m asc u li n it y was associ­ a t e d with h i g h self-esteem. H ow ev e r, f e m i n i n i t y for b o t h sexes was weakly c o r r e l a t e d with self-esteem. M assad (1981) f o u n d t h a t m a le s with h i g h m a s ­ culinity sco res h a d h i g h e r self-esteem t h a n th o s e with low ma sc ul in it y scorcs, a n d t h a t t h e i r f e m i n i n i t y s co r es h a d n o ef fec t on this re l a t i o n s h i p . F e m a l e s with h ig h m asc u li n it y a n d h ig h f e m i n i n i t y s co r es h a d th e h i g h e s t self-esteem, a n d th o s e with low scores on b o t h h a d th e lowest self-esteem. T h u s , m a s c u l i n e c h ar ac te ri s ti c s b o o s t e d f e m a l e self-esteem. R e g a r d i n g th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f d e p r e s s i o n , two p a p e r s have reviewed the li te r a t u r e , r e a c h i n g i d e n ti c a l c o n c l u s i o n s (C antwell, 1990; P e t e r s e n et al., 1993). D is ti nc tio n s s h o u l d be m a d e b e t w e e n depressed mood, depressive syn­ drome, a n d clinical depression. T h e t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s ca n be s e e n as p o i n t s a l o n g a c o n t i n u u m o f severity o f d e p r e s s i o n , with clinical d e p r e s s i o n a p p a r ­ ently o c c u r r i n g in 3% to 5% o f a d o l e s c e n t s a n d close to 0% in p r e a d o ­ le s c e n t c h i l d r e n . In th e o t h e r two c a te g o ri e s , a d o l e s c e n t s also have a h i g h e r o c c u r r e n c e t h a n p r c a d o l c s c c n t s . F o r e a c h o f th e se t h r e e c at e go ri e s , th e d a t a ar e very c on si s te nt : P r e a d o l e s c e n t boys a n d girls, t h a t is, 8- to 12-yearolds, have a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l rates o f d e p r e s s i o n , w h e r e a s fo r a d o l e s c e n t s ag e 14 a n d o l d e r , f e m a le s have h i g h e r rates o f d e p r e s s i o n t h a n ma le s. T h e la tte r p a t t e r n persists in to a d u l t h o o d . P e t e r s e n et al. (1993) s u g g e s te d th a t o n e causal f a c to r f o r t h e g e n d e r d if f e r e n c e s is t h a t t h e bio log ic al c h a n g e s in p u b e r t y s t r e n g t h e n o n e ’s g e n d e r identity. Obviously, fr o m th e p r e s e n t p o i n t o f view, s t r o n g e r id e n ti ty with a s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p (f em a le s) w o u ld b e m o r e d e p r e s s i n g t h a n with a d o m i n a n t g r o u p (m a le s) . In s u m m a r y , all f o u r p r e d i c t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g e i t h e r th e e n h a n c e m e n t o f m a l e sex-typed c h ar ac te ri s ti c s o r t h e d e v a l u a t i o n o f f e m a le scx-tvped c h a r ­ acteristics w ere s u p p o r t e d . T h i s m ay give th e im p r e s s i o n t h a t op posi te-se x p r e j u d i c e is u n i d i r e c t i o n a l . H ow ev er, as will b e s e e n in th e n e x t sec tio n, w h ic h de als with m o r e d i r e c t m e a s u r e s o f p r e j u d i c e , m a l e s a n d f e m a les b o t h e v i d e n c e o p p os ite -s e x p r e j u d i c e . Direct M easures O p p o si te - se x p r e j u d i c e is dis cu s s ed in two ways. In th e first, we lo ok a t th e ne gativ e a n d positive scx-role s te r e o ty p e s t h a t boys a n d girls h o l d for t h e m ­ selves a n d for t h e o p p o s i t e sex. Fo r e x a m p l e , if boys h o l d s t r o n g e r ne gative f e m a le sex-role s te r e o ty p e s t h a n girls d o , a n d w e a k e r positive f e m a le sexrol c s te r e o t y p e s t h a n girls d o , it m ay be i n f e r r e d t h a t boys have p r e j u d i c e d a t t i t u d e s t ow a rd girls. T h r e e s tu d ie s use this a p p r o a c h . In t h e s e c o n d way, we e x a m i n e c h i l d r e n ’s e v a lu a ti o n s of c o u n t c r s t c r c o t y p e d ( o r op po si te -se x)

160

5.

O P P O S IT E - S E X P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

b eh a vi or th at they a n d / o r mal e a n d female peer s carry out, for e xa mp l e , girls playing with trucks o r football. Negative react ions to c o un te r st e re o typed play can be viewed as a deval uat ion o f t he opp o s i te sex, a n d h e n c e , as an i nd i ca to r o f pr ej udi ce. T h r e e studies take this a p p r o a c h . From a gcn c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view, positively e n h a n c e d same-sex valuation is consis­ t e nt with i n g r o u p favoritism, a n d negatively e n h a n c e d op po si te devalua­ tion is c ons ist ent with o u t g r o u p hostility. It is a ssu me d, o f course, that b a d g i ng m e c h a n i s m s lead to identification o f g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p . Kuh n, Nash, a n d Brucken (1978) c o m p a r e d k no wl ed ge o f sex-role ster­ eotypes for 2 Vi- a n d 3 '/2 -year-old boys a n d girls involved in a n u r se ry school. T h e c hi ld r en were shown two p a p e r dolls— o n e clearly r e s em b l i n g a girl, the o t h er , a boy— a n d asked to identify t h e m. All did so correctly. T h e chil­ d r e n were t h e n r ea d a list o f 72 s t a t eme n t s t ha t dealt with traits (e.g., “I’m s t r o n g ”), activities (e.g, “I like to play ball”), o r f ut ur e roles (e.g., “W h e n I grow up, I’ll fly an a i r p l a n e ”). T h e s e were all i tems th at adults a n d o l d e r c hi l d r e n h a d clcarly ident ifi ed as b e i ng sex-rolc st ereot yped. For cach state­ m e nt , the c hi ld r en were asked to p o i n t to the doll t h a t best fit in. T h e results showed t ha t c hi l d r e n a g r e ed with a d ul t stereotypes a b o ut two-thirds o f the time, a rate t h a t is statistically well above the r a n g e o f c ha n ce . T h e r e were no age o r sex di fferences in a m o u n t of stereotyping. Significantly, boys a n d girls s o m e t i m e s dis agr ee d a b o u t the s ta t em e n ts that they st ereot yped. Boys, b u t n o t girls, believed th at girls cried, were slow, a n d c o m p l a i n e d a b o u t h u r t feelings a n d n o t having a t ur n at play. Girls, b u t n ot boys, believed t h a t girls l o o k e d nice, gave kisses, n e ve r fought , a n d said, “I can do it best.” T h u s boys he ld m o r e negative atti tudes a n d fewer positive a ttitudes toward girls than girls h e l d a b o u t themselves. How do beliefs a b o u t boys fit into this picture? Girls, b u t n o t boys, b e ­ lieve t h a t boys enjoy fighting, are m e a n , weak, a n d say, “I did w r o n g . ” Boys, b u t n o t girls, believe t h a t boys enjoy h a r d work, are loud, n a ught y, a n d m a ke p e o p l e cry. Except for the last t h r e e items, which may be too a m b i g u ­ ous to categorize accurately, girls he ld m o r e negative attitudes a n d fewer positive attitudes towar d boys than boys h e l d toward themselves. It can be i n f e rr e d from these findings t ha t 214- a n d 3 Vi-year-olds do h o ld oppositcscx prejudices. T h e study by Albert a n d Po rt er (1988) d ea lt with sex-role stereotypes a m o n g 4-, 5- a n d 6-year-olds e n r o ll e d in p re sc ho ol p r og ra ms . T h e ch i ld r en were shown bo th a male a n d a female doll a n d told two stories, o n e c o n ­ c e r n i n g the c h i l d ’s h o m e , a n d the o t he r , the school e n v i r o n m e n t . I n t er m i t ­ tently t h r o u g h o u t the stories, t h e child was asked to p o i n t to the doll that e n g a g e d in the activity or e vent j u s t d escr ibed. In all, 32 activities were n o t e d , all j u d ge d by adults to be e i t h e r positive o r negative as well as clearly scx-role s t er eo ty pe d. For e x a m p l e , t he i tem, “Wrhich o n e thr ows toys a r o u n d w he n told n o t to?” is a negative mal e scx-rolc stereotype; “W hi ch

D E V E I .O P M E N T O F O F’P C) SIT F.-SE X PR KJ U I) IC E

161

o n e goes over to take care o f the little chi ld?” is a positive femal e scx-rolc stereotype. Overall, c hi ld r en were f o u n d to be m o r e a cc u r at e (i.e., to a gr ee with ad u l t ratings) in the scx-rolc st er eot yping o f t he i r own t ha n o f the o pposi te sex. O l d e r c hi l d r en were also m o r e a cc ur at e in thei r scx-role stereotypes t h a n were y o u n g e r ch il dr en . Girls were m o r e likely t han boys to associate all the negative male sex-role stereotypes with the mal e doll. Moreover, the st re ng t h o f these j u d g m e n t s was g r e at e r for o l d e r t h a n for y o u n g e r girls. For all of the positive mal e sex-role stereotypes, boys s cor ed h i g h e r t ha n, or the s ame as, girls. In findings similar to those for the negative stereotypes, o l d e r girls were less positive t h a n y o u n g e r ones. A similar p a t te r n was f o u n d for female scx-role stereotypes, with boys a n d girls h o l d i n g reversed positions. T h a t is, boys generall y viewed girls m o r e negatively a n d less positively t h a n girls saw themselves. T h e oppositcscx disparity, however, was n o t as gr eat as t h a t seen for male sex-role s t e r eo ­ types. Zalk a n d Katz (1978) tested second- a n d fifth-grade Black a n d Whi te ch il dr en on race a n d g e n d e r biases. For t he latter, they were shown slides of boys a n d girls a n d given e i t h e r a positive or negative d es cr ipt ion o f o n e of t h e m . T h e pa rti ci pa nt s were t he n asked to p o i n t to e i t h er t he boy o r the girl w ho best fit the desc ri pt i on , for e x a mp le , “W hi ch child always answers the t e a c h e r ’s q u e st io ns w r o ng ? ” T h e de scr ipti ons deal t with b ot h a ca d em i c a n d n o n a c a d e m i c characteristics, with six involving positive attributes, a n d seven involving negative ones. T h e p at te r n o f results was similar for s e c on d a n d fifth graders, a l t h o u gh t he o l d er ch il dr en were less biased t ha n the y o u n g e r ones. Both the males a n d females r at ed same-sex c hi ld r en m o r e positively than oppositc-scx chil­ d r e n , c ons is te nt with the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d results for pr es chooler s. Females r at ed mal es m u c h m o r e negatively t h a n they did females; a n d males r at ed males s o m e w h a t m o r e negatively th an they did females. But unlike the r e ­ sults for p r es ch oo le rs , males rat ed males s o m e w h a t m o r e negatively than they did females. O n e possible e x pl an at i o n for the di sc re pa nc y with males is t ha t in these school settings, boys are m o r e f r e q u e n t t r o u b l e m a k e r s t ha n girls a n d arc criticized by t eacher s for this. F o ur o f t h e seven negative d e ­ scriptions involved school -relat ed activities; h e n c e , c h i l d r e n ’s negative eval­ uat io ns may partially reflect th ei r school e xpe ri e nc es . T a k e n to ge t h e r, the results o f t he j u s t p r e s e n t e d research indicate, c o n ­ sistent with the g e n d e r identity l iterature, th at oppositc-sex p r e j ud i c e starts to e m e r g e at age 2 Vi> is clearly seen in 4-year-olds, a n d i ncreases until a b o u t age 8 (the s e con d- gr ad e rs in Zalk Sc Katz, 1978). Between ages 8 a n d 10, it d ecl ines s omewhat , pr oba bl y b ecause o f increases in sex-typed flexibility a n d in the ability to ba la nc e beliefs a n d e xpe ri enc es . T h e overall set o f f in d­ ings is c onsi ste nt with hyp o th ese s b as ed on t he g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y factors

162

5.

OPPOSI TE- SEX PREJUDI CE AND DI S CRI MI NATI ON

o f badgi ng mechanisms, i ngr oup favoritism, a n d o u tg r ou p hostility. T h e r e is n o evidence of o u tg ro u p attractiveness. Th e e x p e r i m e n t by Bussey a nd B andur a ( 1992) dealt with nursery school c h i l d r e n ’s self-evaluation o f how they would feel after they ha d played with same-sex or opposite-sex toys, a n d with their evaluation of older boys and girls they saw on television playing with oppositc-scx toys (spccial video­ tapes were p r o d uc e d for this task). T he children were taught to indicate their evaluations by pressing light switches that were associated with the fol­ lowing five categories: real great, kinda great, nothing special, kinda awful, real awful. For purposes of data analyses the preschoolers were divided into two groups, with average ages of 3 years a nd 4 years, respectively. T h e major findings were as follows. For self-evaluations, the 3-year-olds t ende d to evaluate same-sex toy play positively a nd opposite-sex toy play ne g­ atively, but this was not statistically significant. For the 4-ycar-olds, this pattern was quite p r on o un c ed , and statistically significant. Regarding evaluations o f televised older children, there were no age or sex differences, but generally, the participants rcactcd negatively to opposite-scx toy play, for example, boys playing with dolls, girls playing with trucks. These results arc consistent with the studies dealing with preschoolers’ negative judgment s of oppositc-sex characteristics, a n d positive judgments of same-sex characteristics. Martin (1989) studied two gr oups o f boys a nd girls with average ages o f approximately 4'A a n d 814 years. T he participants were shown pictures of same-age boys a nd girls a n d were read descriptions ab ou t their friends and interests. Only o n e target child was shown at a time. T h e r e were four target children of cach g en de r, r epr es ent ing four g e n d e r characteristics. O n e of cach sex was d cpi ctcd in a g e n d e r neutral way; o n e of cach as having samescx stereotyped interests; o n e o f cach as having opposite-scx counterstereotyped interests; a nd finally, one boy was labeled as a sissy a nd one girl as a tomboy. After cach description was read, the participants were asked to make three “liking” ratings from not at all to a lot: (1) How m u c h do you like the target? (2) How m u c h do o t he r boys like the target? (3) How m uc h do o t h e r girls like the target? In a pattern consistent with those observed in previous work, boys overall liked male targets bet ter than female ones, with the converse hol ding for fe­ males. T h e younger boys a nd girls disliked the tomboys m o r e than all o t h e r target children, whereas the older boys a n d girls disliked sissies the most. T he r e were no significant differences in liking or disliking as a function of depict ed neutral, stereotyped, or counter st er eot yped interests. Regarding the judged liking o f the target children by o t he r boys or girls (second and third questions), the pattern for yo u n ge r children was identical to that o f older children. For the y ounger participants, the only significant finding was their expectation that ot he r boys would like boys bet ter than girls, with the converse h olding for girls.

D E V E I .O P M E N T O F O F’ F’C) SIT F.-SE X PR KJ U I) IC E

163

From the perspective o f opposite-sex p r ej udic e, the mo st i m p o r t a n t re­ sults involved the age-related shift from y o u n g e r chi l d r en m o s t disliking tomboys to o l d e r ch ild en m o s t disliking sissies. O n e possible e x pl an a t io n for t hes e results, c onsi st e nt with a c u l t ur a l/ h is t o r ic a l p o i n t o f view, involves the idea t h a t for bo th age gr ou ps , male characteristics are seen as s o me w ha t m o r e highly valued than femal e characteristics. T h e y o u n g e r c hi ld r en as­ s u m e th at mal e characteristics “b e l o n g ” to males a n d thus sec tomboys mo st negatively. Thi s is consi st ent with S m e t a n a ’s (1986) results, n o t e d in the previous section. T h e o l d e r c h i ld r en , however, value mal e characteristics in b o t h sexes, a n d view sissies m o st negatively b ecause they have r eject ed these characteristics. T h e p a p e r by Lobel, B c m p c ch a t , Gewirtz, S ho ke n- To pa z , a n d Bashc (1993) follows these leads from M a r t i n ’s (1989) r es ear ch in very i m a gi n a ­ tive ways. T h e possible dr awback to t he ir r es ear ch is t h a t it was car r ied out in Israel with 10- to 12-year-old Israeli ch il dr en. Alt h ou gh the article was p u b l i sh e d in a No rt h Ame ric an j ou r na l a n d Lobel et al. (1993) took a n u m ­ b e r o f me as u r e s t ha t d e m o n s t r a t e the c ompar abi li ty o f these c h i l d r e n ’s r e ­ sponses with those o f N o r th Amer icans, Israel is nevert hel ess a d if fer ent cul­ ture. In this e x p e r i m e n t , the r ese ar ch er s m a d e f o u r vi deot apes all involving 10- to 12-ycar-old c hil dr en. In the first, o n e boy (the target) a n d t h r e e girls played “Ch in ese j u m p r o p e ” t o g e t h e r (a girls’ g a me in Israel). In the sec­ o n d , o n e girl (the target) a n d t h r e e boys played socccr t o g e t h e r (a boys’ g a m e ). In t he thi rd, a boy played socccr with t hr ee o t h e r boys. In the f ou rt h, a girl played C h i ne s e j u m p r o p e with t h r e e o t h e r girls. T h e partici­ p ant s were shown only o n e o f t h e videos a n d t h e n asked: (a) to rate t he tar­ get child on sixteen ma s c ul ine a n d f e m i ni n e traits, (b) to rate the p o p u l a r ­ ity o f the t a rge t with his or h e r peers, (c) to rate how m u c h they personally liked the t ar ge t child, a n d (d) to i ndicate w h e t h e r or n o t they woul d like to e n g a g e in a variety o f activities with the target child. Re g ar d in g r at ed masculinity a n d femininity, the target boy a n d target girl wh o played soccer were b o t h r at ed a b o u t the same, a n d m o r e m a s c u ­ line than f em i n i ne . T h e t a rge t boy a n d t ar get girl who played j u m p r o p e were bo t h r at ed a b o u t th e same, a n d m o r e f e m i ni n e t han mascul i ne. Re­ g a r di n g j u d g e d p e e r popularity, t he least p o p u l a r was t he boy who played j u m p r o p e with girls. T h e pop ul a ri ty o f t h e o t h e r targets was essentially the same. Thi s p a t t er n is c ons is te nt with t h a t f o u n d by Martin (1989) for the o l d e r c h i l d r e n — t h a t is, sissies were disliked most. Re g a r di n g p e rs on a l lik­ ing, girls playing with girls (i.e., in a traditional sex-typed way) were liked the m o s t by b o t h boys a n d girls. T h e r e were only slight dif fer ences a m o n g the o t h e r t h r e e c ondi ti ons. Thi s is inc on s i st en t with M a r t i n ’s findings, a n d may i ndicate a level o f c o m f o r t t ha t o l d e r c hi l d r en feel with traditional girls. Finally, boys woul d m o s t p r e f er to e n g a ge in o t h e r activities with the girl who played socccr with the boys, a n d girls woul d m o s t p r e f e r e n g ag i ng

164

5.

O P P O S I T E - S E X P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

in activities with the boys who played soccer with o t h e r boys. This fi n d in g is c onsistent with the view that mascul ine characteristics are mo st highly val­ u e d by boys a n d girls. Additionally, it indicates t ha t h et e ro s e x u a l interests are starting to play a role in o pp os it ion to oppositc-scx prejudi ce. T a ke n t o g e t h e r, these t h r e e e x p e r i m e n t s indi cate t ha t oppositc-sex p r ej ­ u dice e m e r g e s at age 3 a n d is strongly in place at age 4. At these ages, the p r ej ud i ce is bi d i re ct io na l— boys devalue girls’ characteristics a n d girls d e ­ value boys’ characteristics, as p r e d i c t e d by the factor of o u t g r o u p hostility. Between the ages of 4 a n d 8 years, in a p at t e rn c ons is te nt with t he results r e ­ p o r t e d in c h a p t e r 2 c o n c e r n i n g g r o u p identity, a shift occurs. Both girls a n d boys reject boys who take on femal e characteristics. Alt h ou gh t he u n ­ derlying processes may be di fferent , b o th sexes at a b o u t age 8 effectively state t ha t mal e characteristics are m o r e valued t h a n femal e ones, as p r e ­ di cted by c ul tu r al / h is t o r ic a l analysis. Between ages 8 a n d 10 years, the e n ­ h a n c e m e n t o f mal e characteristics s t r e n g t he ns , b u t a new e l e m e n t e nter s a n d op po s e s oppositc-sex p r e j ud i c e — he t er o se x ua l interest. Boys want to be involved with ma s cu l i ne girls, a n d girls want to be involved with m a s cu ­ line boys, consi st ent with t he h i g h e r status o f males th an females. T h e pic­ ture is s o m e w ha t cloudy d u r i n g p r ea d o l e s c e n c c in t h a t boys a n d girls p e r ­ sonally like t raditional girls the most. T h e results in this section have b e a r i ng on the p re dic ti on m a d e in the Cul t ural N o r m s section t ha t owing to g e n d e r e d status differences, oppositcscx p re j u d i c e s h o u l d dimi ni sh with i nc re as ing age for females m o r e t ha n for males. T h e results from the first t h r e e e x p e r i m e n t s dea li ng with n e g a ­ tive j u d g m e n t s a b o u t opposite-scx stereotypes arc i ncons is tent with this p r e ­ diction; b u t those c o n c e r n e d with evaluations o f c o u n t e r s t c r e o t y p c d b eh av ­ iors s u p p o r t the pred i ct i o n. T h e r e is n o obvious resol uti on to this disparity.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F O P PO SI T E- S EX D I S C R I M I N A T I O N As discussed earlier, oppositc-sex d i scr iminati on as d e f i ne d in c h a p t e r 1 has a p pa r en t ly n ever b e e n st ud ie d with N o r t h Ame ri c a n ch i ld re n a n d adol es­ cents. T h e basic as su mp ti on m a d e h e r e is t h a t freely cho se n g e n d e r segre­ gation reflects exclusion b as e d o n g e n d e r differences. Thi s exclusion may be h a r mf u l , a n d h e n c e , discriminatory. At a m i n i m u m , it shows t he gen c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y i nfluences of b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s a n d i n g r o u p favorit­ ism. In t h e following studies, twTo pri nci pal m e t h o d s o f assessing segr ega­ tion are e mp l oy e d: For p re sc ho ol a n d k i n d e r g a r t e n chi l d r en , behavioral observations; for o l d e r c hi l d r e n , p e e r n o m i n a t i o n s (a sociomet ri c t e c h ­ n i q u e ) . Onl y five e x p e r i m e n t s are d esc ri be d o u t of potentially dozens, pr i­ marily for illustrative p ur pos es. T h a t is, t he age-related p a t t e rn o f g e n d e r segr egat ion is clear. T h e S h r u m a n d C h e c k (1987) a n d S h r u m , C h e e k , a n d

D E VE L OP ME NT O F OPPOSI TE- SEX DI SCRI MI NATI ON

165

H u n t e r (1988) research were selected because they studied virtually an e n ­ tire school system from Grade 3 t h r ou gh Gr ad e 12. T h e others were choscn because o f the clarity o f their m e t ho d s a nd results. I.aFrcnierc, Strayer, a n d Ga ut hi er (1984) studied 15 long-standing play gr oups of children 1 'A, 214, 3, 4, a nd 5V§ years old. They observed how fre­ quently children directed positive social initiatives to same- a n d oppositescx peers. For the 114-year-olds, no sex preferences were shown, 2!4-year-old girls, b u t n o t boys, showed same-sex preferences; by age 3, both boys and girls were directing twice as many initiatives to same-sex as to opposite-scx peers. This ratio r e ma i ne d stable for the girls; for the 5!4-ycar-old boys, however, the ratio c ha ng e d to 3-to-l. Thus, 3-year-olds o f both sexes arc reli­ ably showing oppositc-scx discrimination. Maccoby a n d Jacklin (1987) studied the social play o f groups o f 414-yearold nursery school children a nd 6'/4-ycar-old kindergart en children. For cach child engaging in either parallel or interactive play, it was no te d w he the r the chil d’s p a r t n e r was the same or opposite sex or w he t he r the child was part of a mixed-sex group. Both age g r oups participated in mixedscx gr oups approximately one third of the time. T h e 414-year-olds were a bo u t 2'A times mo re likely to be playing with a same-scx t han with an o p p o ­ sitc-scx p art ner, b ut the 6M>-ycar-olds were 11 times mo re likely to be doing so. T h e results for the 4'/4-year-olds arc consistent with those r e po rt e d by I.aFrcnicrc ct al. (1984) a nd those for the 614-year-olds are consistent with o t h e r published data. Thus, a dramatic incrca.se in oppositc-sex discrimina­ tion occurs between the ages o f 4'A a n d 6!4. Th e results of the research on both opposite-scx prcjudicc a n d oppositcscx discrimination for young children arc very consistent. By age 214, chil­ dr en show attitudinal a nd behavioral preferences for the same sex over the opposite sex. These remain relatively stable until ab o ut age 414, after which they grow stronger. By age 6'A, the p h e n o m e n o n of opposite-sex discrimi­ nation is striking. T he dramatic increase in c h i l d r e n ’s sex discrimination af­ ter age 4'A is consistent with the a r g u m e n t ma d e in c ha pt er 2 that group identity emerges between the ages o f 3 a nd 4 a n d increases between the ages of 4 a n d 5. Haydcn- Thomson, Rubin, a n d Hymcl (1987) c o n du c te d two experi ­ ments using sociomctric t echni ques to assess same-sex a n d opposite-scx preferences o f children in ki ndergart en th ro u g h Grade 3 ( Ex pe ri me nt 1) a nd Grades 3 t h r o u g h 6 ( Ex pe r ime nt 2). T he children in cach classroom were given a set o f p h o to g ra p hs o f cach of their classmates a n d asked to placc them in o n e o f three boxes. O n e box was for children you like a lot, the s ccond for children you sort o f like, a nd the third for children you don’t like. In cach e xpe ri me nt , children rated samc-scx classmates h i g h e r than those of the opposite sex. Both boys a nd girls in E x p e ri m e n t 1 showed an increasing negative bias toward opposite-scx classmates with increasing age, that is,

166

5.

OPPOSI TE- SEX PREJUDI CE AND DI S CRI MI NATI ON

from kindergart en to Grade 3. However, in E x p e ri me n t 2, ther e were no particular trends for either boys or girls as a function o f age. Most conserva­ tively, o n e could concl ude that opposite-sex discrimination increases from kindergarten to Grade 3, a nd remains relatively stable from Grade 3 to Grade 6. T hu s in gr ou p favoritism, but n o t o u tg r o u p hostility, is su pp or t e d by the data. Sh ru m a nd Check (1987) a nd Shr um et al. (1988) studied virtually all the 3rd t hr o ug h 12th graders in a racially i ntegrated school district in a c ommuni ty in the s o u t he rn United States. T he data were collcctcd in c o n­ j unction with an ongoi ng biomedical research pr og ra m. T h e single ques­ tion analyzed in both studies was Who from school are your best friends? Using sophisticated statistical methods, Shr um a n d Check (1987) analyzed the answers in o r d e r to u nd e rs ta n d how age, race, a n d g e n d e r influenced the social networks in the schools. In particular, they s ought to discover how t hree social categories— isolates, liaisons, a n d g r oups — c ha ng e d as a f unc­ tion of age, a n d how g e n d e r a nd racial het erogenei ty o f gr oups c hanged with age. In simple terms, an isolate is a person who has zero or one r ecipro­ cated friendship. A liaison is a person who has reciprocal friendships with several others, b u t n o t exclusively with m e mb e rs of a particular gr oup. A group is a set of at least three individuals who have linked friendships. In general, the p rop or ti on of children a nd adolescents who were isolates decreased slightly from Grade 3 to Gr ad e 12. T h e pr o p o r t io n of liaisons strongly increased from Grade 3 to Gr ade 12, with the biggest changcs oc­ curring from Gr ad e 7 (entr ance into j u n i o r high school) to Grade 12. Finally, g ro u p m e m be r sh i p mi r r or ed liaison status, with the largest d r op oc­ curring between Grades 7 a n d 12. T hu s the e nt r an ce into junior high school is a “wat er shed” for the d ev el op me nt of peer relations. What about the g e n d e r composition of groups? In Grade 3 t h r ough Grade 6, an average o f only 17% o f groups were mixed g ender . In Grade 7 a nd Grade 8, this rose to 66%; a n d in Grades 9 to 12 (senior high school), 100% o f groups were mixed g ender . These results indicate that the relatively rigid g e n de r segregation seen in elementary school starts to markedly c hange in junior high school where heterosexual affectional interests come into play. Shrum ct al. (1988) p r es ente d a fine-grained analysis of friendship choices (as distinct from gr o u p me mb e rs h ip ) , indicating that extensive g e n d e r integration is far from the n o rm at any of the ages studied. Two measures of level o f opposite-scx friendship were analyzed: segregation and preference. Both assess the e xte nt to which g e n d e r friendships occur rela­ tive to cha nc e expectations. T h a t is, if no sex discrimination occur red, then the pr o p or ti on o f mal e- ma le , male- femal e, a nd fcmalc- fcmal c friendships would be tied to the pr opor ti on of males a n d females in the school. T h e two measures are similar in this regard, a n d he nc e the age-related pattern o f results is quite similar. Both showed that mi xed- gender friendships were

D E V E L O PM EN T O F OPPOSITE-SEX DISCRIM INATION

167

very i n f r e q u e n t t h r o u g h o u t G r a d e 3 to G r a d e 12. S ta rt in g in j u n i o r hi gh s c hool, th e f r e q u e n c y i n c r e a s e d s o m e w h a t a n d c o n t i n u e d t h r o u g h G r a d e 12. T h e p a t t e r n s w e re slightly d i f f e r e n t for m a le s a n d fema les . Same-sex p r e f e r e n c e s wer e h i g h e s t fo r t h e boys at G r a d e 3 a n d G r a d e 6; for t h e girls, th e y p e a k e d at G r a d e 7. At a m i n i m u m , c h i l d r e n a n d a d o l e s c e n t s in all g r a d e s r e p o r t e d an a ve ra ge o f at least five tim es as m a n y sam e-sex as o p p o site-sex fri end s. Ho w d o e s o n e e x p la i n th e p r e s e n c e o f o p p os itc -s e x d i s c r i m i n a t i o n in 214-year-olds a n d its c o n t i n u a t i o n t h r o u g h a d o l e s c e n c e ? M a c c ob y (1988, 1990) p r e s e n t e d a t h o u g h t f u l analysis o f this p h e n o m e n o n , a n d links g e n ­ d e r s e g r e g a t i o n to p r e f e r r e d play a n d i n t e r a c t i o n styles, c o n s i s t e n t with th e f a c to r o f b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s . M a c c o by suggests t h a t in n u r s e r y s ch oo l, d i s c r i m i n a t i o n is n o t closcly tied to sex-typed activities b e c a u s e m a n y o f th e activities a r e g e n d e r n e u t r a l . Same-s ex p r e f e r e n c e s a r c also u n r e l a t e d to c h i l d r e n ’s own relative m a s c u li n it y o r f e m i n i n i t y as p e r s o n a li t y traits. Two factors s e e m to be involved in same-sex s e g r e g a t i o n in n u r s e r y s c hool. First, boys in this a ge r a n g e a r c m o r e likely t h a n girls to enjoy r o u g h - a n d - t u m b l e play a n d to be o r i e n t e d m o r e to w a r d c o m p e t i t i v e a n d d o m i n a n c e - r e l a t e d activities. Girls s e e m to fi n d t h e s e activities less p l e a s u r ­ able a n d of te n even distasteful. Boys t e n d to be m o r e e xci t a b le a n d girls c a l m e r a n d q u i e t e r in t h e i r e x p e r i e n c i n g o f th e s e activities. S e c o n d , by age 314, girls fin d t h a t th ey are n o t ab le to i n f l u e n c e readily th e play activities o f boys, b u t can d o so with girls. Boys can i n f l u e n c e b o t h sexes. (Fagot, 1985, s h o w e d t h e lack of i n f l u e n c e at age 2 to b e s y m m e tr ic a l. ) T h e r e is a d if f er ­ e n c e b e t w e e n th e a p p r o a c h e s o f the two sexes: Girls m a k e poli te s ug ge s ­ tions, w h e r e a s boys m a k e d i r e c t physical a n d vocal d e m a n d s . T h u s boys le ar n to e njo y b e i n g with boys, a n d girls with girls, in a p p r o x i m a t e l y a 2-to-l ratio. T h i s ratio r e m a i n s stabl e fo r a b o u t 214 to 3 years, a n d t h e n d r a m a t i ­ cally in c r e a s e s w h e n boys d e v e l o p a m a le g r o u p id e nt ity a n d girls a f e m a le g r o u p identity. As boys a n d girls r e m a i n in sam e-sex g r o u p s , they pow er ful ly socialize t h e m s e lv e s in sex-typed i n t e r a c t i o n styles, inter est s, activities, a n d social s t r u c t u r e . Fo r e x a m p l e , girls a r c m o r e likely t h a n boys to b e c o m e m e m b e r s o f s m a l le r g r o u p s , to c o n g r e g a t e in private h o m e s as o p p o s e d to p u blic spaces, a n d to fo r m i n t i m a t e f r i e n d s h i p s with o n e o r two girls, as o p p o s e d to b o y s ’ less i n t e n s e f r i e n d s h i p s with m a n y o t h e r s . Boys c o n t i n u e t h r o u g h ­ o u t c h i l d h o o d a n d a d o l e s c e n c e to b e m o r e c o n c e r n e d with d o m i n a n c e a n d c o m p e t i t i o n , w h e r e a s girls c o n t i n u e to be m o r e c o n c e r n e d t h a n boys with c o l l a b o r a t i o n a n d s e e k i n g a g r e e m e n t . T h u s , t h e sam e-sex g r o u p i n t e r a c ­ tion p a t t e r n s s e e n in p r e s c h o o l a r c very simi la r to th o s e t h a t d e v e l o p in ch ild h o o d a n d adolescence. A st udy by Bukowski, G a u z e , H o z a , a n d N e w c o m b (1993) o f c h i l d r e n in G r a d e 3 t h r o u g h G r a d e 7 c o n f i r m s s o m e o f M a c c o b y ’s (1988, 1990) c o n c lu -

168

5.

O P P O S I T E - S E X P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

sions. Bukowski ct al. (1993) e x a m i n e d personality a n d behavi oral c o r r e ­ lates o f c h i l d r e n ’s own same-sex a n d oppositc-sex f r ie nds hi p choices, a n d thei r popular it y with same-sex a n d opposite-sex peers. A m o n g t he principal f indi ngs were these: Same-sex p r e f e r e nc es were pr imarily d u e to liking same-sex peer s r a t h e r t han to disliking opposite-sex peers; boys who p r e ­ fe rr ed to e n ga ge in large m o t o r activities (e.g., playing ball, ridi ng bicycles) h a d a s t r o n g e r p r e f e r e n c e th an o t h e r boys for same-sex friends; the m o r e a child was rej ect ed by opposite-sex peers, the m o r e likely t h a t child was to p r ef e r same-sex friends; finally, high levels o f aggressiveness were negatively rel at ed to fr i en d sh ip choices, b u t especially so for girls. T h e latter poi nts to the i m p o r t a n t role o f behavior , a n d h e n c e , b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s in m e d i a t ­ ing samc-scx a n d opposite-sex segregat ion. T h e r e is n o evi de nc e for the o p ­ er ati on o f o u t g r o u p attraction in these data. How do the results c o n c e r n i n g opposite-scx p r cj u d ic c a n d d i sc ri mina ­ tion fit with the pr edi ct io n bas ed on the d e v e l o p m e n t o f g r o u p identity a n d cognitive d e v e l op m en t ? Five age-related shifts in k no wl ed g e organi zati on were identified, at ages 4, 6 to 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a n d 18 to 19 years. T h e r es ear ch on d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r ej u d ic e sho we d t ha t shifts in e i t he r m a g n i ­ t ud e o r dir ect i on to o c c ur b etween ages 3 a n d 4, 4 a n d 8, a n d 8 a n d 11 years. T h e se arc consist ent with the first t h r e e age peri ods. T h e r e arc a p p a r ­ ently n o da ta available for the two o l d e r age periods. T h e r esear ch on dis­ c ri mi na ti on identi fied shifts be twe en ages 3 a n d 4, 4 a n d 6, 6 a n d 9, 11 a n d 13, a n d 14 a n d 18 years. T h e s e are c onsist ent with the first f o u r age periods, with two except ions: T h e r e is a shift b et ween ages 6 a n d 9, a n d the 1 4 - to 18year-old agc-rangc partially overlaps two o f t he a f o r e m e n t i o n e d age pe ri od s (i.e., 14 to 16, a n d 18 to 19 years). T h e s e findings p o i n t to t he effects o f a s t r o n g cognitive factor in the d e v e l o p m e n t o f b o t h oppositc-scx p r ej ud ic e a n d discrimi nat i on.

SUMMARY This c h a p t e r b e ga n its t r e a t m e n t of g e n d e r p re j ud ic e a n d d i scr i mi nat ion by briefly surveying the history of g e n d e r relations in the U n i t e d States, with an e mp h as i s on E u r o p ca n - A m er i c an cul tural n or ms . From the time o f the earliest E u r o p e a n sett lements, this history was dis ti nguis hed by male d o m i ­ n a nc e, a n d its progr ession from that p o i n t tr a ce d the s e q u e n c e o f efforts by Ame ri ca n w o m e n to gain sociopolitical equity. Six m a j o r c ul tu ra l/ hi st or i ca l p er i o d s f r a m ed these efforts: 1607-1770, Coloni zat ion; 1770-1825, Revolu­ tion a n d Co ns ol idati on; 1825-1865, E xp a ns i on a n d Civil War; 1865-1920, R e c on st r uc t io n , Wor ld Wa r I, a n d Suffrage; 1920-1945, Prosperity, D e p r e s ­ sion, a n d W o rl d Wa r II; a n d 1945 to the pr es e n t , Postw’ar Growt h a n d C h a n g e . W o m e n have m a d e substantial legal, political, e c o no m ic , military,

SUMMARY

169

sexual, a nd educational gains over this time span. Alt hough they have at­ tained legal equality with me n, there is still n o t functional equality in any of these areas. Some of the greatest gains were ma de in times of war, when new d e ma n d s a nd opport uni ties o c cur re d for them. Females of different social classes ha d very different socialization experiences from the postRcvolutionary War per i od to the present, which led to u ni qu e o p p o r t u n i ­ ties to c omb a t prejudice a n d discrimination. In addition to n or ms deeply e m b e d d e d in Eur opean-Amcrican culture, we looked at geneti c/ evol ut ionary predispositions as an te ce den ts of o p p o ­ sitc-scx prcjudicc a n d discrimination. Badging mechanis ms establish dis­ tinct male a nd female g r o up identities a n d acutc sensitivity to g e n d e r dif­ ference very early in life; these differences, in turn, foster the e m e r ge n ce of ingr oup favoritism a n d o ut gr o up hostility. These lead to the ma i n t e n a nc e o f ma le -f emal e status differences. Several predictions were ma d e based on evol uti onary/ genet ic a n d cultural factors c o n cc rn ing developmental, g e n­ der, parental, a n d familial effects on prcjudicc a n d discrimination. In the section c o n c e rn e d with the socialization of sex-typing, the c o m ­ plexity a n d multidimensionality o f sex-typing was emphasized. Sex-typing o f infants starts virtually at birth a nd pervades nearly all aspects of chil­ d r e n ’s physical a nd social environments. Parents socialize their sons and d aught er s differently. Fathers arc m or e likely to do so t han mot hers, consis­ tent with the suggestion that they have most to gain in maint aining the cul­ tural n or ms of male d o mi na nc e . T h e d ev e l op me nt o f g e n d e r identity is strongly affected by p a re n ts ’ toy selection a n d by involvement in their chil d’s sex-typed play. Consistent with predictions based on gcnctic analy­ ses of prcjudicc, variations in family type (e.g., conventional vs. nonconvcntional, single p a r e n t vs. two parents, single homosexual p a r e n t vs. single heterosexual parent ) have very little effect on cither boys’ or girls’ develop­ m e n t of g e n d e r identity. T eachers a nd peers in preschool settings, how­ ever, a pp ea r to have strong effects on the differential g e n d e r identity of boys a nd girls. Th e d ev e l o pm en t of opposite-scx prejudice was assessed by both indirect a nd direct measures. In the section dealing with indirect measures, four predictions based on the c onséquences of cultural/historical male a nd fe­ male status a nd d o m i n a nc e différences were evaluated. T h e prédictions c o nc c r n c d ci ther the e n h a n c e m e n t of male sex-typed characteristics or the devaluation of female sex-typed characteristics by children a nd adolescents. Importantly, these indirect measures d em on st r at e d that g e n d e r prejudice is bidirectional— that both girls a n d boys participate in the o n goi ng pref er ­ ential valuation of male sex-typed characteristics. For the direct measures, two categories of e xper iment s were exami ned. In the first, we looked at the negative a n d positive scx-role stereotypes t hat boys a nd girls hold for themselves a nd for the opposite sex. In the second,

170

5.

O P P O S I T E - S E X P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

we assessed c h i l d r e n ’s evaluations o f c o u n t e r s t e r e o t y p e d be ha v io r t h a t they a n d / o r male a n d female peer s carry out. Results o f r es e ar c h for t he first cat­ egory indi cat e t ha t oppositc-sex p re j ud ic e starts to e m e r g e at age 2 lA , is clearly seen in 4-year-olds, a n d increases until a b o u t age 8. Between age 8 a n d age 10, it declines somewhat. Data for o l d e r c hi ld r en are unavailable. Results o f research for the s e c on d category arc s o m e w h a t inc ons ist ent with t he j u st m e n t i o n e d results. Between ages 4 a n d 8 years, b ot h sexes start to value male m o r e t h a n femal e characteristics, which t end s to p r o d u c c fe­ male p re j u d i c e a m o n g females. Between 8 years a n d 10 years this e n h a n c e d valuing o f male characteristics s t r en g t he ns , b u t t he e m e r g e n c e of h e t e r o ­ sexual interests after age 10 compl icates the d e ve l o p me n t a l pat t e rn . T h e research on oppositc-sex d i scr imi nati on identi fied d e v el o p me n t al shifts be twe en ages 3 a n d 4, 4 a n d 6, (5 a n d 9, 11 a n d 13, a n d 14 a n d 18 years. T h e s e arc fairly consi st ent with p re di ct io ns based on the d e v e l o p m e n t of g r o u p identity a n d cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e se results p o i n t to t he ef­ fects of a s t r ong cognitive factor m e d i a t i n g this d i scr iminat ion. Analyses by Maccoby a n d o t he rs c o n c e r n i n g dif fer ences b et ween males a n d females in sex-typed i nt er act ion styles, interests, activities, a n d social st r uc tur e suggest t h a t these di fferences u n d e r l i e oppositc-sex discri mi nati on. T h e tenacity o f pr e ju di ce a n d d is c ri mi na ti o n is p e r h a p s n o m o r e vivid than in the realm o f g e n d e r . From the earliest ages, even in i n t e g r at e d set­ tings, powerful b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s arise t h a t c o n f o u n d what m i g h t o t h e r ­ wise be seamless social i n t egr at ion. Parents, peers, a n d t eacher s can provide subtle yet powerful p r ef er en ti al cues; boys a n d girls share bidirectionally the differential valuation o f m al e a n d femal e sex-typed characteristics. Overall, g e n d e r pr ej ud ic e a n d d is cr imi nat ion is pervasive, a n d p e n e t ra t e s social life in powerful yet subtle ways.

C hapter

A Cultural History of African A m ericans

We t ur n to the last of the four target groups, focusing on prejudice a nd dis­ crimination related to race. O n the surface, bias based on race a nd e thni c­ ity should be the most arbitrary and thus the most superficial. But as r e a d ­ ers are no d o u b t aware, history has proven race bias to be deeply influential a nd pervasive in American culture. Wit ho ut dou b t, this is due to the p r o ­ f o un d socictal injury suffered as a c ons cquc nc e of African slavery. So, al­ t h o ug h race p rejudice has many forms, in America it has b cc o mc widely as­ sociated with the African-American cxpcricncc. For this reason we cent er o u r discussion of race prejudice a nd discrimination on African Americans a nd E ur op e an Americans. The coverage o f this subject will span two chapters. This c ha pt cr will fo­ cus on the African-American experi ence, laying the historical f oundati on with an a cc ou n t o f slavery, reconstruction, the civil rights mo vement, and the nat ure of ethnicity in America. C h a p t e r 7 will cover the psychological assessment of p ee r prejudice a nd discrimination related to race. Specifically, this c hapt cr has four goals. T h e first is to discuss the cultural history o f African Americans, with particular attention to the de ve lo p me nt o f cultural n o r ms that e mb o dy prcjudicc a nd discrimination toward Afri­ can Americans. T h e historical span from forccd slavery to the civil rights m o v e m e n t has been a vivid public e n c ou n te r , easily o n e of the defining t hemes o f cultural America. The second goal is to pr e se nt a brief s u mma ry of p er ha ps the most so­ cially significant research that has b ee n carried o ut in Nor th America by psychologists— Ke n n e th a nd Mamie Clark’s work on the d e ve l op me nt of racc prejudice in children. T h e Clarks’ studies played an i m p o r t a n t role in 171

172

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

t he j udi cial decision to p r oh i bi t school segr egat ion a long racial lines. T h u s they established the psychology o f p r e j ud i c e a n d d is c ri min at io n as a f u n d a ­ me nt a l t h e m e o f civil rights. T h e i r research also h e l p e d set t he stage for a n d pr ovi de d a m a j or i m p e t u s to t he study o f racial prcjudicc. T h e thi r d goal is to descri be a n d explain the l it erature on the d e v el o p ­ m e n t o f e t h ni c identity. W h a t is ethnicity, we ask, a n d wh at arc t he positive a n d negative psychological c o n s e q u e n c e s o f e t hn ic e x pe r ie n ce . T h e f our th goal is to c o m p a r e the cultural histories o f the f o u r g r ou ps e x a m i n e d in this book, lo ok in g for c o m m o n t h e m e s a n d p at t e r ns o f differ­ e n c e th at il luminat e the cultural d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re j ud i c e a n d di sc ri mi na ­ tion. T h e se issues give us historical a n d cultural foot ing as we t ur n to race p r ej ud i ce a n d d i scr imi nati on in c h a p t e r 7.

BRIEF C U L T U R A L H I S T O R Y O F AFRICAN AMERICANS It is e st ima te d t h a t over a 350 year p er i od , at least 10 million African slaves arrived in the New Wo rl d, ap p ro x i ma t e l y 5% o f w ho m were b r o u g h t to the N o r t h Am e r ic a n colonies. It is n o t clear how m a ny di ed in transit, b u t p r o b ­ ably at least o n e in six, a n d p e r h a p s c onsider abl y m o r e (Mei er 8c Rudwick, 197(5). Survival in the New Wo rl d largely d e p e n d e d on the t o p o g r a p h y o f the la nd a n d on the climate. Mortality was hi gh in the swampy, insecti nfested r egi ons o f t h e West Indies, b u t relatively low in mo st r egi ons o f the N o r t h Ame ri ca n colonics. It is useful to view African Americans as having h a d f ou r different types of s oc iali zat ion/ encult ur at ion experiences: (a) as non-enslaved (“f re e”) status in the No r th, (b) “f r e e” status in the South, (c) e nslavement in the Nort h, a n d (d) e nslavement in the South (Nash et al., 1990). Prior to the Civil War, 85 to 90% o f the African Americans living in the colonies (and states) were slaves, a n d those who were n o t were e it he r recently freed or d e s c e n d e d from slaves. Being “f re e ” in the Nor th was m u c h less restrictive t han “f r e e d o m ” in the South, b u t was n o t equivalent to that o f White free persons. N o r t h e r n slaves typically wo r k e d in the h o u s e h o l d , were very familiar to thei r o wn e r a n d his family, a n d often h a d child care responsibilities as p ar t o f thei r work. Unlike S o u t h e r n p l a nt at ion slaves, they lived mainly in u r b a n settings a n d usually h a d co ns i de ra bl e u n s up e rv i se d time in the town. T h e field slaves in the S ou th ( m e n a n d w o m e n ) w or ke d e xtr eme ly l o ng hours, usually u n d e r quite u n s ym pa t h e ti c c ondi tions . T r e a t m e n t by thei r masters was f r eque ntl y brut al, food s u p p l ie d to t he m often i n a d e q u a t e (they could s u p p l e m e n t it by thei r own ext ra f a rm i ng efforts), a n d they were usually closely watched. Ac c o rd i n g to a n u m b e r o f writers, for e x a mp l e , A p t h c k c r (1971), F r a n k ­ lin (1984), a n d H a r d i n g (1981), the c ent r a l t h e m e in the e nti r e span o f Af­

BRI EF GUI . TU R A L HI S T OR Y O F AFRI CAN AMERI CANS

173

rican-American history ( p r c - a n d post-Civil War) is the p u r s u i t o f f r e e do m . This p u r s u i t i nc l ud e d , b u t was n o t li mited to justice, equality, a n d selfd e t e r m i n a t i o n . T h e r e is n o con v in ci ng e vi dence t h a t even a substantial mi­ nority, let a l o n e a majority, o f enslaved Black Africans readily a cc e pt ed th ei r b o n d a g e . Rather, t h e r e are a m p l e r e c o r ds t h a t d o c u m e n t Africans’ fierce struggle for f r e e d o m , even b ef or e they arrived in the Ame ri ca n col o­ nies. For e xa mp l e , m a n y c o m m i t t e d suicide by d r o w n i n g r a t h e r than be t r a n s p o r t e d a br o ad . After arriving in the colonies, a t t e m p t e d escapes were f r e q u e n t , especially in t he Sout h. Many fled to the No r t h a n d to Ca na da . O t h e r s w en t to Florida wTh e r e they f o u n d a c c e p t an c e by the Se mi no le I nd i­ ans. T h o m as Jefferson e sti ma te d t ha t in 1 year in Virginia, 30,000 slaves at­ t e m p t e d to escape ( H a r d i n g , 1981). With the p ur s ui t o f f r e e do m as its g ui d in g t h e m e , this section surveys the cultural history o f African Americans. As with the historical survey o f A m e r i ­ can females, this history falls into discrete pe ri od s identified by the wars t h a t m a r k e d t h e m. T h e se p er i o d s arc as follows: 1607-1770, Colonization; 1770- 1825, Revolution a n d Co ns ol idati on; 1825- 1865, Ex p a n si o n a n d Civil War; 1865-1920, Recon st ruc ti on , W o r l d Wa r I, a n d Suffrage; 1920-1945, Prosperity, Depressi on, a n d W'orld War II; 1945 to t he pr ese nt , Postwar Growth a n d C h a n ge . In the Col oni zat ion p e r i o d ( 1 60 7 - 17 70 ), d ra ma ti c c ha ng e s o c c u r r e d in the c o n c e p t i o n o f a n d t r e a t m e n t o f African slaves. D u r i ng the early p ar t o f the p er i od , slavery itself was d e fi n e d , a n d this varied by r egion ( No r t h vs. S ou t h ) . By the e n d o f this p er i o d , abolition o f slavery was b e i ng d e b a t e d in m o st o f the colonics. Initially, in b o t h the N o r t h a n d the S o ut h, t he slaves were t re a te d essentially the same as the Wh i te i n d e n t u r e d servants. Many of t he m m a r r i e d , h a d c hi ld r en , a n d were fr eed after a relatively l on g p e r i o d o f service. T h e i r c hi ld r en were b o r n free, similar to those o f t he Wrhite i n d e n ­ t u r e d servants. This i n d e n t u r e d service status c h a n g e d over t he n ex t 40 years into a system o f he rit able slavery— the Africans legally b e c a m e slaves for life, a n d t he ir ch il dr e n were b o r n as slaves o w n ed by t h e i r m o t h e r s ’ m a s ­ ters ( H a rd i n g , 1981; Mei er 8c Rudwick, 1976; Nash et al., 1990). Virginia a n d Maryland led the way for negative c ha ng es in AfricanAme ri ca n status in the Sout h. T h e se i n c l u d e d p r o h i b it i o n s against e d u c a ­ tion, o wn e rs h ip o f we apons , travel, ow ne r sh i p o f p r ope rt y, part ici pat ion in African religious practiccs, a n d any legal rights. Wh it e Christians a t t e m p t e d to co nv e rt t he m to Christianity, a n d in 1667, the Virginia legislature passed an act t h a t stated that a p e r s o n ’s state o f b o n d a g e was u n a f f ec ted by b a p ­ tism, t ha t is, a Christian slave w’as still a slave. Slavery in the N o r t h e r n colonics started in 1638 in Massachusetts. Slaves in New E n g l a n d h a d the great est legal a n d pe rs o n a l rights i n c l u d i ng the ri ght to sue t he ir masters. In g ener al , thei r t r e a t m e n t was relatively mild, a n d thei r n u m b e r s were quite small. In New York, Pennsylvania, a n d New

174

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

Jersey (t he Mi ddl e Atlantic states), t r e a t m e n t o f slaves was less h a r s h t ha n in the S out h, a l t h o u g h t he ir slave laws were qui te c o mp a r a b l e . In New York City, wh e r e a b o u t 40% o f h o u s e h o l d s o w n ed slaves in the early 1700s (Nash ct al., 1990), t h e r e were occasional slave r ebellions, a n d these were r e ­ s p o n d e d to violently by the Whi te militia. Rebellions by slaves o c c u r r e d in bo th the N o r t h a n d S outh d u r i n g t he Col onizat ion p e r i o d a n d nearly always r es ul ted in t he killing a n d mut il ati on o f the rebellious slaves. Owi ng to growth o f the slave t r ade a n d t he n u m b e r o f S o u t h e r n p l a n t a ­ tions, the n u m b e r o f African slaves in the South grew dramatically d u r i n g the Colonization p er iod. W h at k e p t the Africans spiritually alive, even thriv­ ing? T h e answer can be f o u n d in t h r e e i n t e r c o n n e c t e d t h e m e s t h a t e m e r g e in t he various histories o f this p er iod: (a) h o p e o f f r e e d o m , (b) family life, a n d (c) religion. Re ga rd in g f r e e d o m , m os t slaves were aware o f o t h e rs who successfully escaped. T h e y knew’ o f m a n y Africans in the South who h a d le­ gally a c q u i r e d thei r f r e e d o m fr om e a rn in gs or m an u m i s s i o n . Moreover, new slaves from Africa f re q ue n tl y a p p e a r e d , who r e m i n d e d t he m o f an al­ ternative life to slavery. Family life was the n o r m for all slaves, i n c l u d i ng ma r ri a ge a n d child r e a r­ ing. It wTas an “after work h o u r s ” life t ha t was e n c o u r a g e d by the slave o w n­ ers because families pr ov i de d i n d u c e m e n t s to be c o m p l i a n t a n d to n o t es­ cape. Family life was n o t r es p ec t ed by the owner s who readily split up families to sell any slaves as n e e d e d o r desired. But b r i n g i ng new chi l d r en into the world is i n h e re n t l y h op e fu l , a n d in the case o f slaves, e m b o d i e d h o p e s for f r e e d o m . Religious life wTas a m a j o r featur e o f all the cul tur es from which t he Afri­ can slaves d e s c e n d e d . In the highly s e gr eg a t ed pl ant at ions, they c oul d ma int ai n th ei r old religious practiccs. WTh c n Christianity was f or c ed on t h e m, this p r o d u c e d a m e r g e r o f the African tradit ions writh the new relig­ ion (Berry 8c Blassingamc, 1982). T h e figures o f Moses a n d Jesus b e c a m e c entral to t he ir world view: Moses to lead t he m to the p r o m i s e d l an d (f ree­ d o m ) in this life, a n d Jesus to lead t h e m to the p r o m i s e d la nd in t he next. In the s e con d p e r i od o f Ame ri ca n history, 1770 to 1825 (Revolution a n d C o n s o l i d a t i o n ) , essentially n o t h i n g positive c h a n g e d for the S o u t h e r n slaves. T h e i r n u m b e r s inc re as ed dramatically, in p ar t be c aus e c ott on b e ­ c a me a highly viable c ro p “r e q u i r i n g ” m o r e slaves, a n d in pa rt b ecause the WThite agricultural p o p u l a t i o n e x p a n d e d in t he Southwest. T h e African slave trade in the U n i t e d States was officially a b o l is h e d in 1808. After that date, m a n y slaves were s m ug g l ed into the S ou t h, b u t the majority o f slave traffic was from slaveholders on the East coast to t he cott on pl an ta ti on own ­ ers f a r t h er west. Ironically, o n e o f the first m e n killed in t he Boston Massacre o f 1770 was Crispus Attucks, a r unaway slave fr om F r a m i n g t o n , Massachusetts (Berry 8c Blassingamc, 1982). At the conclusi on o f the Revolutionary W a r m o s t o f the

BRI EF GUI . TU R A L HI S T OR Y O F AFRI CAN AMERI CANS

175

N o r t h e r n states star ted to e n d slavery, a n d two o f t he S o u t h e r n states, Vir­ ginia a n d N o r t h Carolina, passed laws e n c o u r a g i n g slave o wne rs to e m a n c i ­ pat e their slaves. By 1820, all the N o r t h e r n states e x c e p t New York a n d New Jersey h a d a bo li she d slavery, b u t n o n e o f the S o u t h e r n states, wh o d e ­ p e n d e d e c onomi ca ll y on the slaves, did so. Despite th e s t ro n g Whi te antislavery s e n t i m e n t in t he N o r t h , t h e r e was still s tr ong Whi te racism. T h e a b o ­ litionists generally were n o t i nt er es te d in p r o m o t i n g racial int egr at ion. Many believed equality was impossible owing to t he scientifically “p r o v e n ” i n h e r e n t inferiority o f the Africans. As a c o n s e q u e n c e o f these attitudes, various “c ol o n iz a ti o n” societies were f o r m e d whose goal was to he lp Blacks r e t ur n to Africa. Most, b u t n o t all, Blacks o p p o s e d this view. T h e life of the free Blacks i m p r o v e d after the Revolutionary War, e sp e­ cially for those in the N o rt h , w he re slavery was rapidly decl ini ng. Many of t he m m ov ed to towns a n d cities w h e r e they lived in seg re ga t e d n e i g h b o r ­ h oods . T he y f o r m e d mu tu al - be ne f it o rga ni z at ions to he lp o t h e r free Blacks ge t work, ho u s i ng , f ood, a n d p e r h a p s mo st importantl y, ed uc a ti o n. Schools were nearly always s eg re ga te d in the N o r th a n d the So ut h, b u t they received m o r e private Whi te s u p p o r t in the N or t h, i n c l u d i ng m o n e y a n d teachers. O f e qual i m p o r t a n c e to the m ut ua l -b e ne f it societies was the e st a bl i s hme nt o f “Af r ic a n” Baptist a n d M e t h o d i s t c h u r c h e s i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e Wh i te r e ­ ligious hierarchy. T h e Black ministers b e c a m e b o t h religious a n d secular l e a de r s o f t h e i r c o m m u n i t i e s . Many S o u t h e r n Wh i te s o p p o s e d thes e c h u r c h e s for fear t ha t antislavery ideas woul d be p r o m o t e d , a n d p e r i o d i ­ cally b r o k e up religious me e ti ng s ( H a rd i n g , 1981; Me ie r 8c Rudwick, 1976). This historical p er i od c ame to a close with the Missouri C om p r o m i s e of 1820. T h e nation h a d b e en rapidly e x p a n d i n g to the West, a n d N o r t h e r n Co ng r es sme n wa nte d to pr ev e nt the s pr e ad o f slavery. Maine a n d Missouri h a d both appli ed for s ta te ho od in 1820, a n d the following c o m p r o m is e was r eached: Mai ne would be a dm i tt e d as a free state, Missouri as a slave state, b u t no o t h e r states n o r t h o f latitude 36°30' would be a dm it t e d as a slave state (Missouri itself was no rt h of that line). Thus , the strong conflicts between N o r t h e r n a n d S o u th e rn states on the issue of slavery were p u t on hold. T h e ne xt per iod, Expansion a n d Civil Wrar ( 1825-1865), saw f ur th er m o v e m e n t toward the regionalization o f slavery, l eading eventually to war. By 1830, N o r t h e r n states abolished slavery. T h e slave pop ul a t io n increased from appr oximat ely W i million in 1820 to 4 million in 1860, a n d free Blacks i n­ creased d u r i n g the same p e ri od from a b o u t 14 million to Vi million. T h e lat­ ter were evenly divided between the Nor th a n d the Sout h (Nash etal. , 1990). T h r e e events o c c u r r e d in the early 1830s t hat h a d powerful effects on the t r e a t m e n t of S o u t h e r n slaves a n d Black free pe op le : Na t T u r n e r ’s Ins ur ­ r ection (1831); the f o u n d i n g o f the first antislavery society (1833); a n d E n g ­ l a n d ’s abolition o f slavery (1833). Na t T u r n e r was a religious a n d highly r e ­ g a r d e d slave in Virginia. D u r in g a d e e p session o f prayer, h e received a

176

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

message from G o d telling him to slay his e ne mi es , t h e Whit e slaveholders. He o rg a ni z ed a g r o u p o f slaves a n d free Blacks a n d killed all t he Whit es (55 in all) they e n c o u n t e r e d , i n c l ud i ng the h u s b a n d , wife, a n d ch i ld re n o f the family wh o o w n e d hi m ( H a rd i n g, 1981). In 1833, William Lloyd Gar rison, a Whi te e d i t o r o f an abolitionist news­ p a p e r, a l on g with several o t h e r N o r t h e r n Whites a n d Blacks, f o u n d e d the Ame ric an Antislavery Society. This g r o u p a n d allied o r ga ni z at ions heavily p r o p a g a n d i z e d state a n d f ederal legislative b odi es to abolish slavery. Finally, a l t h o u g h relations b et ween E n g l a n d a n d the U n i t e d States were f requentl y tense, Ame r ic a ns often l o ok e d toward the m o t h e r c o u n tr y with a d mi r a t i on . In 1833, E n g l a n d a bol is he d slavery fr om all its colonies, which i n c l u d ed the n e a rb y W'cst Indies. (Slavery h a d b e e n a bol is he d in E n g l a n d in 1772.) Owi ng to these events, a n d the preexi st ing Whit e sl ave holde rs ’ fears a b o u t rebel li on, the n oo se t i g h t e n e d c onsi derably a r o u n d S o u t h e r n Afri­ can A m e r i c a n s ’ necks. Most states passed laws p r oh i b i t i n g m a n u m i s s i o n o f slaves, t hus di sc ou ra gi ng their h o p e s o f f r e e d o m . Re ga rd i ng free Blacks, u nr e st r ic t e d m o v e m e n t within the h o m e state was l imited a n d m o v e m e n t bet ween states wras p r o h i b i t e d . T he y c ou ld n o t serve on j u r ie s or give testi­ m o n y against Whites. Many states i m p o s e d an eve ni ng curfew on g r o u p meet ings. S o me states r e q u i r e d the a t t e n d a n c e o f at least o n e Whi te p er son at bo th religious a n d n on r el ig io us ga th e ri ng s o f Blacks. Legal o wn e r sh ip of w’c a p o n s was h i n d e r e d a n d c on so r ti n g with slaves was strongly d is c our a ge d. Free Blacks convicted o f cri mes received m o r e severe p u n i s h m e n t th an Whites, a n d those convicted o f vagrancy o r who were u n a b l e to pay their d ebt s were occasionally sold into slavery. Alt h ou g h c on di ti ons for the African A me ri ca ns in the N or t h were less r e ­ strictive t h a n for those in the S o ut h, they were di sc r im i na t ed against by Whi tes in nearly all areas o f life. T h e y were n o t allowed to j o in state militias o r the army. Even when the Civil Wrar b r o ke o u t in 1861, they c oul d n o t vol­ u n t e er . T h e navy, sh or t on recruits, did a c ce p t t h e m, a n d Blacks a c c o u n t e d for a b o u t o n e f our th o f its size. In 1863, Blacks were allow’ed to join the a rmy a n d served with distinction. Virtually n o n e , however, were p e r m i t t e d to b e c o m e officers. Free Blacks h a d few political rights. By the 1840s, they were d i s e n fr a n­ chised from t he majority o f N o r t h e r n states e x c ep t New’ York a n d New E n g ­ l and. Most o f t he “O l d N o r th west States” (e.g., O h i o , I ndiana, Illinois) passed laws in the 1840s p r o h i b i t i n g African A me ri ca ns from i mmi g ra t i n g into thei r territory. However, free Blacks o r ga n i z ed suffrage societies a n d state a n d n at ional c on ve nt i on s di r ec t ed toward c o m b a t i n g discr imi nat ion a n d a tt ai ni ng e qual rights. N o t only were N o r t h e r n Blacks di sc ri mi na te d against in t he political a r e n a, b u t they s uffered j o b d i scr iminat ion, e d u ca t i o n d i sc ri mina t ion, a n d

BRI EF GUI . TU R A L HI S T OR Y O F AFRI CAN AMERI CANS

177

d is cr imin ati on in ho u s i ng , t r a ns po r ta t io n , a n d public a c c o m m o d a t i o n s such as hotels a n d rest aurants. Re ga r di ng jobs, for e x a mp l e , m a n y leading Whi te abolitionist business owner s r ef used to hi re well-qualified Blacks. Generally, new Whit e i mm i g r a n t s f r om E u r o p e were given p r e fe re nt i al job t r e at m e nt . Race riots against Blacks o c c u r r e d in mo s t m a j or cities, p r e d o m i ­ nantly by lower i n c o m e Whites. Public t r an sp or t at io n was typically segre­ gat ed, a n d hotels a n d r est au ra nts who c a te re d to Whi tes re fu s e d to a c c o m ­ m o d a t e Blacks. Schools were nearly always se gr egat ed, a n d until the 1850s, m a ny N o r t h e r n states ref used to f u n d public e du c at i o n for Blacks. T h e t h e m e o f c oloni zing Blacks elsewhere was still s tr on g in this p e ri od . Lincoln hi ms e lf h e l d these views at a b o u t the time o f his election to t he Presidency. O n the positive ledger , N o r t h e r n Blacks were relatively free. T h e y ran t h e i r own c h u r c h e s a n d businesses, f o r m e d i n d e p e n d e n t antislavery socie­ ties, f o u n d e d n e ws p a pe rs a n d j o u r n a l s , c re a te d o r ga ni z a ti ons to assist fugi­ tive slaves, a n d received c ha r te rs from E n g l a n d for f raternal organizat ions such as the Masons a n d the O d d Fellows ( N o r t h e r n Whi tes r efused to e x ­ t e n d m e m b e r s h i p to Blacks). Many leaders e m e r g e d d u r i n g this p e r i od t h r o u g h these activities a n d organizations. S o m e were ex-slaves, such as Fr ede ri ck Douglass a n d S o j o u r n e r T r u t h . T h e y were d yn ami c, i m pa s ­ si oned, a n d gifted with c i t he r the written or spo ke n word. David W'alkcr’s Appeal, a 76-pagc p a m p h l e t written in 1829, a n d Mar t in De la n ey ’s Condition, p u b l i sh e d in 1852, are two of the m o s t powerful works in the tradition o f Black p r ote st ( H a rd i ng , 1981). At the b e g i n n i n g of the n e x t p er i od , Re co ns t r u c t io n, Wo rl d Wa r I, a n d Suffrage ( 1865-1920), Lincoln was assassinated a n d repl aced by Andrew J o h n s o n from T e n n e s s e e . J o h n s o n was m u c h m o re sympathetic to the So u t h­ ern White plantation owners than to the ex-slaves, a n d indirectly s u p po r t ed efforts o f the f o r m e r to reinstate Black servitude in the South. Over J o h n ­ s o n ’s vctos, Congress passed bot h the Civil Rights Act o f 1866 a n d the R ec on ­ struction Act of 1867. The se Acts b r o u g h t a light into the Sout h that lasted for 10 years, a n d was n o t to r etur n for a n o t h e r 90 years (Nash ct al., 1990). S o u t h e r n Blacks (95% o f w ho m were ex-slaves) were mainly i nt er es te d in e c o n o m i c i n d e p e n d e n c e , e d u c a t i o n , religious f r e e d o m , legal p ro te ct io n (nearly always against the Whites) a n d the r igh t to vote. R e ga rd in g e c o ­ n o m i c i n d e p e n d e n c e , African A me ri ca ns were primarily farmers. Th e y h a d b e e n p r o m i s e d by G e n er a l S h e r m a n the o p p o r t u n i t y to buy, at r ea so n a bl e cost, 40 acres o f land. Few pl a nt a t ion owners (all h a d t h e ir la nd legally r e ­ t u r n e d to t h e m ) a g r e ed to sell. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , a l mo s t all t he rural e x ­ slaves wo r k e d as “s h a r e c r o p p e r s ” o r m o v e d to S o u t h e r n cities, a n d c o n t i n ­ u e d thei r e c o n o m i c d e p e n d e n c e on Whites. T h e only post-Rcconst ruct ion c h a n g e in this p at t e r n o c c u r r e d in the 20th cent ury, w h en substantial n u m ­ bers o f Blacks mo ve d to N o r t h e r n cities. In 1920, however, a b o u t 85% o f all African A me ri ca ns still lived in the S ou th (Mei er Sc Rudwick, 1976).

178

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

P e r h a p s the mo st long-lived positive c h a n g e was in e d u ca t i o n a l o p p o r t u ­ nities. Imme di at el y after the war, bo th v o l u n t e e r a n d g o v e r n m e n t s p o n ­ s or ed N o r t h e r n e r s (nearly all were Whi t e) c a m e sout h a n d o p e n e d schools for the Blacks. T h e s e c o n t i n u e d t h r o u g h o u t a n d b e y on d Re const ruc tion a n d were a u g m e n t e d by f un ds from state legislators for public e du c at i o n . Essentially all s o u t h e r n schools were racially seg r e ga te d (as were those in the N o r t h ) , a n d those for Blacks were usually the m o s t i mp ov e ri sh e d. Many Black leaders a n d Whi te N o r t h e r n s u p p o r t e r s felt t ha t e d u ca t i on o f Afri­ can A me r i c ans s h o u l d be u n d e r the c ontr ol o f o t h e r African Americans. But few o f the l at ter h a d t h e e d u c a t i o n a l b a c k g r o u n d to teach. As a c o n ­ s e q u e n c e , wealthy N o r t h e r n e r s b e t w ee n 1865 a n d 1870 pa id for t he e st ab ­ l i sh m en t o f a n u m b e r o f Black colleges in the S o ut h, i nc l ud i ng H a m p t o n Institute, Fisk, Atlanta, a n d M o r e h o u s e . T h e se c o n t i n u e to be influential in­ stitutions at p r e s e n t (Berry 8c Blassingame, 1982). After the Civil War, religious f r e e do m i nc re as ed e n o r m o u s l y f or the ex­ slaves. M e m b e r s h i p in the N e g ro Baptist c h u r c h a n d the African Me thodi st Episcopal c h u r c h m o r e t ha n d o u b l e d . No l o n g e r were the African A m er i ­ cans restricted by Whi te overseers. T h e y coul d now o pe nl y select t h e ir own ministers a n d freely or ganize th ei r own services. T h e c h u r c h b e c a m e an even m o r e central p a r t o f t he ir lives than it h a d b e e n b ef or e the war. This centrality exists into t he pr es ent , with m a n y Black leader s i n c l u di n g Elijah M u h a m m a d , Martin L u t h e r King, a n d Jesse J acks on, having b e e n t r ai ne d in the ministry (Nash ct al., 1990). Congr es s ional Reco ns t ru ct i o n r e q u i r e d that African A m e r i ca n s partici­ pate in t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f new state c onst it ut ions for t he ex-slave states, as well as giving t he ex-slaves the ri ght to vote. In S o ut h Ca roli na a n d Missis­ sippi, Blacks m a d e up the majority o f t he po p u l a t i o n. In the s u b s e q u e n t vot­ ing, Blacks were elect ed to public office in all the S o u t h e r n states. Two m e n were elected as U n i t e d States S e n a to r from Mississippi; 14 were el ected from various states to the H o u se of Representatives. N o n e were el ect ed gov­ e r n o r , b u t m a n y were el ect ed as l i e u t e n a n t go ve rn or , secretary o f state, or state t reasurer. Blacks h e l d a very large n u m b e r o f local offices. However, in t he p r es i dent ial election o f 1877 a c o m p r o m i s e was r e a c h e d b et ween N o r t h e r n a n d S o u t h e r n c o n g r e s s m e n , which selected R ut h e r f o r d B. Hayes as p r e s i d e n t a n d formally e n d e d R e c on s tr uc t i on . Gradually, b u t c o m ­ pletely, over the n e x t 20 years, Blacks b e c a m e di s e nf r an c hi se d in t he South. T h e light wras e xt ingui she d. Jim Crow laws were passed in all these states t h a t m a d e it legal to di scr i minat e against Blacks. State a n d federal courts u p h e l d these laws (Berry 8c Blassingame, 1982; Meier 8c Rudwick, 1976). T h e Ku Klux Klan was f o u n d e d in 1866 with the s u p p o r t o f all S o u t h e r n Whi te social strata. O r g a n i z e d a n d s p o n t a n e o u s violence against S o u t h e r n African A me r ic a ns rapidly b e c a m e the n o r m . Race riots in all S o u t h e r n cit­ ies o c c u rr e d, often with the overt s u p p o r t o f the police or el ected officials.

BRI EF GUI . TU R A L HI S T OR Y O F AFRI CAN AMERI CANS

179

T h e r e a p p e ar s to have b e e n an e c o n o m i c basis for this vi ol ence— Blacks a n d Whit es f r eque nt ly c o m p e t e d for the s ame j o b s — b u t also ma ny Whites felt the ex-slaves h a d to be r e m i n d e d o f thei r “c o r r e c t ” place in society. T h e r e was n o t h i n g that African A me ri ca ns c ou l d do to p r e v en t the vio­ lence, a n d little to p r o t e c t themselves. Fear a n d inti mi da ti on b e c a m e a way o f life for m a n y of t he m (Shapiro, 1988). Pr ior to t he e n d o f this historical p e r i o d , two i m p o r t a n t Black-oriented nat io na l or gani zat ions were f o u n d e d . In 1909, u n d e r the l e a de rs hi p o f W.E.B. DuBois, the NAACP (Nati onal Association for t he A d v a n c e m e n t of C o l o r e d People) was es tablished to e n h a n c e the civil a n d political equality o f African Amer icans. In 1911, the Nat ional U r b a n League, u n d e r the influ­ e n ce o f B oo ke r T. W a sh i n gt o n , w*as established to impr ove e m p l o y m e n t o p ­ po rt un it i e s for African Amer icans. T h e se o rgani zat ions have c o n t i n u e d to be influential in bo t h the Black a n d Whi te c o m m u n i t i e s into the pr esent . In t he n e x t p e ri od , Prosperity, Depr essi on, a n d Wo rl d W a r II ( 1 920 1945), Black mi gr ati on to t he N o r t h e r n cities c o n t i n u e d . It slowed d u r i n g the Depressi on years, which were devastating for everyone, especially for Black skilled workers. Migration t h e n ac c cl cr a te d d u r i n g W or l d War II when the d e m a n d for workers in de fe nse industries i nc r ea se d (Berry Sc Blassingamc, 1982; Nash et al., 1990). By th e e n d o f W o rl d Wa r II, a p p r o x i ­ mately 25% o f African A me r ic a ns lived in the No rt h. T h e 1920s b r o u g h t with it a flowering o f Black artists, musicians, a n d writers, which has b e e n r e f e r r e d to as the Ha rl e m Renaissance ( Apthcker , 1971; Me ie r Sc Rudwick, 1976). C e n t e r e d in New’ York City initially, t he re was a t r e m e n d o u s o u t p o u r i n g of African-American creativity. W h a t was new a b o u t this was the m a g n i t u d e o f Whi te s u p p o r t , b o t h in t er ms of p a t r o n a g e a n d m e d i a c o m m i t m e n t . T h e music a n d l i terature o f this p e r i od especially have b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d into Ame ri ca n c ul t u r e a n d c o n t i n u e to be i n f l ue n ­ tial today. T h e Ha r le m Renaissance c ou ld n o t mask t he extensive s egregati on a n d d is cr imin ati on in the Nor t h a n d the S out h against African Americans. T h e r e was n o l essening o f d i scr iminati on in ho us in g, civil liberties, e d u c a ­ tion, t r e a t m e n t in the a r m e d forces, a n d , until midway into the w’ar, e m ­ p l o yme nt . Re g ar d in g jobs in the 1920s, all the m a j o r u n i o n s refused to al­ low Black m e m b e r s h i p . In the 1930s, t he CIO u n i o n s a c c e p t e d large n u m b e r s o f African Ame ri c a ns , partly b ecaus e o f idealism, b u t also b ecause o f pr es s ur e from the creat ion o f i n d e p e n d e n t Black u n i o n s a n d c o m p e t i ­ tion fr om t he AFL u ni on s, which e x c l u d e d Blacks until the 1940s. D u r i ng t he early p a r t o f the war, def ense indust ries d is cr i mi na te d against Blacks. But in r es p o ns e to a t h r e a t e n e d p ro te st m a r c h in Wa s hi n gt on , D.C., led by A. Philip R a n d o l p h (a Black edit or, writer, a n d u n i o n or ga ni z er ) a n d to pr es sur e from o t h e r Black leaders a n d E l e a no r Roosevelt, Pr e si de n t Ro o­ sevelt issued Executive O r d e r 8802, r e q ui r i n g e qual e m p l o y m e n t o p p o r t u ­

180

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

nities for African Americans. Pr e si d e n t Roosevelt also b r o u g h t into t he gov­ e r n m e n t , at s u b c a b i n e t levels, a small n u m b e r o f African-American m e n a n d w o m e n . T h e New Deal c r ea te d m a ny federal jobs, which Blacks in in­ creasing n u m b e r s c ame to hol d. This t r e n d c o n t i n u e d a n d today a high p r o p o r t i o n o f f ederal j o b s are he ld by Blacks (Berry Sc Blassingamc, 1982; Meier Sc Rudwick, 1976; Nash ct al., 1990). T h e r e was on e positive o ut c ome of segregated housi ng in No r t h e r n cities— increased political influence. This was especially true in Chicago, which ha d a large segregated population. In 1928, African Americans there elected the first Black m e m b e r to Congress anywhere in the United States since 1901. Chicago is c omp os ed o f many voting districts, an d local political jobs arc controlled by the leaders o f those districts. T h e same pattern exists in nearly all large N o r th ­ ern cities with similar positive results for the African Americans in districts where they were in the majority (Meier Sc Rudwick, 1976). S o m e w h a t rel ated to the growth of Black political inf lue nc e in t he No rt h were the wid es pr ea d a n d effective activities o f the NAACP. T he y were heavily involved in a large n u m b e r o f cases d ea l in g with African-American civil a n d political rights. Its m o s t f am o us case in the 1920s involved the d e ­ fense (by at t o r ne y Cl ar en ce Darrow) o f Dr. Ossian Sweet, a physician in De­ troit, who was a ccused o f m u r d e r i n g a m e m b e r o f a m o b t h r e a t e n i n g his h o m e a n d family. Dr. Sweet’s acquittal by an all-White j u r y sitting b ef or e a Whi te j udge in a racially in fl ame d city was a victory for everyone. In the 1930s, the NAACP b e c a m e increasingly c on t ro l l e d by African Amer icans, bo th in the office a n d in t h e c o u r t r o o m . Thi s t r e n d c o n t i n u e s to the p re s­ e n t time ( Sha pir o, 1988). T h r o u g h o u t the 1920s a n d 1930s, a n u m b e r o f m a j or African-American l eader s u r g e d Blacks to p u r s u e t he cour se o f s eparatism, Black nati onal ism, a n d Pan-Africanism. T he se i n c l u d e d Marcus Garvey (who f o u n d e d the U n i ­ versal N eg r o I m p r o v e m e n t Association), W.E.B. DuBois (who or ga ni ze d five n ati onal a n d i n t e r n at io n al Pan-African c o n f e r e nc es b etween 1919 a n d 1945), a n d W. D. Fard (who established the Nat ion o f Islam, o r t he Black Muslims). Al t ho u gh these were very diverse grou ps , they h e ld in c o m m o n the belief th at e qual t r e a t m e n t by Whi tes in t he U n i t e d States was unlikely to occur. T h e y a r g u e d that Blacks woul d b en e fi t t he mo st by j o i n i n g forces with cach o t h e r bo t h h e r e a n d a b r o a d to obt ai n t he rights a n d privileges t h a t all h u m a n s deserved. So me m e m b e r s e n c o u r a g e d colonization in Af­ rica— DuBois h ims e lf e m i g r a t e d t h e r e shortly b ef or e his d ea th . O t h e r s e n ­ c o u r a g e d unofficial o r official separatism h e re . T h e issue o f inte gr at io n ver­ sus separatism has n o t d i s a p p e a r e d in c o n t e m p o r a r y African-American di al ogue, a l t h o u g h few Blacks seriously suggest e mi gr at i o n to Africa (Berry Sc Blassingame, 1982). In the last p e r i od , Postwar Growth a n d C h a n g e (1945 to the pr es ent ) substantial gains in justice, equality, a n d self-det ermi nat i on o c c u r r e d for Af­

BRI EF GUI . TU R A L HI S T OR Y O F AFRI CAN AMERI CANS

181

rican Americans. T h e s e gains primarily c a m e a b o u t t h r o u g h the c o n t i n u e d activities of the NAACP in t h e courts, t h r o u g h c o m m i t m e n t to social c h a n g e by Presi dent s T r u m a n , Kennedy, a n d J o h n s o n , a n d t h r o u g h Black activism, fr eq ue ntl y s u p p o r t e d by Wh it e participants. It can be a r g u e d that the m o st centr al factor, directly or indirectly, in c o n t i n u e d positive c ha ng e s for African A me ri ca ns was t h e ir ability to elect public officials. T h r e e o f the signal events in the 1940s were the start of racial i nt egrat ion in professional sports (Jackie Robi nson b r o ke t he color line in baseball in 1947), Pr e si d en t T r u m a n ’s b a r r i n g race d is cr imi nat ion in f ederal agencies, a n d his d e s eg re ga ti on o f the military by executive o r d e r in 1948. T h e i m­ pa ct o f military d e se gr eg a t io n was p r o f o u n d ; mo r eo ve r , it was f u r t h e r e n ­ h a n c e d 3 years later w he n i nt e gr a te d c o m b a t units were s en t to Korea. T h e military a c ad e mi es started a cc ep t in g African A me ri ca ns a n d the n u m b e r of s en i or Black officers started to increase. From the 1960s to the p r e s e n t the military e n g a g e d in two m o r e wars with Black a n d Whit e servicemen p e r ­ f o r m i n g equivalently (Berry 8c Blassingame, 1982; Nash ct al., 1990). Even t h o u g h the p e r c e n t a g e o f Black officers is still l ower than t h a t o f Whites, o n e o f the r e c e n t c h a i r m e n o f t h e J o i n t Chiefs o f Staff, Colin Powell, is an African Ame ric an . T h r e e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t events o f t he 1950s were the decision by the S u p r e m e C o u r t in 1954 b a n n i n g school segr egati on, the successful bus boy­ cott in M o n tg o me r y, Alabama, led by Rosa Parks a n d Martin L u t h e r King, Jr., in 1955 ( a b o u t 1 year later, t he S u p r e m e C o u r t b a n n e d bus segr ega­ ti on), a n d the Con gr ess io n a l Civil Rights Act of 1957, which f u r t h e r g u a r a n ­ t e ed voting rights. Black activists a n d Whit e s u p p o r t e r s c o o r d i n a t e d their efforts to get these laws i m p l e m e n t e d . Many Whi te S ou t h e r n e r s , i n c lu di ng el ect ed officials, often violently resisted these c hanges. I nt egr ati on o f p u b ­ lic t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o c c u r r e d relatively rapidly. I n t e gr a t i o n o f S o u t h e r n schools, i nc l ud i ng colleges a n d universities however, c a me very slowly; for e x a mp l e , in 1962, only 8% o f Black c hi l d r en a t t e n d e d in t eg r at e d schools (Berry 8c Blassingamc, 1982; Mei er 8c Rudwick, 1976; Nash et al., 1990). Voting rights in the Sout h c ame slowly. However, the congr essional Voti ng Rights Act o f 1965 s u s p e n d e d literacy a n d o t h e r voter tests. In c o n ­ junct ion with voter registration drives by Black a n d Whit e activists, this law dramatically i nc re as ed the po ol o f Black voters. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , the n u m ­ b e r o f elected Black officials in the S ou th rose e nor mo us l y , for e xa mp l e , from 72 in 1965 to m o r e t ha n 1,600 in 1974. This t r e n d c o n t i n u e d t h r o u g h the 1970s a n d 1980s, w h e re an African Am e r ic a n was el ect ed G o v e r n o r o f Virginia. In bo th the N o r th a n d the S ou th, African A me r ic a ns were el ected mayors of o u r largest cities a n d won seats in the U.S. H o u se of R e p r e s e n t a ­ tives (Mei er 8c Rudwick, 1976). African A me ri ca ns c o n t i n u e d to mi gr at e to N o r t h e r n a n d We st er n cities d u r i n g the 1950s a n d 1960s. By 1970, a n d to th e pr ese nt , only slightly m o r e

182

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

than 50% o f African A me r ic a ns live in the S o ut h. T h e s e p o p u l a t i o n mo ve ­ m e n t s h a d little effect on a per sistent civil rights p r o b l e m — c o n t a c t with the cri mi nal justice system. Blacks are a rr es t ed m o r e f r eque ntl y t h a n Whites, are s e n t e n c e d to prison m o r e f requently, a n d serve l o n g e r sentences. T h e r e arc relatively few African-American police officers, district attorneys, judges, o r prison officials. Berry a n d Blassingame (1982) p o i n t e d out that u r b a n riots have often b e e n t r igger ed by real a n d percei ved police brutality toward Blacks. T h e 1992 riots in Los Angeles arc consi st ent with this view, as are the 2001 riots in Cincinnati . T h e de c ad es of the 1950s a n d 1960s involved the p e a k o f Black activism. Two i m p o r t a n t t he me s , f or the p r e s e n t p ur po s e s, charact erize this period: se pa ra ti o n versus in te gr ati o n a n d violent versus n o n v i o l e n t m e t h o d s o f achieving African-American goals. T o s o m e ex te nt, b o th t h e m e s b e c a m e t r a n s f o r m e d into a single t h e m e involving Black political power , Black pri de, a n d Black nat ional ism. Ov e r the l ong t e r m, t he assassinations of Malcolm X in 1965 a n d Martin L u t h e r King in 1968 pr ob ab l y c o n t r i b u t e d to t he decl inc o f a strategy o f violence. T h e election to public office o f Afri­ can A me ri ca ns i n d ic a te d t ha t Black activism c oul d be d ir e ct e d m o r e toward voting a n d less toward protest. Black nationalism emp h a si ze s the c o n n e c ­ tion t h a t African Ame ri c ans have a b o n d with o n e a n o t h e r t h r o u g h a posi­ tive c o m m o n herit age. A m a j or goal o f Black nationalism is d e f i ne d as a pluralistic society r a t h e r t h a n a me lt in g pot, with differences bet ween g r o up s b e i ng valued (Berry & Blassingamc, 1982; Mei er & Rudwick, 1976). T h e subtitle o f V i n c e nt H a r d i n g ’s 1981 b oo k, There Is a River, is The Black StruggleJorFreedom in America. T h e struggle c o n t i n u e s today, r ef lected in the socialization e x p e r i e nc es o f y o u n g African-American boys a n d girls. T h e y have to be ever vigilant a n d have to c o n t i n u e to fight for rights that have n o t yet b e e n at tai ned. But the history o f African Amer icans , especially t h a t of the post Wo r l d W a r II p er i od , indicates t ha t ultimately, they will succeed.

B R O W N V. BOARD OF ED U CATIO N T h e psychologist K e n n e t h B. Clark p r e p a r e d a r e p o r t in 1950 for the MidC e nt u r y Whi te H o u se C o n f e r e n c e on C h i l d r e n a n d Youth called “T h e Ef­ fects o f Pr ejudi c e a n d Di scrimi nati on o n Personality D e v e l o p m e n t in Chi l d ­ r e n . ” This r e p o r t a n d o t h e r social science studies were extensively relied on by the U.S. S u p r e m e C o u r t for its 1954 decision in the case, Brown v. Board o f Education. T h e j ustices n o t e d that so-called “s epar ate b u t e q u a l ” public e d uc a t i on facilities were i n h e re n tl y u n e q u a l w h e n t he segr egat ion was based o n race. T h e y m a i n t a i n e d that such racial segr egat i on d e n o t e d “infe­ riority,” which affected African-American c h i l d r e n ’s motivation to learn. W h e n segr egat i on was s an c t io n ed by law, it t e n d e d to “r et ar d the e d u c a ­

B R O W N V. HO ARD OF E D U C A T I O N

183

tional a n d m e nt a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f N e g ro c h i l d r e n . ” T h e r e f o r e t he segre­ g at ed ch i ld re n were b e i ng “d e pr i ve d o f t he equal p ro t ec t io n o f the laws g u a r a n t e e d by the F o u r t e e n t h A m e n d m e n t . ” Such segr egat ion in public e d u c a t i o n was r ul ed by the c o u r t as u nc on st ituti ona l. In 1955, Clark revised his Whi t e H o u s e p a p er , which a p p e a r e d as the b oo k, Prejudice and Your Child. In 1963, the b o o k was e n l a r g e d to inc l ud e several a p p e n d i x e s rel at ed to the S u p r e m e C o u r t decision, leaving intact the 1955 material. W h a t follows is my b r i e f s u m m a r y o f those aspects o f the b o o k de ali ng with the research car r ied o u t by Clark a n d o th er s c o n c e r n e d with the d e v e l o p m e n t o f racial self-image. T h e starting p o i n t for C l a r k ’s research, which he b eg a n in the late 1930s with his wife, Ma mi e Clark, was t hei r conviction th at N e g r o a n d Whi te chil­ d r e n ( Cl a r k’s words) “learn social, racial, a n d religious pr ej udices in the c our se o f observing, a n d b e i n g i n f l u e nc e d by, the exi st ence o f p a t t e r n s in the c ult ur e in which they live” (Clark, 1963, p. 17). How do these Ame ri ca n cultural p a t t e rn s affect the racial awareness a n d racial p r e f e r e nc es o f African- Amcr ican c hi ldr e n? T h e Clarks initially st ud i e d this q ues tion with 3- to 7-year-olds using the “dolls” test. T h e chi ld r en were p r e s e n t e d with four identical dolls, with t he e xc ep t io n t h a t two were brown a n d two were white. T h e c hi l d r en were asked by the African-American e x p e r i m e n t e r to identify the “Whit e dol l, ” the “c ol or e d doll,” a n d the “N eg ro doll.” Mo re th an 75% o f 4- a n d 5-year-olds living in b o th the No r t h a n d the S out h correctly i de nt i­ fied the “r aces” o f the dolls. Thi s p e r c e n t a g e i nc r ea se d with in c re as i ng age. Clark p o i n t e d o u t t ha t African-American c hi l d r en whose skin color is in­ disti ngui shabl e fr om t ha t o f Whit e p e o p l e sh owe d a del ayed ability to reli­ ably identify the dolls. However, by age 5 or age 6 the majority of these chil­ d r e n m a d e c o r r e c t social identifications, th at is, t ha t African-American dolls were bro wn , a n d W'hite dolls were white, despite t he fact t ha t they t hemselves h a d “w h i te ” skin color. Clark c o n c l u d e d t ha t racial awareness d e v e l o pe d in African-American ch il dr e n as y o u n g as age 4. H e n o t e d that o t h e r r es ea rc her s f o u n d parallel results with Whi te c hi ldr en. T h e Clarks additionally asked the African-American ch il dr e n to p o i n t to the doll “which is m o s t like yo u . ” Overall, a p p ro x i ma t e l y two t hirds o f the c hi l d r e n were correct , t he p e r c e n t a g e incr eas ing with increasi ng age: 37% o f 3-year-olds a n d 87% o f 7-year-olds c hos e the br own dolls. Again, c hi ldr en with light skin color h a d m o r e difficulty with this task t h a n t he d a r k e r chil­ d r e n . T h u s , t he re arc close parallels b etween the d e v e l o p m e n t o f racial awareness a n d racial identification. T h e Clarks t he n we nt on to study racial p r e f e r e nc es o f African-American c hil dr en. T h e r es ea rc her s asked the following f o u r questions: 1. Give me the doll t h a t you like to play with. 2. Give m e the doll that is the nice doll.

184

6.

C UL T UR AL HI STORY O F AFRICAN AMERI CANS

3. Give me the doll that looks bad. 4. Give me the doll that is a nice color. (Clark, 1963, p. 23) They fo u nd that the majority of children of all ages preferred the white doll to the brown one. O t h e r researchers have fo u n d c ompar abl e white-tobrown-doll preferences for White children. Clark co nc lu de d that the self­ rejection of African Americans as indicated by their pr ef er ence to be While “reflects their knowledge that society prefers White p e o p l e ” and their ac­ ceptance of this racial attitude. What are the personal and emot i onal cons eque nc es of racial self-rejec­ tion by African-American children? T he Clarks carried o ut a n o t h e r experi­ ment , called the “coloring lest.” They re po r te d bot h objective a nd mo re im­ pressionistic or clinical dala in ihis research. Chil dren were given a sheet of p a pe r with drawings of familiar “things” such as a leaf, an apple, a boy a nd a girl, along with a box of crayons. T h e children were asked to color all the things except the boy a nd girl. Only the 5- to 7-year-olds consistently used the correct colors in this task. T he r esearchers t hen asked these children to color the same-sex drawing “the color that you a r e ” a nd to color the o p p o ­ site-sex drawing the color they liked little children to be. All the light­ skinned African-American children colored the same-sex drawing with a while or yellow crayon, and 15% of the me d iu m or dark-brown children did the same or used a bizarre color like red o r green. W h e n asked to color the opposite-sex child, 48% of all these children chose brown, 37% chose white, and 15% chose an irrelevant color. These results were generally c on­ sistent with the dolls test a nd indicated racial self-rejection. Were there differences between African-American children from the Nor th a nd South? Yes, dramatic ones. About 80% of the So u th er n c hildren, but only about 36% of the N or t h e r n children colored their preferences brown. Moreover, So ut h e r n children rarely used bizarre colors, but 20% of the N or t h e r n children did so. Additionally, only 20% of N o r t h e r n children, but 82% of S ou t he rn children spoke to themselves or to the r esear cher as they worked, indicating guardedness by the No r t he rne rs . Finally, n o n e of the So u th er n children, b ut some (no percent ages are given) of the N o r t h ­ ern children were very distressed by this task, for example, crying or refus­ ing to finish the task without coaxing. What do these n u mb e rs a nd observations mean? Clark believed that the N o rt h e r n African-American children actually had a psychologically h e alt h­ ier reaction to the i n ne r conflict between wh om they were racially and whom the society valued. T he ir pr ef er ence for white over brown, choice of bizarre colors, relative silence d ur i ng the task, but int ermi ttent emot ional upheaval indicates that they did n ot willingly accept a devalued racial i d e n­ tification. T h e acceptance of a brown racial status by the So ut h e rn children indicated an acceptance of an “inferior social status.” In the dolls task, for

D EVELOPMENT O F ET HN I C IDENTITY

185

e x a m p l e , s o m e o f th e S o u t h e r n A frican -A m e rica n c h i l d r e n w o u ld p o i n t to t h e b r o w n d o l l a n d say “T h i s o n e . I t ’s a n i g g e r . I ’m a n i g g e r ” ( C l a r k , 1 9 6 3, p. 4 5 ) . C lark (1963) c o n c l u d e d this section o f th e b o o k with th e following p o w ­ e r f u l s t a t e m e n t r e g a r d i n g t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f h is r e s e a r c h : As m i n o r i t y - g r o u p c h i l d r e n l e a r n t he i n f e r i o r s ta tu s to w h i c h they a r e as­ s i g n e d a n d o b se r v e t h a t t h e y a rc usually s e g r e g a t e d a n d i solat ed f r o m t he m o r e p r i vi le ge d m e m b e r s o f t h e i r society, t hey r e a c t with d e e p fe el in gs o f i n ­ feriority a n d wit h a se ns e o f p e r s o n a l h u m i l i a t i o n . M a n y o f t h e m b e c o m e c o n ­ f us e d a b o u t t h e i r o wn p e r s o n a l w o r t h . Like all o t h e r h u m a n b e i n g s th e y r e ­ q u i r e a se ns e o f p e r s o n a l d i g n i ty a n d social s u p p o r t f or positive self-esteem. A l m o s t n o w h e r e in t h e l a r g e r society, h o w e v e r , d o t h ey f in d t h e i r own d i gnit y as h u m a n b e i n g s r e s p e c t e d o r p r o t e c t e d . U n d e r t h e se c o n d i t i o n s , mi no r i t yg r o u p c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p confli cts with r e g a r d to t h e i r f ee li ng s a b o u t t h e m ­ selves a n d a b o u t t h e val ue o f t h e g r o u p with w h i ch t he y a re i d e n t i f i e d . U n d e r ­ s t a n d a b l y t hey b e g i n to q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t h e y t h e m s e l v e s a n d t h e i r g r o u p are w o r t h y o f n o m o r e r e s p e c t f r o m t h e l a r g e r society t h a n t he y r eceive. T h e s e conflicts, c o n f u s i o n s a n d d o u b t s give rise u n d e r c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s to selfh a t r e d a n d r e je c t i o n o f t h e i r own g r o u p , ( p p . 6 3 - 6 4 )

D E V E L O P M E N T OF E T H N I C IDENTITY In this sectio n, f o u r p r e d i c t i o n s are m a d e b a s e d o n th e c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l d o m i n a n c e o f W h i t e s o v e r all o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s in t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . Fir st, o w i n g to t h e h i g h s t a t u s o f W h i t e s r e l a t i v e t o t h a t o f o t h e r r a ­ c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s , s e l f - e s t e e m in all r a c e s s h o u l d b e m o r e h i g h l y r e l a t e d to W h i t e c u ltu ra l b eh a v io r s a n d values t h a n to the b e h a v io r s a n d values o f t h e i r o w n r a c e s . S e c o n d , o w i n g to t h e i r s e l f - p e r c e i v e d l o w e r s t a t u s , B l a ck s a n d o t h e r m i n o r i t i e s s h o u l d b e m o r e likely t o a d o p t W h i t e c u l t u r a l b e h a v ­ iors a n d values t h a n th e con verse. T h i r d , Blacks a n d o t h e r m i n o r i ty g r o u p s s h o u l d a c q u i r e k n o w l e d g e o f W h i t e c u l t u r a l n o r m s p r i o r to W h i t e s ’ a c q u i s i ­ t i o n o f k n o w i e d g e o f m i n o r i t y c u l t u r a l n o r m s . F o u r t h , owri n g to t h e h i g h e r status o f W h ite s t h a n th a t o f o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s , with in c re a s in g age, race p re ju d ic e a n d discrim in atio n sh o u ld d im inish on the p a r t o f m i­ nority g ro u p s m o r e than o n th e p art o f Whites. In the p r e c e d i n g sectio n, fro m a psy ch olo gical view point, th e c e n tr a l a r ­ g u m e n t o f t h e C l a r k s was t h a t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n by B l a c k c h i l d r e n w i t h a m i n o r ­ ity g r o u p h a v i n g a n i n f e r i o r s t a t u s l e a d s t o d e e p f e e l i n g s o f i n f e r i o r i t y a n d a sen se o f p e r s o n a l h u m i li a t i o n . T h e Clarks base this c o n c lu s i o n o n b o t h q u a l i t a t i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s o f r a c i a l c o n f l i c t a m o n g B l a c k c h i l d r e n a n d by t h e c h i l d r e n ’s s y s t e m a t i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h a n d p r e f e r e n c e f o r W h i t e d o l l s o v e r B l a c k o n e s . H o w e v e r , it is p o s s i b l e t h a t d i r e c t m e a s u r e s o f s e l f - e s t e e m

186

6.

C UI / r U RA L HI ST O RY O F A F R1C A N A M F. RI C A N S

may n o t c o n f i r m this c o n c l u s i o n . T h a t is, Black chilclrcn ma y id e nt if y with a n d p r e f e r W h i t e dolls o r p i c t u r e s m o r e th a n Black o n e s , a n d not have a low self-esteem. Thi s, o f c o u r s e , is n o t to s ug ge s t t h a t racial bias is to b e e x o n e r ­ a t e d as a societal ill, e i t h e r in its own r i g h t o r in re la ti o n to p r e j u d i c e a n d discrimination. W h a t d o th e d a t a show? Ov er all, in s tu d ie s c a r r i e d o u t b o t h b e f o r e a n d a ft e r th e star t o f t h e civil right s m o v e m e n t a n d passage o f civil right s legisla­ tion in 1964, for b o t h c h i l d r e n a n d a d o l e s c e n t s , t h e r e is n o systematic r e l a ­ t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n m e a s u r e s o f self-esteem a n d m e a s u r e s o f racial p r e f e r ­ e n c e o r e t h n i c id e nt ity ( A b o u d , 1988; Cross, 1987; P h i n n e y , 1990). T h a t is, c h i l d r e n a n d a d o l e s c e n t s m a y have h ig h o r low self-esteem a n d e i t h e r posi ­ tively o r negatively value t h e i r own e t h n i c g r o u p . T h i s is a s u r p r i s i n g result, c o u n t e r to th e C l a r k s ’ c o n c l u s i o n s , a n d a p p a r e n t l y c o u n t e r to t h e p r e d i c ­ tion t h a t Black self-esteem will be positively r e l a t e d to W h i t e c u l t u r a l values a n d be h av io rs . How is it e x p l a i n e d ? Le t us first star t with s o m e d e fi n it io n s . Racial g r o u p s a n d e t h n i c g r o u p s a r e n o t e q u iv a l e n t. In th e U n i t e d States, they d o t e n d to covary, for e x a m ­ ple, African A m e r i c a n s , C h i n e s e A m e r i c a n s , I n d i a n A m e r i c a n s d o for m r a ­ c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s . But Jewish A m e r i c a n s , G r e e k A m e r i c a n s , a n d Italian A m e r i c a n s arc all Wrhite a n d of te n i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e physically. In C a n a d a , F r e n c h C a n a d i a n s a n d Engl ish C a n a d i a n s lo o k alike, b u t form di s tin c t e t h ­ nic g r o u p s . It is h e l p f u l to r e m e m b e r t h a t m a n y o f the se d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s o f E u r o p e a n “W h i t e s ” w e re o n c e m e t i c u l o u s l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d as “r a c e s ,” with id e n ti fi a b le physical traits t h a t w e re o v e r l o o k e d in th e p r e s e n c e o f th e large, u n i n t e g r a t e d p o p u l a t i o n o f African A m e r i c a n s . R e c e n t r e s e a r c h in th e U n i t e d States usually c o m p a r e s d i f f e r e n t r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s with c a c h o t h e r o r with W h i t e s as a w h o le . T h e e t h n i c g r o u p s c h o s e n a r e p r i m a r ­ ily th e s u b o r d i n a t e d m i n o r i t y g r o u p s , especially African A m e r i c a n s , o f w h o m rac e a n d e th n ic it y eq ually d e f i n e t h e m . N ear ly all writers in this field off er d e f i n i t i o n s o f e t h n i c g r o u p s . Rothe r a m a n d P h i n n e y ’s (1987) d e f i n i t i o n c a p t u r e s t h e essential f e a t u r e s o f th e c o n c c p t . An ethnic group is “a ny c ol le c ti o n of p e o p l e w h o call th e m s e lv e s an e t h n i c g r o u p a n d w h o see th e m s el v e s s h a r i n g c o m m o n a t t r i b u t e s ” (p. 12). N o t e t h a t rac e a n d m i n o r i t y status a r c n o t re l e v a n t to t h e d e f i n i t i o n . Ethnic awareness re fers to a p e r s o n ’s ability to m a k e d is ti n c ti o n s b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s . Ethnic identity g o e s b e y o n d this. It re fe rs to o n e ’s sense o f b e l o n g i n g to an e t h n i c g r o u p a n d a c q u i r i n g its b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n s . T h u s , b e i n g Jewish A m e r i c a n , o r African A m e r i c a n , o r J a p a n e s e A m e r i c a n d o c s n o t a u to m a t i c a l l y pla ce an in di v id u a l in an e t h n i c g r o u p , t h o u g h o t h e r s m a y d o so. If th e p e r s o n d o e s n o t have a s en s e o f b e l o n g i n g , a n d d o e s n o t s h a r e b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n s c h a r a c te ri s ti c o f a p a r t i c u l a r e t h n i c g r o u p , t h e n the p e r s o n d o e s n o t ide nti fy as a m e m b e r o f t h a t g r o u p . H ow ev e r, t h a t p e r s o n m a y c er ta in l y b e a w are o f th e e x is t e n c e o f d i f f e r e n t e t h n i c g r o u p s . Ethnic

D E V E L O P M E N T O F E T H N I C I DENTI TY

187

preference refers to an i ndi vi du a l ’s valuing o r p r e f e r r i n g o n e r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p over others. T h e p r e f e r r e d g r o u p is n o t necessarily t he i nd ivi dua l’s racial/ethnic group. E t h n i c awareness is typically m e a s u r e d by p r e s e n t i n g ch il d re n with dolls o r pict ures d e p i c t i ng di f f er en t r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s a n d asking t h e m to p o i n t to the p i c t u r e / d o l l of a specific g r o u p , for e x a mp l e , White, Native Ame ric an , Black, Chinese. A n o t h e r te ch ni q ue involves p r es e nt ing children with t hr ee pictures o f people, two from the same r a ci a l/ e t hn i c g r o u p a n d o n e from a n o t h e r g r oup. T h e chil dren arc asked to choose the two who are most similar. Ethnic identity is typically m e a s u r e d by showing children dolls or pictures depi ct i ng different r a ci a l/ e t hn i c g r ou ps a n d asking t he m to p oi n t to the d o l l / p i c t u r e that mo st looks like t hem. Et hni c p r ef er en ce is typi­ cally m e a s ur e d the way the Clarks did as descri bed in the previous section. Chi ldren arc shown pictures or dolls r ep r es en ti ng different ethni c g r oups a n d they are asked questions a b o u t which doll t hey’d like to play with, which is the nicest, a n d so forth. WTe def er discussing research dealing with ethnic p r ef er en ce until the n e x t c h a p t e r on the d e ve l o p m e n t of prejudice. R o t hc r am a n d P h i nn e y (1987) a n d Bc uf (1977) each hy po th es iz ed th re e stages in t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f c h i l d r e n ’s e t hn ic identity. T h e following is a synthesis o f their views. In the first stage, which char act er izes mo s t g r ou ps o f 3- a n d 4-ycar-olds, ch il dr e n have little awareness o f r a c i a l / e t h n i c differ­ ences. In t he s e co nd stage, ages 4 to 6 years, m os t Black a n d Wrhitc ch il dr en show a c cur at e e th ni c awareness, b u t Native Amer icans , Ch in es e Amer icans, a n d Mexican A me r i c ans d o not. Whi te c hi ld re n t e n d to ac qu ir e awareness earlier than those o f o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c gr oups. Also in this stage, Whi te ch il dr en d e m o n s t r a t e a c cur at e e t h ni c identity, b u t the o t h e r N o r th A m er i ­ can e t hn ic g r o u ps d o not. T he y typically p o i n t to the Whi t e d o l l / p i c t u r e equally or slightly m o r e fr eq u e nt ly t h a n t ha t o f thei r own r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p in r es p on se to the q uest ion, “Whi ch doll ( pi ct ur e) looks like you?” In the t hi r d stage, b et ween 7 a n d 10 years o f age, all g r o u ps o f c hi ld r en d e m ­ o ns tr ate a ccur ate e t hn ic identity a n d have d e ve l o p e d an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f “racial c onst ancy. ” Prior to this stage, ch i ld re n believe t h a t they can willfully c h a n g e th ei r race, or t h a t variations in a pp a re l o r h ai r (e.g., wear ing NativeA me ri ca n clothes o r a b l o n d wig) p r o d u c e c h a n gc s in o n e ’s race. Whi te c hi l d r e n achieve racial const ancy at earlier ages in this stage t ha n o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c gr oups. T h e se findings arc c ons is te nt with the pred i ct i o n , b as ed on c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l c o n s i d e r at i o n s , th at s u b o r d i n a t e d g r o u p s s h o u l d be m o r e likely to a d o p t the behaviors a n d values o f d o m i n a n t g r o u p m e m b e r s th an the converse. We previously discussed t he observation that girls, as m e m b e r s o f a s u b o r d i n a t e class, attain oppositc-sex knowl e d g e b e ­ fore boys do, which s u p p o r t s this hypothesis. T h e p h e n o m e n o n in the s e c o nd stage in which c hi ld r en o f non -Wh it e e t hni c g r o u p s identify with Wrhite d o l l s / p i c t u r e s r a t h e r t ha n their own e t h ­

188

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

nic d o l l s / p i c t u r e s has b e e n r e f er r ed to as “mi s i de nti fi ca ti on” ( R o t h c r am 8c Ph inn ey , 1987). This is a crucial p a r t o f the p h e n o m e n a t he Clarks discov­ e r e d a n d t ha t f o r m e d the basis for thei r c oncl us ions a b o u t Black selfd evaluation. We saw t ha t misidentification is u n r e l a t e d to self-esteem. W h a t d ocs it m e a n , then? Bc uf (1977), Cross (1987), a n d G. M. V a ug h n (1987) of fer ed similar ex­ p l ana ti on s o f this p h e n o m e n o n . T h e essential aspects o f t h e i r m o d e l s arc as follows. T h e self-concept can be viewed as c o m p o s e d o f two m a j o r c o m p o ­ nents, a social identity a n d a p er so na l identity. O n e ’s social identity i n­ cludes all the various social gr ou p i ng s , i n c l ud i n g e t h n i c gro up s , tha t a child is aware o f a n d to which h e or s he belongs. To a large extent , t he social s t r u ct u r e o f a society, which i nc lu d e s de va lu a tio n o f cer tain mi no r i ty gr oups, d e t e r m i n e s t he social g r o u p i n g s o f which c hi ld r en arc aware. In d e ­ ve lopi ng o n e ’s own social identity, ch i ld re n m a k e c o m p ar i s on s be t we en at­ tributes o f thos e g r o up s o f which they arc aware, a n d locate t hemselves as m e m b e r s o f s ome of the groups. T hu s, min or it y ch il dr e n learn they arc m e m b e r s o f e t h n i c g r o u ps d ev a l ue d by the majority cul ture. A c h i l d ’s p e r ­ sonal identity incl udes all t he at tr ibut es th at she or h e n o t es in m a k i n g in­ t er pe rs ona l c o mp a r i s o n s with o t h e r individuals h e or she is in c o nt ac t with. This i nc lu de s beliefs, e m o t i o n a l states, skills, i n t e r p er s on a l c o m p e t e n c e , a n d self-esteem. H e n c e , o n e can ac q u i re high self-esteem b u t identify with a de va lue d mi norit y g r oup . W h e n minorit y ch i ld re n in t he s e c o nd stage are asked who they look like, a n d t h e n p o i n t to the Whi te d o l l / p i c t u r e , B e u f (1977), Cross (1987), a n d V a u g h n (1987) a r g u e d t ha t t he c hi ld r en are n o t i nt e r p r e t i n g the q u e s­ tion as o n e o f pe rs o na l identity, b u t r a t h e r o n e o f p r e f e r r e d social identity. T h e s e a u t h or s ma i nt a in t ha t ch i ld re n in the s e co nd stage know who the mo st highly valued g r o u p is (Whites). Because they believe th at race is a fluid category, it can be c h a n g e d at will. H e n c e , thei r p o i nt i n g to t he Whi te d o l l / p i c t u r e reflects th at beli ef a n d thei r desire to be p ar t o f a highly val­ u e d g r o up . In the thi rd stage, ch i ld re n no l o n g e r misidentify t h e i r e t h n i c ­ ity. T h a t is b ecause they have a c q u i re d racial constancy, which is parallel to o t h e r a t t a i nm e nt s in the stage o f c o n c re t e o p e r a ti o ns (Piaget, 1971). T he y now a c ce pt t he ir m e m b e r s h i p in a par ti cul ar e t h ni c g r o u p be ca u s e that m e m b e r s h i p can n o t be willed o r wished away. A critical feat ur e of b e i n g a m e m b e r o f an e t h n i c g r o u p , especially from the vi ewpoint o f pr ej ud i ce a n d d iscr imi nat ion, is t h a t o n e has a c q u i re d pa t­ terns o f behaviors, beliefs, a n d feelings that distinguish i n g r o u p from o u t ­ g r o u p m e m b e r s . In t h a t g r o u p s differ in a large n u m b e r o f ways, the q u e s­ tion m u s t be answer ed, “W hi ch ways arc m o s t ce nt ra l ?” Drawing from an extensive survey o f a n th r o p o l o g i c a l a n d social psychological literature, R o t hc r am a n d P h i nn e y (1987) identi fied f ou r d i m e n s i o n s t h a t c a p t ur e the essential types o f social rules involved with s tr uc tu ri ng i n g r o u p intc rpe r-

D E V E L O P M E N T O F E T H N IC IDENTITY

189

s o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n s . T h e s e c a n b e c o n s t r u e d as b e h a v i o r a l b a d g e s t h a t c a n b e u s e d to i d e n t i f y g r o u p m e m b e r s . T h e f o u r d i m e n s i o n s a r e as follows: 1. An o r ie nt a t io n t oward g r o u p affiliation a n d i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e versus an i n­ dividual o r ie n t a t i o n e m p h as i z i n g i n d e p e n d e n c e a n d c o m p e t i ti o n . 2. An active, a c hi e v e m e n t - o r i e n t e d style versus a passive a c ce pt in g style. 3. Aut h o r i ta ri an is m a n d the a c ce p t a n c e o f hie ra rc hi ca l rel at ionshi ps versus e g al i t a r i a n is m. 4. An expressive, overt, p er s on a l style o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n versus a r es tr ai ned, i mp e rs o na l , a n d formal style, (p. 22)

T h u s, individuals w ho differ substantially from the behavioral n o r m s o f a g r o u p o n a n y o f t h e s e d i m e n s i o n s a r e likely to e x p e r i e n c e c on f li c ts wi t h t h a t g r o u p , f o r e x a m p l e , a p e r s o n h a s a n active, a c h i e v e m e n t - o r i e n t e d style b u t t h e g r o u p s h e o r h e is i n t e r a c t i n g with h a s a n o r m o f passive a c c e p ­ t a n c e . T h i s was cl ea rl y s e e n in M a c c o b y ’s (1 9 88 , 1990) d i s c us s io n o f t h e v ar yi ng d e g r e e s o f g r o u p affi li ati on o f m a l e a n d f e m a l e m e m b e r s . P r e s u m ­ ably, e t h n i c g r o u p s t h a t d i f f e r o n two o r m o r e d i m e n s i o n s will e x p e r i e n c e c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n f l i c t wi t h c a c h o t h e r . O n e m a j o r c o n s e q u e n c e o f thi s i n t e r ­ g r o u p c on f l i c t is a c o n f i r m a t i o n o f b o u n d a r i e s b e t w e e n i n g r o u p s a n d o u t ­ groups. In a d d i t i o n to t h e s e f o u r d i m e n s i o n s , o t h e r wri ter s, f o r e x a m p l e , H e l l e r ( 19 8 7) a n d K o c h m a n ( 1 9 8 7 ) , e m p h a s i z e d d i f f e r e n c e s in l a n g u a g e a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n styles as b e i n g f u n d a m e n t a l to c o nf li c ts b e t w e e n d i f f e r e n t eth n ic groups. Heller m ain tain s that m e m b e r s o f an eth nic g r o u p partici­ p a t e in p a r t i c u l a r social n e t w o r k s , h a v e ac ces s to p a r t i c u l a r s ocial r o l e s ( i n ­ c l u d i n g v a r i o u s w o r k a n d play r o l e s ) , a n d s h a r e r e s o u r c e s c o n t r o l l e d by t h e g r o u p , f o r e x a m p l e , c e r t a i n c h u r c h e s , n e i g h b o r h o o d s , o r s h o p s . “S h a r e d l a n g u a g e is basic to s h a r e d i d en t i t y, b u t m o r e t h a n t h a t , i d e n t i t y rests o n s h a r e d ways o f u s i n g l a n g u a g e t h a t r e f l e c t c o m m o n p a t t e r n s o f t h i n k i n g a n d b e h a v i n g , o r s h a r e d c u l t u r e ” ( H e l l e r , 1987, p. 1 81 ). H e l l e r a r g u e s t h a t l a n g u a g e s h a p e s i d e n t i t y f o r m a t i o n in two e ss e n t i a l ways: It m a r k s t h e b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n g r o u p s a n d it c a r r i e s t h e m e a n i n g o f s h a r e d e x p e r i ­ e n c e s . P e r h a p s t h e m o s t d r a m a t i c cas es i l l u s t r a t i n g H e l l e r ’s views i nvolve t h e d i f f e r e n t l a n g u a g e s u s e d by t h e d e a f a n d t h e h e a r i n g , as d e s c r i b e d in c h a p t e r 3. D i f f e r e n t l a n g u a g e s k e e p o u t s i d e r s o u t , a n d r e i n f o r c e t h e s h a r e d e x p e rien ce s o f insiders. L an g u a g e may be the p rim ary b a d g in g m e c h a n is m u s e d to d e f i n e i n g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p . K o c h m a n ( 19 87 ) is in e ss e nt ia l a g r e e m e n t with H e l l e r ( 1 9 8 7 ) t h a t c e r ­ t ain f e a t u r e s o f l a n g u a g e a r e “b o u n d a r y m a i n t a i n i n g m a r k e r s . ” M e m b e r s o f e t h n i c g r o u p s k n o w t h e s e f e a t u r e s well a n d us e t h e m to affi rm s el f a n d o t h ­ er s as e t h n i c g r o u p m e m b e r s . In t h e A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n c o m m u n i t y , Black in ­ tonation a n d expressive intensity a r c two s u c h f e a t u r e s . Black i n t o n a t i o n is a

190

6.

C U I / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

s pc cc h p at te rn o f rising a n d falling pitch that is distinctive a m o n g Blacks. Blacks wh o do n o t use this p at t e rn are often accused o f “acting W hi t e . ” Ex­ pressive intensity involves a gr ea t deal o f a n i m a t i o n a n d vitality in s pc c ch as o p p o s e d to s u b d u e d , low-keyed c o m m u n i c a ti ve acts. WTh c n Blacks talk in the latter m a n n e r , they arc also a ccused o f “acting W hi t e . ” O t h e r c o m p o ­ n e nt s o f Black v er na cu l ar sp e ec h , especially h e a r d a m o n g mal e adol es­ cents, arc “b o a s t i n g ” a n d “verbal d u e l i n g ” ( D u n d c s 1973). Both involve a type o f sense o f h u m o r a n d self-presentation t ha t are characteristically i d e n ­ tified with African Americans. A study by Ro th e ra m- Bo r us a n d P h i n n e y (1990) illustrated how m e m ­ b er sh ip in d if fer ent e t h ni c g r o u p s in flu en ce s c h i l d r e n ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the same social e x p e r i en c e. In th at di ff er en t i nt e r p r e t a t i o n s lead to differ­ e n t social e xpect at ions , it is b u t a s ho rt step to infer t ha t conflict a n d the c o n s e q u e n t b o u n d a r y m a r k i n g is a likely o u t c o m e . In o t h e r words, wher e social e xp e c ta t i on s o f two e t h ni c g r o u p s differ substantially for any o f the f o u r behavioral d i me n si o n s, t he re m i g h t likely be conflict based on that type o f behavior. In t h e ir e x p e r i m e n t , the part i ci pant s were t h i r d - a n d sixth-grade AfricanAme ric an a n d Mexi can-Amcrican boys a n d girls a t t e n d i n g t he s ame e t h n i ­ cally in te g ra t ed schools. T h e c hi l d r en were s hown eight v ideot apes o f br i ef social e n c o u n t e r s involving same-ethnicity peer s t ha t were d e s i g n e d to i n­ voke the f o u r d i m e n s i o n s o f cultural variation previously de s c ri be d by the a u t h o r s ( R o t h c r am 8c P h inncy, 1987). Two of t he scenes dealt with the is­ sue o f g r o u p versus individual o r i en ta ti on , two with attitudes toward a u ­ thority, two with excessive versus r es t r a in ed emotionality, a n d two with ac­ tive versus passive r es pons es to social situations. After cach s cene was p r e s e n t e d , the ch i ld r en were asked what they woul d d o if they were the pri ncipal c h a r a c t e r in t he s c e ne — for e x a mp l e , a female t e a c h e r is shown scolding a child be ca us e she is d i s a p p o i n t e d in hi m. If you were t he child, “wh at would you d o ? ” C h i l d r e n ’s r e sp on se s to cach scene were c o d e d by the e x p e r i m e n t e r s into t h r e e o r f o ur di f fer ent categories. T h e se categories arc the m e a s ur e s o f social expectat i ons. T h e pri ncipal findings were as follows. T h e r e were relatively few differ­ e n c e s in social e x p e c t a t i o n s a m o n g M e x i c a n - A m c r i c a n a n d AfricanAme ric an t hi rd-graders for any o f the f o u r d i m e ns i o ns o f cultural variation. However, the two e t hn i c g r o u p s differed c onsiderabl y in sixth grade. In a s ophisticated statistical test tha t assessed t he similarity o f r e spons e s to s ame a n d d if fer ent e th n ic - gr o up c hi l d r e n , t h e r e were, with few e xcepti ons, welld e f i ne d r e s p on se p a t t e rn s for all m e m b e r s o f each o f these two e thni c gr oups. Generally, Mexi can-Amcri can sixth gr a de r s were m o r e g r o u p ori­ e n t e d t ha n African Amer icans. T h e y also relied m o r e on a ut h o r it ie s for solving p r o b l e m s than the latter g r o up . Conversely, African Ame ri ca ns were m o r e e mot iona ll y expressive a n d verbal t ha n Mexican Americans.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F E T H N I C I DENTI TY

191

Finally, the f o r m e r g r o u p also u s e d m o r e active c o p i n g strategies in re­ s pons e to social situations, wher eas Mexi can-Ameri can sixth gr a de r s were m o r e willing to a c c e p t s i tu a ti ons as t hey wer e. R o t h e r a m - B o r u s a n d P h i n n e y (1990) p o i n t e d o u t t h a t the sixth-grader findings are consi st ent with o t h e r r es ear ch using a d ul t m e m b e r s o f the two e t hn ic groups. T h e j u s t m e n t i o n e d age-related findings arc c o n n e c t e d to a n o t h e r i m ­ p o r t a n t aspect o f the d e v e l o p m e n t o f e t h n i c identity— bicultural socialization (Cross, 1987; R o t h e r a m 8c Phi nn e y, 1987; V a ug h n, 1987). This c o n c e p t has b e e n i mpl ied in m u c h o f the p r e c e d i n g discussion, b u t was c o nc e pt ua l iz ed as minor ity chi ld re n identifying with t he Wh i te majority. T h e m o r e a cc u­ rate way to discuss the socialization o f e t hn i c mi nori t ies is that they acquir e at least two e t h ni c identifications: those o f majority c ul t u r e a n d own- gr oup mi no r i ty cul ture. It is obvious t ha t in o r d e r to be mini mal ly c o m p e t e n t in society, o n e n e e d s to know s o m e o f the majority g r o u p social rules o f that society. Moreover, in N o r th Ame ric an societies, virtually everyone is e x ­ p os ed to majority cul tur e t h r o u g h television, p r i n t e d me di a , a n d schools. Majority c hi l d r e n , on the o t h e r h a n d , have little pr es sur e to ac qu ir e knowl ­ e d ge o f minor it y cultures, a n d often have little e x p o s u r e to minor it y gr ou ps . Even in in te g ra t ed settings, social rules are usually d e t e r m i n e d by the majority cul ture. Thi s analysis is consi st ent with the p re di ct io n that Blacks a n d o t h e r mi nor ity g r o u ps s h o ul d ac qu ir e k no wl ed ge o f Whi te cul­ tural n o r m s p r i o r to W h i t e s ’ a cq u ir i ng knowl e dg e o f minor it y cultural n o r ms . We f o u n d parallel results r e g a r d i n g the oppositc-scx acquisition of kno wle dg e f or boys a n d girls. Two o f t he c o n s e q u e n c e s o f differential socialization o f majority a n d mi ­ nority c hi l d r en is t ha t the f o r m e r readily devel op a clear social identity at a relatively early age, a n d the latter d evelop at least two social identities, which are occasionally in conflict. This is essentially the “divided consci ous­ ness” o f African Amer icans , which W.E.B. DuBois so e lo qu en t ly de sc ri be d in his, The Souls o f Black Folk (1903). T hu s, t h e r e may be c onf us ion a m o n g the mi nori ty g r o u p at early ages t ha t leads to a delayed d e v e l o p m e n t o f a mi no r i ty identity. O u r previous discussion o f the t h r ee stages o f acquisition o f e t hn i c identity s u p p o r t this view as d o t he results o f the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d study. W h a t f u r t h e r c ompli cates t he pi c tur e for minor ity c h i l d r e n, however, is t h a t t he ir own e t h ni c g r o u p is de val ued by the majority cul ture. As n o t e d earlier, w he n race constancy eme rge s, mi no ri t y c hi l d r en m u s t identify with this de va lue d g r o u p. V a u g h n (1987) suggested t ha t t he re arc t h r e e possible o u t c o m e s o f the latter p h e n o m e n o n . C h i l dr e n may a c ce p t thei r g r o u p ’s inf er ior status, they may fight it, or they may e mp h as i z e what is un iqu el y positive in th ei r e thni c g r o up . It is likely that m e m b e r s o f mi no r i ty g r o u ps do all t hree: t he first b e ­ cause o f life-long c o n d i t i o n i n g by the majority cul t ure; a n d the s e c on d a n d th ir d b ecause i n g r o u p valuing a n d o u t g r o u p deval ui ng nearly always oc cur ,

192

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

a n d individuals usually strive for a positive self-image. T h u s, from V a ugh n (1987), o n e m i g h t e x p e c t th at for minor it y ch il dr en a n d adolescents, after race constancy is a cq u ir e d, same-race p r e f e r e n c e s woul d progressively i n ­ crease with i ncreasing age. Thi s is c o u n t e r to t h e previously stated c u l t u r a l / historical pr ed ic ti o n t h a t as ch il dr e n get older, p r cj u d ic c a n d d isc ri mi na ­ tion s h o ul d di mi ni sh m o r e for mi no ri t y g r o u ps t h a n for Whites.

COMPARISONS AMONG THE HISTORIES In chapter 3, we began o u r examination of four selected groups with the sug­ gestion that cultural history is a f u n d a me n ta l necessity in the psychological study o f prejudice and discrimination of U.S. minorities. Prejudice and dis­ crimination, we argued, operates t h r ou g h n o r ms deeply e m b e d d e d in cultural history. Having now e xa mi ne d the groups individually, we turn to a c o m p a r a­ tive view, which will allow inferences to be m a d e a bout the motivations u n d e r ­ lying the norms. It is very unlikely, for example, that economi c considerations were the major d e t e r mina nt s in discriminating against the d ea f an d mentally retarded, b u t they may have been operative in the tr ea tme nt of females an d Af­ rican Americans. Thus, comparisons of histories b r o a de n o u r perspectives on the cultural bases of prejudice an d discrimination. C o m p a r i s o n s a m o n g the fo ur cul tural histories will r e ap a n o t h e r benefit. As is seen, over the time p e r i od st udied, d i scr imi nati on a n d p e r h a p s p r e j u ­ dice has ma rk e dl y d ec r ea s ed toward each o f these t arget gr oups. C o m ­ p a r i n g the f ou r may allow us to m a k e in f e re nc es a b o u t the factors t h a t u n ­ derlie the positive changes. Wre have seen in p r e c e d i n g c ha p te r s t ha t t h e r e are f o u r types o f causes u n d e r l y i n g the d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ej ud i ce a n d di scrimi nati on: g e n e t i c / e v o ­ l utionary, psychological, no r ma ti ve , a n d power-conflict. G e n e t i c / e v o l u ­ tionary inf luences are t he mo st stable, a n d psychological influences, the least. T h e n or ma ti ve a n d power-conflict causes are i m p o r t a n t h e r e b ecause t hey are i n t e r m e d i a t e a n d may c h a n g e over relatively s ho r t historical p e r i­ ods. Moreover, it is in the a r e n a o f these no rm a t i v e a n d power-conflict causes that positive c h a ng e s may o c c ur a n d also t hat i nt er ve n t io n can be ex­ p e c t e d to have a positive infl uence. In o r d e r to o bt ai n an a ccur at e assess­ m e n t of the n o r ma ti ve a n d power-conflict causes o f p re j ud i ce a n d discrimi­ n a t io n, it is thus necessary to carry o u t c ul tur al- his tor ic al analyses. Two c autions, however, are to be n o t e d a b o u t these analyses for the f o u r target gr oups: (a) the age g r o u ps a n d c o n t e n t areas c o n s i de r ed differ a m o n g t h e m , a n d (b) t h e r e is t r e m e n d o u s diversity o f e x p e r i e n c e a m o n g m e m b e r s within these t a rge t gr oups. A n u m b e r o f c o m m o n features e m e r g e d c o n c e r n i n g t he m a i n t e n a n c e of p r ej ud i ce a n d d is c ri mina t ion toward these gr oups. T h e f o u r g r o u ps have always h e l d s u b o r d i n a t e positions in the cul ture. All were initially viewed as

COMP ARI SONS A M O N G T H E HISTORIES

193

i n c o m p l e t e o r inferior, a n d the specific t h e m e s o f p r cj u d ic c a n d discrimi­ na ti on for cach are l ong- s tanding r a t h e r t han recentl y deve lo pe d. T h e d o m i n a n t g r o u p s in the c ul tu re have a t t e m p t e d a n d in m a n y cases c o n ­ t inue to a t t e m p t to c on tr ol the sexuality, e d u c a t i on , a n d job o p po r t u n i t i e s for these target gr oups. T h e s e f o u r g r o u ps were consistently s u b o r d i n a t e , b u t o n e can i magi ne alternative scenarios; g r o u p s starting in a d o m i n a n t position a n d b e c o m i n g s u b o r d i n a t e , for e x a mp l e , c o n q u e r o r s who arc ov er t hr own. T h e r e have also b e e n g r o up s starting in a s u b o r d i n a t e position a n d b e c o m i n g m e m b e r s of the d o m i n a n t g r o u p , as was the case with Irish i mm ig r an t s to the U ni te d States in the late 19th a n d early 20th cent uri es. T h e p r e s e n t t ar get g r o u ps were initially viewed, a n d to s o me e x t e n t still arc, by t he d o m i n a n t cu ltu re (i.e., Whit e males), as b e i n g i n h e r en tl y inferior, p e r h a p s as h a n d i c a p p e d or i n c omp l et e . This p r e s u m e d inferiority was ( a n d to s o me ext ent , still is) u se d as a justification for paternalistic a n d discr imi nat or y t r e at m e nt . T h e d o m i n a n t g r o up s fr eq u e nt ly a p p e a l e d to a n d to s ome e x t e n t still a pp e al to “scientific” evidence to s u p p o r t their beliefs, t hu s giving the a p p e a r a n c e of an objective assessment o f inferiority. C on s i st en t with an e n d u r i n g s u b o r d i ­ na te status, cach history co n t ai ns long- standi ng t h e m e s o f p r ej ud i ce a n d di scr imi na ti on , which ge t mo di f ie d, t r a n s fo r me d , a n d replayed over time. Very few new inferiorities t h a t feed into p r c ju d i c c a n d d is cr imi nat ion e m e r g e over the c ourse o f these histories. An e xc ep t io n to this rule was the transitory linkage b et ween m e n t a l r et a rd a ti on a n d i mmor al it y seen in the early p a r t o f the 20th century. As stated, c o nt r ol by the d o m i n a n t g r o u p has often wor ke d by r egulat ing the sexuality, e d u ca t i o n , e m p l o y m e n t , a n d e c o n o m i c o p p o r t u n i t i e s o f the s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p . R e g a rd i ng sexuality, re gu l a t io n a n d / o r p r ev e nt io n were periodically a t t e m p t e d . Public e d u ca t i o n was typically l imited a n d often p r oh ib i te d . J o b o p p o r t u n i t i e s were c on t ro ll e d t h r o u g h restricting e d ­ ucat ional o p p o r t u n i t i es , a p p re n ti c es h ip s , a n d h ir ing practices. At a c o n ­ scious level, these contr ols were e x e r t e d be ca us e o f the p r e s u m e d inf er ior ­ ity o f the t ar get gro u ps . P e r h ap s at a m o r e u n c o n s c i o u s level, t he cont rols e n s ur e that the status q u o will be m a i n t a i n e d , t h a t the t ar get g r o u p s will stay s u bo r di na te . In the 1960s, all target g r o u ps a n d the d o m i n a n t c u lt u r e started to c o m e to t er ms with the ge ne ra l issue o f pluralism. Does equality in o u r cul tur e m e a n “s a m e n e s s ”? Does “d i f f e r e nt ” imply inferiority or, can t he re be e q u a l ­ ity in difference? Individuals a n d g r o u p s have varying st re ng t hs a n d weak­ nesses. M e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t cul tur e have b e e n slowly a ckn owl ed gi ng the “e qu a l b u t d if f er e nt ” a n d “s tr e ngt hs a n d weaknesses” a r g u m e n t s , which has led to r e n e w e d t h i nk i ng a b o u t pr ej ud i ce a n d discrimi nat i on. T h e r e are no ta bl e differences in the histories. African-American, deaf, a n d mentally r e t a r d e d individuals have b e e n consistently stigmatized by the

194

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

d o m i n a n t cul ture. Whit e f emales have not, a l t h o u g h thei r “li mi tat ions” have b e e n p o i n t e d out. S u b o r d i n a t e grou ps , even as stigmatized groups, have also b e e n r e g a r d e d for positive mor al o r psychological qualities— mor al i n n o c e n c e , e m o t io na l a ut hent ici ty (e.g., “s o u l ”), sexuality, a n d in­ n at e artistic o r musical talent. T o the e x t e n t th at this has led to e mu l a t i o n by the d o m i n a n t g r o u p , it is consi st ent with the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y factor o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness. Mor e so t han the o t h e r t h r e e gr ou ps , g e n u i n e mor al strength a n d leadership o f w o m en have b e en a ck nowl edged t h r o u g h ­ o u t the e nt ir e history. A n o t h e r set o f dif fer ences is r el a t e d to w h e t h e r t h e target g r o u ps h a d the capacity for n o r m a l f u nc t i o n i n g a c c o rd i ng to the n o r m s o f th e d o m i n a n t society. Initially, ex p e ct at io ns for n or ma lc y a pp l ie d to the mental ly r e ­ t a r d ed a n d the deaf. Following the Civil War, a wi ndow o p e n e d for African A mer icans , b u t closed for a b o u t 90 years. After Wo rl d Wa r I, it o p e n e d for w o m e n . Currentl y, owing to the reco gn it i o n o f a m o r e expansive a n d m o r e widely varied view o f normalcy, gr ea t strides have b e e n m a d e in the inclu­ sion o f all b u t mentally r e t a r d e d individuals. E c o n o m i c c o m p e ti ti o n is o n e of the m a j o r motivations s u b o r d i n a t i n g m inor it y gro up s , a n d it has b e en an operative t h e m e for the s u bo r d i n a t i o n o f Blacks a n d females by Whi t e males. Thi s motivation s eems lacking r e ­ g a r d i n g the d e a f a n d mentally r e t a r de d , a l t h o ug h e c o n o m i c c on si de ra t io ns certainly played a role in t h e i r t r e at m e nt . D e a f a n d mentally r e t a r d e d chil­ d r e n were stigmatized b ecause o f t h e i r i m p a i r m e n t s — t hei r deviation from the n o r m . Un f or t un at el y, efforts by s ome p a r e nt s a n d wel l-meani ng ot he rs to m a ke t he m “n o r m a l ” have occasionally s us ta ine d the stigmatization. Re ga r di n g c h a ng e , with the possible e xc e pti on o f limited e d uc at io n a l p rogress for s o me o f the deaf, the histories provi de evi dence t h a t discrimi­ n a ti on ( a n d p e r h a p s pr eju di c e) have ma rk ed ly d e c l i ne d for all the target g roups. O p p o r t u n i t i e s now exist for m e m b e r s o f these g r o u p s that c oul d only be d r e a m e d o f b ef or e W o rl d W a r II. Issues o f equality a n d pluralism are n o t yet s or t e d out, n o r will they be in the n e a r future. T h e r e a p p e a r to be t h r e e i n t e r r e l a t e d factors t h a t t o g e t h e r led to c h a n g cs in d is cr imina tion, a n d p e r h a p s also pr cj udi cc, toward all f o u r su b­ o r d i n at e gr oups. T h e s e are: (a) self-advocacy by m e m b e r s o f th e s u b o r d i ­ n at e g r o u ps (or by thei r family) for c h a ng e ; (b) advocacy for c h a n g e by p owerful a n d / o r substantial n u m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u p (i.e., Whi t e males); a n d (c) c h a n gc s in law c i t h e r t h r o u g h legislation or executive edict. R e g a rd i n g the first factor, self-advocacy, this was clearly seen for Blacks b ot h p r i o r to a n d after the Civil War, for w o m e n , especially after t he Revo­ l utionary War, a n d for the d e a f a n d the ment all y r e t a r d e d , for w ho m family m e m b e r s u r g e d t he development , o f spccial schools. T h e advocacy b r o u g h t p er si st ent p re ss ur e on the d o m i n a n t cu lt ur e to c ha nge . It was effective b e ­ cause m e m b e r s o f the s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s h a d d ev e lo p e d organi zat ional

S UMMARY

195

a n d leadershi p skills t h r o u g h the clubs, special interest groups, a n d c hu r c h es to which they b e l o n g e d a n d participated. T h e r e is p owe r in collaboration, as c ont rast ed with individual action, especially if the cause is just. With the s e c o nd factor, t h e r e have also b e e n powerful a n d / o r s ub st a n ­ tial n u m b e r s o f t he d o m i n a n t g r o u p wh o took u p t he cause o f the s u b o r d i ­ n at e gr oups. T h e y were e n c o u r a g e d by the latter in at least two ways: mor a l p er s uas ion a n d political i nf luence. Fr om colonial days on wa r d, t h e r e were always m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u p s who felt t h a t p re ju d i ce a n d dis­ cri mi na ti on were wr ong. With efforts by s u b o r d i n a t e gr ou ps , this sense of “w r o n g n e s s ” b e c a m e t r a n s f o r m e d i nto f eelings o f obl igat ion to m a k e ch angcs . T h e r e may also have b e e n an a d d e d i n d u c e m e n t in thr eats to p o ­ litical power; wh en s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s started to i nf lue nc e voters or m a r ­ ket pl ace practices, t he motivation to c h a n g e was f u r t h e r s t r e n g t h e n e d . But m a ny motives for action are always in play, a n d they have to be we ig he d b e ­ fore c h a n g e oc cur s— for e x a mp l e, feelings o f obligation versus ant ici pati on o f losing status. D u r i ng certain p e r i o ds — in the 1960s, for e x a m p l e — m a n y from the d o m i n a n t g r o u p disavowed t he status ma r ke r s o f their class in o r ­ d e r to l e n d alliance to various s u b o r d i n a t e groups. Finally, r e g a rd i n g the thi rd factor, c h a n ge s in the law h a d to be m a d e in o r d e r for wi d e sp r ea d decr eas es in d iscr iminat ion to occur. T h e se c ha ng e s were m a d e by power ful m e m b e r s o f t he d o m i n a n t c ul tur e a i de d by, a n d i n­ f lu e nc e d by the advocacy o f m e m b e r s o f s u b o r d i n a t e gro u ps . School segre­ gation based on race was d e c l a re d u n c o ns t i t ut i o na l by n i n e Whit e m e n o f the U n i t e d States S u p r e m e Court . T h e case was a r g u e d by a Black lawyer fr om the NAACP. Passage o f w o m e n ’s suffrage, racial i n te gr a tio n o f the a r m e d forces, public e d u c a t i o n for the d e a f a n d mental ly r e t a r d e d , all c a me a b o u t t h r o u g h c h a n ge s in the law. A n d these c h a n ge s were m a d e by m e m b e r s o f d o m i n a n t gr oups. F re que nt ly the p r e s i d e n t o f the U n i t e d States a ct ed al one, as H ar r y T r u m a n did in racially i n te gr at in g the a r m e d forces. T h e f e de ra l civil rights laws o f the 1960s were an i m p o r t a n t t u r n i n g p o i n t for all f o ur groups. T h e s e g r o u p s now h a d a nt id is c ri mi n a t io n laws on their side a long with h i gh -r an ki ng advocates u p h o l d i n g the laws. Also, they h a d the courts, which a t t e m p t e d to impartially allow advocates to c ha lle nge the ways t ha t the laws were b e i n g en f or ce d. Despite the great progress that has b e e n m a d e , the histories indicate that there is a long way to go to attain the goals o f equality a n d self-determination. But the fact that real progress has o c cu r re d gives h o p e for the future.

SUMMARY We b eg an o u r e x a m i na t io n o f p r cj u d ic c a n d di scr imi nat i on toward African A me r ic a ns with an overview o f its cultural roots. D u r i ng t he first c u l t u r a l / historical p er i od , the slavery of African A me r i c ans c a m e to be d e f i ne d as

196

6.

C UI / r URAL HI ST O RY O F AFRI CAN A M E RICA N S

t he fact th at they were i n h e ri t a b le b o n d s m a n r a t h e r t h a n i n d e n t u r e d ser­ vants. Prior to the Civil Wa r a pp r ox im at e ly 90% o f African A me ri ca ns were slaves living in the S ou th , 5% were “f r e e ” in the N o rt h , a n d 5% were “f r e e” in the S o ut h. But t h r o u g h o u t t he e nt ir e history, f r e e do m for Blacks was never e qui val ent to t ha t o f Whites. For a b o u t 10 years after t he Civil War, d u r i n g R ec on st r uc ti on , an e x t r a o rd i n a r y window o f f r e e d o m o p e n e d for S o u t h e r n Blacks. T h e y o w n ed land, a t t e n d e d school, voted, a n d were el ected to state a n d federal offices. In the e n s u i n g 90 years, Jim Crow laws were e n a ct e d , a n d gains against d i scr imi nati on were mi ni mal . T h e m a j o r ex c ep ti on was Pr e si de n t T r u m a n ’s racial i nt egr at i on o f the a r m e d forces. From the 1960s to the p r e se nt , African A me ri ca ns have m a d e substantial p rogress toward the goals o f equality, f r e e d o m , a n d s el f-det ermi nat ion. Psychological r es e ar ch , especially t h a t c ar r ie d o u t by K e n n e t h a n d Ma mie Clark, h a d a significant i m p a c t on the U.S. S u p r e m e C o u r t decision t h a t racial segregat i on o f schools was u nc on st i t ut io na l. Using for c ed choice m e t h o d s with d if fe re nt c ol or e d dolls, the Clarks f o u n d th at bot h Whi te a n d Black 4- to 7-year-olds reliably ident ifi ed with t he Whi te dolls. Moreover, the c hi l d r en a tt r i bu t ed positive characteristics to Wh i te dolls, a n d negative characteristics, to Black dolls. T h e Clarks c o n c l u d e d that Black b u t n o t WThite ch il dr en were self-rejecting. With the Clarks as a starting po int , we t u r n e d to an e x a m i na t i o n o f the n a t u r e o f e t h n i c identity. Research on the d e v e l o p m e n t o f e t h n i c identity shows that, c o u n t e r to the Cl arks’ assertions, y o u ng Black c h i ld r en may n e g ­ atively evaluate thei r own e t h ni c g r o u p a n d still have a hi gh self-esteem. T h e e xp la n at i o n for this p h e n o m e n o n is that pe rs on a l identity a n d e thni c identity are s o m e w h a t i n d e p e n d e n t d e v e l o p m e n t a l characteristics. Et hnic g r o up s differ from each o t h e r a lo ng several f u n d a m e n t a l p e r c e p t u a l a n d behavioral d ime ns io ns , i n c l ud i ng l a ng u ag e pat terns. We saw t ha t it was on the basis o f these f u n d a m e n t a l dif fer ences t ha t e t hn i c conflict can arise. C h i l d r e n ’s d e v e l o p m e n t o f an e t hn i c identity follows t h r e e stages: (a) awareness o f e t h ni c di fferences at ages 3 to 4 years, (b) a ccur at e e t h n i c awareness at 4 to 6 years, a n d (c) a ccur at e e t h ni c identity at ages 7 to 10 years. T h e last stage involves c h i l d r e n ’s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f racial constancy. As in previous c hapt er s, we have s o u g h t h e r e to a c c o u n t for the cultural a n d historical f o u n d a t i o n for p r ej udi ce a n d di scr iminat ion rel ated to Afri­ can Amer icans. I n d e e d , so centr al has it b e e n to the c our se o f Ame r ic a n c ul t ur e, the African-American e x p e r i e n c e has a c c u m u l a t e d an al most p a r a ­ d igmatic status for race p re ju di ce a n d discr imi nat ion in general. O u r c o m ­ parative e x am i n a t i o n o f f ou r t arget gro up s , however, d e m o n s t r a t e d d ef ini­ tive similarities a n d d i ff er en ces t h a t s uggest the overall ge ne ra li t y of p r ej ud i ce a n d d is cr imina tion. T h e f o u r u nd er l yi ng in fl ue nc es — g e n e t i c / evolutionary, psychological, nor mat ive, a n d power-conflict— o p e r a t e differ­ ently a n d to di f f er en t d e gr e es within cach g r o up . But in cach case, d o m i ­

S UMMARY

197

n a n t g r o u ps in t he c ul t ur e have s o u g h t to c on tr ol the sexuality, e du c at io n , a n d job o p p o r t u n i t i e s for the s u b o r d i n a t e gr oups. Authoritative evidence, s o m e t i me s given the status o f “scientific,” is e m p l o y e d by the d o m i n a n t g r o u p as evidence o f the inferiority o f s u b o r d i n a t e groups. Yet, despite the pervasiveness o f these n o r m s t h r o u g h o u t the cult ure, t he re is for each g r o u p evi dence o f steady progress in t he decl ine o f p r e j u ­ dice a n d di scr iminat ion. O u t s p o k e n a n d influential advocates from the s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p have spo k e n decisively on b e h a l f o f f r e e d o m a n d o p p o r ­ tunity a n d have o r ga n iz e d collective activity to exact pr es sur e to b r i n g a b o u t social c h a ng e . A n d powerful individuals from t he d o m i n a n t society have pr ov i de d m o r al p er suasion a n d political i nf lue nc e to b r i n g a b o u t str uctur al c ha ng e . T h e s e t h r e a d s o f similarity have suggested s o m e Am e r ic a n cultural n o r m s a n d influences c o m m o n to all the gr o u ps . But they have also sug­ gested t he existence of the u n de r ly i ng psychological basis for p re j u d i c e a n d d is cr imin ati on t ha t tr an s ce n ds p a rt i c ul a r ci rcumst ances . In the n e x t c h a p ­ ter, we t ur n to t he psychological d e v e l o p m e n t o f race p r cj udi cc a n d dis­ cri mi na ti on , giving d u e at t e n t io n to t he g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c u l t u r a l / historical c o m p o n e n t s t ha t we believe arc its u nd e rl yi ng influences.

C hapter

7

Race Prejudice an d Discrim ination

This c ha pt cr examines race prejudice a nd discrimination, following the thread of cultural history from c h ap t cr 6 to a consideration her e of gc­ nctic/ evol ut ionary issues. Mindful of the me s c o m m o n to the o t h e r target groups, we look in scqucncc at racc prcjudicc a nd then racc discrimina­ tion. Finally, wc close o u r consideration of the target gr oups with a c o m p a r ­ ative assessment of prejudice a nd discrimination related to cach gr oup. Specifically, this c ha pt cr has three goals. T he first goal is to evaluate sev­ eral hypotheses related to the gcncti c/ evol ut ionary a nd c ultural/historical material previously discusscd. These hypotheses will parallel those p r e ­ sented in the previous c hapt cr for oppositc-sex prejudice. T h e second goal is to s ummari ze as accurately as possible the literatures dealing with the d e ­ v e lo pme nt o f prcjudicc a n d discrimination for race/ ethni ci ty, with an e m ­ phasis on Black a nd White racial groups. As the last in the scries of chapters on the d e ve l o pm en t o f prcjudicc and discrimination in the target groups, this c h ap tc r t hen turns to comparative observations that discern similarities a nd differences a m o n g the groups. Its third goal is thus to integrate the four prejudice a nd discrimination litera­ tures discussed in the p res ent a nd previous chapters in o r d e r to find c o m ­ m o n t hemes in this research. The shift in this c h ap t er from historical to evolutionary concer ns follows the course established in previous chapters, testing hypotheses against c o n­ t empor ar y research. In particular, wc look at two hypotheses, o ne mor e speculative than the ot her, both based on the genet ic/ evoluti onary m a t e­ rial. First, in o u r evolutionary heritage, adolcsccnt females b ut n ot males migrated to o th er gr oups a nd were less involved in i n tcr gr oup hostility than 198

D E VE L OP ME NT O F RACE PREJUDI CE

199

males. This suggests that males may be genetically predisposed to form s tr onger c o mm it me n ts to ingroups, which leads to the prediction that males would develop s tronger degrees o f prejudice a nd discrimination than females. This hypothesis was s u p p o r t e d for opposite-sex prcjudicc, a nd is probably applicable to race prejudice a n d discrimination. Second, based on the g roup identity a n d cognitive d e ve l o p me n t literature, it was predi ct ed that prcjudicc a n d discrimination would eme rge between the ages o f 3 a nd 4 years a nd u n d e rg o age-related shifts at 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a nd 18 to 19 years. As with previous comparisons, badging me ch an is ms that identify racially based behavioral differences should play a role in observed prejudice a nd discrimination. Based on cultural/historical considerations, two predictions arc ma de for the prcjudicc a nd discrimination literature. First, owing to the higher status of Whites than Blacks, Black children should be mo re likely to show White p references t han arc White children to show Black p references. Sec­ o nd , owing to the hi g h e r status o f Whites than o t h e r r acial /ct hni c groups, with increasing age, racc prejudice a n d discrimination s hould diminish m o r e for minority gr oups than for Whites.

D EVELOPMENT OF RACE PREJUDICE Owing to vol umi nous literature, this c ha pt er emphasizes Black and While racial groups. Fortunately, two excellent reviews of most of this research have b ee n re po r t e d by Ab oud (1988) a nd Williams a nd Morland (1976); we frequently rely on their discussions. Most o f the research carried o ut since the 1960s with young children has b ee n strongly influenced by the materials and m e t h od s developed by Wil­ liams and Mor land (1976), which they fully describe in their book. Re­ searchers use variants o f their two forced choice tests: the Color Meani ng Test (CMT) and the PRAM II. In the CMT, children are shown different colored p h ot ogr a ph s of two animals that are identical except for coloring; one is black a nd the o t h e r white. After the e x pe r i m e n t e r reads a short story ab o ut each of these animals, the child is asked to identify the animal d e­ scribed. For example, "Here are two cats. O n e of them is a bad cat and scratches on the furniture. Which is the bad cat?” Half the stories depict positive qualities, a nd half negative qualities. If a child consistently chooses one color for the positive qualities (e.g., black) a nd the o t h e r color for the negative qualities (e.g., white), then the child is assumed to have a color bias (e.g., pro-Black). In the PRAM II, children are shown p h o to g ra p hs of two nearly identical drawings o f h u m a n s — male a n d / o r female, young a n d / o r old— except that one has a pinkish-tan skin color a nd the o t h e r medium-brown. The chil-

200

7.

RACE P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

d r c n arc read br i e f stories a b o u t o n e o f th e p e o pl e a n d asked to m ak e a choice. For e xa mp le , “H e r e arc two little girls. O n e o f t he m is an ugly little girl. People do n o t like to look at h e r . Whi ch is the ugly little girl?” As with the CMT, h a lf t he qualities arc positive, a n d ha lf negative. It is a ss u me d by r e s ea rc her s t ha t c ons is te nt pro-White or pro-Black choices reflect racial bias. With o l d e r ch il dr en , a variety o f a tt i tude m e a s u r e s have b e e n e m ­ ployed. A f r e q u e n t m e a s u r e is the social distance scale. With this scale, p a r ­ ticipants arc asked que st ions like t he following: W o u l d you feel c om f or t a b l e living n e x t d o o r to a Black family? Yes, definitely', Yes, probably; / don't know; No, probably', No, definitely. As wc i nd i ca te d in c h a p t c r 3, t h e r e may be serious m e t ho d o l og i c al diffi­ culties s t e m m i n g fr om t h e use o f f or ce d choi ce m e t h o d s to infer the devel­ o p m e n t o f racc p re judi c e. Consistently c h o o si n g the “w h i te ” over the “bl ac k” p ic tur e certainly indicates a p r e f e r e n c e for white over black, b u t it d oes n o t necessarily indi cate a rejection o f black. For e x a mp l e , I may nearly always p r ef er c hoc ol at e to vanilla ice c re a m, b u t in the a bs e nc e o f c h o c o ­ late, I woul d readily c o n s u m e vanilla. In o r d e r to o ve r co me the f or ce d c hoi ce p r o bl e ms , A b o u d a n d Mitchell (1977) used a c o n t i n u o u s m e a s ur e o f how m u c h 6- a n d 8-year-old Whi te ch il dr e n like thei r own a n d t hr ee o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c gr oups: Asian, Hispanic, a n d Native Indi an. Generally they like their own g r o u p the best, b u t only slightly m o r e t ha n t he ir n e x t p r e f e r r e d g r ou p . T h e least liked g r o u p was r at ed relatively neutrally, as c o n ­ trasted with b e i ng disliked. T h u s , pro-White did n o t m e a n anti-non-White. Un f or tu n a te ly , very few studies o f race p rc j ud i cc ( b u t n o t racc d is cr imina ­ tion) have used c o n t i n u o u s measures. In o u r pr es e nt at i on in c h a p t e r 6 o f the three-stage m o d e l o f et hni c i d e n­ tity, we stated that most chi ldren show accurate r a ci a l /e t hn ic awareness be­ tween 4 a n d 6 years o f age a n d that Whi te c hi l dr en show accurate et hni c identity in this age range. Chil dr en of o t h e r r a ci a l /e t hn ic gr oups do n o t c o n ­ sistently choose pictures o r dolls o f their own et hnic g r o u p until age 7 or older. N o t surprisingly, ethnic pr ef er en ce follows this pattern. T h r e e types of p r o c ed u r e s have b ee n used to assess these preferences. In the first, chi l dren are given depictions o f two or m o r e r a ci a l/ e t hn i c groups, includi ng their own, a n d asked with which c hi l dr en they would most like to play. In the sec­ o nd , they are asked to choose the picture or doll they would most r a t h er be ( ra c ia l /e th ni c sclf-prcfercncc). In the third, with White an d Black children, the PRAM II, CMT, or o t h e r attitude me asur e s were employed. White Ch i l dr e n a n d Adolescents For ease o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g , wre p r e s e n t f indi ngs for Wh i te a n d Black chil­ d r e n separately. Whi te c hi l d r en clearly show Whi te e t h n i c p r e f e r e nc es at 4 years o f age. T h e s tr e ng t h of these p re fe re nce s, in mo st studies, increases to

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE PRE J UDI CE

201

a b o u t 7 or 8 years, a n d th en e i t h e r decl i nes o r levels off b et ween age 8 a n d age 12 (Ab ou d, 1988; Williams Sc Mo rl a nd , 1976). At all ages, however, Whi tes m o s t p r e f er Whites. Moor e, H au ck , a n d D e n n e (1984), using a n o n f o r c e d c hoic e social distance scale, f o u n d n o decli ne in racc p rc j ud i cc for a doles cents b et ween ages 12 a n d 16 years, b u t Williams a n d Mo r l a n d (1976), using the evaluative scale o f the se ma n t ic differential did r e p o r t a decl ine for a d ol escent s b et ween 14 a n d 18 years. Baker a n d Fishbein (1998) f o u n d a dccl inc in p r ej ud ic e for males a n d f emales be twe en the ages o f 8 a n d 1 7 years with a n o n f o r c c d c hoi ce social distance m e a s u r e c o m ­ pa ra bl e to t ha t o f M o o r e ct al. (1984). With a f or c ed choi ce be h a vi or d i s p o ­ sition m e a su r e , they f o u n d n o c h a n g e in t h a t age r a ng e for females, b u t an a p p a r e n t increase in p r ej u d ic e for males. For the latter m e a su r e, chi l d r en a n d a dol es cents in Gr ad e s 3, 6, 7, 9, a n d 11 were p r e s e n t e d with a s he et of p h o t o g r a p h s o f un fa mi l i ar same-age ch i ld re n, f o u r cach o f Whit e males, Whi te females, Black males, a n d Black females. T h e y were asked to select five o f the p h o t o g r a p h s o f individuals w h om they would like to know bet ter. T h e age curve for females was relatively flat. For males, the curve was flat for Grades, 3, 6, a n d 7, b u t far fewer Black a dol es cents were c h o s en by the p a r ­ ticipants in Gr ad es 9 a n d 11. Instead, the Whi te males in these h i g h e r gr ade s selected m o r e Whi te f emal es t ha n th ei r y o u n g e r school mat es. Baker a n d Fishbein (1998) suggested, following the a r g u m e n t o f P. A. Katz ct al. (1975), t h a t social desirability may m e di a t e the age-related d c ­ clinc in p r e j ud i ce w h e n using relatively t r a n s p a r e n t measur es. Also, it is n o t clear w h e t h e r pr ej ud ic e toward Blacks increases or same-racc inter es t i n ­ creases. T hu s, the dat a do n o t allow us to c o n c l u d e w h e t h e r Whit e p r e j u ­ dice toward Blacks increases, decreases, or stays the same d u r i n g the j un io r a n d s en ior high school years. It is possible, o f course, t h a t t he diff er ent c o m p o n e n t s of p r e j u d i c e — beliefs, affect, a n d b e ha v io r di spositions— have dif fe re nt d e ve l o p m e n t a l courses (P. A. Katz Sc Zalk, 1978), b u t t h e r e arc n o t e n o u g h da ta for c onclusi ons to be drawn. In t he b e g i n n i n g o f this c h a p te r , two pr edi ct io ns were m a d e based on gcn c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y c onsi der at i ons: Males would be m o r e p r e j u di c e d than f emal es a n d shifts in p r cj udi cc wTou ld o c c ur at ages 4, 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a n d 18 to 19 years. C o n c e r n i n g sex differences, A b o u d (1988) reviewed the r elevant li terature for p r e a d o l e s c c n t c hi l d r e n a n d c o n c l u d e d t ha t t he re arc n o reliable or consi st ent sex differences. However, f o u r studies with adol es­ cents a n d y ou ng college s tu d en t s r e a c h c d a d if fer ent co ncl us ion. M o o re et al. (1984), with Black a n d Whit e 12- t h r o u g h 16-year-olds f o u n d f emales to be less p r e j u d i c e d than males on nearly all m e a s u r e s o f p re judi c e. T h e r e were n o race-bv-scx o r grade-by-sex statistical int eracti ons. Baker a n d Fish­ bein (1998) f o u n d Whit e females in Gr a de s 3, 6, a n d 7 to be equally or m o r e p r e j u di c e d t han Wrhite mal es on two me as u r e s o f pr ejudi c e, b u t on b o t h me as u re s males in Gr ad es 9 a n d 11 were m o r e p r e j u di c ed t ha n fe­

202

7.

RACE PREJUDI CE AND DI SCRI MI NATI ON

males (no Black students were assessed). Qualls, Cox, a n d Sc he hr (1992) tested u nd e rg r ad u at es from a nearly all-White liberal arts college (mean age o f 19.6 years) on a questi onnai re assessing opposite-scx, homosexual, a nd racial prejudice. They f ou n d that females ha d less racial prejudice than males. Finally, testing only White students, Hoover a nd Fishbcin (1999) fo un d junior a n d senior high school a n d collcgc males to be mo re pr eju­ diced than females on thr ee different measures of prcjudicc, including against African Americans a n d two measures o f sex-role stereotyping. Thus, it may be co n c lu de d that for adolcsccnts, b ut n o t necessarily prcadolescents, White males express m or e racial prcjudicc than White females. This is partially consistent with the gcnct i c/ evol ut ionary hypothesis. It is n o t clear why this p h e n o m e n o n docs n ot hold for younger children. O n e possibility is that the latter have less of a c o m m i t m e n t to gr oup no r ms and identity than do adolcsccnts. Black Children and Adolescents We now turn to research c on c er n in g the de ve lo pme nt of racial prejudice in Black children. Ab oud (1988), Williams a nd Mor land (1976) a nd I have re­ viewed a large n u m b e r of studies dealing with this issue; most of the studies employed the PRAM or some variant of it. T h e principal findings are as fol­ lows. Black 4-year-olds generally equally prefer Blacks a n d Whites o r show a greater pr ef er ence for White dolls or pictures. Th e ir pro-White bias usually increases between 4 a nd 6 years of age. Between the ages o f 7 a n d 10 years, in most studies, Black children develop a positive Black preference. Those children who had previously been pro-White, b e c ome racially neutral in their choices, a nd those who were neutral, b ec ome pro-Black. T h e r e is some evidence, however, from Semaj ’s (1980) study that d u r ing the age range of 8 to 10 years, pro-Black attitudes decline somewhat. Thus, proBlack attitudes form a curvilinear relationship with age. Importantly, in studies where researchers have i ndep en de nt ly assessed attitudes toward White a nd Black children, as Black children b e co me m or e pro-Black, their attitudes toward Whites b ec ome neutral, as op po se d to negative. Wh en taken in conj uncti on with the White prejudice literature, the c om b i n e d pattern supports the cultural/historical prediction that Black children are mor e likely to show White preferences than the reverse. As with While racial altitudes, the data for Black adolescents are not nearly as extensive as for preadolescents. Moore et al. (1984) re po r te d no age changes in Black racial attitudes between the ages of 12 a nd 16 years. Williams a nd Morland (1976) re po rt ed that Black attitudes toward Whites b ecame progressively mo r e negative between 14 a nd 18 years. Patchen (1982) did n ot r ep o r t age effects for his senior high school students (pre­ sumably, there were n o n e ) , but slated that only ab ou t 11% of these stu-

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE D I SC R I MI NAT I O N

203

de nt s h el d negative a tt it ude toward Whites. For s o me at ti tude categories, for e x a mp l e , willing to help Blacks, Jun to be with, Blacks were m u c h p r e f e r r e d to Whites. But for mo st categories, for e x a mp l e , starts fights, are mean, expect special privileges, Black st ud e n t s pe rc ei ve d bo t h racial g r o u p s equivalently. Given the small n u m b e r o f studies as well as i nconsi stent results, n o c o n c l u ­ sions can be d r awn r e g a rd i ng Black a d o l e sc e nt racial attitudes. Before t u r n i n g to the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y hypot heses, o n e i m p o r t a n t study is des cr ib ed , t h a t by Bagley a n d Young (1988). T h e a u t h o r s gave the PRAM II a n d CMT to p r e s c ho o l e r s in Britain, Ja ma ic a, C a n ad a , a n d G ha na . T h e y f o u n d t h a t 4- to 7-year-old Black chi ld re n o f G h a n i a n p a r e nt s living in En g l a nd , C a n ad a , a n d G h a n a generally h a d positive Black a n d negative Whi te biases on b o th tests. This implies t ha t the positive Whi te biases just r e p o r t e d for o t h e r Black ch i ld re n is l inked to their b e i n g raised by Black p a r en t s who themselves were raised in Whi te d o m i n a n t cultures. T h u s , it is n o t inevitable t h a t Black pr e sc h oo l e r s in N o r t h Ame ri ca will initially d e ­ velop positive Whit e, negative Black biases. O u r hyp ot he se s r e g a r d i n g a g e - a n d sex-related effects revealed m i xe d re­ sults. For sex dif fer ences in p re j ud ic e a m o n g Black ch il dr en , the da ta arc i nc on si st en t with y o u n g e r ch il dr en a n d too sparse with adol es c en ts to m a ke an assessment. Re g ar d in g age-related c h a n gc s in p re ju di ce , the li terat ure only s u p p or t s t he first two p r c d i c t c d age shifts (at ages 4 a n d 7 years). No c ons ist ent c ha ng es are f o u n d for any o f the o t h e r age periods. At age 4, ch il dr en devel op a positive Wrhite racial bias. At age 7 m a r k e d c h a n ge s oc­ cur for b o t h Black a n d Whit e c hi ld r en , which arc c o rr e la t ed with the devel­ o p m e n t o f race constancy. A b o u d (1988) indi c at ed t h a t b et ween the ages o f 8 a n d 12, c hi l d r en o f b ot h races shift in thei r e t hn ic j u d g m e n t s toward i n ­ dividualization a n d away from g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p . T h e se shifts are c o r r e ­ lated with d e c r e as ed pr ej udi ce. However, the decl ine in pr ej ud ic e starts at a b o u t ages 7 to 8 years, a n d h e n c e d oc s n o t fit into the 10- to 12-year-old age per iod. T h e s e dat a also b e a r on the c u l t ur a l/ h is t o r ic a l pr ed ic ti o n t h a t with in­ creasing age, race p re j ud i c e s h ou l d d imi ni sh m o r e for Blacks th an for Whites. WTh c n e x a m i n e d a l on g with the findings for Wrhite c hi ld r en , the pr ed ic ti on was n o t s u p p o r t e d . Both Black a n d Whi te ch i ld re n showe d a d e ­ cline in race p re j ud i c e b etween 8 a n d 12 years, a n d the results were i n c o n ­ sistent d u r i n g adol cscencc.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE D I S C R I M I N A T I O N Basically t he re are t hr ee kinds o f r es ear ch de al in g with racial d is cr imi na ­ tion, o n e based o n observations of behavioral interactions, a s e c on d o n selfr ep or t s o f behavioral i nteractions, a nd a third based on soci ometr ic ratings.

204

7.

RACE P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

T h e soci omctr ic p r o c e d u r e s arc o f two types ( Singleton Sc Asher, 1977). In the first or “best f r ie nd s” type, ch i ld r en a n d adol escents are given the n a m e s o f all t he ir classmates a n d asked to identify th ei r best fr iends or those with w ho m they m o s t p r e f er playing. In the s c c o n d — r oster a n d rat­ i ng— c hi ld r en a n d a dolcs ccnts arc given the n a m e s o f all t h e i r classmates a n d asked to rate on a 5- or 7-point scale how m u c h they like to play with or to work with each o f t h e m . T h e s e two p r o c e d u r e s often lead to very differ­ e n t concl usi ons a b o u t racial di scr iminat ion. In the behavi oral research, the ch il dr en a n d a dol es cent s arc obser ved in t he classroom, school p la y gr o u n d a n d cafeteria. T h e r c s c a r c h c r no t es with w h om they are interacting. In the self-report research, the ch il dr en a n d a dol es cent s arc asked to indi cat e how fr equent ly they i n t er ac t with or talk to m e m b e r s o f di f fe re nt races a n d / o r oppos ite sexes. Self-reports are m o r e similar to behavioral observations than to sociometrics, a n d h e n c e arc g r o u p e d with the f or me r. We first d e ­ scribe the observational resear ch, restricting o u r discussion to r es ear ch car­ ried o u t in the U n i t ed States.

Behavioral O bs er va ti on s T h e earliest t hr ee studies c o n c e r n e d with pr es c h o o l c hi ld r en observed d u r ­ ing free play f o u n d n o systematic r el at ions hip be twe en play p a r t n e r p r e f e r ­ ences a n d race (H. W. Stevenson Sc N. G. Stevenson, 1960, for 2 Vfc-year-olds; M. E. G o o d m a n , 1952, for 4-year-olds; a n d Porter, 1971, for 5-year-olds). However, the s ampl e sizes in these studies were small, a n d g e n d e r p r e f er ­ ences were n o t cont ro ll ed . Fishbein a n d Imai (1993) c or r e c t e d this p r o b ­ lem a n d m e a s u r e d dyadic playmate p r e f e r e nc es a n d be ha vi or p a t t e rn s of play activities, social involvement, verbalization, a n d negative acts for all 90 c h i l dr e n e n r ol l e d in an u r b a n pre sc hoo l. T h e b eh a v i or p at t e r ns were simi­ lar for boys a n d girls a n d for Black, White, a n d Asian racial gr oups. Overall, all g r o u p s o f ch i ld re n p r e f e r r e d playing dyadically with same-sex class­ mates. Girls showe d a relative p r e f e r e n c e (to c h a n c e e xpe ct at ions ) for play­ ing dyadically with same-race, same-sex classmates, a n d a g r e a t e r relative avoi dance for Whi te boys t ha n e i t h e r Black o r Asian boys. Boys, on the o t h e r h a n d , sho we d a relative p r e f e r e n c e for dyadically playing with Whiter a c e / s a m e-sex classmates, a n d least relative avoidance for sam e-race girls. T h e s e results obviously are inco ns i st en t with impl i cat ions from the racial at­ titudes l it erature in that playing with Whi te c hi ld r en woul d be the p r e ­ f er r ed choice for b o t h boys a n d girls. T h e Fishbein a n d Imai (1993) results for Black a n d Whit e playmate p r e f e r e nc es were r epl ic at ed in an i n d e p e n d ­ e nt study c ar r ie d o u t by Fishbein, Stegelin, a n d Davis (1993). T h e r e were n o t e n o u g h Asian c hi ld r en in their study to carry o u t the rel evant playmate analyses. Fishbein a n d Imai (1993) off er ed an e xp la n at i o n for these f in d ­ ings, which we c on si de r shortly.

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE D I SC R I MI NAT I O N

205

Finkelstein a n d Ilaskins (1983) obser ved Whi t e a n d Black k i nd e r g a r t e n ch il dr en d u r i n g b o th classroom inst ruct ion a n d p l a y g ro u n d recess pe ri od s in b o t h the fall a n d s pr ing a ca d em i c q u a r te r s o f a single school year. T h e a u t h o r s e x a m i n e d f o u r categories o f int er ac ti on s— group play, talk, negative, a n d command— a n d assessed w h e t h e r observed a n d c h a n c e ex pe ct at i o ns were significantly different. C o m p a r a b l e me as u r e s were m a d e for dyadic in­ teractions. D u r i ng t he fall q ua r te r , bo th racial g r o u ps p r e f e r r e d sam e-race to ot hcr-race contacts (sex differences were n o t analyzed). T h e se sam e-race p r ef e re n ce s were gr e at e r on the p l a y g ro u n d t ha n in the classroom. In the latter situation, t eacher s have a s t r on g in fl u e n c e in d ir ec ting interactions. D ur i ng the spring q u a rt e r , sam e-race classmate p r e f e r e nc es inc re as e d in st r eng th, suggesting t ha t c h i l d r e n ’s interracial e x pe r ie n ce s s t r e n g t h e n e d thei r s egregati on te nd en cie s. T h e a u t h o r s p r o p o s e d , based on t h e ir o b s er ­ vations, t ha t race-based differences in b eh a v i o r p r edi sposit ions u n d e rl ie the incr eased segregat ion. For e x a mp l e, Black a n d Whi te ch il dr e n differed in how m u c h they used talk, negative behavi or, a n d c o m m a n d s in thei r i n­ teractions. This e x pl an at io n is consi st ent with bo t h t he a r g u m e n t o f R o t h ­ cr am a n d P h i nn e y (1987) c o n c e r n i n g the effects o f di ff er ent e t hn ic social­ ization on behavioral pr edi sposi ti ons a n d i n t e r e t h n i c conflict, a n d the role of b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s in discri minat ion. T h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d pat ter n o f results is different from those of Fishbein a n d Imai (1993), in that bot h Black a n d White children h e r e p re f er r ed samcracc playmates. Unfortunately, Finkclstcin a n d Haskins (1983) did n o t sepa­ rately e xa mi n e the four racc-by-scx c o mb in at io ns used by Fishbein a n d Imai. However, in the age r ange studied, boys overwhelmingly p re fe rr ed playing with boys, a n d girls with girls— probably leading to same-race/same-sex pref­ erences. Regarding the “fit” o f these results with the prejudice literature, at ages 6 to 7, Black children are shifting to a positive Black bias. Although no attitude measur es were taken, it is likely t hat the sam e-race behavioral pr ef er ­ ences were consistent with changes in racial attitudes. A n o t h e r study to observe classmate p r e f e r e n c e s on the basis o f race was car ri ed o u t by Si ngleton a n d Asher (1977) with third-grade ch il dr en . T h e observations were m a d e in classroom settings as c o n t r a s te d with the play­ g r o u n d . T h e a u t h o r s assessed w h e t h e r t h e r e were race o r sex di fferences in the f re qu e nc y o f c hi ld r en b e i ng a lone, i nt e ra ct in g with t he t ea ch e r, or in­ t eracting with peers. T h e r e were n o significant effects. T h e a u t h o r s also as­ sessed w h e t h e r t h e re were race or sex di fferences in the p e r c e n t a g e of p e e r int er ac ti ons t h a t were positive. With t he mai n e xc ep t io n o f Black males hav­ ing relatively fewer positive i nt er ac ti ons with Black peers, t he re were n o a p ­ pr eciable race or sex effects on this me a su r e. Also, t h e re were very s trong samc-scx p r e f er e nc es , consi stent with the two studies j u s t covered. How­ ever, inco ns is te nt with b ot h studies, in the p r e s e n t re se a rc h, females p r e ­ f er r ed i n te ra cti ng with sam e-race peers, wh e re as males showed n o racial

206

7.

RACE P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

pr ef e re nc es . U nf or t un a t e l y, the a u t h or s d i d n o t e x a m i n e p r e f e r e n c e s on the basis o f the f o u r race-by-scx c o mb i na t i o ns , b u t it can be a s s u m e d that for t he girls, p r e f e r r e d i nt er acti ons were with samc-racc a n d same-sex peers. In t he Schofield a n d Sagar (1977) study, seventh a n d e ight h g r ad er s in a newly a n d voluntarily racially in t e g ra t ed school were obser ved over the c ourse o f 1 year. T h e focus was on seating a r r a n g e m e n t s in the s chool cafe­ teria. S t u d e n t s ’ choices were analyzed by sex a n d race; specifically, relative to c h a n c e e x pe ct at i o n s what were the sex a n d race o f s c h oo lm a t es sitting n e x t to a n d directly across from each st ud e nt ? Data analyses did n o t c o n ­ sider the f o u r race-by-sex c o mb in at i o ns . However, t he results were very clear. Seating segr egati on by sex was s t r o n g e r than by race for b o t h seventh a n d e ighth graders. And, in bot h gr ade s a dol es cents significantly p r e f e r r e d sitting n e x t to m e m b e r s o f the s ame race, with females showing a s tr o ng e r effect t ha n males. T h e racc effects were i nf l ue nc e d, however, by s t u d e n t s ’ a ca de mi c e xp er ie nc es . T h a t is, in seventh gr a de , w h e re n o a ca d e mi c track­ ing existed, cross-racial seating choi ces i nc re as ed over the a ca d em i c year. In eight h gr ade , w he re a ca d em i c t racki ng did exist, a n d which led to i n ­ cr eased classroom segr egat ion, sam e-race seating segr egat ion incr eased over the a c ad e mi c year. Schofield a n d Francis (1982) st ud i ed classroom p e e r inte ra cti ons in the racially m i x e d ac ce ler at ed ei ghth g r a de classes from the s ame s chool inves­ tigated by Schofield a n d Sagar (1977). T h e majority o f these st ud en t s h a d b e en e n r ol l e d for 2 years, b u t s ome h a d newly t r an sf er r ed t he year o f the study. T h e racc a n d sex of peer s involved in the in te ra c ti on ( the f o u r cat e­ gories used by Fishbein 8c Imai, 1993), t he t o n e o f t he inte ra ct ions (posi­ tive, negative, o r n eu t r a l) , a n d the o r ie nt at i on o f the i nt er a ct io n s (taskrel at ed or social) were c od ed . T h e st ud e n t s over whelmi ngly in t er a ct e d with same-sex peers. T h e females sho we d a s tr ong p r e f e r e n c e for i nt er act ing with sam e-race peers, wh e re as the males sho we d no such race pr ef er e nce s. T h e r e were no racc o r sex dif f er ences in t one, with all b u t 1% o f int e r ac ­ tions b ei ng positive o r neutral . T h e r e were n o sex differences in o r i e n t a ­ tion; however, same-racc i nt e ra ct ions t e n d e d to be social in n a t u r e , a n d cross-race o n e s t e n d e d to be task-oriented. T h e p at t e rn o f results from samc-racc p r e f e r e n c e s by femal es b u t n o t mal es is consi st ent with the class­ r o om results o f Si ngleton a n d As her (1977). Before a t t e m p t i n g to pull all these findings to g et h e r , o n e a dd it iona l ex­ p e r i m e n t is p r e s e n t e d , t ha t by Da mi c o a n d Sparks (1986). T h e se a u t h or s asked sevent h- gr ade s tu d e n ts in two structurally d if f er en t schools to i n d i­ cate “how f r eque nt ly they talked to every o t h e r s t u d e n t ” in th ei r grade. T h e i r f ou r choices r a n g e d from a lot to never. This quest ion was n o t r e ­ stricted to in-class int eract ions. O n e o f the schools ( no tracking) o rg a ni ze d s tu d en t s in teams. Classes were h e t e r o g e n e o u s in ability, a n d substantial i n­

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE D I SC R I MI NAT I O N

207

class p e e r i nt er a ct io n s were e n c o u r a g e d t h r o u g h c oo per at ive l e a r ni n g activities. T h e o t h e r school (tracking) ability tr acked s tu d en t s a n d used t e a c h e r lect ur e a n d s t u d e n t recitation i nstr ucti onal me t h o d s . T hu s, limited in-class p e e r i nt er ac ti on s o c c u rr e d. T h e da ta were or ga n iz e d a lo ng t he lines o f the f o u r r ac e -s e x categories previously d escr ibed. A c ons is te nt pict ur e e m e r g e d across bo t h types o f schools. St ud e nt s o f bo th races m os t p r e ­ f er r ed talking with samc-racc, same-sex peers. Whit e s tu d e n t s n e x t p r e ­ f er r ed talking with cross-race, same-sex peers, b u t Black s tu d en t s t e n d e d to have thei r s e c o n d p r e f e r e n c e for opposite-sex, same-racc peers. All four r a c e / s e x g r o u ps least p r e f e r r e d i nt e ra ct in g with opposite-sex, cross-race peers. Overall, t he re was less cross-racial i n te ra ct io n in the tracking t ha n no-t racking school. T h e princi pal race-related results o f these six studies can be s u m m a r i z e d as follows. In free-play o r o t h e r n o n c l as s ro o m settings, fr om k i n d e rg a rt e n t h r o u g h G r a d e 8, males a n d f emal es pr e fe r i nt er acti ng with samc-racc, same-sex peers. In p re sc ho ol , this is t rue for females, b u t males p r e fe r i nt er ­ act ing with Whi te males. In classroom settings, in k i nd e r g a r t e n t h r o u g h G r ad e 8, femal es p r e f er i nt er ac ti n g with samc-racc peers, a n d males show little o r n o racial p r e f e r e n c e . T h u s, t h e re arc two issues to be resolved: (a) the shift for Black males in free play settings fr om p r esc ho ol to k i n d e r g a r ­ ten, a n d (b) the discr epancy b etween classroom a n d n o nc la ss r oo m settings. O n e plausible i n t e r p r et a t i o n for t he first issue follows that p r o p o s e d by Fishbein a n d Imai (1993). Briefly t h e re is substantial e x p e r i m e n t a l evi­ d e n c e th at c h i l d r e n ’s playmate choices are i n f l u e n c ed by two factors: racial status a n d physical attractiveness. Status can be rou gh l y a p p r o x i m a t e d by scores on tests o f racial bias, such as the PRAM II. For p r esc ho ol age chil­ d r e n , Whi tes have h i g h e r status. For o l d e r c h i ld r en , samc-racc ch i ld re n have h i g h e r status. It is a s s u m e d t hat males a n d femal es evaluate same-racc peer s as m o r e attractive t han o t h e r race peers. T h e r es ear ch li terature shows t h a t physical attractiveness is m o r e i m p o r t a n t for females than males as a d e t e r m i n a n t o f fr ie nd sh ip choice, b u t is a factor for males, also (Krantz, 1987; G. J. Smi th, 1985; V a u gh n 8c Langlois, 1983). In p r es c hool , physical attractiveness outwei ghs racial status for Black females, b u t for Black males the oppos it e occurs. T h e r e is no conflict be t we en the two factors for Whit e c hil dr en. In k i n d e r g a r t e n , racial status has shifted for Black ch il dr en in a positive Black d ir ec tion, a n d h c n c e they show a samc-racc bias, a n d pr e fe r i nt e ra ct in g with Black peers. O n e plausible ex p la n at io n for the c l a s s r o o m / n o n c l a s s r o o m discrepancy also hypothesizes the o p e ra t i o n o f two factors: sex differences in f r ie nd s hi p b o n d s a n d t he c on st ra in ts o f cl assroom settings. Schof iel d a n d Sagar (1977) a n d Schofield a n d Francis (1982) a r g u e d t ha t males cast a wider so­ cial n e t t ha n females, owing to thei r int erest in l argc-group activities as well as c o m p e t it i o n a n d d o m i n a n c e striving. Females p r e f er i nt er act ing with

208

7.

RACE PREJUDI CE AND DI SCRI MI NATI ON

small g r oups of closc friends. Both males a n d females pr e fe r same-race friendships, b ut females are m o r e closely b o n d e d to their friends than are males. In classroom settings, the primary social constraint oper at ing is to fo­ cus on academic tasks a nd secondarily, on maintai ni ng friendships. Owing to their str onger b o n d i n g to closc friends, females, b u t n o t males, me rg e the primary a nd secondary social constraints a n d interact most with samcracc females. In the abscncc of an acadcmic task constraint, males also p r e ­ fer interacting with samc-racc, same-sex peers.

Self-Reports The material discussed in this section deals with self-observations by high school students of interracial interactions (Patchen, 1982). P a t c h e n ’s study was remarkable in scope in that it included interviews a n d / o r question­ naires with over 5,000 students, 1,800 teachers, a nd administrators from all 12 public high schools in Indianapolis, Indiana. Unfortunately, Patchen did n o t r ep o r t his results by grade, bu t the sh ee r n u mb e rs of participants minimized that concern. Patchen asked students a n u m b e r of questions ab o ut t hree categories of behaviors c o n ce r ne d with same versus o t h e r race interactions: interracial avoidance, friendly contacts, a nd unfriendly interactions. For interracial avoidance, the majority o f Black and White students re­ p or te d avoiding silting n e a r an olher-race s tu de nt at least once d ur i n g the cu rr en t semester. About half re po rt ed avoiding talking with other-race stu­ dents, a nd substantial minorities re po rt ed avoiding standing or walking n ea r other-race students. Strong majorities of White and Black students were u n inf lue nc ed by race in matters such as att endi ng school events, j o i n ­ ing activities, or going to parties. T h e r e were essentially no race differences for the interracial avoidance category. Friendly cross-racial contacts were f r eq ue nt within the school setting, but mu c h less fr eq ue nt off campus. Interracial dating and visiting the h o m e of cross-racial peers were very infrequent. Ab ou t half the students re po r te d never doi ng things with cross-racial peers outside of school. However, the overwhelming majority re por te d greeting, having friendly talks, a nd walk­ ing with cross-racial peers in school. T he majority r e po rt ed doi ng school work with cross-racial peers. Th e re were essentially no racial differences for this category. For unfriendly interracial interactions, there were substantial differences between the reports of Black a nd White students, consistent with a badging mechanisms hypothesis of perceived behavioral differences. White students were mor e likely than Blacks to repor t being talked to in an unfriendly way, to being called bad names, to being purposely blocked from passing, and to being t hr ea te ne d with bodily harm. Th e re were mu ch smaller disparities in

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE D I SC R I MI NAT I O N

209

r ep or t s o f interracial a r g u m e n t s , pu sh i ng , a n d fighting. T h e s e a p p r o x i ­ m a t e d the f re q ue n cy for samc-racc report s. Thus , Wh it e st ud en ts perceived themselves as b e i n g m o r e t h r e a t e n e d by Black s t u d e n t s t ha n t he converse, b u t hostile physical c o n t a c t be t we en the two g r o u p s was equivalent. P a t c h en (1982) r e p o r t e d race-by-sex c or re la ti ons for these t h r ee c a t e go ­ ries. In ge ne ra l, Black males a n d Black females r e s p o n d e d similarly, with o n e small e x c e p t i o n — femal es r e p o r t e d fewer un fr i en dl y cont acts t ha n males. For Wh it e student s, t he re were m o r e c onsist ent sex differences. Fe­ males r e p o r t e d less avoidance, fewer u n f r i e n dl y contacts, a n d m o r e positive racial attitudes t h a n d id males. In all these cases, the c or r el at ions were rela­ tively small. T h e se f indi ngs are consi st ent with the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y pr ed ic ti on o f less female th an mal e pr ejudi c e a n d discri mi nati on. T h e P a t c he n (1982) findings sho we d a fair a m o u n t o f interracial wari­ ness a m o n g these high school adolescents, especially o f the Wh i te students. However, f riendly acts f r eq ue nt l y o c c u r r e d , primarily in the s chool setting. Impor tant ly, w he n st ud e nt s were asked “W h a t ki nd o f e x p e r i en c es you have usually h a d with ot her-race p e o pl e at this high school?,” t he answers were equi val ent for bo th racial gr oups: 13% said not loo friendly or unfriendly, 55% said fairly friendly, a n d 32% said very friendly. T h e i nterracial wariness a n d friendliness i n di c at e d co n si de r ab le a mbi va le nc e in these relationships. Soc iome tr ic E x p er i m e n t s We now t u r n to t he soci omet r ic e x p e ri m e n t s. J a r r e t t a n d Qu ay (1984) used b o th roster-and-rating a n d best-friends t e c h n i q u e s in assessing k i n d e r g a r ­ ten a n d first-grade playmate p r e f e r en ce s in two l ong- st andi ng i nt eg ra te d schools. Co ns is te nt with the research just cited, sex was a m o r e powerful factor t ha n race with bo th t e c h n i qu e s in d e t e r m i n i n g p e e r p r ef e re n c es for all g r o u p s o f ch il dr en . T h e two sociometr ic t e c h n i q u e s led to very diff er ent results r e g a r d i n g racial p re fe re nce s. With the rost er-and-rat ing m e t h o d , b o t h Black a n d Whi te k i n d e r g a r t e n a n d first-grade c h i l d re n h a d a s t r o n g e r positive p r e f e r e n c e for Whi te th an Black peer s ( no analyses were carried o ut on t he f our sex-by-race categories), a n d a s t r o n g e r rejection o f Black peers. With the best-friends t e c h n i q u e , however, k i n d e r g a r t n e r s sh owe d no racial pr ef e re nc es , b u t first-graders s ho w e d sam e-race pr ef er ence s. Ja rr et t a n d Q ua y (1984) also p e r f o r m e d c or re la ti on al analyses be twe en the two t e c h n i q u e s a n d f o u n d c h i l d r e n ’s scores to be u n r el a t e d. T h e a u t h o r s sug­ gested t ha t t he h i g h e r status o f Wrhite ch il dr e n may u n d e r l i e the results with the roster-and-rating t echniques. Si ngl et on a n d As he r (1977) used a roster-and-rating scale to assess two kinds o f p r e f e r en ce s a m o n g thi rd-grade c hi ldr en: how m u c h they liked to play with each o f th ei r classmates, a n d how m u c h they liked to work with t h e m. T h e data were analyzed for the f o u r race-by-sex categories j u s t d e ­ scribed. T h e results were very similar for the work-and-play categories.

210

7.

RACE P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

C h il d re n o f b o t h races strongly p r e f e r r e d same-sex to opposite-scx peers. T h e y showed a mild t e n d e n c y to p r e f er samc-racc peers. T h e p e r c e n t a g e o f variation in p r e f e r en ce s a c c o u n t e d for by sex o f p e e r was a b o u t 40%, b u t for race o f p e e r it was only 1%. This p a t t e r n o f results for race is diff er ent than t h a t o f J a r r e t t a n d Q u a y (1984) a n d dif fe re nt t ha n Si ngleton a n d A s h e r ’s (1977) own results using observational m e t h o d s. Si ngl et on a n d Asher (1979) asked the s ame q ue s ti ons o f the s ame chil­ d r e n 3 years later, w h e n they were in sixth grade. T h e y tested an addit i onal g r o u p o f third-grade ch i ld re n to assess c o h o r t effects. C o n c e r n i n g t he latter c h il dr e n, their r e sp on se p a t t e r ns were virtually identical to those tested by Singleton a n d As he r (1977). T h e p at te rn o f results for the sixth gr a de r s was very similar to w h e n they were in thi rd gr a de . T h e two small exc ep ti on s were that Black chi ld re n showe d a g r e a te r positive Black racc bias in G r a de 6 t h a n in G r a de 3, a n d all g r o up s o f c hi ld r en sho we d small decl ines in same-sex p r e f e r e nc es b et ween G r a d e 3 a n d G r a de 6. Nevertheless, p e e r p r e f e r en ce s bas ed on sex were far s t r o ng e r than those b ased on race. Carter, Dc Ti ne , Spe ro, a n d Benson (1975) used a r oster-and-rating m e t h o d with seventh a n d eighth gr a de r s to assess ho w m u c h they perceived classmates as fulfilling their n e e d s for a ca d em ic a cc c pt an c e ( a c h i e ve m en t r e c og n i ti on ) a n d social a c ce pt an c e. T h e r e were essentially n o differences in the r es p o n se p at t e r ns of a dol escent s in G r a d e 7 a n d G r a de 8. Using an al ­ yses o f variance, t h e r e were n o racc p r e f e r e nc es by e i t he r Black males or Black females for a ca d em ic a c cc pt an c c . However, bo th g r o u p s p r e f e r r e d Black to Whit e peer s for social a c ce pt an ce . Both Whit e males a n d females, conversely, p r e f e r r e d Whi te peer s for bo t h types o f ac cc pt an ce . Using m u l ­ tiple regression analyses, a hi gh g r ad e p o i n t average (GPA) was the s t r on g­ est p r e d i c t o r for all f o u r r a c e / s e x g r o u p s for a ca d emi c a c cc pt an ce . It is us e ­ ful to thi nk o f GPA as a b a d ge o f p er s o na l identification th at is c or r el at ed with race; sex b e i n g the n e x t s tr onge st p r e d i c t o r for all b u t t he Black males; race h a d essentially n o predictive value. For social a c ce pt an ce , Black a n d Whi te femal es m o s t strongly p r e f e r r e d same-sex peers. A high GPA was an i m p o r t a n t , b u t se co nd a ry f actor for b o t h . Black mal es mo st strongly p r e ­ f er re d samc-racc peers, with a high GPA b e i ng the n e x t m os t i m p o r t a n t fac­ tor. Whi te mal es m o s t strongly p r e f e r r e d p ee r s with a high GPA a n d sec­ ondarily, same-sex peers. T h u s, with t he e xc ep t io n o f Black males, a n d only in the realm o f social a c ce pt an ce , same-sex p r e f e r e nc es were s t r o n g e r t ha n race p r e fe r en ce s , which is consi stent with the Si nglet on a n d As her (1977, 1979) studies. T h e new findings in this study arc the i m p o r t a n c e o f GPA to s t u d e n t s ’ a ca d emi c a n d social p r ef er en ce s , a n d the relatively u n i q u e pa t­ tern for Black males. T h e relative i m p o r t a n c e o f GPA in p re d ic t in g social a c c c p t an c c u n d e r ­ scores the behavioral, a n d h e n c e bad g i ng , u n d e r p i n n i n g o f race p r e f e r ­ ence. GPA— i n t e n d e d as a socially b e n i g n pe da gogic al tool— is in fact a stat­

D E V E L O P M E N T O F RACE D I SC R I MI NAT I O N

211

us m a r k e r t ha t p e r m e a t e s m u c h o f t he or ga n iz e d activity o f schools. In c o n ­ trast, n o n t r a c k i n g schools arc d e s i g ne d explicitly to avoid the conflation of a c h i e v e m e n t a n d status, a n d s tu de nt s achieve social status by successfully a d a p t i n g t he ir traditional behavioral d i m e n s i o n s to in te g r a te d cooperat ive activities. Co ns eq ue nt l y , wc have seen t hat cross-racial int eracti on in such settings is less inhibit ed. P a t c h en (1982) r e p o r t e d a best-friends soci omct r ic task in his study of s en i or high school students. T o the ques tion c o n c e r n i n g the n u m b e r of other - racc p e r son s a m o n g s t u d e n t s ’ five best friends, a p pr o x i ma t el y 80% o f b ot h Black a n d Whi te s tu d e n ts r e p o r t e d none. A pp ro xi ma t e l y 11% r e ­ p o r t e d one. T hu s, closc interracial f riends hi ps were very i n f r eq u en t . T o the questi on c o n c e r n i n g the racial c om p o s it i o n o f the i nf or mal g r o u p t h a t stu­ de nt s “h a n g a r o u n d with,” a pp r ox im at e ly 72% o f Black a n d Whi te s tudent s said that thei r g r o u p is all the same race. T h u s, s tr ong racial p r e f e r e nc es do n o t c ompl et el y p r e v e n t s ec on da ry f ri e n d sh ip s fr om occur ri ng. T h e final two e x p e r i m e n t s discussed are those by S h r u m a n d C h e ek (1987) a n d S h r u m ct al. (1988). Recall t ha t in b o t h studies, a best-friends sociometr ic p r o c e d u r e was used with the 3rd- t h r o u g h 12th-grade st ud e nt s in a single c o m m u n i t y school system. S h r u m a n d C h e c k (1987) f o u n d that t he p e r c e n t a g e o f s tu d e n ts who associated with p e er s in m i xe d race g r o u ps was 83% in G r a d e 3, 42% in G r a d e 4 to G r a d e 6, 0% in G r a de 7 a n d G r a d e 8, a n d 0% in G r a d e 9 to G r a d e 12. T h e s en i or high school results arc consis­ t e n t with those r e p o r t e d by P a t c he n (1982) for his soci omct r ic data. T h e di sc re pa nc y— 0% versus 2 8 % — is only a p p a r e n t in t h a t S h r u m a n d C h e e k (1987) bas ed thei r findings on c o n n c c t c d sets o f best friends, wher eas P a t c h en (1982) asked a b o u t the racc o f peer s t ha t st ud en t s “h a n g a r o u n d with.” T h e latter are n o t necessarily restri ct ed to best friends. S h r u m c t a l . (1988) r e p o r t e d thei r results in two ways: the overall pat ter n o f race p r e f e r e nc es at cach g r ade a n d the pa t te r n o f sam e-race, same-sex p r e f e r e n c e s at cach gr ade . Re g a rd i n g the first, b o t h Black a n d Whi te g r o u p s showed i ncreasing same-racc p r e f e r e nc e s from G r ad e 3 to G r a d e 12— with Whit e s tudents, especially females, dramatically p r e f e rr i n g samcracc peer s in G r a de 8 a n d G r a de 9. For samc-racc, same-sex p r ef er en ce s, in ge ne r al , all f o u r s e x / r a c e g r o u ps e vi d e n ce d a curvilinear r el at ions hip with g r a d e level. T h e se p r e f e r e nc es were lowest at G r a de 3, hi gh e st in Gr a de s 6, 7, a n d 8, a n d lower at Gr a de s 11 a n d 12. Black s t u d en t s ( mal e a n d female) were less self-segregated at the h i g h e r g r a de levels th an Wh it e students; however, this w’as relative in t h a t samc-racc self-segregation was very m a r k e d from G r a de 7 on. Recall th at P a t c he n (1982) f o u n d n o dif fer ences bet ween the two racial gr oups. Finally, S h r u m ct al. (1988) p o i n t e d o u t t ha t from G r a d e 7 o n, sclf-segrcgation by race is a m u c h s t r o n g e r f act or in i n t c r g r o u p relations t ha n is sex segregati on. In fact, the se ni or class in this s chool sys­ tem h a d s epar at e p r o m s for Blacks a n d Whites.

212

7.

RACE P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

in these studies, a d e a r p a t t er n o f results was f o u n d with best-friends’ soci omet ri c m e t h o d s . In k i n d e r g a r t e n , n o t c on tr ol li ng for sex, n o samcracc p r e f e r e n c e s were f o u nd . From G r a d e 1 o n, bo th Black a n d Whi te chil­ d r e n a n d a do l cs cc nt s sh owe d s t r o ng same-race, same-scx p r ef er en ce s . T h e s e p r e f e r e nc es p e a k e d in G r a d e 6 to G r a de 8, w he re self-segregation was particularly strong. In these a n d o l d e r grades, Blacks t e n d e d to be less r a c e / s e x seg r eg ate d than Whites, a n d for bo t h races, race was a m o r e pow­ erful factor in self-segregation t han sex. T h e rostcr-and-rating results were quite different. In k in d e r g a r t e n a n d first gr ade , b ot h Black a n d Wh i te chil­ d r e n p r e f e r r e d Whites. In G r a d e 3 t h r o u g h G r a d e 8, t h e re was a mild samerace p r e f e r en ce , b u t a very s tr ong same-sex p r e f e r en ce . From G ra de 6 to Gr a de 8, race b e c a m e relatively m o r e i m p o r t a n t for Blacks, particularly males. T h e r e are no da ta for s enior high s chool students. Two a p p a r e n t c on tr a di c ti on s e m e r g e be twe en the results from the two m e t h o d s : (a) In best-friends t e ch n i qu e s , race self-scgrcgation ma rk e dl y i n­ creases t h r o u g h G r a d e 8, especially in c o m p a r i s o n to sex segregat ion, wher eas with rost er-and-rati ng t e chn iqu es , race is m u c h less i m p o r t a n t t ha n sex; a n d (b) in best-friends t e ch ni que s, G r a d e 6 to G r a de 8, Whites arc m o r e racially self-segregated t han Blacks, b u t for roster-and-rating, Black males have s t r o n g e r racc p r e f e r e nc es t h a n Wh it e males. A plausible e xp la n at io n o f these c o nt r ad i c t i on s is as follows. T h e bestfr i ends m e t h o d assesses s t u d e n t s ’ actual practices, primarily in noncl ass­ r oo m settings. Thi s i ncl udes b o t h u n s c h e d u l e d time in school as well as offc a m p us activities. O n e ’s best friends, we l e a r n e d from the n on c l as s ro o m observational r es e ar ch, are o f the s ame race a n d s ame sex. Roster-andrating m e t h o d s primarily e mp h a s iz e in-school settings, usually in-class ones. T h e s e ratings thus have an a ca d e mi c e mpha si s, m o r e so t h a n d o bestfr i ends ratings. We l e a r n e d from t he classroom observational research t ha t race is m u c h less i m p o r t a n t t han sex in p e e r p r ef e re n ce s , especially for males. Thus, r e g a r d i n g the first a p p a r e n t c o nt r ad ic t ion , same-sex p r e f e r ­ e nces are s t r on g with b ot h m e t h o d s , b u t the setting b e i n g assessed d e t e r ­ mine s the relative i m p o r t a n c e o f racc. In classroom settings, it is n o t very i m po r t an t , b u t out si de o f class, it is. R e g a rd i n g the s c c o nd c o nt r a d i c ti o n , t ha t Whi t es h a d fewer Black best fr i ends th an the converse, is c onsi st ent with the c ul t u r al /h i st o ri c al p r e d i c ­ tion t h a t owing to racial status di fferences in the cul tur e, Blacks were m o r e likely to show Whi te p r e f e r e nc es than the converse. T h e shift in a positive Black directi on for Black males in rostcr-and-ratings p r obably reflects an at­ t e m p t on t he ir p a rt to a d a p t to the compet it i ve disadvantage they have in the classroom setting. Rccall that in the C a r t e r et al. (1975) results with the mul t ipl e regression analyses, GPA was very i m p o r t a n t for bo th a ca de mi c a n d social a c ce pt an c e . It can be i n f e r re d from their analyses t h a t Whites generally h a d h i g h e r GPAs t ha n Blacks, a n d h e n c e woul d t e n d to be prc-

213

C O M P A R ISO N O F P R EJ U D ICE AN D 1)1SC RIM I N A T I O N

fer red. But, as has b e e n previously a r g ue d , males t han females a n d h e n c e woul d be less willing than s u b o r d i n a t e status. Black males, by p r e f e rr i n g o t h e r a n d a ca d em i c a c ce pt an c e, woul d k ee p e x p e r i e n c e d

are m o r e competitive females to c o n c e d e a Black males for social status di fferences to a

minimum.

In c o n c l u d i n g o u r discussion of t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f race d iscr imi nat ion, let us relate these findings to the hyp o t he se s p r e s e n t e d at the b e g i n n i n g of the c ha pt c r. Based on g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y c ons ider at ions , it was s p e c u­ l ated t hat males woul d di scr iminate a lo n g racial lines m o r e so th an females. In all studies b u t two, t h e r e were c i t he r n o sex di fferences o r females dis­ c r i m i n at e d m o r e t han males; thus, this hypothesis is rejected. Given that t he re was n o s u p p o r t for this hypothesi s in t he racc pr e ju d ic e literature, it is safe to c o n c l u d e t h a t this g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y co ns i de ra ti on has n o b e a r ­ ing in the d o m a i n o f racc for chi ld re n a n d adolescents. In findings similar to those for race p r e judi ce , t he re is support ive evi­ d e n c e for d e ve l o p m e n t a l shifts o c c u r r i n g at ages 4 a n d 7 years. A n o t h e r shift occurs b et ween 12 a n d 15 years, b u t t ha t a p p e ar s to be bas ed on a m a r k e d i ncrease in h e t e r os e xu a l interests, a n d n o t c h a n g e s in g r o u p i d e n ­ tity o r cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t . T h a t is, racc di scr imi nat i on peaks in t he 12to 15-ycar age r ange , a n d t he n declines s o me wh a t afterward. T h e s e findings are consi st ent with the a bs e n c c o f any shifts in race p r e ju di ce d u r i n g this age range. T h e hypothesis based on c u l t u r a l / h i s t or i c al c ons i de r at i o n s t h a t with in­ creasing age, racc d isc ri mi n a tio n woul d d ec re as e m o r e for Black than Whi te individuals is n o t s u p p o r t e d . Most studies show n o age-related differ­ ences, b u t s o m e find Blacks m o r e discr imi nat or y t ha n Whites, a n d o the r s show the converse. T h e r e may be an age-related pa tt er n for a part i cul ar m e t ho d ol o gy , b u t n o t h i n g c onsi st ent e m e r g e s across t he various m e t h o d s used. T h e lack o f consistency fits with the racc pr ej ud ic e data. H e n c e , it is pr ob ab l y safe to c o n c l u d e t ha t this c u l t u r a l/ h is t o r ic a l co n s i de ra ti on also has n o b e a r i n g in the d o m a i n o f race for c hi l d r en a n d adolcsccnts.

C O M P A R I S O N O F P RE J U D I C E AND D I S C R I M I N A T I O N OF THE TARGET GROUPS A p o e t o n c e said t h a t a rose wTas still a rose by any o t h e r n a m e . T h a t c o n c e p t d o e s n o t apply to the d e v e l o p m e n t o f pr ejudi c e a n d d i scr imi nat i on. T h a t is, p re j ud ic e a n d di scr iminat ion vary as a fu n c t io n of target g r o up . For e x a m ­ ple, kn o wi ng how racial p r e j u d i c e develops d oe s n o t accuratcly i nf or m us a b o u t t he d e v e l o p m e n t of opposite-sex p r ej udic e. Moreover, knowic dge of the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re j u d i c e for any t ar get g r o u p d o e s n o t necessarily p r e ­ dict discr imi nat ion p a t t e r n s towar d th at g r o up . In o t h e r words, p r e j ud i ce

214

7.

RACE PREJUDI CE AND DI SCRI MI NATI ON

a n d discrimination generally follow somewhat different developmental paths. Wh at have wc l earned in o u r survey a b ou t these effects? First, in briefly co mp ar in g the d e ve l op me n t of prcjudicc a nd discrimina­ tion a m o n g the four target groups, the consistency appears to be greater for prcjudicc than for discrimination. Second, the results for opposite-scx prcjudicc a n d discrimination most closely fit the predictions based on ge­ net ic/ evol uti onary a nd cultural/historical conceptualizations. Thi rd, in all eases, behavioral differences between the groupings at least partially u n d e r ­ lie both prcjudicc a nd discrimination. Finally, in all groupings, the first two age peri ods o f c ha ng e p r e di ct ed by g roup identity conceptualizations e mer ge, indicating that social cognitive d ev el op m e nt partially underlies the early d e ve lo pme nt of prcjudicc a n d discrimination. Let us first e xami ne the prcjudicc literature. Data on preschool children were only available for oppositc-scx a n d race prcjudicc. For these g r o u p ­ ings, the c mc r gc n cc of prejudice (or its proxy, negative stereotyping) oc­ curs by age 3 years, a n d is strongly evident in 4-ycar-olds. However, this must be qualified because Black preschool children often show prcjudicc toward Blacks at this age. From age 4 a n d older, different patterns are f o u n d for these two groupi ngs as well as for prejudice toward mentally r et ar ded peers. Opposite-sex prejudice, which is bi-dircctional, increases in strength to ab ou t age 8, a nd declines somewhat between ages 8 a n d 10 years. However, girls, b ut n o t boys, between ages 8 a n d 10 start to increasingly value opposite-sex characteristics. Race prejudice by Whites increases to age 7 or 8 years, d e ­ clines or levels off between 8 a nd 12 years, a nd follows no consistent pattern at older ages. For Blacks, a positive-White bias exists until ab o u t age 7, when it shifts to neutrality or White prejudice. Between 8 a n d 10 years, prejudice toward Whites declines slightly. No firm pattern emerges thereafter. Preju­ dice toward the mentally retarded is seen in n o n r e t a r d c d kindergarten chil­ dr en. It declines in strength thereafter t hr ou g h age 12 years. Little is known for adolescents. For all three groupings, males arc f ou nd to be m o r e or equally pr ej u­ diced as females, which is consistent with the geneti c/evol ut ionary specula­ tion based on the assumption of str onger g r oup c o m m i tm e nt s by males than by females. For all three groupings, behavioral differences were found to be correlated with prejudice, consistent with the gcnctic/ evol ut ionary c on cc pt of badging. This was especially p r o n o u n c e d for opposite-sex pr ej u­ dice a n d prcjudicc toward the mentally retarded. Predictions based on cultural/historical considerations do n ot always have parallel results for opposite-scx a nd racc prejudice. No relevant data are available for prejudice toward the mentally retarded. T he predictions c o nc er ni ng the effccts o f sub or din at e status— that Blacks a n d females would acquirc knowledge, behavior, a n d values o f male a nd White cultural n or ms prior to the convcr.se— were suppor ted. However, cultural/historical

C O M P A R ISO N O F P R EJ U D ICE AN D 1)1SC RIM I N A T I O N

215

b ased p r ed i ct i o ns c o n c e r n i n g self-esteem a n d age-related decr eases in p r e j­ udice h e l d for females in relation to males, b u t n o t for Blacks in relation to Whites. Re g ar d in g the d i scr imi nati on literat ure, observational d a ta are available for p re sc ho ol c hi l d r en for all f our g r oupi ngs . For opposite-sex a n d race dis­ crimination», same-race, same-sex p r e f e r en ce s are generally p r e s e n t in p r e ­ school a n d these p r e f e r e nc es increase b etween ages 6 a n d 8 a n d c i t h er d e ­ cline or level off until age 12. However, for racc d isc ri mi n a tio n in classroom settings, females b u t n o t mal es c o n t i n u e to racially discriminate. Discrimi­ na ti on toward t he deaf a n d mentally retarded by the n o n h a n d i c a p p e d is p re s­ e n t in p r e s ch o ol a n d r e m ai n s hi gh t h e re af ter , with no a p p a r e n t age-related tr ends. In pre sc ho o l, mental ly r e t a r d e d ch il dr e n p r e f er i n te ra cti n g with n o n r c t a r d c d peers, whe re as d e a f chi l d r en p r e f er int eracti on with teachers. For t he sociomct ric m e t h o d s , with best-friends data, all f o u r g r o u pi n g s show essentially the s ame p a t t e r ns from Gr a de 3 a n d h i g h e r — d is cr imi na ­ tion is quite m a r k e d at all ages. It is also s t r o n g e r in this age r a n ge t ha n it is for y o u n g e r ch i ld re n. But i n g r o u p / o u t g r o u p f ri e nd sh ip s do o c c ur infre­ qu e nt ly for all g ro upi ngs. In g ener al, rostcr-and-ratings m e a s ur e s indicat e far less d i scr i mi nat ion t han best-friends measur es. This is especially the case for in-class o r i n ­ s chool a cademi call y o r i e n t e d activities. D is c ri mi na ti o n by sex a p p e a r s m u c h s t r o n g e r t ha n by racc. For n o n h a n d i c a p p c d / h a n d i c a p p c d i n te ra c­ tions, no c o m p a r a b l e i n fo r ma t i o n is available. For bo th observational a n d sociomct ri c m e t h o d s , i n g r o u p / o u t g r o u p b e ­ havioral dif fer ences— b a d g i n g — u n d e r l i e t he di scr iminat ion. This was m o s t readily seen r e g a r d i n g the mentally r e t a r d e d wh er e d e g r e e o f social c o m p e ­ t enc e c oul d be assessed. But it was also no ta b l e with the o t h e r gro u p in gs . Re g ar d in g the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y specul ati on c o n c e r n i n g sex differ­ ences in d is cr imi nati on, t h e r e was n o s u p p o r t for it in the opposite-scx liter­ a tur e a n d it w*as c o nt r a d i c t e d in the racc literature. No reliable sex differ­ ences were ident ifi ed for discr imi nat ion toward mental ly r e t a r d e d or d e a f peers. T h e c u l t u ra l /h i st o ri c al p re di ct io ns t hat di scr imi nat i on o f s u b o r di n at e s woul d dec l in e relative to t h a t o f d o m i n a n t g r o up s were c i t h er u n s u p p o r t e d (opposite-scx a n d racial di scr imi na ti on ) o r were n o t investigated ( d e a f a n d me ntal ly r e t a r d e d ) . Finally, t h e r e was s tr ong s u p p o r t for age-related shifts in d is cr imi nat i on o c c ur r i ng in the first two p er i o ds t h a t were p r e d i c t e d by the g r o u p identity a n d cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t l iterature. Parallel findings o c c u r r e d for t he d e ­ v e l o p m e n t o f p r ej udic e. Additionally, for opposite-scx p re ju di ce , two laterp r e d i c t c d age-related shifts were n o t ed . T h e s e results suggest t h a t the early d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r ej ud ic e a n d di scr iminat ion are li nked with social c ogn i­ tive d e v el o p m e n t .

216

7.

RACE P RE J UDI CE AND D I S C R I MI N A T I O N

In s u mma ry , the early d e v e l o p m e n t o f opposite-sex p r ej ud ic e, race pr ej ­ udice, a n d p re j ud ic e toward the mentally r e t a r d e d is tied to g r o u p identity processes a n d social cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t . However, each o f the t hr ee g r o u p i ng s has a u n i q u e p at t e rn o f d e v e l o p m e n t from p re s ch o ol t h r o u g h j u ni or high school. No c ons i st ent p a t t e rn s e m e r g e in s enior high school. Badgi ng m e c h a n i s m s a p p e a r to u n d e r l i e the various categories o f p r e j u ­ dice. Di scrimination follows d if fer ent d e ve l o p m e n t a l pat hs t ha n prejudice, a n d the various m e t h o d s o f assessing discr imi nat ion p r o d u c c di f f er en t p a t ­ terns o f results. O n e o f the m os t consi st ent results is th at within-school, aca­ demically o r i e n t e d d i scr imi nati on is m u c h lower than out-of-school or i n ­ school, socially o r i e n t e d di scr i minat ion. In j u n i o r a n d s en io r high school, Blacks a n d Whites, males a n d females, d e a f a n d h ea r in g , me nt al ly r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r e t a r d c d all p r e f er i n g r o u p to o u t g r o u p peers. Badgi ng m e c h a ­ nisms likely play a role in these choices.

SUMMARY Racc p rc j ud ic c a n d racc di scr i mi nat ion follow d if fe re nt p at te r ns a n d arc as­ sessed by dif fe re nt m e t h o d s . Studies o f race p r ej u d ic e have b e e n strongly i n f l u e n c e d by th ei r m e t h o d s a n d materials. In large part, their results are to be qualified for thei r use o f forced-choi ce m e t h o d s — for e x am p l e , PRAM II or C M T — which do n o t conclusively i ndi cat e race p r e j ud i ce r a t h e r than p r ef e re n c e. Also, c h a n ge s in social desirability c omp lic at e pr e fe re nti al de ci ­ sions a n d t hus also m e a s u r e m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s for racc pr ej udice. In a ddi tion, racc p re ju d i ce has d if fer ent d e v el o p me n t al paths for Black a n d Whi te c hi l d r e n . Wh i te ch i ld re n show Whit e e t h n i c p r e f e r e n c e s by 4 years o f age. T h e st rength o f these p r e f e r e n c e s increases to a b o u t age 8, a n d c it he r levels off o r declines b etween ages 8 a n d 12 years. No clear pa t­ tern e m e r g e s t her eaf ter ; but at all ages, Whi tes p r e f e r Whites. T h e r e is an i ndi cat ion t h a t in a d ol es ce nc e a n d y o u n g a d u l t h o o d , Whit e females arc less p r e ju d i c e d t ha n Whi te males. Black chi l dr en follow a d i ff er e nt pa th , d e m ­ o n s tr at ing Whi te e t hn ic p r e f e r e n c e s b etween ages 4 a n d 6 years. Between 7 a n d 10 years, they generally show Black p re fe re nce s. Between 8 a n d 10 years, the positive Black p r e f e r e n c e s de c li ne slightly a n d attitudes towrard Whites b e c o m c neut ral . R e g a rd i n g g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p re di ct io ns we s o u g h t to assess, the dat a arc inc on s i st en t r e g a r d i n g age dif fer ences in a d ol es ce nc e o r sex differ­ ences at any ages. For bo th races, age shifts in p re ju d i ce p r e d i c t e d by the g r o u p identity a n d cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t liter at ur e arc partially c onsi stent with the e vol uti onary hypothesis. Also, age-based decl ine in pr ej ud i c e is similar for bo th races, c o nt r a di c t i n g the c u l t u ra l / h i st o r i c a l p r ed i ct i o n that p r ej ud i ce would di mi nish m o r e in the s u b o r d i n a t e racc.

S UMMARY

217

T h e t h r e e t e c h n i q u e s to study racc d i s c r imi n a t io n — observational, rating-and-roster sociomctrics, a n d best-friends sociomet ri cs— d o n o t lead to equi val ent conclusions. With observations, Black p r es c h o o l boys pr e fe r playing with Whit e boys, b u t Wh it e boys a n d girls a n d Black girls pr e fe r samc-racc peers. From k in d e r g a r t e n t h r o u g h se ni or hi gh school, in free play or no nc l as s ro om settings, ch i ld r en p r e f er i nt er ac ti ng with same-sex, samc-racc peers. In classroom settings in k in d e r g a r t e n t h r o u g h G r a de 8, fe­ males p r e f er same-race peers, b u t males show little o r n o racial pr ef er ence s. T h e r e were two u n e x p e c t e d results from these discussed studies. First, in frcc-play settings b e g i n n i n g in k i n d e r g a r t e n , Black males shift int eract ion p r e f e r e n c e from Whit e males to Black males, p r e su ma b ly d u e to conflicts with physical attraction p r e f e r en ce . Se co nd , t he re is a dis cr e pa nc y bet ween frcc-play a n d classroom settings such that in classroom settings, males of bo t h races show little o r no racc p r e f e r en ce . T h a t f emal es d o so is p r e s u m ­ ably d u e to th ei r t e n d e n c y to overlay s t r u c t ur e d classroom activity with closc-fricndship social expect at ions. With roster-and-ratings soci omet r i c m e t h o d s , k i n d e r g a r t e n a n d firstg ra de c hi ld r en p r e f er Whi tes to Blacks. In Gr a de s 3 t h r o u g h 8, a mild samcracc p r c f e r en cc , b u t a very s tr on g same-sex p r e f e r e n c e occurs. T h e r e arc no da ta for s enior hi gh s chool s t udents. O n e n o t e wo r th y r oster-and-rating result was the c or r elat i on o f a c a de m i c a c h i e v e m e n t (GPA) with social ac­ cc p ta n cc , with GPA as the s tr onges t p r e d i c t o r — s t r o ng e r even than race or sex— o f social ac cc pt anc c. With best-friends sociomct ri c m e t h o d s , in k i n d e r g a r t e n settings, n o racc p r e f e r e n ce s were f o u nd . From G r a d e 1 t h r o u g h s en io r high school, bo t h Black a n d Whi te c h i l d r e n a n d a dolcs ccnts p r e f e r r e d same-race, same-sex friends. T h e se p r e f e r en ce s were s t ro ng es t in G r ad e s 6 to 8. Age shifts p r e ­ dict ed by the g r o u p identity a n d cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t li ter atur e were p a r ­ tially s u p p o r t e d . Co ns i st en t with c u l t u ra l /h i st o ri c al analysis, t h e r e were h i g h e r cross-racial friendshi ps ratings for Black r e s p o n d e n t s t h a n for White ones. T h e r e was a di scr epancy b et ween best-friends a n d roster-and-ratings results, at tr i bu t ed to t he t e n d e n c y o f the best-friends m e t h o d to reflect outof-school a n d u n s t r u c t u r e d settings (wher e racc p r e f e r e n c e is operative), a n d the r ost er-and-rat ing m e t h o d to rcflect in-school a n d s t r u c tu r ed set­ tings (wher e a ca d e mi c a c h i e v e m e n t is operative). In c o nt r ad i ct i on to t he p r o p o s e d g c n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y hypothesis, t he re was n o t e n d e n c y for males to dis cr imina te by racc m o r e t han females. Fur ­ t h e r m o r e , as with racc p r ej ud i ce , the racc di scr iminat ion age decl inc was n o t g r e a te r for Blacks t ha n for Whites, as p r e d i c t e d by the c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i ­ cal hypothesis. T h e r e were d e ve l o p m e n t a l shifts at ages 4, 7, 12, a n d 15, with the latter two shifts a tt r ib ut e d to h e t e r os e xu a l interests. This c h a p t c r c o n c lu d e s o u r t r e a t m e n t o f the t a rge t gro up s, each of whose status within Ame ri ca n c ul t ur e has b e e n c ha ra ct er i ze d by per si st ent

218

7.

RACE PREJUDI CE AND DI SCRI MI NATI ON

prcjudicc a nd discrimination. We surveyed the d e ve l o pm en t of'prejudice a nd discrimination for each g r oup a nd wc suggested its cultural/historical a nd ge ncti c/evolut i onary causcs. Each historical survey has been marked by an ong oi ng h o p e by some that prcjudicc a n d discrimination mi gh t be re­ d uc e d or eliminated. Wc have her et of or e left unans wer ed the question of w he the r this h o p e can be fulfilled. Can prcjudicc a nd discrimination be r e­ duced? This is the subject of the next chaptcr, in which wc survey a nd assess two p r o m i n e n t psychological theories on the reducti on o f prcjudicc and discrimination a n d research related to these theories.

C hapter

M odifying P r e ju d ic e an d D iscrim ination1

IN T RO D U C TIO N In th e p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r s we saw ho w a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a p p r o a c h h e l p s us u n d e r s t a n d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . We id e n t i f i e d f o u r p r i n c i p l e factors involved with this d e v e l o p m e n t , t h r e e o f w hic h usually le ad to i n g r o u p p r e f e r e n c e s a n d o u t g r o u p a n t i p a t h y , a n d o n e o f t h e m — o u t g r o u p a t t r a c t i o n — le ads to o u t g r o u p a ssimilatio n. H o w ­ ever, essentially n o p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n r e s e a r c h exists t h a t fo­ cuses o n th e positive c h a r a c te ri s ti c s o f o u t g r o u p s . In this c h a p t e r , it is useful to c o n s i d e r h o w b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s in c o n ­ j u n c t i o n with t h r e e o f th e f o u r e v o l u t i o n a r y factors can b e utilized to m o d ­ ify p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . B a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s le a d to i d e n ti fi c a ­ tio n o f g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p , a n d in an e v o l u t i o n a r y sen se , a r e ess ential to survival a n d r e p r o d u c t i o n . W h e n o p e r a t i n g at a d is ta n c e (distally) t h e r e is essentially n o o p p o r t u n i t y to m o d if y p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e g r o u p id e n ti ty o f in­ dividuals. H ow ev e r, w h e n o p e r a t i n g n e a r b y (p r o x im a l ly ) s u c h as t h r o u g h i n t e r a c t i o n s with o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , t h e r e a r e m a n y o p p o r t u n i t i e s to p e r ­ ceive similarities b e t w e e n th e i n g r o u p a n d th e o u t g r o u p . In o r d e r to m o d ­ ify p r e j u d i c e , similarities s h o u l d be e m p h a s i z e d a n d g r o u p d i f f e r e n c e s m i n ­ im iz ed . V ic ar io us i n t e r a c t i o n s , s uch as t h r o u g h th e m e d i a , a n d especially television, can p r o b a b l y s u b s ti t u te to s o m e e x t e n t for p e r s o n a l i n t e ra c t io n s . We saw h ow a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e usually o p e r a t e s to p e r p e t u a t e o r c r e ­ ate p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . H o w e v e r, a u t h o r i t i e s can be a m a j o r vehiT hi s c h a p t c r was wr itten in c ol l a bo r at io n with C a t h e r i n e M. J o h n s o n .

219

220

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

clc for modi fying pr cj udi cc. Author iti es s h o ul d p r o m o t e c ha ng e s o f atti­ tudes a n d b eha vi or for i n g r o u p m e m b e r s , a n d c o n d e m n pr ej udic e a n d d i sc ri mina tion. This, o f course, is wh a t t he U.S. S u p r e m e C o u r t a t t e m p t e d to d o in the Brown v. Board o f Education ( 1 9 5 4 / 1 9 5 5 ) case. T h a t decision h a d to be i m p l e m e n t e d by state a n d local aut hori ti es, as well as c o m m u n i t y l eader s in o r d e r to be influential in c h a n g i n g p r ej ud ic e a n d discrimi nat i on. As we see in this c h a p te r , au t ho r i ty a c c c p t an c c plays a central role in suc­ cessful a tt e mp t s to modify attitudes a n d behavior. O u t g r o u p attraction can play a significant role in modifying p re ju d i ce a n d discr imi nat ion. We sec n u m e r o u s ex a mp l e s o f this in daily life for African-American a n d femal e athletes a n d en te rt ai ne rs . Many p e o p l e o f all races a n d b o t h g e n d e r s a d m i r e a n d want to e m u l a t e these very attractive o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . If we take the tack o f seeing t he m as except i ons, th en little will c h a n g e in t er ms o f i n t e r g r o u p relations. If we b r o a d e n o u r p e r ­ spective, especially t h r o u g h inte ra cti ons with o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , g u i d ed by aut hori ti es, we can start to perceive t he positive qualities in m a n y o u t ­ g r o u p m e m b e r s , a n d eventually c o m e to sec t h e m a n d us as m e m b e r s o f the s ame o ve r ar c hi n g g r o u p . For e x a mp l e , in Cinci nnat i , an elderly u p p e r so­ c i o e co n om i c status (SES) Jewish female f r ie nd d esc ri be d t he Ap pa la ch i an s (who arc all Christian) she has g ot te n to know. She talks a b o u t t h e m as the mo st c ar ing a n d loyal friends for which a p e rs on coul d h o p e . In m a n y g r o up s in Cinci nnat i, Ap p a la ch i an s are t h o u g h t o f as “r e d n e c k s . ” But if p e o p l e c a me to see thei r valued characteristics, the r e d n e c k i mage would c h a ng e , a n d i n g r o u p - o u t g r o u p disparities woul d likely di minish. T h e thir d factor, i n g r o u p favoritism, can o p e r a t e to modify p re j ud i ce a n d d is c ri mi n a tio n, if o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s can also be seen as p ar t o f the i n g r o up . T h e Shcrifs’ e x p e r i m e n t s (Sher if et al., 1961; S h e r i f & Sherif, 1953) discussed in c h a p t c r 2, i ndic at e d th at cooper ati ve activities bet ween i n g r ou p s a n d o u t g r o u p s can lead to the f o r m at i o n o f an o v e ra rc hi ng g r o u p t h a t in cl ud e s previous i n g r o u p s a n d o u t gr o up s . A n o t h e r vehicle is the s t r u c t ur i ng o f i nt er ac t io ns t h a t lead to p e rc e p t i o n s o f inc re ase d similarity bet ween i n g r o u p s a n d o u t g r ou p s . Aut hor iti es a n d ot he r s in the c o m m u n i t y can take steps t h a t will lead to p e r c e p t i o n s o f t he similarities be twe en the various g r o u ps in a c o mm u ni t y . O n c e c o m m o n g r o u p identification is achieved, t h e n favoritism will b e c o m e wi d e s p r e ad t h r o u g h o u t the new, i n­ clusive g r ou p. Given this b a c k g r o u n d , t h e r e are five goals o f this c ha pt c r. T h e first is to m a ke p re di ct io ns in t er ms o f g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d c ul tu r al /h i s to r ic a l co n si de ra ti on s a b o u t r e d u c i n g p re jud ic e a n d d is cr imi nat ion in c hi l dr en. T h e s e c o nd goal is to describe the two t heor ies t h a t arc m os t often associ­ ated with p re ju di ce r e d u c t i o n — C o n t a c t T h e o r y a n d Lcwinian Th e or y. T h e thi rd goal is to briefly descri be the types o f m e a s ur e s used in studying the r e du c t i on o f p r e ju di c e a n d di scr imi nati on. T h e f our t h goal is to s u m ma r iz e

IN TR O D U C T IO N

221

several o f t he pr inciple b odi e s o f r ese ar ch th at have b e e n c ar r ie d o u t on the topic o f the r e d uc t i o n o f p r ej u d ic e a n d di sc ri mi na ti on. T h e fifth goal is to p r e s e n t a m u lt i f a ct or a p p r o a c h d e s i g n e d to r e d u c e p rc ju d i cc a n d discrimi­ na ti on in ch i ld r en a n d adolescents. Two o f the m a jo r legally m a n d a t e d a tt e mp ts a i m ed toward r e d u c i n g p re ju di ce a n d d i scr imi nati on have b e e n racial school de se g r eg a ti on , a n d m a i n s t r e a m i n g o f the physically a n d ment al ly h a n d i c a p p e d . A substantial li terature from t he 1960s, 1970s, a n d 1980s exists for b o t h o f these. No simi­ lar legislation exists for r e d u c i n g oppositc-scx p r c j u d i c c b etween c hi ldr en in schools. Relatively little research on modi fyi ng pr cj ud i cc a n d di s cr i mi na ­ tion has b e e n c ar r ie d o u t in the 1990s. This raises the ques tion o f t he g e n e r ­ ality of the earlier findings to the c u r r e n t century. Based on the p re ju di ce a n d d is cr imi nat ion research t ha t has b e e n d o n e , d e s c ri be d in earlier c h a p ­ ters, as well as r e c e n t r esear ch on modi fyi ng pr cj ud ic c a n d discri mi nati on, o u r j u d g m e n t is t h a t general i zati on o f the o l d e r da ta is substantial.

P re d ic tio n s In r e g a rd to the first goal, five p r ed i c t i on s are m a de . Based on the g e n e t i c / e vol ut ionary m o d e l it was previously p r e di c t e d a n d f o u n d t ha t p re ju d i ce h e ld by males woul d be s t r o n ge r t ha n t h a t he ld by females. Based on these findings a n d the u n d e rl y i ng theory, it is p r e d i c t e d t h a t it will be easier to c h a n g e attitudes a n d behavi ors of girls than those o f boys. S e c on d , based on t he c ul t ur al /h is t o r i c a l i m p o r t a n c e of d o m i n a n c e in establishing p r e j u ­ dice, modi fi cat ion o f status dif fer ences be t we en g r o u ps will likely be an i m­ p o r t a n t factor in t he r e d uc t i o n o f p re j ud i c e a n d discr imi nat ion. T h i r d , ow­ ing to t he i m p o r t a n c e o f a ut ho r it y a c c c p t an c c in the acquisition o f cultural kn owledge, i nc lu d i ng pr ej u d i c e a n d d isc ri mi na ti on, o n e woul d e x p ec t that i n v ol ve me nt by a ut hor i ti es in s a n ct io n in g a c c c p t a n c e o f o t h e r g r o u ps would lead to a d ec re ase in pr ej udi ce. T h e f our th p r edi c tion is bas ed on t he i m p o r t a n c e o f c o o p e r a t i o n to g r o u p identity. O n e woul d e x p ec t th at c hi l d r en pl aced in cooperat ive te ams would in c lu de th ei r t e a m m a t e s in t he ir i n g r ou p , regardless o f g e n ­ der, race, ethnicity, or disability. Behaviors a n d attitudes toward these t e a m ­ ma te s s h o ul d b e c o m e relatively positive. O n e woul d n o t necessarily expect, however, th at these att itudes a n d behaviors woul d e x t e n d to o t h e r p e o pl e o f t h a t s ame race, e t h ni c g r o u p , sex, o r disability be ca us e these “o t h e r ” p e o ­ ple were n o t p a r t o f t h e ir i n g r o u p . Finally, o n e m a j o r pr ed ic ti on o f the g r o u p identity a n d cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t l ite ra tur e is t ha t t h e r e s h o u l d be shifts in t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r ej u d ic e at ages 4, 6 to 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a n d 18 to 19 years. Co ns e qu e nt ly , o n e woul d e x p ec t dif fer ences in the ef­ fects o f in te rv en ti on s to r e d u c e p re j ud ic e a n d discr imi nat ion at these ages.

222

8.

MODIFYING PRE JUDICE AND DIS CRIMINATIO N

Based on the fact that genetics a n d evolution, culture a n d history, and social d e ve l op me nt all play a role in the acquisition of prejudice a n d dis­ crimination, interventions based on any one o f these factors will probably have a limited effect in r educi ng prejudice a nd discrimination. This implies t hat a multifactor app ro ac h to change should be used wherever possible. Contact Theory O n e of the theories frequently cited to explain changes in prejudice is C o n ­ tact The or y (Allport, 1954). Allport cauti oned that for contact to work in r educi ng prej udi ced attitudes (a) the parties involved must share equal stat­ us, (b) the c o mmuni ty must sanction the change, (c) the gr oups must be in the pursuit of c o m m o n objectives (cooper ati on) , and (d) the association must be d ee p a n d g en ui n e (intimate). T h e next few pages are devoted to defining each of these factors in mor e detail a nd linking them to the ge­ net ic/ evol uti onary a n d cultural/historical models. Differential power a n d status are i mp o rt a nt in the d e ve l o pm en t of preju­ dice a n d discrimination. This suggests that equal status would be central to r educi ng those attitudes a nd behaviors. Accordi ng to Allport (1954), equal status occurs for children when they have similar ma nn er s , mo de s of speech, moral attitudes, me ni a l ability a nd their parents have compar abl e a mou nt s of properly. C o h e n ’s (1984) Status Equalization Project indicated that in school sellings, readi ng ability is also an i mp o r t a nt status factor for fifth- and sixth-grade European-American, African-American, Asian-American, a n d Hispanic-American students. Norvell a n d Worchel (1981) discovered that llie status children bring with them from o th e r settings is often m o r e imp or t ant than their status in the c u rr e nt situation. T h u s a st ude nt with high status, say as an athlete, would bring that status with h e r to classroom activities even if she did not excel scholastically. This finding fits well with the geneti c/evoluti onary fac­ tor o f o u tg r ou p attraction. Robinson a n d Preston (1976) f ou n d that c ha r­ acteristics (hat indicate high status of Whites, for example, r eadi ng ability, are occasionally different than those that indicate high status a m o ng Blacks. Thus there is some a gr ee me nt that status is an impor tant factor in changing prejudice, but it is no t as clear what factors influence status in a given situa­ tion. However, Slavin and Cooper (1999) a nd Genesee a nd Gandara (1999) seriously questioned whet her equal status can readily be attained in class­ room settings. Special training of teachers to boost the status of children has occasionally been successful. It is possible that rather than equal status as a factor in r educi ng prejudice, it is mor e i mp or t an t and mor e feasible to instill in students mut ua l kindness a nd respect for one another. C ommun it y sanction is linked to the co n c e pt of authority in the g e ne t i c / evolutionary mo d el a n d cultural/historical model. By community sanction, or

IN TR O D U C T IO N

223

i nstitutional su pp or ts , Allport (1954) m e a n t law, custom o r local a t m os ­ p h e r e t h a t p r o m o t e s c h a n ge s in pr ejudi ce. Research s up p or t s Al lp o rt ’s hy­ pothesis a n d indicates t h a t the a t m o s p h e r e r e g a r d i n g p r ej u d ic e in the class­ r o o m , t he school, a n d the s u r r o u n d i n g c o m m u n i t y all i m p a c t a c h i l d ’s p er c e p t i o n o f c o m m u n i t y sanction (Lachat, 1972; Schofield, 1979). As already discussed, c o o p e r a t i o n is an i m p o r t a n t a spect o f g r o u p i d e n ­ tity. Allport (1954) d e f i n e d cooperation as a p u r s ui t of c o m m o n objectives. This factor is o f e n o u g h i m p o r t a n c e t h a t a whol e b o dy o f lit er atur e has b e e n de ve l o p e d on the effects o f c o op e r a t i o n on the r e d uc t i o n o f p r e ju di ce a n d d iscr iminat ion. T h u s the c o n c c p t o f c o o p e r a t i o n has b e e n e x p a n d e d a n d is discussed in detail later in th e cha pt cr . Similar to c o op e r a t i o n , i ntimacy is an aspect o f g r o u p identity. Allport (1954) believed t h a t casual c o nt ac t r e i n f or c ed s t ereotypes a n d p r e j u di c e d att itudes while i nt i ma te c o n t a c t served to d ec re as e pr ej udice. By intimacy, h e m e a n s d e e p e r a n d m o r e g e n u i n e associations. I ntimacy b et ween i n d i ­ vidual m e m b e r s o f g r o u p s — for e xa mp l e, individual E u r op c an - Am e r ic a n a n d Afri can-American c h i l d r e n — develops w h e n they work, study, a n d play t o g e t h e r consistently over a p e r i od o f time. T h e intimacy does n o t n eces sar ­ ily e x t e n d to all m e m b e r s o f the o u t g r o u p . T h u s this fact or s h o u l d have a g r e at e r effect on di scr iminati on than on prej udi ce. Lewinian T h e o r y Lewinian Theory is a form o f field t heory a n d postulates that a p e r s o n ’s atti­ tudes are at a quasistationary e qu il ib r i um (frozen) w h e n driving forces for c h a n g e are e qua l to r es tr ai ni ng forces for staying p u t (Lewin, 1948). W h e n the st re ngt h of a driving force ( o r r es tr ai ni ng force) is altered, t ha t is, i n­ c reased o r d e cr ea sed , the a tt it ude will b e c o m e u n f r oz e n, c h a ng e , a n d r efreeze at a new level. A simplified behavioral e xa mp l e mi gh t be helpful here. O n e o f us (Cathy J o h n s o n ) has a specified a m o u n t of time each week to ride my horse. Factors that drive m e toward riding m o r e are: I enjoy the activity, I enjoy bei ng o u t ­ d oor s a n d in the woods, I wish to improve my skill level, it’s m o r e fun than cleaning the house, a n d my horse n e e d s the exercise. T h e r e are factors that, if con si d e re d alone, would limit my r iding (restraining forces): I have to earn m o n e y to pay for the horse, too m u c h time in the sun is ba d for my skin, most o f my friends do n ot ride, a n d my horse also enjoys being o u t in the pasture. T ak e n t og e th er these driving a n d restraining forces k ee p my weekly riding time relatively constant. If e it her the driving or restraining forces cha ng e , I would s pe nd a different a m o u n t of time riding. For e xampl e, acqui r ing a sec­ o n d horse would increase the “horse exercise” driving force a n d I would s p e n d m o r e time riding. Additionally, winni ng the lottery would r e d u ce the “e a r n i n g m o n e y ” r es tr ai ni n g force a n d i ncrease my time riding.

224

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

Similarly, driving a n d r es tr ai ni ng forces apply to attitudes. First wc dis­ cuss r es tr ai ni ng forces. Lcwin (1948) i nd ic at ed t h a t g r o u p b el o n gi n gn e s s a n d i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f fate serve as r es tr ai ni ng forces to at tit ude c ha nge . G r o u p b e l o n g in g ne s s is similar to g r o u p identity a n d t he r ef o re is tied to i n­ t e r g r o u p m e c h a n i s m s a n d i n g r o u p favoritism. A l lp or t ’s c o m m u n i t y sanc­ tion for a c c e p t an c e o f t he o ut si d er woul d be viewed by Lewin as a r ed u ct io n o f the “a u t h o ri ty ” r es tr ai n in g force. I n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f fate for Lewin is b ased on c u l t u ra l / h i st o r i c a l factors o f collective m e m o r y o f history, l a n ­ g uage, religion, a n d morality. Keep in m i n d t h a t owing to cognit ive/ social d e v e l o p m e n t , the effects on p re j ud i ce c h a n g e with age, causing this force to be s t r o n ge r or we ak e r d e p e n d i n g on the age g r o u p in q u es tion. O t h e r scientists have used field t he or y to discuss a dd it iona l res t ra ini ng forces. J. H. Evans (1976) suggest ed t ha t strain in social int eracti ons, t ha t is, u ne as i­ ness, i nhi bi tion, a n d uncer tai nt y, is o n e o f the forces in the m a i n t e n a n c e of p r e ju d i c e d attitudes a n d thus a r es tr ai ni ng force to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of m o r e positive attitudes. Do n a l d s o n (1980) hyp ot he s i ze d that di scomfort, a rest rai ni ng force, is caused by the e x pe ct at i on o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e social b e ­ havior by o ut g ro u p s . Factors like cognitive a n d social d e v e l o p m e n t serve as driving forces to att it ude c h an g e. T he se factors arc age rel at ed a n d thus the relative str engt h o f driving forces will c h a n g e with m a t ur a t i on . Additionally, Do n a l d s on (1980) suggested t ha t the e m p a t h y ch i ld re n feel t oward o t he rs acts as a driving force to positive at ti t ude c h a ng e . We sec later in the c h a p t e r that m o r e r e c e n t research s u p p o r t s this suggestion.

M ea su r es Em p l o ye d Most o f the me as u r e s utilized in p r ej u d ic e r e d u c t i o n e x p e r i m e n t s assessed e i th er the cognitive or the behavi oral p redi spos it ion c o m p o n e n t o f atti­ tudes. N o n e m e a s u r e d the affective c o m p o n e n t . Measur es o f di sc ri mi na ­ tion generally inc l ud e f r ie nd sh i p choi ce or playmate choice. T h e c o m m o n m e as ur es are now descri bed. A social distance scale is o n e way to m e a s u r e the behavi or al pr edi spos i­ tions c o m p o n e n t o f pr ej udi ce. In a typical social distance scale, the subject is i nst ruct ed to place a dr awing of a child t ha t r e p r e se n t s the self into a n u m b e r o f dif fe re nt scenes. A scene m i g h t d ep i ct c hi l d r e n wo r k i n g in the classroom, playing at recess, o r playing at h o m e . Scoring is d o n e by actually m e a s u r i n g the distance be twe e n the self-figure a n d o t h e r figures in the scene. Activity p r e f e r e n c e scales also m e a s u r e the behavi oral i n t e n t io n aspect o f prejudi ce. A typical o n e incl udes showi ng c h i l dr e n a pict ur e of h o m o g e ­ n e o u s st udents, for e x a mp le , s ame - ra c e/ s am e - se x wor king t o g e t h e r a n d a

DESEGREGATIO N

225

similar picture with h e t e r o g en e ou s students. T h e children arc then asked which gr o u p they would like to join or have as friends. T h e r e are several ways to meas ur e the cognitive aspcct o f prcjudicc in­ cluding attitude scales a n d stereotype rating scales. An exampl e o f an atti­ tude scalc is the PRAM II, where children choose between drawings of Black a n d White figures in response to evaluative adjectives. A stereotype rating might list a scries of unfavorable characteristics (e.g., sneaky, dirty, bad) a nd favorable characteristics (e.g., brave, strong, friendly). T he child is asked to identify wh et he r all, most, some, few, or no children of a particu­ lar category fit that characteristic. For yo u n ge r children, a picturc-story technique mig ht be used to measure stereotypes. Th e measur es o f di scrimination generally i ncl ude sociometrics or o b ­ servation. Observation is used to me as u r e playmate choicc a n d is usually c o n d u c t c d d u r in g a s h o r t pe ri od of free time before a n d following any interventions. Sociometric scales can measure either playmate choicc or f riendship choicc. We identified the types o f measures used in the prcjudicc a nd discrimi­ nation reduction literature. T h r o u g h o u t the following discussion, prejudice measures are referred to as social distance scales, activity pr ef er ence scales, stereotype ratings, a nd attitude scales. Discrimination measures arc observa­ tion, sociomctric playmate choice, or sociomctric friendship choicc.

DESEGREGATI ON O n May 17, 1954, the U.S. S u p r em e Cour t h a n d e d down a decision in the case of Brown v. the Board o f Education ( 1954/1955) that ultimately b r o u g h t an e nd to segregation in the public schools. T he c o u r t ’s decision was based, in part, on the information in an amicus curiae brief signed by 35 psycholo­ gists, which staled that desegregation would decrease cross-racial prejudice, lhat is, Black children toward Whites a nd White children toward Blacks. More than 40 years have passed since Brown v. the Board of Education (1954/1955), giving us ample time to evaluate the results of school desegre­ gation. O n e of the goals of this section is to present information on the re­ sults of those studies. In the discussion, attention will be paid, where possible, to differentiating results by age, sex, race, and geographic location. Con­ sideration is given to the effects of forced busing on prejudiced attitudes. T h e s econd goal of this section is to i nt er pr et the data in terms of two of the predictions already made. First, following desegregation, girls’ altitudes toward children of a different race will generally be m o r e positive than those held by boys. Second, one would expect differences in the results o f desegregation to be age related. As discussed in the next section, the data are insufficient to evaluate the effects of commu ni ty sanction and modifica­ tion of status.

226

8.

MODIFYING PRE JUDICE AND DIS CRIMINATIO N

T h e third a nd final goal o f this section is to discuss the results o f desegre­ gation in terms of Cont act The or y a nd Lewinian Theory.

The Studies Table 8.1 contains i nformat i on regar ding 23 studies a nd was designed to give as clear a picture as possible of the factors that influenced the o ut ­ comes o f desegregation. T h e c ol umn headings, or core characteristics, were chosen based on patterns that e me r ge d from examining the litera­ ture. T he response of the commu n i ty to desegregation is identified as a core characteristic, al though it is n ot m e n t i o n e d in many studies. Allport (1954) identified it as an i m p o r t a n t factor a nd we a tt empt to d e te rmi ne w he t h e r a patt ern exists when the available data are e xami ned. T he studies are listed in o r de r first by time since desegregation, followed by region and type of desegregation. This m e t h o d was chosen to aid the r ea de r in identify­ ing im po r ta n t patterns. The d e p e n d e n t measure, while i mpor ta nt , was not listed as a core c ha r­ acteristic, because it did not seem to have a consistent impact on the o ut ­ come, a nd no patterns e me rge d. Th r e e types o f prejudice measures were used: stereotype ratings, attitude surveys, a nd social distance scales. In n o n e of this research were sociometric data employed as the d e p e n d e n t measure. T h e 23 ex pe rime n ts yielded 37 o ut c om e results. O f these, 16 reveal an increase in prejudi ced attitudes following desegr egat ion, 10 show no change, a nd 11 indicate a decrease in prejudice. Approximately 40% of the studies showed a decrease in prejudice for Blacks, whereas the n u m b e r for Whites is only 25%. Do the effects of desegregation c hange over time, for exampl e 1 year ver­ sus 5 years after a school has b ee n desegregated? T h e answer d e p e n d s on the race of the child. Research falls into three time-related categories, based on the length o f time the school had been desegregated prior to the study taking place. In short-term studies, initial data were collected prior to desegregation a nd the research was c ompl e te d within 1 year following d e­ segregation. No control gr oups were used in these studies. Medium-term data were compiled from schools that had been desegregated 1 to 5 years prior to the study, with segregated schools used for control groups. Lon g­ term studies c om pa r ed schools desegregated for 5 years or mo r e to segre­ gated schools. W he n e xami ni ng Table 8.1 for effects of time since desegregation, dif­ ferences in prejudice for European-American children show an interesting pattern. An increase in prejudice or no ch ange following desegregation was seen for the White children when data were collected on a short-term basis. T he children in m edi um- te rm conditions displayed a decrease in prejudice

TA BLE 8.1 S um m ary o f C o re Study C h aracteristics a n d O u tco m es Outcome Study

Barber (1968) Carrigan (1969) Dentier & Elkins (1967) Evans (1969) G arth (1963) McWhirt (1967) Campbell (1956) Lom bardi (1963) Silverman & Shaw (1973) W hitm ore (1956) G reen & G erard (1974) W ebster (1961) Speelman & Hoffman (1980) Arm or (1972) G ardner, Wright, & Dee (1970) Singer (1966) Seidner (1971) Friedm an (1980) Koslin, Arnarel, & Ames (1969) Lachat (1972)c Lach at (1972) H erm an (1967) W. G. Stephan (1977) Williams, Best, & Boswell (1975)

N

Grade

Time Since Desegregation

200 570 1,230 198 94 152 746 344

8 K-5 3-6 4-6 9-12 10 8, 10, 12 9-10 7-12 8, 10, 12 K-6 7 Pre, 1, 3 7-12 6-8 D 3 K-3 1-2 12 12 6 5-6 1-4

Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Short Medium Medium Medium Medium Long Long Long Long Long Long Long

p p

1,769 104 72 171 260 136 96 p

129 p

? 350 750 483

*■*

Region

N orth North North

s-wb South South South South South South West West ? N orth North North South North North N orth North North S-W South

Type o f Desegregation

Community Response

Voluntary Forced Natural Forced Voluntary' Voluntary Forced Forced Forced Forced Voluntary Forced

Negative

p

Voluntary Voluntary Natural Voluntary Natural Natural Natural Natural Natural Natural Voluntary

?a ? ?

? ? ?

Black —

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

+ +

0

Mixed

—

? ? p

? Neutral Positive ? ? p

—

—

N eutral Negative ? ? ? p p

White

+

0 0 0 0 —

0 —

+ +

+ +

0

0 + +

+

—

+ 0

—

—

—

0

227

a? Indicates no inform ation in the report. hS-W indicates Southw est.( Lachat is listed twice due to distinctly different com m unity responses in the study.

228

8.

MODIFYING PRE JUDICE AND DIS CRIMINATIO N

toward Blacks following desegregation in two of the studies a n d no change in one. In the six long-term studies, seven results were r e po rt e d for White students. T h r e e revealed decreases in prcjudicc as a result o f desegrega­ tion, thr ee showed increases, a n d one showed no c ha nge in attitude. T h e results for African-American children were mixed in all three timerelated categories in Table 8.1. Five short-term studies showed an increase in prejudiced attitudes, one revealed no changc, a n d three indicated a d e ­ crease in prejudice toward Whites. O f the four medi um-term results, two re­ vealed a decrease in prejudice as a result of desegregation, o n e showed an increase a nd o ne showed no c hange. O n e of the three long-term studies re­ vealed a decrease in prejudice, o n e showed an increase, a n d one revealed no change. Wc can conclude from these studies that for White children, prcjudicc is at best u n c h a n g e d immediately after desegregation, decreases between 1 a nd 5 years following desegregation, b u t after 5 years, the results arc mixed. The racial attitudes of Black students t end to be less effected by time and the results arc mi xed for all thr ee time categories. Unfortunately, there arc no publi shed studies that have m o n i to r ed the effects o f desegregation in a single school system for mo r e than 1 year. Hcnce, the longitudinal effects o f desegregation are n ot known. Regional differences, particularly d is cr epanci es in results bet ween N o rt h e r n a n d So ut he rn schools, arc o f interest. Examination of Table 8.1 reveals eight studies that investigated prcjudicc o f N o rt h er n Black children toward Whites. O f these, t hree fo un d decreases in prejudice, four fo un d in­ creases, a nd one fo un d no changc. Ten ou tc ome s for White students are also listed. Five of these show an increase in prcjudicc as a result of desegre­ gation a n d five reveal a decrease. Looking toward the South, prejudice toward Blacks increased for White children in two of the studies a nd r e ma ine d u n c h a n g e d in the r ema i ni ng four (sec Table 8.1). T h e picture for Black children in the South is differ­ ent. Two studies d e m o ns t ra t e d decreases in prcjudicc following desegrega­ tion a nd two showed n o changc. While cond u c t in g studies in the So u t h­ west, Evans (1969) a n d W. G. St ep ha n (1977) discovered that Black children develop greater prejudice toward Whites following desegregation. W. C. S t e p h a n ’s (1977) study revealed parallel findings for White children. Some conclusions can be drawn from these data. Europcan-American children in the North bc c omc either significantly mo re or significantly less prej udi ced as a result of desegregation, whereas in the South, their pr ej u­ dice either increased or was unaffected. African-American students experi­ ence desegregation similar to Whites in the North, b ut in the South their prejudice was mor e likely to decrease or remain u n c h an g ed . Two studies arc n o t en o u g h to highlight the Southwest as a spccial case, b u t prejudice did increase for both White a n d Black populations.

D E S E G R E G A T IO N

229

D es egr egat ion has typically o c c u r r e d in t h r ee distinctly di ff er en t ways, as in di ca te d in T ab l e 8.1. Forced desegregation is generally the result o f a school b o a r d o r d e r or c o u rt o r d e r a n d occurs within the e nt ir e school system o f a given city. S t ud en ts arc b u s e d from thei r own n e i g h b o r h o o d to a school in a n o t h e r n e i g h b o r h o o d . Voluntary desegregation can o c cu r in an individual school or in an e nt i r e school system. S ome o f the s tu d en t s in these schools arc also b us ed to o t h e r schools, generally t h r o u g h a process o f o p e n e nr ol l­ m e nt . An e x a m p l e o f this would be a school in a p r e d o m i n a t e l y Black n e i g h b o r h o o d offering a dv an ce d p l a c e m e n t cour ses in o r d e r to attract Whi te s tu d e n t s from o t h e r n e i g h b o r h o o d s . N atural desegregation occurs when the n e i g h b o r h o o d is in t eg r at e d a n d the school accurately reflects the n e i g h b o r h o o d p op ul a ti on . It s eems a p p r o p r i a t e to m e n t i o n a wo rd a b o u t the di f f cr cnce b et ween in­ t egration a n d d e se gr eg at io n . T h e two t er ms have similar m e a n i n g s a n d arc often used i n t er c ha n ge ab l y to d e n o t e the e n d i n g o f segr egat i on a n d the c o m i n g t o g e t h e r o f p e o p l e o f various raccs a n d e t h n i c gr oup s. Desegregation is the process of b r in g in g the raccs to g e t h e r a n d integration is the co nd i ti on t h a t occurs following des egr eg a ti on . O f t e n the wor d “i n t e g r a t i o n ” is used to c o n n o t e the c on d i ti o n t ha t exists w he n the mi nor i ty g r o u p is a cc c pt ed on a c omplet ely e qual basis (Pettigrew, 1971; St. J o h n , 1975). E x a m i n i n g the results o f t he studies in Tabl e 8 . 1, b as ed on t he way d es eg ­ regat ion o c c u r r c d , reveals s o m e in te re st in g patterns. First it s h o u l d be n o t e d th at all o f t he f or cc d de se gr eg at io n “e x p e r i m e n t s ” were short -term in n at ur e , wh e re as t hos e t h a t e x a m i n e d voluntary o r n a tu r a l dese gr e ga ti o n span the e nt i r e time c o n t i n u u m . Research in which the at ti tudes o f Whit e ch il dr en were e x a m i n e d following f or cc d d es eg re g a ti on revealed an i n ­ crease or n o c h a n g c in p re judi c e. T h e o u t c o m e s for Whi te st ude nt s follow­ ing vol untary d es eg re ga ti on are mi xed: T h r e e studies f o u n d n o significant c h an g c, two f o u n d an incrca.se, a n d o n e f o u n d a decr ease. O f t he ei gh t o u t ­ c ome s for n at ur al d e se gr eg a ti on, h a lf f o u n d an incrca.se in p rc jud ic c a n d the r e m a i n i n g half, a dccrca.se. T h e o ut c ome s for African-American children arc mi xe d for all t hr ee types o f desegregation. In situations whe re the desegregation was forccd, two stud­ ies f o u n d an increase in prcj udi cc toward Whites, o n e f o u n d a dccrcasc, an d o n e f o u n d n o changc. For voluntary desegregation, prej udice increased in t hr ee studies, decr eased in t hr ee studies, a n d r e m a i n e d u n c h a n g e d in one. T h e results are similar in eases of natural integration. Two studies f o u n d in­ creases in prejudice, two showed decreases, a n d o n e saw no changc. O n e can draw the following c oncl us ions from these data. Whi te c hi ldr en who e x p e r i e n c e fo rc cd d ese gr e ga ti on t e n d to b c c o m c m o r e pr eju di c ed. W h e n d es eg re ga ti on is vol unt ary o r nat ural, the results are mi xe d. No such pa t te r ns exist wh e n the results for Black c hi l d r e n arc viewed by type of d e ­ segregati on; the results arc m i x e d for all t h r e e types.

230

8.

MODIFYING PRE JUDICE AND DIS CRIMINATIO N

Only three of the studies in Table 8.1 differentiated results by sex. In general, White girls exp e r ie nc ed mo r e positive attitude changcs as a result of desegregation than White boys, whereas Black girls’ attitudes b ecame m o r e negative than those o f Black boys (Dcntlcr & Elkins, 1967; Silverman & Shaw, 1973; Singer, 1966). Singer studied fifth-grade children in n a t u ­ rally integrated schools. He f oun d that both White girls a n d boys displayed positive attitudes toward Blacks, b u t girls showed the most positive attitudes a nd were mo re willing than any o t h e r g ro u p to associate with Blacks. How­ ever, Black girls held negative stereotypes o f Whites, whereas the attitudes of Black boys were generally positive. Rccall that it was prcdi ctcd that girls would have mo r e positive attitudes toward o t he r raccs than boys a n d that girls’ attitudes would c hangc mo r e readily t han boys; t hus the prediction is n o t s u pp or te d for Blacks. Docs the age o f the child at the onset o f desegregation effect the o ut ­ come? T h e studies in Table 8.1 arc divided into t hree age-related categories for the following discussion. Th e first gr ou p o f children exp er ie nc ed deseg­ regation in preschool t h r ou gh sccond grade, that is, less than 8 years old. For the s econd gr oup the o nset of desegregation was between the third and sixth grades (age 8 to age 12). T h e third g r oup is Grades 7 t hr ou g h 12 (age 12 to age 18). First let’s look at the results for Black children. Five o f the o ut come s in Tabic 8.1 includc the youngest age category. O f these, three f ound an in­ crease in prcjudicc as a result of desegregation, one showed a decrease and one, no change. T h e results for the middle age g roup are similar with five showing an incrca.se in prejudice, two a decrease, a nd two, no changc. For the oldest age group, two of these studies fou nd an incrca.se in prejudice, four showed a dccrcasc, a nd one showed no changc. T h us there is a te n­ dency for the cffects o f desegregation to be mo r e positive for the older gr ou p than for the two y ounger ones. The picturc for White children is different. Looking at outcomes for the youngest age group, two r e po r t an increase in prcjudicc, two, a dccrca.se a nd four, no changc. For the middle age gr ou p the 11 o utcomes arc fairly evenly divided between an increase in prejudice, a decrease, a n d no changc. In Grades 7 th ro ug h 12, White c h i l d r e n ’s prejudice increased in five of the studies, decreased in two, a nd showed no c ha ngc in three. T hus there is a tendency for the effects of desegregation to be m o r e negative with the older g r o u p than for the two yo un ge r ones. Rccall that it was prcdi ct cd that there would be differences in the results of prejudice intervention m e t ho d s at ccrtain ages, that is, 4, 6 to 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a nd 18 to 19 years. T h e results of Table 8.1 d o n o t s up p o r t this p r e ­ diction. T h e r e does seem to be a shift at age 12 to slightly mo re prcjudicc as a result of desegregation for White children a nd a similar shift to less pr eju­ dice for Black students. It is n ot d e a r how to i nt er pr et these results.

D E S E G R E G A T IO N

231

C o n ta c t T h e o ry Why have we n o t seen a c o n s i st e n t d e c r e a s e in p r e j u d i c e for any g r o u p s o f c h i l d r e n as a r es ult o f d e se g r e g a t i o n ? O n e possibility is t h at the c o n d i t i o n s s t ip u la t ed by A ll po r t (1954) were n o t met . Recall t h a t A l l p o r t ’s c o n d i t i o n s i n c l u d e d c o m m u n i t y sa nc t io n , e q u al status, c o o p e r a t i o n , a n d i n t i m at e as­ sociation. T h e d e se gr ega ti on r esear ch is relatively m u t e r e g a r d i n g A ll po r t ’s (1954) suggestion that c o m m u n i t y s anct ion is an i m p o r t a n t fact or in p re ju d i ce re­ duc ti on . In the o n e case wh er e the c o m m u n i t y o pe nl y s u p p o r t e d d e s e g r e ­ gation, pr e ju d i c e de c re a se d (see Tabl e 8.1). Five of the studies i nc lu d e n e g ­ ative, ne ut ra l, o r m i x e d c o m m u n i t y reactions. In all these cases, Black a n d Whi te ch i ld re n e it he r b e c a m e m o r e p r e j u di c e d or t he ir attitudes did n ot c ha ng e. T he se dat a are insufficient to evaluate c o m m u n i t y sanction. N o n e o f the schools a t t e m p t e d to modify o r equalize status. Re ad i ng ability a n d e c o n o m i c factors play a role in d e t e r m i n i n g status. In f orccd b us i ng situations, the Black s tu d en t s often c a me fr om lower e c o n o m i c n e i g h b o r h o o d s a n d the White s tu de nt s c a m e from s u b u r b a n m i dd l e class schools. Additionally, in m a n y situations, the level o f e d u c a t i o n available in previously se gr eg at ed Black schools was lower t han that available in previ­ ously se gr eg a te d Whit e schools. W h e n these st ud en ts were b r o u g h t t o­ g e t h er , r e a d i n g ability dif fer ences existed. O n e can c o n c l u d e t h a t equal status was n o t a t ta i n e d for the c hi l d r en in the studies. Allport (1954) also in di c a t e d t ha t the p u r su i t o f c o m m o n objectives or c o o p e r a t i o n is an i m p o r t a n t factor in r e d u c i n g p rej udice. N o n e of the s t u d ­ ies i n c l u d e d cooper ati ve cont act . H e n c e this aspect o f C o n t a c t T h e o r y can n ot be pro ve d or di sproved by the literature. Allport (1954) believed that casual c o n t ac t r e i n f or c ed stereotypes a n d p r e j ud i c e d attitudes wh er e as int ima te c o n t ac t served to d ecr ease prejudice. Similar to c o o p e r a t i o n , the e x p e r i m e n t s in Table 8.1 d o n o t indicate w h e t h e r intimacy existed in the schools st udied. Recall t h a t short-term d e ­ segr egat ion r es ul ted in an incrca.se or no c h a n g c in pr ej ud i c e for Whi te stu­ dents. This may, in part, be d u e to the fact th at it takes time for intimacy to build a n d 1 year is n o t e n o u g h . Given these c ons ide ra tions , it would be surpri si ng if s chool d e s e g re g a­ tion h a d p r o d u c e d the e x p e ct e d decr eas es in p r e j u d i c e d att itudes for chil­ d r e n b ecause the C o n t a c t T h e o r y c on d i ti o n s did n o t exist in any o f the schools. We d o know, however, t h a t de cr e ases in pr ej udi ce for b o t h Whi t e a n d Black c hi l d r en are possible. Lewinian T h e o ry From Lewinian Th e or y, o n e c ou ld c x p e c t d es e gr e ga ti on to p r o d u c c d e ­ creases in p re j ud i c e for b ot h Black a n d Whit e ch il dr e n. Let us look at s ome

232

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

o f the r es tr ai n in g a n d driving forces to see how they fit with t he dat a p r e ­ s e n t ed in this section. T h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f socially i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a vi o r a n d d i s c om f o r t causcd by strain in social i nt er act ions are forces that restrain Whi te a n d Black ch il dr e n fr om c h a n g i n g their attitudes. O n e m i g h t e x p e c t i nt er ac ­ tions in d e s e g r eg a t ed schools to lessen o r e l imina te these forces b ccausc Black a n d Wrhite chi ld re n play, in t er a ct socially, a n d p e r f or m in c o m p a r a ­ ble ways. This display o f socially ac cc pt ab le be ha v io r by bo th races o f chil­ d r e n may n o t have o c c u r r e d very often, a n d if it did, the effects were n o t c onsistent in r e d u c i n g the p r e j ud i ce o f c i t he r g r ou p. Rcspcct for au tho ri ty can be e i t he r a r est rai ni ng or driving force in Lewinian Theor y. As already n o t e d , the da ta in Tabic 8.1 arc relatively m u t e r e g a r d i n g the effects o f c o m m u n i t y r es p on se . It is likely t h a t in mo s t cases, the c o m m u n i t y was negative o r n eu tr a l r e g a r d i n g d es e gr e ga t i on , b u t most studies did n o t r e p o r t this i n f o r ma t io n. O n e o f the driving forces to c h a n g c p r e j u d i c e d attitudes is emp a th y. O n e c ou ld c x p e c t t h a t de se g r eg at io n wo uld increase e m p a t h y a n d t h e r e ­ fore r e d u c e pr ej udice. However, the d e v e l o p m e n t o f e m p a t h y r equ ir e s ac­ tive c o nt ac t b et ween m e m b e r s o f the two racial gr oups. If this c o nt ac t o c ­ c u r r e d, the effect on e m p a t h y was n o t consistent. It d oe s n o t a p p e a r t ha t Lewinian T h e o r y is very helpf ul in e xp la i ni n g the results o f d e se gr eg at i o n . It is possible, however, t h a t t h e r e was n o t e n o u g h i n ter act ion b et ween the races in t radi tional schools f or driving forces for c h a n g c to develop. Lat er in the c h a pt c r , we look at t he i m p o r t a n c e of i n t e r ­ action in c h a n g i n g b o t h att i tude a n d behavior.

M AI NS TR E A MI NG Until 1975, the c o n c e p t o f equal p r ot e ct i o n u n d e r the law did n o t g e n e r a l ­ ize to disabled ch i ld re n. T h e Education for A ll Handicapped Children Act c h a n g e d t hat a n d initiated the c o n c e p t o f mainstreaming. M a i n s t r e a mi n g re­ fers to the p l a c e m e n t o f c hi ld r en with disabilities into e d u c a t i o n a l p r o ­ gr ams for a n d with n o n d i s a b l e d c hi ld r en (Karnes 8c Lee, 1979; Safford 8c Rosen, 1981; Tawney, 1981; A. P. T u r n b u l l 8c Blacher-Dixon, 1981). C u r ­ r e n t t e rm i no l o g y i ncl udes inclusive education a n d the regular education initia­ tive. T h e first goal of this section is to e x a m i n e the m a i n s t r e a m i n g research. W h e n looki ng at the results o f m ai n s t r e a m i n g , m a n y r e s ea rc her s primarily focus o n c h a n ge s in a ca d em i c a n d social skills for disabled ch i ld re n. A few have e x a m i n e d c h a n ge s in p r e ju di ce a n d d is c ri min at io n for n o n d is a bl e d c hi ld r en toward the disabled as a result of m a i n st r ea m in g. Wre first look at the latter g r o u p o f studies. At t e n t io n is paid to differenti ati ng results by

MAINSTREAMING

233

type o f h a ndi c a p, age, a n d sex. Next, the first body ofl i t er at ur e is discussed in light o f the cffcct changcs in acadcmic a nd social skills may have on n ondi sabl ed c h i l d r e n ’s prejudice a nd discrimination. Th e second goal of this section is to i n te rp re t the data in terms of two predictions m a d e earlier. First, it was prcdi ct cd that girls’ attitudes toward disabled children will generally be m o r e positive following interventions than those held by boys. Second, it was prcdi ctcd that agc-relatcd differ­ ences would occur in the results o f mainstreaming. T h e third a n d final goal o f this section is to discuss the results o f ma i ns tr ea mi ng in terms of Contact T he or y a n d l.cwinian Theory. T h e Prejudice and Discrimination Studies T h er e is a moder at e body of literature that examines the effects of mainstreaming on prejudice and discrimination by nondisabled children. Eleven studies are shown in Table 8.2. Experiments dealing with cooperative learn­ ing in mai ns tr ea me d settings are n o t i ncl uded because these types o f e xp e r­ iments are specifically dealt with in the following section. T he first five stud­ ies c o mp a r e a mai ns t re ame d condition to a segregated condition, whereas the r ema in i ng six look at various aspects of mainst reami ng. Six of the stud­ ies measure prejudice a nd the r ema ining five measure discrimination. Does type of handicap effect the prejudice or discrimination by nondis­ abled children? The answer is yes. Represented in the studies were children with mild, moderate, and severe mental retardation, o rt hopedi c limitations, emot ional disabilities, sensory impairments, and learning disabilities. Some decrease in prejudice a n d discrimination by nondi sabl ed children was fo un d in relation to all these types of disabilities; b ut most e xper iment s did n ot differentiate results by type of disability. Two studies specifically looked at the reactions of n ondi sabled children to different types of handicaps. T. Parish, Ohlsen, a n d j . Parish (1978) used an attitude scale to assess the prejudice of nondi sabl ed children toward children with three types of disabilities. T h e results indicated a preference in the following order: physically challenged, learning disabled, a n d e m o ­ tionally disabled. In a similar study, Miller, Richey, a nd La mme rs (1983) used a social distance scale a nd d e t e r mi n e d that n ondisabled children pr e­ ferred learning disabled children m o r e than they did nondisabled ones. T h e r ema ini ng handicaps were pr ef er r ed in this order: h ear ing i mpaired, physically challenged, mildly mentally retarded, a nd visually impaired. Main­ streaming does generally create mo r e positive attitudes a nd behaviors to­ ward all types o f handicaps. T h e r e does however, seem to be a hierarchy of pr ef er ence by type of handicap. Exami ni ng the studies in Table 8.2 for differences based on the age of the nondisabled students reveals no general patterns, which is inconsistent

T A B L E 8.2 S u m m a ry o f M a in s tr e a m in g S tu d y C h a ra c te ris tic s a n d O u tc o m e s

Study

#/T ype Disability'

Dependent Measure

N

Grade

A rchie 8c Sherrill (1989)

229

4—5

9 /M R /P D , SI

M ainstream ing vs. seg reg ated c o n ­ trol

A ttitu d e scale

G ottlieb, C o h en , 8c G oldstein (1974) R apier e t al. (1972)

499

3 -6

3 0 /M R

S tereotype scale

152

3 -5

2 5 / I’l)

M ainstream ing vs. seg reg ated c o n ­ trol M ainstream ing (b efo re vs. after) age d ifferences

S heare (1974)

400

9

3 0 /M R

M ainstream ing vs. seg reg ated c o n ­ trol sex d ifferences

A ttitu d e scale

York e t al. (1992)

181

7 -9

2 4 /M R , PD, SI

M ainstream (b efo re vs. after) aca­ dem ic a n d behavioral d ifferences fo r h a n d ic a p p e d ch ild ren

S ociom etric playm ate

Brew er 8c Sm ith (1989) G o o d m an e t al. (1972) M iller et al. (1983)

457

1-5

2 0 /M R

40

1-6

18/M R

N u m b e r o f years m ain stream ed (.7-5.7) Sex differences

}

4 -7

Parish e t al. (1978)

131

5 -7

T ype o f h an d icap

R oberts 8c Zubrick (1992) Taylor et al. (1987)

194

3 -7

? /L D , SI, PD, MR ? /L D , PD, ED 9 7 /M R

S ociom etric playm ate S ociom etric frien d sh ip Social distance scale A ttitu d e scale

64

3 -6

3 4 /M R

A cadem ic a n d behavioral differ­ ences fo r h a n d ic a p p e d c h ild re n B ehavioral d ifferen ces fo r h a n d i­ c a p p e d ch ild ren

S ociom etric frien d sh ip S ociom ctric playm ate

In depen den I Va liable

T ype o f h a n d ic a p

A ttitu d e scale

Outcomes fo r Nondisabled

M ain stream ed fo u n d h a n d ic a p p e d m o re fun a n d in tere stin g vs. scg. co n tro l. M ain stream ed less accep tin g o f h a n d ic a p p e d vs. scg. control. Shift to less p reju d ice tow ard dis­ a b led after m ain stream ing. G re a te r shift fo r 5th vs. 3 rd grade. M ain stream in g m o re accep tin g o f disabled vs. seg. Girls m o re ac­ c e p tin g vs. boys. M ore accep tin g o f disabled after m ain stream in g . Perceived positive acad em ic a n d social skills ch an g es in disabled ch ild ren . No d ifferen ces based on years m ain stream ed . Girls m o re accep tin g o f disabled vs. boys. / O rd e r o f p referen ce: LD, N, III, PD, MR, VI. O rd e r o f p referen ces: N, PD, LD, ED. P re fe rre d MR c h ild re n with highlevel social a n d academ ic skills. MR displaying socially acceptable behavior p re fe rre d .

a# = N u m b e r o f h a n d ic a p p e d c h ild re n in th e study. ED = E m otionally D istu rb ed ; MR = M entally R e ta rd e d ; VI = Visually Im p a ire d ; LI) = L e arn in g D isabled; III = H e a rin g Im p a ire d ; SI = Sensory Im p a ire d ; S cg = S e g re g a ted ; PD = Physically D isabled.

MAINSTREAMING

235

with prcdi ct cd age effects. Rapier, Adelson, Carey, a n d Croke (1972), how­ ever, did find some age differences. In their study, the attitudes o f n o n ­ disablcd third, fourth, a nd fifth graders (age 8 to age 11), toward orthopcdically disabled children were e x a mi n e d using an attitude scalc. Although the overall shift was from neutral to mo re positive attitudes, the shift was greatest for fifth graders a n d least for children in the third grade. T he fail­ ure to find prcdi ct cd age effects is consistent with the desegregation s tud­ ies. This implies that social cognitive factors play little part in these two types o f nonspecific interventions. In the previous discussion of the pr cj u­ dicc a nd discrimination literature, the prcdi ct cd age effects were only fo un d for oppositc-scx prcjudicc a nd discrimination. In the o t he r catego­ ries, consistent with the p r esent findings, age ha d no systematic impact. As predicted, there seem to be sex differences in prcjudicc a nd discrimi­ nation toward the disabled in this research (Tabic 8.2). Sheare (1974) stud­ ied n o n h a n d i c a p p c d students, divided equally between boys a nd girls. Half o f the students were placcd with mildly mentally r et ar de d children in their classcs. T he o t he r students ha d no mentally r et ar ded students in their classes. Sheare f ou nd that girls in both ma ins t r e ame d schools a nd segre­ gated schools were less prejudiced than boys in both conditions. Similarly, H. G o o d m a n , Gottlieb, a n d Harrison (1972) fo u n d that girls discriminate less than boys. These studies su p po r t the prediction that prcjudicc held by male children is s tronger after the intervention than that held by females. An additional i mp o r t a nt question to ask is: Do higher social a nd acadcmic skills of disabled children result in less prcjudicc a nd discrimination by their nondisabled peers? Consistent with the idea of badging mechanisms, the a n ­ swer is yes for discrimination, but there arc no data for prejudice. Th r e e of the studies in Tabic 8.2 link rcduccd discrimination by nondisabled children with the socially acceptable behavior of disabled children. York, Va ndcrcook, MacDonald, Hcisc-Ncff, a nd Caughey (1992) studied n ondi sabl cd students in two schools that ha d been mai ns tr ea me d for 1 year when the final data were collectcd. T he results indicated that the n o n ­ disablcd students pcrccived positive social skills changcs a n d acadcmic changcs in the disabled children, a n d were also mor e acccpting o f them than prior to classroom integration. T h e study d o n e by A. R. Taylor ct al. (1987) was also noteworthy. They looked at the effects of mentally re ta rd ed c h i l d r e n ’s social behavior on dis­ crimination by n o n r e t a r d c d children. Taylor ct al. fo und that re ta r de d chil­ dr en who behaved in socially c o m p e t e n t ways were m or e acccpt cd by their n o n r c t a r d c d peers than those who displayed avoidant a nd withdrawn b e ­ havior or those who were aggressive a n d disruptive. In a similar study, Rob­ erts a n d Zubrick (1992) fo u n d that both social a n d acadcmic competency in r et ar de d children were c on nc c tc d with the a m o u n t of discrimination by n o n r c t a r d c d children.

236

8.

MODIFYING PRE JUDICE AND DIS CRIMINATIO N

These data indicate that social a nd acadcmic compctcnci es in m a i n ­ streamed disabled children do result in less discrimination by their n o n ­ disablcd peers. Additionally, it is pr obabl e that moderately a nd severely mentally r e ta rd e d children will exper ience discrimination by their n o n ­ disablcd peers bccause they arc less able to display social a n d acadcmic c ompct encc. T he Social and Academic Skill Studies The question r ema i ni ng is: Do the social and academic skills of disabled children i mprove as a result of mainstreaming? We know t hat social and ac­ ademic c omp ete nc y for disabled children is c o n n e ct e d with decreased dis­ crimination by nondi sabled children. We assume that ma inst reami ng will be effective in r educing discrimination by nonclisabled children if improve­ ment s in social or academic skills for disabled children occur, which is c o n­ sistent with badgi ng mechani sms a nd i n g r o u p favoritism considerations. Four studies were fo u n d that co nn e ct mai nst reaming to the i mp ro ve me nt of academic a nd social skills for primarily mildly mentally re ta rde d pr e­ school children (Cole, Mills, Dale, & Jenkins, 1991; Guralnick & Gr oom, 1988b; Jenkins, Spelts, O d o m , 1985; R. E. Wylie, 1974). T h r e e of (he four studies deal with the effects of ma inst reami ng on the social skills of disabled children (Guralnick & Gr oom, 1988b; J enki ns el al., 1985; R. E. Wylie, 1974). T h e studies are similar with the exception of the subject popul ati on, a n d all o f them show hi g he r levels of social skills in the ma i ns tr ea me d condition than in the segregated condition. R. E. Wylie (1974) studied mildly to moderately re ta rd e d preschoolers, Guralnick and Groom (1988b) e xa mine d mildly mentally r et ar ded preschoolers, and J e n ­ kins et al. (1985) included mildly mentally ret arded, orthopedically chal­ lenged, sensory impaired, a nd normally abled preschoolers. Wylie (1974) looked al social play interactions in m ai ns t r e ame d a nd segregated settings. Interactions for all b ut two of the r et ar ded children increased when the n o n r e t a r d e d children were i ntr oduced. T h e two children who did not dis­ play an increase in social play were nonverbal. Two of the studies were designed to e xami ne the academic skills of dis­ abled children resulting from mai nstr eami ng (Cole el al., 1991;Jenkins et al., 1985). T h e o ut comes of these exper iment s are no t consistent. In Cole et al. (1991) mentally r et ar ded preschoolers in mai ns tr ea me d classes were c omp a re d with similar students in segregated classes. All students were tested on general cognition, vocabulary, language, and early readi ng ability prior to b e gi nn in g their first year of classes a nd al the e nd of the school year. T h e results showed that the h i g h e r funct ioni ng students gained mor e academically from i ntegrated classes, whereas those that were functioning at a lower level gained m o r e from segregated classes. No significant differ-

M A IN S T R E A M IN G

237

e nc cs were f o u n d be twe en variously a b l ed m a i n s t r e a m e d a n d similar segre­ g at ed st ud e nt s in the study by J e n k i n s et al. (1985). T h e d at a j u s t cited i ndicate t h a t the social a n d a ca d cmi c skills o f highf u nc ti on in g, disabled p r e s ch o ol c hi l d r e n i mpr ove as a result o f m a i n ­ s tr eaming. We saw earlier t ha t this i m p r o v e m e n t is associated with a d e ­ crease in discr imi nat or y be ha vi or by n o n d i s a b l c d ch i ld re n. T h e results are d if f er e nt f or lower f u n c t i o n in g , m o de r at e l y to severely ment al ly r et a rd e d. T h e social a n d a ca d cm i c skills o f these ch il dr en d o n o t impr ove in m a i n ­ s t r e a m e d settings a n d they c o n t i n u e to be pcrcci vcd as m e m b e r s o f the o u t g r o u p . T h u s , d is c ri min at io n by n o n r c t a r d e d c hi ld r en toward their low f u n c t i o n i n g r e t a r d e d peer s pr oba bl y r e m a i n s u n c h a n g e d . C o n ta c t T h e o ry Can we explain the d ecr eases in p r ej udi ce a n d d i scr iminati on by n o n ­ disabled c hi ld r en toward the disabled bas ed on C o n t a c t Theor y? T h e a n ­ swer s eems to be no. As you will recall, C o n t a c t T h e o r y i ncludes e qu al status, c o m m u n i t y s anction, cooper at ive contact , a n d i nt imat e contact. T h e r e is n o evi dence to suggest that e qu al status exists for disabled chil­ d r e n a n y m o r e th an it did for Black c h i l d re n following de s eg re ga t io n ( Hertel, 1991). In m a ny studies whe re a d ec re as e in p re ju d i ce o r discri minat ion was seen a m o n g the n o n d i s a b l e d student s, these st ud e n t s were acting as role m o d el s for the disabled c hi ld r en (Snyder, Apolloni, & Coo k e , 1977). Additionally, the n o n d i s a b l e d c hi l d r e n i nt er ac te d with the disabled chil­ d r e n in a h e l p i n g way, which seems to be an i m p o r t a n t factor in r e d u c i n g d i scr iminat ion ( C o op e r, D. W. J o h n s o n , R. T. J o h n s o n , & Wi l de rs o n , 1980; D. W. J o h n s o n , R. T. J o h n s o n , & Ma ruy ama , 1983; R. T. J o h n s o n , Rynders, D. W. J o h n s o n , Sch mi dt , 8c Ha i de r , 1979). This evidence indicates that e qu al status is n o t relat ed to a d ecr eas e in p r e ju di ce o r d iscr iminat ion by n o n d i s a b l e d c h i l dr e n toward the disabled. C o m m u n i t y sanct ion is the s e c o nd factor in the C o nt a c t Theor y. No studies e x a m i n e d c o m m u n i t y s u p p o r t of m a i ns t re a mi n g . T h e r e is, however a d e b at e a b o u t the effectiveness o f m ai n s t r e a m i n g , with s tr on g o p i ni o ns fr om bo t h sides. T h e par ti cipant s in this d e b at e are par ent s, e du c at or s, a n d psychologists. T h e r e likely is n o t s tr on g c o m m u n i t y s u p p o r t for an issue that is b e i n g a r g u e d so aggressively (M. Byrnes, 1990; Davis, 1989; Je nk i ns , Pious, & Jewell, 1990; L i e b e r m a n , 1990). Coope ra ti ve a n d i nt imat e con t ac t are the final two c o m p o n e n t s . N o n e of these studies i n c l u d e d cooper ati ve interactions. H e n c e this aspect o f C o n ­ tact T h e o r y can n o t be p r ov e d o r di spr oved by the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d litera­ ture. A l t h o u g h t h e r e was pr ob abl y i nt imat e c on t a c t a m o n g the p r es c ho o l gr ou ps , t h e re is n o evi dence that i nt imate co n t a c t is r e q u i r e d to c h a n g e atti­ tudes or behavi ors o f n o n d i s a b l e d st ud e nt s toward the disabled. Substantial

238

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

r e se ar ch has f o u n d t ha t decreases in p re ju d i ce a n d di scr i minat ion toward the disabled can o cc ur following lect ures a n d video p r e s en t a t i on s wit h o u t any c o n t a c t ( Do n al d s o n , 1980; Lazar, Gensley, 8c O r p c t , 1971; Scdlick 8c Pcnta, 1975). Alt h ou g h C o n t a c t T h e o r y a p p e a r e d to be hel pf ul in e xp la in i ng t he n e g ­ ative results o f d es eg re ga ti on , it docs n o t seem to apply to m a i ns t r e am in g . Most o f the criteria were n o t p r e s e n t in m a i n s t r e a m e d schools w he re d e ­ creases in pr ej ud ic e were f o u n d.

Lewinian T h e o ry Lewinian T h e o r y may b e t t e r explain why m a i n s t r e a m i n g causes a d e cr ease in p rc ju di cc a n d d iscr iminat ion. Let us e x a m i n e s o m e o f the driving a n d re­ str aining forces t h a t arc salient. Rccall t h a t strain in social i nt e ra ct i on s is o n e o f the forces in the m a i n t e n a n c e o f p r e j u d i c e d att itudes a n d t h u s a re­ str aining force to the d e v e l o p m e n t o f m o r e positive attitudes. Seei ng dis­ abl ed c hi l dr e n p e r f o r m i n g n o r m a l tasks in school alleviates this strain, a n d provides a r e d u c t i o n in the r es tr ai ni ng forces. T h e e x pe ct at i on o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e social b e h a vi or by the disabled is a n ­ o t h e r r es tr ai ni ng force a n d discovering t ha t disabled c hi ld r en be ha ve a p ­ pr opr iat el y r e d u ce s the force. T h e study by Taylor ct al. (1987) s u p p o r t e d this conclusi on. Rccall they f o u n d t ha t me ntal ly r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n who b e ­ haved in socially a cc ept abl e ways were c ho se n as playmates m o r e by n o n ­ r c t a r d e d chi l d r e n t ha n those who were a voi dant a n d withdrawn o r aggres­ sive a n d disruptive. Finally, the e m p a t h y t ha t n o n d i s a b l c d chi l d r e n feel toward th e disabled provides a driving force to positive c h a n g e in attitudes. It is a s s u m e d that “h e l p i n g b e h a vi o r ” by n o n disabled c hi ld r en toward the disabled p r o d u c e s emp a th y , a n d h e n c e , p r ej ud i ce r e d u c t i o n ( Do na l ds o n , 1980).

C O O P E R A T IV E I N T E R A C T IO N T h e third substantial bo dy o f li terature on p r e ju di ce a n d d is cr imi nat ion re­ d u ct i o n is based o n cooperat ive inter act ion. Slavin a n d C o o p e r (1999) d e ­ scribed ei ght d if fer ent types of school-based a p p r o a c h e s , b u t all s ha re the following c o m m o n characteristics. C o o p e r a t i o n implies that t he re m us t be positive goal i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e , which can take the form o f s h a r ed rewards, divided r esources, o r c o m p l e m e n t a r y roles (D. W. J o h n s o n 8c R. T. J o h n ­ son, 1992). Interaction m e a n s t ha t c h i l d re n work o r talk t o g e t h e r as a g r o u p as o p p o s e d to simply occu p y in g the s ame r o o m , a n d wor ki ng individually. T h e g r o u p s may be formally s tr u c t ur e d by the t eacher , lasting o n e class pe-

C O O P KRATIV K IN T KRA CT IO X

239

r i o d to several weeks, i n f o r m a l a n d n o t s t r u c t u r e d by t h e t e a c h e r , o r “b a s e ” g r o u p s t h a t last an e n t i r e te rm (D. W. J o h n s o n Sc R. T. J o h n s o n , 2000). T h e first goal o f this section is to discuss th e results o f th e c o o p e r a t i v e in­ te r a c t i o n r e s e a r c h . T h e s e c o n d goal is to i n t e r p r e t th e d a t a in t e r m s o f two p r e d i c t i o n s m a d e earl ier . T h e first p r e d i c t i o n is b a s e d on t h e i d e a t h a t b a d g i n g m e c h a n i s m s d u r i n g c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n le a d to p e r c e p t i o n s o f similarity o f i n g r o u p a n d o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , w hic h in t u r n le ad to i n c l u ­ sion of b o t h g r o u p s in to a single o v e r a r c h i n g g r o u p (D ovidi o, Ka wakami, Sc G a e r t n e r , 2 0 0 0 ) . T h i s s h o u l d le a d to i n g r o u p favoritism o f th e inclusive g r o u p . It is e x p e c t e d , t h e n , t h a t c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n will r e d u c e p r e j u ­ dic e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t ow a rd o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s w h o b e c o m e c o o p e r a ­ tive t e a m m a t e s . T h i s r e d u c t i o n is n o t c x p c c t c d to g e n e r a l i z e to all m e m b e r s o f t h e s a m e o u t g r o u p b e c a u s e the y have n o t b e e n p a r t o f th e c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n s . T h e s e c o n d p r e d i c t i o n is t h a t o n e w o u l d c x p e c t d i f f e r e n c e s in th e effects of p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n r e d u c t i o n i n t e r v e n t i o n s at ages 4, 6 to 7, 10 to 12, 14 to 16, a n d 18 to 19 years. T h e t h i r d a n d final goal o f this section is to discuss th e results o f c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n in t e r m s o f C o n t a c t T h e o r y a n d L e w in ia n T h e o r y . T h e S tu die s T a b l e 8.3 c o n t a i n s 20 st udie s t h a t e x a m i n e d th e effects o f c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r ­ a c ti on in a c a d e m i c settings o n p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t ow a rd dif f er ­ e n t racial a n d e t h n i c g r o u p s a n d th e o p p o s i t e sex, as well as d i s c r i m i n a t i o n to w a r d th e di s a b l e d . T h r e e o f the e x p e r i m e n t s m e a s u r e d p r e j u d i c e a n d dis­ c r i m i n a t i o n to w ar d m o r e t h a n o n e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p ( o u t g r o u p ) . F o u r ­ t e e n Findings p e r t a i n e d to r a c i a l / e t h n i c p r e j u d i c e o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , t h r e e p e r t a i n e d to op posi te -se x, a n d six, to p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a t i o n b e t w e e n d is a b l e d a n d n o n d i s a b l e d c h i l d r e n . T h e a ver ag e s a m p l e size was 134 s u b ­ je c t s b u t th e n u m b e r r a n g e d fr o m 11 to 558. T h e c h i l d r e n in the se stud ie s r a n g e d in a ge fr o m 7 to 18 years ( G r a d e 2 to G r a d e 12), b u t m o s t were in th e 5th t h r o u g h 10th g r a d e . T h e i n t e r v e n t i o n s to o k o n a v era ge 1 h o u r e a c h day f o r 4 weeks. T h e only b r i e f i n t e r v e n t i o n (15 m i n u t e s ) was in the P. A. Katz a n d Zalk (1978) e x p e r ­ i m e n t . A variety o f d e p e n d e n t m e a s u r e s were u s e d . T h e first f o u r stud ie s listed in T a b l e 8.3 i n c l u d e d s o m e m e a s u r e o f a t t i t u d e t ow a rd th e o u t g r o u p in th e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n . T h e s e c o n d g r o u p i n g o f e x p e r i m e n t s , six in all, utilized o b s e r v a ti o n s to m e a s u r e b e h a v i o r to w ar d classmates. T h e r e m a i n ­ ing te n e x p e r i m e n t s c o ll e c te d s o c i o m e t r i c da ta. F o u r o f th e e x p e r i m e n t s in­ c l u d e d follow-up d a t a r a n g i n g fr o m 2 weeks a ft e r th e i n t e r v e n t i o n to 9 months. F o u r t e e n o f the s tu d ie s in T a b l e 8.3 h a d c h i l d r e n w o r k i n g in c o o p e r a ti v e te a m s as th e single e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n . T h e m a jo ri ty o f the se e xp er i-

240

TA BLE 8.3 S um m ary o f C o o p erativ e C o n tact Study C h aracteristics a n d O u tco m es Outcomes/Follow- up Study

Grade

N

Days/Hrs. Per Day

Dependent Measure

Comparison Group

Attitude

Behavior

Black White Hispanic Euro1' Girls Boys /

+0;|

0 0

Attitude Weigel et al. (1975)

324

D. W. Johnson et al. (1978)

30

P. A. Katz Be Zalk (1978)

40

Ziegler (1981)

146

7 & 10

5-6

100/1

50/1

2 8c 5

1 /1 /4

5-6

10/1/14

A ttitude scale Activity preference Sociometric friend & playmate Activity preference Altitude scale Sociomctric friend Attitude scale Social distance Sociomctric friend 2-week follow-up A ttitude scale Sociomctric friend 10-week follow-up

+0 +0

+

4-0

+

+

4-

+

+

Black White

0/0 0/0

0/0 0/0

Italian

4-/0 +/0

4- / 44- / 4-

+/0

+ /+

4-/0 4-/0

+ /+

Asian Greek West Indian Euro

4- / 4-

Behavior: Observâtio n

R. T. Johnson et al. (1979) M artino & I). W. John­ son (1979) Ryndcrs et al. (1980)

30

7-9

6/1

Observation

12

2-3

9/1

Observation

30

7-10

8/1

Observation

D. W. Johnson & R. T. Johnson (1981) Rogers et al. (1981)

51

4

16/1

11

6

4 /Vi

Observation Sociometric playmate Observation

Retarded N onrctardcd LDC Nondisabled Retarded Non retarded Black White Black White

44+ 4+ 44+ 4-

1). W. Johnson & R. T. Johnson (1982)

76

4

15/1

Observation Sociomctric friend 5-month follow-up

Black White

+ /+ + /+

Retarded N onretarded Black White Hispanic Euro Black White Black White Black White I.D Nondisabled Girls Boys Black White I.D Nondisabled Black White Black White Girls Boys Black White

+ + + + + + + + + + + /+ + /+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Behavior: Sociometric Ballard et al. (1977)

200

3-5

40/V¿

Sociometric playmate

Blaney et al. (1977)

304

5

18/1

Sociometric playmate

65

7

20/1

Sociometric friend

Slavin (1977) DeVries et al. (1978)

558

7-12

18/4

Sociometric friend

Slavin (1979)

294

7-8

50/1

40

5-6

20/1 Vi

Sociomctric friend 9-month follow-up Sociometric friend

60

7

15/3

Sociometric friend

6-8

50/1

Sociometric friend

6

10/1

Sociometric playmate

4 &6

11/1

Sociometric friend

Armstrong et al. ( 1981 ) C ooper et al. (1980)

Slavin & Oickle (1981)

230

D. W. Johnson & R. T. Johnson (1985) W arring et al. (1985)

48 125

a+ 0 = Positive change toward classmates, no change in general attitude. 15Euro = European-A m erican. CLD = L earning disabled.

242

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

m e n t s i n c l ud e d s om e i nt er act ion b et ween t e a ms within a class. T h e cont rol c on d i ti on in 18 o f t he studies involved ch i ld r en wor ki ng individually. Six o f the e x p e r i m e n t s i n c l u d e d two e x p e r i m e n t a l co nd iti on s , o n e cooperat i ve a n d o n e competitive. T h e results from the compet it ive c on di t i o n s arc dis­ cussed t o g e t h e r at the e n d o f this section. O pposi te -Se x Pr ej udi ce an d Discrimination O n e o f the studies in T able 8.3 e x a m i n e d t he effects o f cooper at i ve i nt er ac ­ tion on opposite-sex p re j ud i c e a n d two e x a m i n e d t he effects on d is cr imi na ­ tion. T h e first is by D. W. J o h n s o n , R. T. J o h n s o n , a n d Scott (1978). Whi te s tu d en t s were divided into cooper ati ve a n d c on tr ol c ondit ions . In the c o o p ­ erative c o n d it io n , t he s t u d e n ts wo r k e d in te ams on m a t h a ssi gnment s c o m ­ pleting o n e answer s h e e t p e r t eam. T he y were i ns t r uc te d to shar e ideas a n d seek clarification from cach o t h e r a n d were r e w a rd e d a n d praised as a g r o up . Two m e a s ur e s o f opposite-sex p r ej udi ce were u se d following the in te r­ v enti on, an activity p r e f e r e n c e scale a n d an at tit ude scale. T h e results from b o t h me as u r e s i ndic at e d t ha t boys a n d girls in the e x p e r i m e n t a l co nd it i o n were less p r e j u d i c e d toward the op po s i te sex t h a n thei r c o u n t e r p a r t s in the c on tr ol c on di t i on . T h e cooper ati ve c o n d i t i o n for C o o p e r et al. (1980) a n d Wa rr ing, D. W. J o h n s o n , Ma ru ya ma , a n d R. T. J o h n s o n (1985) also i n c l u d e d ch il dr en wro r ki ng t o g e t h e r in teams o n s chool assignments. Increases in oppositc-scx f ri en ds hi p choices toward classmates were f o u n d following cooper at ive i n ­ teraction wTh e n c o m p a r e d wTit.h t he control. T h e t h r e e studies j u s t cited i ndicate t ha t cooper at ive int eracti on d oe s re­ d u c e di scr imi nati on toward opposite-sex classmates a n d p r ej ud ic e towTard u n k n o w n m e m b e r s o f the op p os it e sex. T h e latter results d o n o t s u p p o r t the pr ed ic ti on t ha t cooper ati ve i nt er act i on will only have effects for the o u t g r o u p classmates wo rk e d with a n d n o t for u n k n o w n m e m b e r s of that o u t g r o u p . This gener ali zat ion o f effects p h e n o m e n o n is consi st ent with the c oncl us ions o f a meta-analysis by Pettigrewr a n d T r o p p (2000) evaluating a wTide r a ng e o f studies on i n t e r g r o u p c o nt ac t exclusive o f school-based c o o p ­ erative i nteractions. Racial a n d Ethnic Pr ej ud i ce a n d Discrimination Does cooper at i ve i nt er act ion also effect attitudes a n d behaviors bet ween d if f er ent racial a n d e th ni c groups? F o u r t e e n studies in T ab le 8.3 e x a m i n e d the effects o f c ooper at ive i nt er acti on on r a c i a l / e t h n i c pr ej ud i ce a n d dis­ c ri mi na ti on . O f t he 17 o u t c o m e s r e p o r t e d , 3 m e a s u r e d p r ej udi ce a n d 14 m e a s u r e d discri minat ion.

C O O P E R A T I V E IN T K R A C T IO N

243

Weigel, Wiser, a n d Cook (1975) c o m p a r e d Whit e a n d mi nori t y (AfricanAme r ic an a n d Mcxi can- Amcr ican) s tu d en t s in cooper at ive English classes with those in a c o nt r o l g r ou p. In the cooper at ive c o n d i t i o n, s tudent s wo rk ed in teams, a n d th ei r gr ade s were r e w a rd e d individually with b o n u s points given based on g r o u p p e r f o r m a n c e . A s te r eo t yp e scalc was u s e d to assess p r e j u d i c e t owa rd classmates, wher eas an a tti tude scalc a n d an activity p r e f e r e n c e scale were used to m e a s ur e p re ju di ce toward u n k n o w n m e m b e r s o f t he o t h e r racial a n d e t h ­ nic gro up s. T h e results o f the st ereot ype scale i ndi ca te d a d e cr ease in ra­ c i a l / e t h n i c p r cj ud ic c toward classmates. T h e results o f t he o t h e r two m e a ­ sures showe d n o di fferences in r a c i a l / e t h n i c p r cj u d ic c following c i t h e r the cooperati ve i nte rve nti on o r the c ontr ol situation. P. A. Katz a n d Zalk (1978) h a d chi ld re n p u t t i n g t o g e t h e r jigsaw puzzles for 15 mi nu t es . T h e ch i ld re n in the e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p s were Wh it e a n d Black. T h e c ont r ol g r ou p s were exclusively Whit e ch il dr e n wh o also wor ked t o g e t h e r on jigsaw puzzles. T h e d e p e n d e n t me as ur es , an at tit ude scalc a n d a social distance scale, were a d m i n i s t e r e d b ef or e the i nt er ve nt ion, i m m e d i ­ ately following, a n d 2 weeks later. T h e results showed no di f f er ence in cross-racial p re ju d i ce c i t h er i mm e d ia t el y following o r 2 weeks after the i n­ t ervention. Ziegler (1981) did find c ha ng c s in attitudes toward o t h e r e t hn i c g r ou ps following cooper at ive int er act i on. C o n d u c t e d in T o r o n t o , t he study i n ­ c l u d e d Anglo C a n ad i a ns , West I ndia n Ca n ad i an s , Ch in es e C an ad ia ns, Gr eek Ca n ad i a n s , a n d Italian Ca nadi ans . C h i ld r en in the e x p e r i m e n t a l c on di ti on l e a r n e d mat eri al a n d t h e n t a u g h t that mat eri al to their t e a m ­ mates. Quizzes were given biweekly a n d cach c h i l d ’s g r a de was c o m p o s e d of an individual score a n d a h o m e team score. T h e d e p e n d e n t m e a su r e , an a tt it ude scalc, was a d mi n i s t e r e d before, i m ­ medi at ely after, a n d 10 weeks after the i nt er ve nti on. At the e n d o f t he ex­ p e r i m e n t , the c hi l d r e n in t he cooper at ive c on d it i o n showed a significantly g r e a t er i ncrease in positive attitudes towar d o t h e r e t h ni c g r o u p s t h a n did those in the c on tr ol c o n d i ti o n. T h e effects substantially d ec r ea s ed 10 weeks later a n d were n o l o n g e r statistically significant. T h e s e t hr ee studies taken t o g e t h e r i ndicate t ha t lasting c h a n gc s in ra­ c i a l / e t h n i c attitudes toward the g en e r a l p o p u l a t i o n do n o t o c c ur as a result o f cooper ati ve i nt er acti on. W h e n a c h a n g e was n o t e d , the effects disap­ p e a r e d within 10 weeks. Al th o ug h the data are limited, attitudes toward o u t g r o u p classmates seem to imp ro ve following cooper ati ve int er act ion. No age effects were n o t e d in any o f these e x p e r i me n t s . T h e studies in­ c l u de d ch i ld re n in G r a d e 2 t h r o u g h G r a d e 10 (ages 7 to 16) a n d t he results were the s ame regardless o f the age g r ou p. O f the 14 e x p e r i m e n t s in Tabl e 8.3 t ha t m e a s u r e d r a c i a l / e t h n i c discrimi­ na ti on , 3 used observations as the d e p e n d e n t me a su r e . T h e first o f these, by

244

8.

MODIFYING PREJUDICE AND DISCRIM INATION

R oger s, Miller, a n d I l e n n i g a n (1 981) , s t u d i e d Black a n d W h it e girls for 2 w eeks d u r i n g recess. C o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n s c o n s is te d o f pl ay ing c o o p e r a ­ tive g a m e s 2 days p e r week. T h e girls w e re o b s e r v e d p r i o r to a n d following t h e e x p e r i m e n t . Prosocial cross-racial i n t e r a c t i o n s i n c r e a s e d significantly on a p r e - p o s t c o m p a r i s o n . In s u p p o r t o f the se d a ta , D. W. J o h n s o n a n d R. T. J o h n s o n (1981, 1982) o b s e r v e d W h i t e a n d Black s t u d e n t s in t h e i r two e x p e r i m e n t s . In th e c o o p e r ­ ative c o n d i t i o n , th e s t u d e n t s w o r k e d t o g e t h e r in t e a m s to finish t h e i r s ch ool work. Each te am c o m p l e t e d o n e a n s w e r s h e e t a n d was r e w a r d e d as a g r o u p . In o r d e r to ob ser ve b e h a v io r s , 10 m i n u t e s o f free ti m e w ere given a ft e r each class. Significantly m o r e cross-racial i n t e r a c t i o n was n o t e d b e t w e e n s tu d e n t s in th e c o o p e r a t i v e c o n d i t i o n t h a n th o s e in th e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n . T h e s e t h r e e s tu d ie s ta k e n t o g e t h e r in d ic a te t h a t cross-racial d i s c r i m i n a ­ tion d e c r e a s e s as a r e s u lt o f c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n . T h e e x p e r i m e n t by D. W. J o h n s o n a n d R. T. J o h n s o n (1982) i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e positive c h a n g e s may be long -lasting (5 m o n t h s ) . T h i r t e e n st ud ie s in T a b l e 8.3 u s e d s o c io m e tr ic d a t a to m e a s u r e r a c i a l / e t h n i c f r i e n d s h i p a n d p l a y m a t e c h o ic e s as r e l a t e d to c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c ­ tion. T h e first o f th e se are by W eigel c t al. (1 97 5) , P. A. Katz a n d Zalk (1 97 8) , a n d Z ie gl e r (1 981 ) , d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r in this s ec tio n . Both W eigel et al. (1975) a n d P. A. Katz a n d Zalk (1978) f o u n d n o d i f f e r e n c e s for W hite s o r Blacks b e t w e e n t h e c o o p e r a t i v e c o n d i t i o n a n d th e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n on m e a s u r e s o f p la y m a te o r f r i e n d s h i p c h o ic e . H ow ev e r, W eig el et al. (1975) a n d Zi egl er (1981) d id f in d positive c h a n g c s r e g a r d i n g cro ss- et hnic ( o t h e r th a n B l a c k / W h i t e ) p r e f e r e n c e s . Addit ion al ly, Z i e g l e r ’s resu lts h e l d o n follow up 10 weeks later. Slavin (1977, 1979), Slavin a n d O ic kl e (1 981) , a n d DeVries, Ed war ds , a n d Slavin (1 9 7 8 ) m e a s u r e d cro ss- ra cial Black a n d W h i t e f r i e n d s h i p c h o ic e s b e f o r e a n d a ft e r c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n s . Slavin (1977, 1979) i n ­ c l u d e d Black a n d W h i t e s t u d e n t s fr o m two d i f f e r e n t Engl ish classes in b o t h e x p e r i m e n t s . Slavin a n d O ic kl e (1981) a n d De Vries ct al. (1978) i n c l u d e d s t u d e n t s s tu d y in g a variety o f subjects. T h e small t e a m s o f a d o l e s c e n t s in th e e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n l is te n e d to a p r e s e n t a t i o n fr om t h e t e a c h c r a n d t h e n wTo r k c d t o g e t h e r to le ar n th e m a te r ia l. T h e y w e re q u iz z e d individually a n d c a c h te am was given a sco re b a s e d on th e a ve r ag e p e r f o r m a n c e o f its m e m b e r s on th e quizzes. T h e results o f all f o u r s tu d ie s i n d i c a t e d a g r e a t e r in c r e a s e in cross-racial f r i e n d s h i p c h o i c e s foll owing c o o p e r a t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n w h e n c o m p a r e d with t h e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n . Ad dit ion al ly, t h e Slavin (1979) e x p e r i m e n t i n c l u d e d a 9 - m o n t h follow-up, w hic h i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e results a r e long-lasting. Six sim ila r e x p e r i m e n t s c o n f i r m e d t h e just m e n t i o n e d p a t t e r n o f results (Blaney, C. S t e p h a n , R o sc n fi e ld , A r o n s o n , & Sikes, 1977; C o o p e r e t al., 1980; D. W. J o h n s o n 8c R. T. J o h n s o n 1981, 1982, 1985; W a r r i n g e t al.,

C O O P E R A T I V E IN T E R A C T I O N

245

1985). All f o u n d m o r e r a c i a l / e t h n i c fr ie nd sh i p or playmate choices follow­ ing the cooper at ive con di t i on w h e n c o m p a r e d with the cont rol . D. W. J o h n ­ son a n d R. T. J o h n s o n (1982) sho we d th at the effect lasted 5 m o n t h s after the i nt er venti on. T h e s e 13 studies taken t o g e t h e r i ndicate t h a t r a c i a l / e t h n i c d i sc ri mi na ­ tion generally decreases i mm e d i a te l y following a n d up to 9 m o n t h s after c o ­ operative i nt er acti on in classroom settings has o c c u r r e d . Additionally, the results fr om the Blaney ct al. (1977) e x p e r i m e n t i ndic at e d th at the d e ­ crease is g r ea te r toward cooper ati ve t e a m m a t e s than toward o t h e r ch i ld r en in the class. This findi ng is consi st ent with the idea that i n g r o u p favoritism is restricted to m e m b e r s o f the cooperatively i nt e ra ct in g g r o u p . W h e n e x a m i n e d t og e th e r , the 14 studies on the effects o f cooper at ive i n ­ t eraction on r a c i a l / e t h n i c p r ej ud ic e a n d d i scr imi nati on s u p p o r t t he p r e ­ diction t h a t cooper at ive i nter act ion woul d r e d u c e p re j ud i ce a n d discrimi­ n ati on toward o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s who b e c o m e cooper at ive t e a m m a t e s but n o t necessarily toward u n k n o w n m e m b e r s o f the o u t g r o u p . T h e Weigel et al. (1975) study sho we d less r a c i a l / e t h n i c p re j ud i ce toward t e a m m a t e s in t he cooper ati ve co n d i ti on b ut these results did n o t g eneralize to u n k n o w n m e m b e r s o f a n o t h e r r acc o r e t hn ic g r o up . W h e n r a c i a l / e t h n i c attitudes to­ ward the g en e ra l p op u l a t i o n did show s ome c h a n g c it was n o t long-lasting. However, using a wider c o n t e x t o f i n t e r g r o u p c on t ac t t han cooperat i ve i n­ t eracti on, Pettigrew a n d T r o p p (2000) f o u n d gener al izati on o f positive ef­ fects. T h ey did n o t r e p o r t a b o u t long-term effects. T h u s , this latter issue is still unresol ved. T h e results o f these studies d o not , however, s u p p o r t the s e co nd p r e d i c ­ tion m a d e at the b e g i n n i n g o f this section t h a t t h e r e would be age differ­ e nces in t he effects o f cooperati ve intervent ions. In ge ne r al , irrespective of age, attitudes toward u n k n o w n m e m b e r s o f o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u ps do n o t c h a n g e as a result o f cooper at ive int er acti on. R a c i a l / e t h n i c attitudes a n d behavi ors toward known classmates b e c o m e m o r e positive for ch il dr en o f all ages as a resul t o f cooper at ive interventions.

Di scrimi nati on Towra rd the Disabled T h e r e m a i n i n g g r o u p for whom we n e e d to evaluate results is t h e disabled. N o n e o f t he studies in Tabl e 8.3 m e a s u r e d at ti t ude c h a n g e toward the dis­ a bl ed as a result o f c o o p e r a t i o n . Six o f t he studies did, however, m e a s u r e d is cr imina tion. O f these, t h r e e used observations a n d t hr ee used socio­ metri c data. R. T. J o h n s o n ct al. (1979) a n d Rynders et al. (1980) st u d ie d mildly m e n ­ tally r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r c t a r d c d st udents. In bo th studies, the c hil dr en were p l a cc d into a cooperative or a c o nt r o l c on d i ti o n . T h o s e in the cooperat ive

246

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

c o n di t i o n were i n s t r u c t e d to impr ove t h e ir g r o u p bowling score, wh e re as c on tr ol c on d it i o n st ud en t s were i n st r uc t ed to i mpr ove thei r individual scores. N o n r e t a r d e d ch i ld re n in the cooper ati ve co nd it i o n i n tc r ac t cd posi­ tively with a n d c h e e r e d for the r e t a r d e d ch i ld re n m o r e th an did those in the c ont rol c on dit ion. In a similar study, Mar ti no a n d D. W. J o h n s o n (1979) used sw immi ng in­ stead o f bowling a n d l e a rn i ng disabled inst ead o f r e t a r d e d c hi l d r en . O b s e r ­ vations were d o n e in a 15-minute free-swim p e r i od after each class. In the cooperati ve c on d i ti o n , the n u m b e r o f friendly i nt er ac ti on s betw’ee n l e a r n ­ ing disabled a n d n o n l c a r n i n g disabled chi l d r en incr eased a n d the n u m b e r o f hostile i nt er ac ti ons d e c r e a se d over time, wh er e as those in t h e individual co n di t io n stayed the same. W h a t h a p p e n s when soci omctr ic dat a arc u se d in place o f observations to m e a s u r e d is c r i mi n a t i o n ? Ballard, C o r m a n , Gott lieb, a n d Ka uf ma n (1977) studi ed mildly r e t a r d e d a n d n o n r c t a r d e d chi l d r en in a cooperati ve a n d a c o nt r ol c on d i ti o n . T h e cooperat ive e x p e r i e n c e was cr ea te d by plac­ ing c hi l d r e n in t eams w he re they w’o r k e d t o g e t h e r to p r o d u c c a m u l t i me d i a p re s e n ta t io n (e.g., a slide show or skit). O n e of the t eams in each classroom c o n t a i n e d a r e t a r d e d s t u d e n t a n d two o r m o r e t eams did not. O n c o m p l e ­ tion of the p re se nt at io ns , new teams were f o r m e d f or a s e co nd cycle o f the process. C h i ld r en in the c o nt r ol co n di t i on c o n t i n u e d with their n o r m a l class work t h r o u g h o u t t he 8 week e x p e r i m e n t . Soci omct r ic playmate choi cc q u e s ti ona ir e s were given b ef or e a n d after the e x p e r i m e n t . N o n r e t a r d c d c hi ld r en in the cooper at ive c on d it i o n who h a d a c h a n c e to w’ork with a r e t a r d e d s t u d e n t chose thei r r e t a r d e d peers m o r e often as playmates t han did e i t he r those in the e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i ­ tion who did n o t work with a r e t a r d e d child or those in the c on tr ol c o n d i ­ tion. Additionally, b ec au se all n o n r c t a r d c d ch il dr e n in t he e x p e r i m e n t a l c on d i ti on in t cr a ct c d positively with r e t a r d e d ch i ld re n, thei r liking for their r e t a r d e d peer s i nc re ase d w h e n c o m p a r e d to t he c o nt r ol g r ou p. Similar e x p e r i m e n t s were c o n d u c t e d by A rm st r on g , D. W. J o h n s o n , a n d Balow (1981) a n d C o o p e r c t al. (1980). T h e C o o p e r et al. (1980) study was d es c r i b e d earlier. Differences b et ween the two studies are n o t e d in T able 8.3 a n d i nc lu de subj ect age a n d e d u c a ti o na l c on te n t. T h e results o f bot h e x p e r i m e n t s i nd ic a te d that n o n l c a r n i n g di sabl ed s tu d e n ts in the c o o p e r a ­ tive c on d it i o n chose their l ea r ni n g disabled peer s m o r e often as friends than did similar st ud e nt s in an individual setting. Two p r ed i ct i on s were m a d e at the b e g i n n i n g o f this section: o n e r e g a r d ­ ing o u t c o m e s toward cooper at ive t e a m m a t e s versus those towar d u n k n o w n o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , a n d o n e r e g a r d i n g age differences. Al th o ug h it is evi­ d e n t from these six e x p e r i m e n t s t h a t the b e h a vi or o f n o n d i s a b l c d c hi ldr en t oward their disabled classmates c h a n gc s as a r esult o f cooper ati ve i nt er ac ­ tion, wc d o n o t know if these c h a n g c s general ize to o t h e r h a n d i c a p p e d p e r ­

COO PERATIVE INTERAC TION

247

sons n o r w h e t h e r attitudes c h a n g c as well. Additionally, t h e r e were no sys­ tematic di fferences in results b as ed on age o f t h e subject. Compe ti t ive Studies As m e n t i o n e d at t he b e g i n n i n g o f this section, six o f the e x p e r i m e n t s i n­ c l u de d a compet it ive c on di t i o n . In f o u r o f these, t he compet iti ve co nd i ti on was c o n f o u n d e d by mix in g c o o p e r a t i o n a n d c o mp e t i t i o n, th at is, a c o o p e r a ­ tive team c o m p e t e d with a n o t h e r cooperative team for rewards (DeVries et al., 1978; D. W. J o h n s o n 8c R. T. J o h n s o n , 1985; Rynders et al., 1980; Wa rr in g et al., 1985). In the r ema i ni ng two studies, children in the competitive c o n di ­ tion were instructed to o ut pe r fo r m their teammat es, a n d rewards were given to the wi nner s ( C o o pe r ct al., 1980; D. W. J o h n s o n 8c R. T. J o h n s o n , 1982). T h e results o f these studies were mixed. T h r e e o f the e xp e ri me n ts f o u nd less discrimination as a result o f competitive interaction a n d thr ee f o u n d n o dif­ ference between the competitive condition a n d the control. Con t ac t T h e o r y Can the results o f these cooper ati ve i nt er acti on studies be u n d e r s t o o d in t e rms o f C o n t a c t Theor y? L e t ’s look at each aspect o f t he theory. Does e qual status exist in cooper at ive i nt er act ion studies? In m a n y o f the studies, t he answer is yes, b u t in t he studies on be ha v i or toward disabled ch i ld r en particularly, t he answer is no. In the majority o f these studies, n o n h a n d i c a p p c d c hi ld r en felt they h e l p e d thei r h a n d i c a p p e d peer s b u t did n o t feel t ha t t hose p ee rs h e l p e d t h e m . Docs c o o p e r a t i o n exist? T h e a n ­ swer to this q ues ti on is definitely yes. H o w a b o u t c o m m u n i t y sanction? It would pr ob a bl y a p p e a r to t he c h il d re n that the t e a c h e r or facilitator is sanc­ ti o n in g wo rk i n g t o g e t h e r a n d in m a n y o f these studies, such b eh a v i o r is re­ w a r de d by the a ut h o r it y figures pr es ent . So the answer is yes. Finally, d oc s intimacy exist? We have to answer yes to this qu e st io n also. G r o u p s o f c hi l d r en t ea chi ng, assisting, a n d e n c o u r a g i n g cach o t h e r seems as i nt i ma t e as mos t o t h e r types o f c o nt ac t they may have. So it a p p e ar s t ha t with t he e x c ep t i o n o f e qual status be twe en n or ma ll y d eve lo p i ng a n d dis­ a bl ed c hi l d r e n , the C o n t a c t T h e o r y do es h e lp us explain these results. Lewrinian T h e o r y Lewinian T h e o r y is also useful in e xp la i ni ng the results o f this r esearch. L e t ’s e x a m i n e s ome of t he driving a n d r es tr ai ni ng forces t h a t arc salient. You rccall from the previous section on m a i n s t r e a m i n g t h a t strain in so­ cial i nt e ra ct ions is a r es tr ai ni ng force to the d e v e l o p m e n t o f positive atti­

248

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

tudes a n d behaviors. W o r k i n g with ch i ld re n wh o arc d if f er en t from on e se lf (e.g., opposite-sex, differently ablcd, di f f er ent race) over a p e r i od o f time a n d fi nd i ng o u t t ha t they are n o t so very di f fe re nt wo ul d d ec re as e this r e ­ str aining force. A s e c o n d r es tr ai ni ng force t hat pe rt ai ns to cooper ati ve i nt er ac ti on is a u ­ thority a c ce p ta nc e . This force is d e c r e a s e d w h e n the a u t ho r it y figure ( t ea ch cr ) sanctions a n d rewards those who are i n te ra cti ng t oge the r. T h e final r es tr ai ni ng force is the d is c om f o r t caused by t he expe ct at io n of i n a p p r o p r i a t e social behavi or. In m a n y o f these studies, it was f o u n d that off-task or i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e ha v io r d e c re a se d in the cooperat ive setting. This woul d indi cat e th at the c hi ld r en in these g r o u ps b e h a ve d a p p r o p r i ­ ately a n d w or ke d well t og e th er . T h u s this r est rai ni ng force is also d ec r ea s e d with cooperati ve i nt eract ion. T h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f e m p a t h y woul d be a driving force to c h a n g e atti­ tudes a n d behavior. T h e o p p o r t u n i t y to work with a n d help their diff er ent race, disabled, o r opposite-sex peer s would aid in the d e v e l o p m e n t o f e m ­ pathy. T h e result o f this would be to i ncrease this driving force.

T H E MEDIA T h e effects o f m e di a, particularly television a n d movies, on att itude c h a n g e have b e e n o f high interest since the dawn o f television. In thei r b o o k o n the i nf lue nc e o f me di a , Li ebe rt a n d Sprafkin (1988) det ail ed research that shows that t he m e d i a are effective in r ei nf or ci ng existing atti tudes a n d modi f yi ng r a t h e r t ha n c ompl etel y revising t h e m. In a study d o n e by Alper a n d Leidy (1970), they f o u n d t ha t television was a useful m e d i u m for i m m e ­ diately c h a n g i n g attitudes a n d th at these c h a ng e s were s maller b u t still p r es ­ e n t 6 m o n t h s later. Given t he e vidence that the m e d i a affects attitudes, it is i m p o r t a n t to discuss how it effects p r e ju di ce in c hil dren. T h e r e are twro goals o f this section. T h e first is to p r e s e n t the results of studies on the effects o f m e d i a on p re j u d i c e a n d d i scr imi nati on r e d uc t i o n in ch i ld r en . It is e x p ec t e d, based o n the roles o f b a d gi n g m e c ha n is ms , which can lead to p e r c e p t i o n s o f o u t g r o u p similarity, a n d o u t g r o u p at trac­ tion, which can lead to the p e r c e p t i o n o f valued characteristics in o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , t ha t carefully d e s i g n e d television p r o g r a m s will lead to de c re a se d p r ej udic e a n d d iscr imi nat ion. T h e s e c o nd is to discuss the results in t erms o f C o n t a c t T h e o r y a n d Lewi nian Theor y. T h e Studies Five studies t ha t m e a s ur e the effects o f television a n d film on p re j u d i c e in c hi l d r e n are d esc ri be d in t he n e x t few pages ( Go rn , Go l d be r g, Sc K a n un g o, 1976; Graves, 1999; H o u s e r , 1978; Kraus, 1972; Westervelt Sc McKinney,

THK MEDIA

249

1980). T h e studies used a variety o f m e t h o d s to measure prejudice. T he children in the studies r ange d in age from 3 to 17 years (preschool to 11th grade). Th e first study was by Kraus (1972) a n d i ncluded 11th grade (ages 16 to 17), White adolescents. An 11-minute film showing two teachers aiding an African-American s t ud e nt in applying a nd getting into a White private col­ lege was the e xpe ri me nt a l manipul at ion. Four versions of the film, varying the raccs o f the teachers, were p r oduc ed: (a) both teachers were White, (b) both teachcrs were Black, (c) one White a nd one Black tcacher, a n d (d) one Black a n d one White teachcr (roles reversed). T h e study design in­ cluded a pretest, a posttest, a n d a control gr oup. An attitude scale a n d a social distance scale were used to measur e pr ej u­ dice. T he results indicated t hat both versions o f the film that i ncl uded both a Black a n d a White teachcr were effective in r e duc ing prejudice when c o m p a r e d to both the control g r oup a nd the pretest data. T h e o t he r two versions did n o t p r o d u c c attitude change. In the study by Gor n c ta l. (1976) White, English-Canadian preschoolers (ages 3 to 4) viewed Sesame Street. Professionally p r o d uc e d, 2- to 3-minutelong segments of children playing toget her in various settings were inserted into the pr ogr am. Two versions o f cach se gme nt were p r o d u c e d; (a) an in­ tegrated version with White, Oriental, a nd Amcrican-Indian children, and (b) a minority only version with Oriental a nd Amcrican-Indian children. Subjects in the e xper iment al condition saw o n e of the two versions o f the inserted segments, whereas those in the control condition watchcd Sesame Street with no inserts. To measure prejudice, an activity pr ef er ence scalc was administered. T h e results indicated that children viewing ei ther the i ntegrated se gme nt or the minority only se gme nt were significantly less prejudiced toward Or i­ ental a nd Amcrican-Indian children than those in the control gr oup. T h e third study was by H o us e r (1978) a n d included White, Black, O r i e n ­ tal, a nd Hispanic ki ndergart en t hr ou g h third-grade children (ages 5 to 9). For the exper iment al gr oup, H ou se r (1978) crcated films showing children o f different ethnic groups talking to cach other. Much of the talk c enter ed a r o u n d the idea that a pp ca r anc c a n d skin color arc no t i m po r t an t when re­ lating to others. T h e control condition saw no films. A stereotype rating scalc was used to measure prcjudicc. T he findings in­ dicated that prejudice dccrcascd following the exper iment al ma n ip u l a ­ tions. T h e results held equally well regardless of age, sex, ethnicity of the subject, a nd ethnicity of the tester. T h e fourth study was d o n e by Westervclt a n d McKinncy (1980). Fourthgrade (ages 9 to 10) boys a n d girls co mp le te d a pretest a nd a posttest. T h e exper imental condition involved a 13-minute film showing physically dis­ abled children in wheelchairs participating with nondisablcd children in

250

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

physical e du c at io n a n d classroom activities. T h e c o nt r ol g r o u p saw no films. A social distance q ue st io n a ir e a n d a stereotype rat ing scalc were used to evaluate bo t h a child in a w he el ch a i r a n d a n o t h e r o n e with leg braces using c ru tc he s (as a test for gen er a li zat io n) . Pr ej udice was assessed in t hr ee situa­ tions: school, h o m e , a n d p e e r g r o up . T h e me as u re s were a d mi n i s t e r e d i m­ medi at ely following t he film a n d again 9 days later. Both me a su r es sh o we d that p r ej ud i ce toward c hi l d r e n in wheelchai rs d e ­ c reased b ot h w h e n c o m p a r e d to the pr e te s t a n d to the c on t r ol g r ou p . H o w ­ ever, attitudes toward ch il dr en on c ru t ch e s were unaf fect ed. Nine days later the positive c h a n gc s d i s a pp e ar ed . T h e fifth study, by Graves (1999), s u m m a r i z e d two u n p u b l i s h e d evalua­ tion projects o f the video c u r r ic u lu m, Different and the Same, d e si gn ed for classroom use with early e l e m en t a r y ch i ld r en . T h e subjects in Graves’ r e ­ search were p r e d o m i n a n t l y thir d graders. T h e n i n e 12- to 15-mi nute videos use r aci all y/ethnically n e u t r a l p u p p e t s a n d raci al ly/ et hni call y diverse a d ul t actors who m o d e l successful cross r a c i a l / e t h n i c i nteractions. Conflict r es o­ lution is a f e a t ur e d aspect o f these videos. Various behavioral, attitudinal, a n d cognitive m e a s ur e s were used with the e x p e r i m e n t a l gr ou ps , who saw a n d discussed the videos, a n d the c o nt r ol gr o u ps , wh o did not. In general , this video c ur r ic u lu m was very successful in c h a n g i n g p r ejudi ce, di sc rimi na ­ tion, a n d stereotyping, a l t h o u g h the effects were n o t e qui va le nt for all rac i a l / e t h n i c groups. Alt h ou g h the n u m b e r o f studies j u s t d e s c ri be d is small, the results consis­ tently show t h a t television a n d film have an i m m e d i a t e i m p a c t in r e d u c i n g p r ej ud i ce a n d di scr iminati on in c hi ld r en a n d adolescents. T h e films were effective regardless of the age, race, o r sex o f t he subjects. T h e results were similar for p r e ju di ce toward Black, Or ie n t al , Hispanic, a n d wheelchairb o u n d ch i ld re n. It is i nt er est ing to n o te t ha t in t he Westervclt a n d Mc­ Kinney (1980) study, pr cj ud ic c r e d u c t i o n was obser ved only toward the s pe ­ cific physical disability shown a n d the results did n o t general ize to c hi ldr en on crutches. Additionally, the positive effects were short-lived. F u r t h e r r e ­ search is n e e d e d to d e t e r m i n e long-term effects for m e d i a interventions. Fishbein (1984) s u m m a r i z e d research dea l in g with the i m p a c t o f television on a tt it ude c h a n g c a n d f o u n d t ha t unless the i n t er ve nt io ns were r e p e at e d, the effects were usually short-lived. C o nt a ct T h e o r y O n e m i g h t say t ha t C o n t a c t T h e o r y d oe s n o t apply to these m e d i a studies b ec au se n o actual c o n t a c t exists. It is, however , i n t e re s t i n g to n o t e t he as­ pects o f the t h e o r y t ha t are p r e se n t . T h e films c o n t a i n c h i l d r e n who are wor k in g t o g e t h e r ( c o o p e r a t i o n ) in a way t ha t d e n o t e s e q u al status a n d

RO L E-P LA YIN G S IM UL ATIONS

251

intimacy. We c a n no t know if the subjects pr e su me t hat commu ni t y sanction exists. Lewinian T heory Lewinian Theory may be mo re helpful in explaining this research. Viewing children working a n d playing t oget her would decrease the restraining forces that serve to maintain prejudice. T he subjects could see that the Black or disabled children in the films were similar to themselves in some ways a nd t hat they behaved appropriately. This would decrease the strain in social interactions a nd discomfort caused by expectations of inappr opr iate behavior. Additionally, e mp at hy (driving force) would be i ncreased by view­ ing a n d getting to know these children on the screen.

ROLE-PLAYING SI MULATIONS T h e r e is evidence that role-playing is an effective way to c ha nge attitudes. It is believed that increased emp at hy underlies these attitude c hanges (Doyle & Aboud, 1995; W. G. St ephan & Finlay, 1999). Increased e m p at h y may have its effects in several ways. Following the evolutionary model , e mpathy may lead to o u tg r ou p attraction in that it highlights the positive qualities of the ou tg ro u p , a view that can best be attained t h r ou gh being “in their shoes.” Prejudice reduct ion may also occur t hr o ug h e n h a n c e d emp at hy by decreasing the psychological distance between in gr o u p a nd o u t g r o up me mbe rs , making it mo r e difficult psychologically to treat them as the “o th e r. ” This p h e n o m e n o n may lead to t he pe r ce pt ion of increased similar­ ity between these groups, a nd thereby decreased prejudice. Research has shown that peopl e will c hange their attitudes ab o ut an is­ sue t hr o ug h simple role play (Janis & King, 1954; King & Janis, 1956; Mann &Janis, 1968; McGuire, 1985). A study d o n e by Clore and Jeffrey (1972) re­ vealed that college students b e came significantly less prejudiced toward the physically disabled after playing the role of a person in a wheelchair. Byrnes a nd Kiger (1990) fo un d that White college s tu de nt s’ attitudes toward Black people improved following a role play designed b y j a n e Elliott called “Blue Eyes-Brown Eyes” (Peters, 1985). Elliott designed this simulation, following the death of Marlin L u t he r King, Jr., which allowed h e r third-grade stu­ dents to feel the effects of discrimination. Doyle a nd Aboud (1995) found in a naturalistic longitudinal study that third-grade children whose roletaking abilities increased the most from ki nder gar ten showed the largest re­ ductions in prejudice. The central question is: Are role-playing simulations of any value in cha ng in g the attitudes o f White children toward Black children, n ondis ­

252

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

a bl ed c h i l d r e n toward the disabled, or boys toward girls? T h e first goal of this section is to e x a m i n e the li ter at ur e t ha t investigates racc p re j ud ic e as well as p re ju d i ce toward the disabled. No studies were f o u n d t ha t e x a m i n e d the effectiveness o f simulat ions for c h a n g i n g opposite-sex pr ej udi ce . T h e s e c o n d goal is to discuss the results in t er ms o f C on t a ct T h e o r y a n d Lew­ inian Theor y. T h e Studies Five si mulat ion studies were f o u n d t ha t de al t with c h a n g i n g p r e j u d i c e in ch il dr en t h r o u g h active role-play si mul ati ons (Dahl, I l o r s m a n , Sc Arkell, 1978; H a n d l e r s Sc Austin, 1980; Mar go, 1983; Marsh Sc F r i e d m a n , 1972; W e i n e r Sc Wright, 1973). T h e d e p e n d e n t variable in all of the e x p e r i m e n t s was p re judi c e. In n o n e o f t h e studies was discr imi nat ion m e a su r ed . T h r e e o f the studies i n c l u d e d st ud en t s role-playing disabilities involving m o t o r skills (Dahl ct al., 1978; H a n d l e r s Sc Austin, 1980; Margo, 1983). All o f these f o u n d a d e c r ea s e in p r e ju d i c e following the simulat i on. Dahl e t a l . (1978) used fifth-grade (age 10 to 11) classes in t h e ir e x p e r i m e n t . T h e classes were pre- a n d post testcd using a social distance scalc a n d an at ti tude scale. In the e x p e r i m e n t a l c on d it i o n , st u de n ts s p e n t 10 m i n u t e s e x p e r i e n c ­ ing each o f t h r ee disabilities: he ar i n g , visual, a n d a physical i m p a i r m e n t . Decreases in p r cj ud ic c toward d e a f o r bl ind p e o p l e were n o t f o un d. T h e only d e cr eas e in pr e judi ce n o t e d was toward the o t h e r physical i m p a i r m e n t g r o u p, in c o n n e c t i o n to m a n e u v e r i n g a wheel chai r. T h e r es ear ch d o n e by Margo (1983) h a d similar results. In M a r g o ’s study, each fifth- a n d sixth-grade (age 10 to 12) s t u d e n t role played f our physical i m p a i r m e n t s by r es t r aining fingers, using c ru t c h es a n d leg weights, a n d m a n e u v e r i n g a wheel chai r. Ma rgo f o u n d decreases in pr ej ud ic e only toward p e o pl e in wheel chai rs w he n c o m p a r e d to t he pretest. T h e r e were no similar decr eas es toward t h e o t h e r t h r ee i mp a ir me n ts . F o r bot h of these e x pe r i m e n t s , the di fference b etween dec re as in g p r e j u ­ dice a n d no effects s eems to lie in t he realness o f the s imulation. Re­ str aining a finger or using leg weights may simul ate an e x p e r i e n c e close to wha t a disabled pe r so n feels, b u t everyone knows t h a t disabled p er s on s do n o t wear leg weights. T h e par ti cipants arc also likely to realize t he potential of b e i ng in a w h e el c h ai r in t h e ir own life, wher eas the p ot ent ial o f waking u p o n e m o r n i n g to find two fingers fused t o g e t h e r is none xi st en t . Blindness was s imul at ed in t h r e e o f the studies (Dahl ct al., 1978; H a n ­ dlers Sc Austin, 1980; Marsh Sc F r i e d m a n , 1972). Two o f these e x p e r i m e n t s sh owe d a de cr eas e in p r e ju di ce toward the bli nd following t he role play a n d o n e f o u n d no di fference. Close inspection o f t h e studies to d e t e r m i n e the cause o f these d i s c r ep a nt results revealed a dif fer ence in the setting o f the

R O L E-PI -AYIX G $ IM UI .AT IO N $

253

e x p er i m en t s. T h e two studies that f o u n d a d e cr eas e in p r e j ud i ce were p ar t o f a l arger p r o g r a m t ha t i n c l u d e d discussions a b o u t stereotypes a n d the stu­ d e n t s ’ feelings a b o u t b li nd ne ss a n d bl ind p eo p le , wh er e as the thir d study c o n t a i n e d n o such discussions. T h e s e da ta i ndic at e d t h a t si mul ati ons that may have l imited effect in isolation can have a g r e a te r effect if a wcll-facilitatcd, rel evant discussion is h el d b ef or e a n d after t he role play. Onl y o n e o f the e x p e r i m e n t s e x a m i n e d the effects o f role playing on racc p re j ud ic e ( We i ne r 8c Wr ight, 1973). T h e simulation was b ased on J a n e Elliot’s “Blue Eyes-Brown Eyes,” m e n t i o n e d earlier. In thei r e x p e r i m e n t , W e i n e r a n d W r i g h t divided a thi rd-grade (age 8 to age 9) class into two g r o u p s d is t ingui she d by g re en a n d o r a n g e a r m b a n d s . O n the first day, the class was told t ha t the O r a n g e s t u de n ts were s mar ter , c lcaner , a n d b e t t er b e ­ haved t h a n the G r e e n students. O r a n g e c hi l d r e n were also g r a n t e d special privileges a n d praised t h r o u g h o u t the day wher eas the G r e e n c h i l d re n were criticizcd. O n day two, t he situation was reversed, allowing t he G r e e n chil­ d r e n to be the s u p e r i o r g r o up . T h e simulation b e c a m e very real for the stu­ de nt s a n d t ension b et ween the g r o u p s deve lo pe d. T h e pri ncipal results using pre- a n d posttcst c om p a r i s o n s were t ha t the ch il dr en h el d less racial p r ej ud ic e a n d were m o r e likely to c o m m i t to hav­ ing f ut ur e crossracial i nt er acti ons following the simulat i on. T h e effects were s tr on g i mm ed ia te ly following the role play a n d again 2 weeks later. T h e dat a fit nicely with the a n ec d ot a l evi dence from Elliot’s thi rd-grade stu­ de nt s b o t h wh e n she p e r f o r m e d the si mul at ion a n d later w h e n the s tudents b e c a m e adults (Peters, 1985). T h e s e studies show t h a t si mul ati ons can be effective in r e d u c i n g p r e j u ­ dice in ch i ld re n. In o r d e r to be effective, the simulat ions mu s t be as real as possible. Discussions b ef or e a n d after the role play arc i m p o r t a n t bo t h to at­ titude c h a n g c a n d to alleviate any stress felt by t h e part ici pant s d u r i n g the e x p e r i en c e. As with t he m e d i a resear ch, the long-term effects o f these in te r­ vent ions arc n o t known. Con t ac t T h e o r y It is difficult to m a k e t he c o n n e c t i o n b e tw ee n t h e effectiveness o f role-play s i mu l at io n s in r e d u c i n g p r e j u d i c e a n d C o n t a c t T h e or y . T h e factors in C o n t a c t T h e o r y a re e q u al status, c o m m u n i t y s a n c ti o n , c oo p er a ti v e c o n ­ tact, i n t i m a t e con ta c t, a n d the s ituation m u s t be real. Role plays d o n ot p r o m o t e e q ua l status. As a m a t t e r o f fact, s i mu la t io n s like t h e o n e d o n e by W e i n e r a n d W r i g h t (1973) s eem to rely on t h e f eelings o f “s u p e r i or i t y ” a n d “inf er ior it y” felt by t he p a rt ic i pa nts . F u r t h e r m o r e , c o m m u n i t y sa nc ­ tion, i n t e r g r o u p c o o p e r a t i o n , a n d int ima te c o n t a c t arc n o t p r e s e n t in these situations.

254

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

Lewinian T h e o r y Lewinian T h e o r y is useful in e xp l ai ni ng the results o f this research. T h e d e ­ v e l o p m e n t o f e m p a t h y for disabled p e r s on s or p er s on s o f o t h e r races d u r ­ ing the simul at ion e x p e r i e n c e (Kiger, 1992) woul d be a driving force to d e ­ ve lo p i ng m o r e positive at t i tu de s toward those p e rs on s . T h e r e are n o obvious r est rai ni ng forces p r o d u c e d by the simulations.

I N D I V I D U A T I O N AND SELF-ACCEPTANCE T h e final body o f l it erature discussed is the research on indivi duat ion a n d self-acceptance. A defi ni tion o f each will he l p get us started. Individuation is the process o f differenti at ing p e o pl e fr om o n e a n o t h e r . T h e process a p ­ plies to s ep a ra ti ng o n e ’s self from o t h e r s (self-individuation) or diff er ent iat ­ i ng o t h e r individuals from the g r o u p s to which they belo ng . Self-accep­ t ance is p a rt o f the self-individuation process ( Ab o ud , 1988). It is d e f in e d by Rubi n (1967a) to m e a n “a willingness to c o n f r o n t ego-alien as well as ego-syntonic aspects o f the self a n d to a c ce pt r a t h e r t han d e n y thei r exis­ t e n c e ” (p. 234). In o t h e r words, a p e r so n with hi gh self-acceptance recognizes a n d accepts all aspects of the self, a n d a p er s on with low self-acceptance sees a n d accepts only s ome aspects of hi m o r h er s e l f while d e ny ing that o t h e r as­ pects exist. T h e ego-alien or denied aspects o f the self are generally those that society d e e m s “u n a c c e p t a b l e . ” It is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e the di fference b e ­ tween self-acceptance a n d self-esteem. Self-esteem, simply put, is p r i d e in o n e ­ self. An individual can be low in self-acceptance a n d hi gh in self-esteem— d e n yi ng s ome aspects o f the self while m a i n t a i n i n g pr ide in who she or he believes h e rs el f o r hi ms el f to be. M u c h o f the l i terat ure on self-acceptance is based on the r es ear ch d e ­ tailed in The Authoritarian Personality ( A d o r n o et al., 1950). O n e o f the c o n ­ clusions o f that research can be s u m m a r i z e d as follows: N o n p r e j u d i c e d p e o ­ ple are aware of b o t h thei r “a c c e p t a b l e ” a n d “u n a c c e p t a b l e ” characteristics, wher eas p r e j u d i c e d p e o pl e t e n d n o t to see thei r “u n a c c e p t a b l e ” c h a r a c t e r ­ istics a n d fail to i nt egr at e t he m into thei r self-image. As will be seen, the research evi dence s up p o r ts the view that b o t h self­ i ndividuati on a n d i ndi viduati on of ot he rs leads to d ecr eases in prejudice. This effect is b r o u g h t a b o u t by allowing p e o pl e to set aside o u t g r o u p s te re o­ types a n d to treat ot he r s as individuals. W h e n this is d o n e , p e o pl e c o m e to perceive similarities be twe en o t h e r s a n d self, a n d to find positive or a d ­ m i r e d qualities in the others. As n o t e d in a previous section, the latter is an e x a m p l e o f the evolutionary factor o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness. Self-indi­ vi duat i on pr ob abl y p r o d u c e s these effects by b e in g c or r el at ed with a p re di s ­ position to seek o u t o r observe i ndi vi duat ing characteristics o f others,

IN D IV ID UAT ION AND SELF-ACCEPTANCE

255

thereby breaking down categorical j u d g m e n t s o f them. Fiskc (2000) re­ ferred to this latter process as “moving pcrceivers from the category-based (e.g., racc-bascd) to the attribute-based (i.e., individual trait-based) e nd of the c o n t i n u u m ” (p. 116). A search of the literature locates nine studies that look at the relation­ ship between self-individuation a n d prejudice. O f these, seven deal with people between the ages of 19 a nd 59 (Berger, 1952; Cook, 1972; D. Katz, Sarnoff, & McClintock, 1956, 1957; Rubin, 1967a; Sheerer, 1949; Stotland, D. Katz, & Patchcn, 1972), a n d two deal with children a nd adolescents b e­ tween the ages o f 9 a n d 18 (Phillips, 1951; Tr en t, 1957). A variety o f meas­ ures have been used for both self-acceptance a nd prcjudicc. T h e next sec­ tion contains mo r e information on cach experi ment. T h e r e arc two goals o f this section. T he first is to p r esent the literature on individuation, including the sclf-acccptance research. T h e second goal is to discuss the results in terms of Cont act Theory a n d Lewinian Theory. Research on Children Both of the studies that used children and adolescents as subjects were d e ­ signed to deter mi ne if a correlation exists between self-acceptance and preju­ dice (Phillips, 1951; Trent, 1957). In both experiments, two questionnaires were designed and validated, one to measure self-acceptance a nd one to measure racial/ethnic attitudes. Phillips (1951) administered his scales to White high school (age 15 to age 18) and college (age 18 to age 21) students. His attitude scale measured prejudice toward ot her racial a nd ethnic groups. T r en t (1957) looked at self-acceptance a nd prejudice in 9- through 18-yearold (Grades 4 to 12) Black children. His attitude questionnaire was or ga n­ ized according to the three dimensions of racial prejudice: cognitive, e m o ­ tional a nd behavioral intention. T he results of both experiments showed that high self-acceptance was correlated with low prejudice. Research on Adults Correlational studies have also been d o n e with adults. O f the seven studies on adults, three e xa mi ne d (he relationship between self-acceptance and prejudice. S heer er (1949) studied counseling cases (White adults) for state­ ment s o f self-acceptance a n d r ac i a l /e thni c prejudice. Berger (1952) meas­ ur ed self-acceptance and r ac ia l/ et hnic prejudice for White college students (age 18 to age 21). In a study designed to assess the effects o f contact with Blacks on White college students, Cook (1972) admi ni st ered pre- and posttests measur ing self-acceptance a n d racial attitudes. All three experi­ ment s showed that high self-acceptance was correlated with low r a ci a l / e t h­ nic prejudice.

256

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

S h e e r e r (1949) also e x a m i n e d c ou ns e li ng cases for c ha ng es over time. S h e e r e r f o u n d an increase in self-acceptance d u r i n g the c ourse o f th e r ap y a n d a c o r r e s p o n d i n g d ec re ase in p r e j u d i c e d attitudes. This was the first study t ha t suggested t h a t t h e r e was m o r e than j u s t a corr el at ion bet ween the two characteristics. Katz et al. (1956, 1957) a n d St ot land ct al. (1972) also f o u n d a cause a n d effect r el a t ions hi p b etween self-acceptance a n d p r ej u d ic e toward African Ameri cans. All t h r e e studies i n c l u d e d Whit e collcge s tude nts , a n d a series o f pretests a n d posttcsts. Self-acceptance was assessed using a projective story c o mp l e t i o n test. Measur es o f p re j ud ic e were a stereotype scalc a n d a social distance scalc. In o r d e r to i nf lue nc e self-acceptance, cach subj ect was asked to r e a d a p a p e r on denial a n d p r oj e ct ion a n d a rel ated case study. T h e ease history d e sc ri be d the life story o f a college s t u d e n t a n d h e r or his struggles with denial a n d self-acceptance. It was d e s i gn e d to p r o d u c e selfa c c ep t a nc e on the p a r t o f t he subject. T h e results o f all t hr ee e x p e r i m e n t s i n d i ca te d t h a t self-acceptance i nc r ea se d as a r esult o f t he i nt er ve nt i on , which was a c c o m p a n i e d by a c o r r e s p o n d i n g d ecr eas e in pr ejudi ce. In s u p p o r t of the study j u s t cited, Rubin (1967a, 1967b) f o u n d that p re j­ udice toward Black p e op l e d e c re a se d following an i nt er v e nt io n d e s i g ne d to i ncrease self-acceptance. R u b i n ’s study was det ail ed in two s epar ate articles. His e x p e r i m e n t consisted o f Whit e pa rti c ipa nt s in a 2-week sensitivity tr ain­ ing work s h op . T h e subjects r a n g e d in age from 23 to 59 years, a n d the study design i n c l u d e d a pretest, a posttest, a n d a c on tr ol g r o up . T h e participants served as thei r own c o nt r o l by b e in g tested 2 weeks p r i o r to the e x p e r i m e n t a n d again at the o n s e t o f t he study. A s e n t e n c e c o m p l e t i o n test was used to m e a s ur e self-acceptance a n d an a tt it ude scale assessed p r ej ud i ce toward Af­ rican Amer icans. Rubin f o u n d t ha t as a result o f the wo rk s h op , the partici­ p a n t s ’ self-acceptance inc r ea se d a n d thei r pr ej udi ce dec re ased . T h e n i n e studies j u s t de sc ri be d indicate that self-individuation leads to d e cr e as ed pr ej udice. T h e first five e x p e r i m e n t s sh owe d a negative c o r r el a ­ tion be twe en self-acceptance (indi vi duat i on) a n d pr ej udice. T h e r e m a i n ­ ing f o u r studies showed t ha t i nt er ve n t io ns t hat i nc re as e d self-acceptance also d ec r ea s ed r a c i a l / e t h n i c p re judi c e. T h e r e were n o e x p e r i m e n t s that m e a s u r e d discri minat ion. I ndi vi duat ion o f O t h e r s Only a few e x p e r i m e n t s were f o u n d that linked indivi duat ion o f o t h e rs with prejudi ce. ( Ab o u d 8c Fenwick, 1999; P. A. Katz, 1973; P. A. Katz 8c Zalk, 1978; I.anger, Bashncr, 8c Chanowi tz, 1985). T h e subjects in Katz’s studies were second-, fifth-, a n d sixth-grade (age 7 to age 8 a n d age 11 to age 12) Whi te a n d Black s t ud e nt s from i n te g ra t ed schools. An att itude scale, a so­ cial di stance scalc, a n d a stereotype scale were a d mi n i s t e r e d b ef or e a n d af­

IN D IV ID U A T I O N AND S E L F-A C CE PTANC E

257

ter the e x p e r i m e n t a l m a n i p u l a t i o n . T h e Whi te c h i l d r e n in the e x p e r i m e n ­ tal c on d it i o n were t a u g h t e i t h er to di fferentiate b et ween pictures o f Black p e o p l e with various skin tones, hair, a n d facial expr essions (Katz, 1973), or to associate par ti cul ar n a m e s with pa rt ic ul a r faces (Katz 8c Zalk, 1978). T h e African-American ch il dr e n in these c on d it i o n s p e r f o r m e d the s ame task with pict ur es o f E u r o p e a n - A m c ri c a n peo pl e. All the ch i ld r en in t h e c o n tr ol c on d it i o n were simply shown pi ct ures o f Whi te a n d Black p e op le . T h e r e ­ sults i nd ic at ed t h a t the chi l d r en in t he e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p s were less p r e j u ­ d iced c o m p a r e d to b o t h t he pr etest results a n d to the c on t r o l g r oup . T h e L a n g c r e t a l . (1985) e x p e r i m e n t l oo ke d at how indivi duati on o f o t h ­ ers for n o n d i s a b l c d sixth gr ad e rs (age 11 to age 12) effects p r e ju di ce to­ ward the wh e el c h a ir b o u n d , the bli nd, the deaf, a n d p e o p l e with only o n e a rm. D u r in g the 5-day i nt er ve nt i o n, t he c h i l d r e n in t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n ­ dition were t a u g h t to m a ke distinctions bet ween d i ff er en t types o f disabled p e o p l e a n d to distinguish b et ween beliefs a b o u t the disabled a n d reality. For e xa mp le , the ch il dr en were shown a p i c t ur e o f a p er s o n in a whe el ch a ir worki ng as a newscaster a n d were given written i nf or ma ti on a b o u t t h a t p e r ­ son. T h e c hi l d r e n wrote down wh a t was o c c u rr i n g in the p h o t o g r a p h , four r ea s o ns why the p i c t u re d individual woul d be g o o d at his or h e r job, a n d an e xp la n at io n o f how the d e p i ct e d pe r so n c oul d d o his o r h e r j o b . In the c o n ­ trol co nd it io n pi ct ur es were shown with no differenti ati on m a n i p u l a t i o n . A social distance scalc a n d an activity p r e f e r e n c e scalc assessed pr ejudi c e to­ ward the disabled. T h e results i nd ic at ed t h a t following t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l c o nd it i o n , n o n d i s a b l c d c hi ld r en were less p r e j u di c e d toward the disabled when c o m p a r e d to t hos e in the c o n tr ol c o nd i t i on , a n d to thei r own pr et est results. In t he A b o u d a n d Fenwick (1999) e x p e r i m e n t , g r o u p s o f fifth gr ad e r s in r aci all y/ethnically in t eg r at e d schools were e i t h e r t a u gh t from a c u r r i c u ­ l um, More Than iMeets the Eye (t he e x p e r i m e n t a l g ro u ps ) , o r fr om a s t a n d ar d c u r ri c u l um focusing on p er so na l a n d social d e v e l o p m e n t (t he c ont ro l g r o u ps ) . T h e e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o g r a m lasted 11 weeks a n d i n c l ud e d carrying o u t 11 d i ff er en t activities o n c e or twice a week. T h e activities f ocused on gett ing the c hi l d r en to focus on the i nt er n a l qualities o f individuals r a t h e r t h a n ex t er na l characteristics associated with racial differences. This p r o ­ gr am also p u t e mp ha s is on the fact t h a t friends often differ from o n e a n ­ ot he r, b u t th at these dif fer ences are a p pr e ci a te d, a n d t ha t n o n f r i e n d s arc often similar to cach o ther . T h e t cacher s also discussed with t he students, in s o me d e p t h , the issues s u r r o u n d i n g stereotyping. St u d e n t s were given pretests, a n d posttests 2 m o n t h s after the p r o g ra m was c o m p l e t e d . Several me as u r e s were used to evaluate the i m p a c t o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o g r a m — percei ved dissimilarity within racc using p h o t o ­ gr ap h s, verbalized descr ipt ions o f i nt er na l similarities b et ween same-racc pairs, a n d a racial at t it ude m e a su r e . No significant p r e - p o s t differences

258

8.

MODIFYING PRE JUDICE AND DIS CRIMINATIO N

were f ou n d between the e xpe r ime nt a l a nd control groups for perceived ph ot og r ap h dissimilarity. This held for both Black a nd White students. For changes in verbalizations of internal similarities, White bu t n ot Black experi­ mental students showed dramatic increases, indicating substantial changcs in individuation. Finally, high, but n o t low prcjudicc White students showed substantial dccreascs in prcjudicc, a nd Black students showed no significant changcs. These results indicated that by increasing the individuation of high prejudice White students, prejudice toward Blacks is dccrcascd. Although the n u m b e r o f studies is limited, they do suggest that individu­ ation of others can lead to decreased prcjudicc both toward peopl e o f o t he r races a n d toward the disabled. Wh e n considered in light o f all the individu­ ation experiments, t he data provide strong s u p p o r t for this factor playing a role in prejudice r educt ion efforts. Unfortunately, n o n e of the e xper i ment s in this section me asur e d discrimination. Contact Theory Contact The or y c a n no t be used to explain why individuation leads to de ­ creased prejudice. Recall that cooperati on, intimacy, c ommu ni t y sanction, a nd e qual status are factors in Contact Theory. No c ontact exists in the self­ individuation studies. T h e ex pe ri me nt s on individuation of others do in­ clude viewing pictures of a n d learning a b o u t disabled peopl e or people of a n o t h e r racc. This may be indirectly related to intimacy. T h e r e is, however, no c ooper ati on and no information is given on either status or commu ni ty sanction. Lewinian Theory Lewinian The or y is m or e helpful in explaining the data. Let us exami ne some of the driving a n d restraining forces. Learni ng a b o u t people from o utgr oups in o r d e r to differentiate between ou t gr o u p individuals serves to develop emp a th y (driving force) a nd decrease strain in social interactions (restraining force). Also recall that cognitive de ve lo pme nt and individua­ tion serve as driving forces to attitude change.

A MULTI PLE FACTOR APPROACH Based on the fact t hat prejudice a nd discrimination arc d e t e r m i n e d by m u l­ tiple factors (gcnctics a n d evolution, eulture a n d history, a nd social devel­ o p m e n t ) , a n d moreover, that these factors have different effects on differ­ e nt targets, interventions based on any one of them should have a limited impact. Additionally, the b r o a d e r social context in which any interventions

A M U L T IP L E F A C T O R A P P R O A C H

259

o c cu r can have a s t rong m o d e r a t i n g effect on the success o f these i n t e r v en ­ tions (M. C. Taylor, 2000). For e xa mp le , Taylor (2000) p o i n t e d o u t that historically, a n d currently, racial h o u s i ng segr egat ion a n d e m p l o y m e n t dis­ cri mi na ti on have h a d powerful effects on racial p r c j u d i c c a n d d i sc ri min a­ tion. T he se a n d o t h e r i m p o r t a n t c on te x t ua l i nfluences, such as e du c at i o na l o p p o r tu n it i es , can mo st readily be c h a n g e d t h r o u g h political processes a n d n o t psychological ones. Yet, as psychologists, we strive to i n d u c e c h a n gc , b u t arc usually u n a b l e to i nf lu enc e the b r o a d e r social c ontext , a n d may be seriously h a m p e r e d by this inability. We saw in this c h a p t c r t ha t d es egr eg a ti on h a d little effect on r e d u c i n g racial pr ej ud i ce a n d discri mi nati on. M a i n s tr e am in g h a d a m o d e r a t e i m pa c t on dec re as in g p re j ud i c e a n d di scr iminat ion toward the disabled, especially t hos e whose social a n d a ca d e mi c skills were relatively a dva nc ed. C o o p e r a ­ tive i nt e r ac ti on was highly effective in r e d u c i n g d is cr imi na ti on toward o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c gr ou ps , the disabled, a n d the opp os i te sex. Many of these effects were long-lasting. It h a d an a p pr ec i ab le i m p a c t on c h a n g i n g oppositc-sex attitudes a n d a m o r e m o d e s t effect toward o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c gr ou ps . T h e results f u r t h e r in di ca te d t h a t these positive effects were s h o r t ­ lived. Research on m e d i a effects was limited. It sh o we d t h a t video depictions, especially those c r ea t ed for e d u ca t i o na l use, p r o d u c e d c onsistent r e d u c ­ tions in p r e ju di ce toward b o t h o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s a n d the disabled. Similarly, t he li mited da ta on role-playing si mul at ions sh owe d d ecr eases in pr ej ud ic e toward bot h t h e disabled a n d o t h e r racial gro up s . Likewise, i n­ creasing indivi duat ion o f self a n d o t he rs r e d u c es pr e judic e toward both o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p s a n d t he disabled. No da ta arc available c o n c e r n ­ ing the i m p a c t o f films, role-playing simulations, a n d individuation on dis­ c ri mi na ti on. Based on these findings, wc suggest that mult i pl e a p p r o a c h e s be used in t he schools to c o m b a t pr ej ud ic e a n d di scr iminati on. Impor tantl y, s o m e o f t he m can be used in n o n i n t e g r a t e d settings. Du e to the consistent access to large n u m b e r s o f c hi ld r en , the s chool system is the ideal situation for i n t er ­ v ent ions de si g n e d to r e d u c e p re j ud i c e a n d d i scr imi nat i on. We saw t h a t d e ­ segr egat ion by itself has limited effects in c h a n g i n g atti tudes a n d behaviors. However, cooperati ve l ea r ni n g has b e e n shown to have strong, wi despr ead effects on r e d u c i n g d iscr i minat ion. We believe t h a t this form o f t ea ch in g s h o u l d b e c o m e an integral p a r t o f the e d u c a ti on a l system, especially in ra­ cially i n t e g r a t ed a n d m a i n s t r e a m e d settings. An a d d e d b en e f it o f this a p ­ p r o ac h is t ha t it gives st ud e nt s t he i mpressi on th at the c o mm u n i t y , e sp e­ cially au t ho r i ty figures, s u p p o r t the i m p o r t a n c e o f c h a n g i n g at ti t udes a n d behavi ors toward m e m b e r s of o t h e r groups. M a in s tr e am i ng has b e e n shown to be a m o de r at e l y effective a p p r o a c h in r e d u c i n g pr ej ud ic e a n d discr imi nat ion toward the disabled. Rccall t h a t the

260

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

effects are limited w h e n t he disabled s t u d e n t is mo d e r at e ly to severely m e n ­ tally r e t a r d e d . T h e r e f o r e , c oo per at ive l e a r ni n g in these cases s h o ul d be d o n e cautiously. In t ha t indivi duat ion o f self a n d o t h e r s is effective in r e d u c i n g pr ejudi ce, we believe t ha t t e ac h in g m e t h o d s t ha t p r o m o t e self-acceptance a n d valuing differences a m o n g p e o p l e s h ou l d b e c o m e an integral p a r t o f the n o r m a l e du c at io n process. This fits well with local a n d nat i on al efforts to p r o m o t e the valuing o f diversity. A b o u d (1988) suggest ed the use o f psychological tests t h a t reveal p e rs o n a l profiles to he lp individuals discover u n i q u e as­ pects o f self. T h e s e profiles can t h e n be c o m p a r e d with o t he rs to look for similarities a n d differences. Finally, films a n d role-playing s imul ati ons arc effective tools in r e d u c i n g p re jud ic e , a n d t h e r e fo r e s h o ul d be used in te r­ mittently t h r o u g h o u t the a c a de m i c year. W. G. S t e p h a n a n d Finlay (1999) sh owe d that e m p a t h y training, i n d e p e n d e n t o f role-playing simulations, can have a positive effect on r e d u c i n g p r e judic e. It would also serve to e n ­ h a n c e o t h e r i n t e r p er s on a l relations. O t h e r t ha n cooper ati ve i nt er act ion, t he re arc no known m e t h o d s o f r e d u c i n g opposite-sex prej udice. T h e s e p r o p o s e d c h a n g e s arc q u i te d ra ma t ic . Many m i g h t qu e st io n w h e t h e r they are feasible. However, t he re arc school systems in the U ni te d States t ha t have successfully inst itut ed cooper at ive l e ar n in g p ro gr ams . A d ­ ditionally, m a ny schools t h r o u g h o u t t he c ou n tr y are i nc l ud in g individua­ tion a n d valuing diversity p r o g r a m s in t hei r curricula. It is clear t h a t the social, e d uc at io na l, a n d e m o t i o n a l p r o b l e m s c rc a tc d by p r ej ud ic e a n d dis­ c ri mi na ti on will n o t be resolved if we c o n t i n u e with the status quo. We n e e d s t r o n g viable int er ve nt i o n s to resolve the issues. T h e p r o p o s e d c ha ng e s may go a l on g way toward alleviating these p r o b l ems .

SUMMARY T h e r e are two th eor ie s f r equ en t ly citcd to explain c h a n ge s in pr ej ud i ce a n d d i s c ri m i na t i o n — C o n t a c t T h e o r y a n d Lewinian Th eor y. T h e i m p o r t a n t c o nd it i o n s in C o n t a c t T h e o r y arc: e qual status, c o m m u n i t y sanct i on, c o o p ­ e rat ion, a n d intimacy. C o n t a c t T h e o r y hel ps us u n d e r s t a n d the results of the research on d e s e gr e ga t io n, cooper at ive int e ra ct io n, a n d t he media. It is less hel pf ul in e xp l a i n in g t he lit er atur e on m a i n s t r e a mi ng , role-playing sim­ ulations, a n d indivi duat i on. Lewinian T h e o r y is a form o f field t he or y with driving a n d r est raini ng forces. T h e forces t h a t restrain c hi ldr en from c h a n g i n g t h e ir p r e j u d i c e d at­ titudes incl ude: a ut hor ity a cc c pt an c c, i n t e r g r o u p m e c ha n i s ms , i n g r o u p fa­ voritism, strain in social i nt eract ions, a n d t he e x pe ct at io n o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e social b eh a v i or by o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s . Driving forces for c h a n g e include: cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t , indi vi duat ion, a n d e mp a th y . Lewinian T h e o r y is

SUMM ARY

261

useful in discussing the results o f the r es ear ch on m a i n s t r e a mi ng , c o o p e r a ­ tive i nt er act ion, t he me di a , simulations, a n d individuation. It d oe s n o t aid us in u n d e r s t a n d i n g t he results o f t he de s egr e ga t io n e x pe r ime n ts . Data from 23 studies on the effects o f de se gr eg a ti on on p r e judic e a n d d is cr imin ati on yield s o me in te re s ti ng conclusions. De segr egat ion is largely ineffective in d e c re a si ng e i t h e r p r e ju di ce or d iscr imi nat ion. T h e results, however, t e n d to be m o r e positive for Black chi ld re n t h a n for Whites. In ge ne r al , t he re were n o systematic dif fer ences in o u t c o m e s be twe e n boys a n d girls a n d t he re were no age effects n o t e d in t he e x pe r im en t s . T h e a b ­ s ence o f equal status bet ween st ud en t s a n d lack o f c o m m u n i t y s u p p o r t a p ­ p e a r to be i m p o r t a n t factors in d e t e r m i n i n g the o u t c o m e s o f these studies. F o u r t e en studies were discussed on the effects o f m a i n s t r e a m i n g on p re j­ udice a n d di scr i minat ion o f n o n d i s a b l e d c h i l d re n toward the disabled. M a in s tr e am i ng d oc s crcat c m o r e positive attitudes toward all types o f h a n d ­ icaps, b u t is less effective on p re ju d i ce toward t he m o d e r at e l y to severely mental ly r e t a rd e d. T h e r e arc di fferences bas ed on t he age o f the n o n ­ disablcd c hi ld r en , with o l d e r ch i ld re n (ages 10 a n d up) d ev el opi ng m o r e positive attitudes when c o m p a r e d to y o u n g e r o ne s (ages 8 a n d below). M a i n s t r e a m e d girls t e n d to be less p r e j u d i c e d than th ei r mal e peers. C oope r at ive inte ra ct io n implies positive goal i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e a n d chil­ d r e n wor king o r talking to ge the r. Twenty studies were discussed on the ef­ fects o f cooper ati ve i nt er acti on ( p r e d o m i n a n t l y cooper at ive l ea r ni ng ) on pr ej ud ic e a n d d is cr imi n a t io n toward di f f er en t racial a n d e t h n i c gro up s , the oppos ite sex, a n d the disabled. T h e r e are lasting effects on d i scr i mi nat ion (9 m o n t h s ) b u t n o t on attitudes. Coope ra ti ve i nt er act i on d o e s effect bot h oppositc-sex a n d r a c i a l / e t h n i c p r e ju di ce a n d d i scr imi nat i on, with the ef­ fects for the f o r m e r g r o u ps b e i n g s t r o ng e r t ha n for the latter gr oups. T h e d is cr i mi nat or y b e h a vi or o f n on d i s a b l c d ch il dr en toward t he ir disabled classmates decreases as a result o f cooperat ive inter act ion. Five studies t h a t m e a s u r e t he effects of me di a , particularly television a n d movies, on att i tude c h a n g c were discussed. Television a n d film d o effect pr ej ud ic e in ch i ld re n a n d adolescents. T h e films were effective regardless o f the age o f the subjects a n d seem to i m p a c t all t h r e e aspects o f pr ej udi ce. T h e effects arc p r e s e n t for p r e j ud i ce toward the disabled a n d o t h e r r ac ia l/ e thn ic gr oups. Xo studies were f o u n d t ha t e x a m i n e d the effectiveness of films for c h a n g i n g oppositc-scx p re ju d i ce o r for c h a n g i n g d is cr imi nat i on toward any g r ou p. T h e r e is evidence t h a t role playing is an effective way to c h a n g e attitudes; t he re is n o i nf o rm at io n on d isc ri mi na ti on. Ex a mi n at io n o f the l it e ra tur e r e ­ veals five studies t ha t investigated race p re ju d i ce a n d p r e ju di ce toward the h a n d i c a p p e d . No studies were f o u n d t h a t e x a m i n e d the effectiveness o f simulat ions for c h a n g i n g oppositc-sex p r e j u d i c e o r f or r e d u c i n g discrimi­ na ti on toward any g r o up . In o r d e r to be effective, si mul at ions m u s t be as

262

8.

M O DIF YING P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R I M I N A T IO N

real as possible. Discussions b ef or e a n d after the role play arc i m p o r t a n t b ot h to at tit ude c h a n g e a n d to alleviate any stress felt by the part icipants d u r i n g the e x pe ri enc e. Individuation is t he process o f dif fer ent iat ing p e o p l e from o n e a n o t h e r a n d can apply to t he self (self-acceptance) a n d to others. Ni ne studies were discussed on the r el at ions hi p be twe en self-acceptance a n d p re judi c e , b u t no e x p e r i m e n t s on discr imi nat ion were f o u nd . N o n p r e j u d i c e d p e o p l e arc high in self-acceptance, wh e re as p r e j u di c ed individuals have low self-acc c pt an c e. M a ni pu la t i on s d e si gn ed to increase self-acceptance result in d e ­ c reased r a c i a l / e t h n i c p r e ju d i c e a n d p re j u d i c e toward the disabled. F o u r e x p e r i m e n t s deali ng with the c o n n e c t i o n be twe en individuation o f othe rs a n d pr ej ud i ce were p r e s e n t e d , b u t no dat a were available on d i sc ri mina ­ tion. T e a c h i n g ch i ld re n to di fferent iate a m o n g disabled p e o pl e a n d a m o n g individuals from o t h e r r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u ps causes a d e cr ease in pr ej ud ic e t oward the d if fer ent iat ed gr oup. A mul tiple factor a p p r o a c h is n e e d e d to p r o d u c c decreases in p r e ju di ce a n d di scr iminati on toward the opposite-sex, t he disabled, a n d o t h e r ra ci a l / c t hni c gr oups. Coo per at ive l e a r ni n g a n d processes th at p r o m o t e self-acc c p t a n ce a n d valuing dif f er ences a m o n g p e o p l e m u s t b e c o m e an integral p a r t o f o u r a ca d cm ic p r ogr ams. Finally, films a n d role-playing arc useful tools to d ecr eas e p r cj ud ic c a n d s h o ul d be used int er mi t t en tl y t h r o u g h o u t the a ca d cm i c year.

C hapter

9

Parents, Peers, an d Personality

O n e o f t he great facts of psychology is that for nearly all characteristics, there arc mar ked individual differences across people. This is certainly true for prcjudicc a nd discrimination. Wc a rgue d that there arc powerful gc­ n c t i c / evolutionary processes at work that strongly predispose us to develop prejudice a nd discrimination toward certain socially prescribed targets. However, the extent to which any individual develops these attitudes and behaviors d e p e nd s on his or h e r gcnctic i nheri tance a nd socialization e x pe ­ riences. We have seen, for example, that authorities can direct people for or against any particular out gr oup. If you have exp er ie nc ed the “against,” then you will tend to be prejudiced against t hat o ut gr oup. We also noted that o ut gr ou p attraction can play a role in co un te r in g prejudice a nd dis­ crimination, b ut the ext en t to which people arc affected by this process will d e p e n d on their particular experiences with those o ut gr ou ps as well as what they have seen a nd he ar d a b o u t them. W h e n people arc asked to identify the most powerful influences for ac­ quiring prejudice a nd discrimination, most, including psychologists, invari­ ably say, “It’s the parent s. ” This seems so obvious t hat it almost makes little sense to question it. Fortunately, there are several rcscarchcrs who have d o n e so, and wc shortly present their findings. But before that, it should be noted that there arc o the r psychologists who assert that parents have rela­ tively little to do with influencing their c h i l d r e n ’s behavior or attitudes (Harris, 1995; Plomin, 1990). Harris (1995) a r gu e d that it is the p e e r gr ou p t hat has the strongest socialization influences on children a nd adolescents. Harris proceeds to d o c u m e n t this by drawing on a wide variety o f psycho­ logical findings. Plomin (1990) based an a r g u m e n t on very extensive bchav263

264

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

ior geneti cs analyses showing t h a t individual dif fer ences a n d similarities in personality, intelligence, a n d psy ch op at ho l og y pr imarily d e p e n d on g c ­ nctic differences a n d similarities, a n d secondarily, on n o n s h a r e d e n v i r o n ­ me nt a l ( p r e d o m i n a t e l y social) differences. In particular, s h a r ed e n v i r o n ­ me nt a l infl uences within th e family setting a p p e a r to have little to d o with psychological similarities be twe en siblings a n d parents. In c h a p t c r 2, we sh owe d s u p p o r t for the b e ha v io r genetics position from Eysenck’s (1992) r es ear ch on pr ej udice. T h u s, it is plausible that p a r e nt a l pr ejudi ces d o have little o r n o i nf lu e n c e on t he d e v e l o p m e n t o f their c h i l d r e n ’s prej udi ce. How do we study this quest ion? T h e simplest a n d mo st d i r ec t way is to give sets o f p a r e n t s a n d chi l dr en the same, or highly similar tests o f p r e j u ­ dice a n d cor re la te thei r scores. If c h i l d r e n ’s a n d p a r e n t s ’ scores are posi­ tively c or r el at ed , a n d t he re are individual dif fer ences across the e n t ir e set o f p a r e n t s a n d c hi l d r en , t he n t ha t is evidence for pa re n t a l influences. This assumes, of course, t h a t the inf l ue nc e mai nl y goes in the dir ect ion o f p a r ­ ents to ch il dr en , a n d n o t the reverse. If t he scores arc n o t positively c o r r e ­ lated, t h e n this is e v idence t ha t the inf luences arc very small o r n on ex i st en t . A s e c o nd way to study this q ues ti on is to e x a m i n e p ar ti c ula r child r e ar i ng strategies, such as t he e x t e n t to which p a r e n t s use a u t h o r i t a r i a n a p ­ pr oa c he s , or the e x t e n t to which pa re n t s t each ch i ld re n a b o u t racial bias a n d d i scr iminat ion, a n d relate these strategies to c h i l d r e n ’s pr ej udice. We saw in c h a p t e r 1, for e x a mp l e , th at highly p r e j u di c ed adults t e n d to d e ­ scribe their p a r e n t s as a ut ho r i t a r i a n. To wh at e x t e n t does this rel at ionshi p h o l d for a c o n c u r r e n t assessment o f p ar en ts a n d chil dr en?

PARENTAL I N FL U E N C E S O N C H I L D R E N ’S P R EJ U DI C E Onl y a few studies have dealt with this issue since 19(50. An d o f these, all but o n e deal t exclusively with e t h ni c pr ej udi ce. It is possible t h a t the inf luence p a r en t s have on thei r c h i l d r e n ’s p r c ju di cc varies consi der abl y with the tar­ get o f t he p r ej udic e. We will see that tha t is the case. Also, few o f t he studies assess b o t h m o t h e r ’s a n d f a t h e r ’s pr ej udi ce. It is also possible t h a t m o t h e r s a n d fathers differentially i nf l ue nc e thei r c h i l d r e n ’s prejudices. We will also see t ha t that is the case. Wc have f o u n d only t hr ee studies s howing a m o d e r a t e i nf luence, in the i n t e n d e d d ir ec tion, o f p a r e n t s ’ attitudes or behaviors on thei r c h i l d r e n ’s e thn ic pr ejudi ce. Two o t h e r studies f o u n d effects in the op p o si t e d i rect ion o f what p a r e nt s i n t e n d e d . Two studies f o u n d essentially n o p ar e nt a l influ­ e nc e on c h i l d r e n ’s pr cjudi cc. A n d o n e study f o u n d varying i nf luences on c h i l d r e n ’s p r ej ud i ce , d e p e n d i n g on the p a r e n t a n d the type o f pr ejudi ce. Re ga r di n g the first g r o u p o f studies, Mo s he r a n d Scodcl (1960) e x a m ­ i n e d the rel at ionshi p bet ween Wh it e m o t h e r s ’ (fathers were n o t assessed)

P A R E N T A L IN F L U E N C E S O N C H I L D R E N S P R E JU D IC E

265

a u th or i ta r ia n c hi ld-rearing strategies a n d th ei r scores on a mo d if i ed ver­ sion of the E t h no c e n tr i ci s m scalc from A d o r n o ct al. (1950) a n d t he ir 11o r 13-year-old c h i l d r e n ’s e t hn ic attitudes, using a social distance m e a s u r e for 10 dif fe re nt e th ni c gr oups. In g ener al, m o t h e r s who were e t h n o c e n t r i c were also a u th o r i t a r i a n . However, only e t hn o c en tr i si sm was directly a n d m o d e ra t e l y rel at ed to pr cjudi cc. E t h n o c e n t r i c m o t h e r s t e n d e d to raise p r e j ­ u d i c e d c hi ld r en . A ut ho ri t a r i a ni s m, by itself, h a d n o significant effect on c h i l d r e n ’s prej udi ce. S p c n c e r (1983) e x a m i n e d th e r el a tions hi p b et ween Black m o t h e r s ’ a p ­ p r o a c h e s for t e ac hi ng t h e i r 3- to 9-ycar-old ch il dr en a b o u t race a n d civil rights in the U n i t ed States a n d thei r c h i l d r e n ’s racial pr ej udic e (fathers were n o t assessed). T h e m o t h e r s were given a q u e s t i o n n a i r e t h a t allowed S p c n c c r to identify two b r o a d a p p r oa c he s . In the first a p p r o a c h , m o t h e r s e m p h a s i z e d to thei r c hi ld re n bo t h how Blacks have b e e n d is cr imi n a t e d against in this society a n d t he centrality o f civil rights to thei r lives. In the s c c o nd a p p r o a c h , m o t h e r s e m p h a s i z e d the positive r e c e n t gains of Blacks in i nt egr ati on a n d in the overall racial climate o f this c ountry. T h e ch il dr en were given the PRAM II scalc to assess racial p r e f e r e n ce s o r biases. Recall t h a t in the PRAM II, c hi ld r en are shown pairs o f drawings o f Black a n d Whi te c hi ld r en a n d adults a n d arc asked to p o i n t to the pi ctur e t ha t fits the positive o r negative descr i pt ion. T h e effects of m o t h e r s ’ strategics were not observed until the c hi ld r en were a b o u t 7 years o l d — t e a c hi n g strategy h a d n o no ti c e abl e effect on 3- to 6-year-olds. For the 7- to 9-year-olds, if their m o t h e r s e m p h a s i z e d d i scr imi nati on a n d civil rights, ch i ld re n t e n d e d to give m o r e pro-Black r es ponse s on the PRAM II. If t he ir m o t h e r s e m p h a ­ sized racial climatc a n d inte gr a ti on, t he c hi ld r en t e n d e d to give m o r e proWhi te responses. T h e latter is a surpri si ng r esult in t h a t m o t h e r s p r e s u m ­ ably w a n t ed t he ir chi ld re n to have positive Black attitudes. Carlson a n d Iovini (1985) e x a m i n e d the r ela ti onship b etween Black a n d Whi te a d o l e sc c nt boys’ att itudes ( no ages were given) a n d those o f t he ir fa­ t h e r s ’ ( m o t h e r s ’ attitudes were n o t assessed). T h r e e items o f a social dis­ t ance m e a s u r e were used for bo th fathers a n d adol escent s, d e al i n g with worki ng with a pe rs on o f a n o t h e r racc, ma rr yi ng a p er s on o f a n o t h e r racc, a n d inviting a pe r so n o f a n o t h e r race to o n e ’s h ous e . For Whi te families, t he re was a m o d e r a t e positive c or relat ion b etween f a t h er s ’ a n d s o ns ’ atti­ tudes, b u t for Black families t h e re was n o significant cor rel at ion. Ta ke n as a g roup, these t hr ee studies provide only m o d e s t s u p p o r t for pa ­ rental influences. W h e n they are present, they e m e r ge after the age o f 6 years, a n d are n o t consistently f o u n d across race a n d type o f p a r en t i n g strategy. T h e two studies t ha t f o u n d effects op po si t e to those i n t e n d e d by the p a r ­ ents were car ried o u t by Br anch a n d N c w c o m b e (1980, 1986). Both studies d eal t with Black m o t h e r s a n d th ei r c hi l d r e n (fathers were n o t assessed). In

266

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

t he 1980 study, t he chi l d r en were 4 to 5 years old, a n d were given the PRAM II a n d the C l ar k ’s doll test. Rccall t h a t in the C l a r k’s doll test, chi ld re n arc p r e s e n t e d with f o u r Wh it e a n d Black dolls a n d given c i t h er negative or po s­ itive descr ipt ions o f o n e o f t he dolls. T h e c hi ld r en arc asked to selcct the doll t h a t best fits the descr ipti on. Based on q u es t i o n n a i r e data, t he p ar e nt s were classified as b e i n g civil rights activists o r nonactivists. No rel at ionshi p was f o u n d b et ween p a r e n t s ’ activism a n d c h i l d r e n ’s p rc j ud ic c on the PRAM II. For the C l a rk ’s test, however, the h i g h e r the pa re n t s activism, the m o r e pro-White were the children. T h e chi ldren o f the nonactivist par ent s showed no racial pr e fe re nce s. In the 1986 study, t he ch i ld r en were e i t h er 4 to 5, or 6 to 7 years o f age. T h e y were given t h r e e di f f er ent tests o f racial bias— the C l a r k ’s doll test, the PRAM II, a n d a n o t h e r multi pl e-choi ce doll test. For t he latter me asu re , c hi l d r e n could m ak e positive o r negative r espons es toward bot h r a c i a l / e t h ­ nic gr oups. T h e m o t h e r s were given two que sti o n n a i r e s, o n e assessing Black e t h n o c e n t r i s m a n d o n e assessing att it udes toward t e ac hi ng thei r chil­ d r e n pro-Black attitudes. For t he 4- to 5-year-olds, the PRAM II a n d Clark tests were u n r e l a t e d to m o t h e r s ’ attitudes, b u t for t he mult ipl e-choice doll test, they were relat ed in t he op po si te di recti on. T h e m o r e anti-White were the m o t h e r s , the m o r e pro-White were the chi l d r en . For the 6- to 7-yearolds, seven o u t o f t he e ig h t c or r el at ions b et ween m o t h e r s ’ a n d c h i l d r e n ’s att itudes were n o t statistically significant. In o n e case, t h e r e was m o d e s t a g r e e m e n t b et ween their attitudes. T h es e results indicate, for Black families, t ha t m o t h e r s can have u n i n ­ t e n d e d , a n d even op p o si t e inf lue nc es on the racial attitudes o f th ei r 4- to 5year-old chi l dr en . Wh at e ve r small inf lue nc e they may have on t he ir 6- to 7year-olds, this i nf lu e nc e does seem to be in the i n t e n d e d di recti on. T h e two studies t ha t f o u n d essentially no pa re n t a l i nf lu e nc e were car ried o u t by Davey (1983) a n d A b o u d a n d Doyle (1996). In the Davcy (1983) study, the attitudes o f British Whi t e, Asian, a n d Black m o t h e r s a n d fathers a n d t he ir 7- to 10-ycar-old ch i ld re n were assessed. T h e ch i ld r en were given p h o t o g r a p h sorting tasks, stereotype me a sur es , a n d sociomct ric choices in o r d e r to evaluate their r e sp o ns es toward t h e o t h e r two raccs. T h e p a re n ts were interviewed on a wide r a ng e o f topics c o n c e r n i n g i n t e r e t hn i c beliefs, values, a n d attitudes. All g r o u ps sh owe d a positive bias toward thei r own g r ou p , b u t Davcy f o u n d n o systematic r el ati ons hi p bet ween p a r e n t s ’ a n d c h i l d r e n ’s att it udes toward c i t h e r o f t he ou tg r ou p s . In ge n e ra l, each r a cia l/ e thn ic g r o u p o f c hi ld r en e xpr ess ed p r ej u d ic e toward t he o t h e r two groups, even t h o u g h th ei r p a r e nt s for t he m o s t p a r t were ac ce pt in g o f t hos e groups. A b o u d a n d Doyle (1996) s tu d i e d Whi te C a n ad i a n m o t h e r s a n d their 9year-old ch il dr e n (fathers were n o t assessed). T h e ch i ld r en were given the PRAM II a n d t he Mu l ti r esp on se Racial Attitude Measur e. T h e latter test al­ lowed t he m to evaluate t h r e e d i f f er ent r a c i a l / e t h n i c gr oups: Whit e, Black,

P A R E N T A L IN F L U E N C E S O N C H I L D R E N S P R E JU D IC E

267

a n d Native C a n a d i a n I ndia n. U nl ike t he PRAM II, whi ch involved a forcedchoicc p r o c e d u r e , c hi l d r e n c o u l d assign positive o r negative evaluations to any c o mb i n a t i o n o f these gr oups. T h e m o t h e r s were give a racial attitudes test t ha t assessed positive a n d negative attitudes toward Blacks. T h e a u t h or s f o u n d n o significant r e la ti ons hips b etween the c h i l d r e n ’s atti tudes on ei­ t h e r test a n d m o t h e r s ’ positive or negative att itudes toward Blacks. T h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d two investigations c o n t r a d i c t the results o f those studies t ha t have f o u n d p ar e nt a l i nfl uences on 7- to 10-year-old c hil dr en. T a k en as a whole, this r es ear ch indicates, at best, a very m o d e s t rel at ionshi p be twe en p a r e n t s ’ r a c i a l / e t h n i c att it udes a n d those o f thei r p r e a d o l e s c e n t a n d a d o l e sc c nt c hil dr en. T h e final, a n d mo st c o m p r e h e n s i v e study was c ar rie d o ut by O ’Bryan, Fi shbein, a n d Ritchcy (1999). T h e par ti cipant s were 15- a n d 17-year-old Whi te st ud e nt s e n r ol l e d in Catholic schools, a n d b o t h o f thei r biological par ent s. T h e a dol es cent s a n d p a r e nt s were given the identical tests, which assessed p rc ju d i cc against p e o p l e with HI V/AI Ds , ho mo s e x ua l s , Black p e o ­ ple, fat p e op l e, a n d male a n d femal e sex-rolc stereotyping. T h e p a re n ts were individually tested in t hei r h o m e by o n e o f the r es ear ch assistants a n d the a dol es cents were tested at school. T h r o u g h the use o f mul tiple re gr e s­ sion statistical tests (a c o m p l e x form o f mul ti pl e c or re la ti onal analyses) in which bo t h p a r e n t s ’ scorcs were e x a m i n e d separately, p ar en ts were f o u n d to have a small b u t consistently positive effect across all six areas o f p r e j u ­ dice a n d sex-role stereotyping. However, m o t h e r s a n d fat her s h a d diff er ent effects. Mot her s, b u t n o t fathers, i n f l u c nc c d t he ir a do le s cc n t c h i l d r e n ’s pr ej ud ic e toward p e o pl e with H I V/ AI DS , p e o p l e who were fat, a n d Black pe op l e . Fathers, b u t n o t m o t he r s, i nf l u c nc c d thei r a do le s cc n t c h i l d r e n ’s mal e a n d female scx-rolc ster eotypi ng a n d h o m o s e x u a l prej udi ce. How do we u n d e r s t a n d these results? T h e r e arc at least two rel ated possi­ bilities. T h e first is t h a t the pr ima ry i nf l ue nc e for pr cj ud ic c is t he m o t h e r , unless the f at he r is especially c o n c e r n e d a b o u t s ome ar ea( s ) . We saw in c h a p t e r 5 t ha t father s have a s t r o n g e r c o m m i t m e n t t h a n m o t h e r s in the so­ cialization o f sex identity. This implies t h a t fathers woul d have a s t r o n g e r i n ­ f luence t h a n m o t h e r s for male a n d female scx-role identity a n d h o m o s e x ­ ual p r ej udic e. T h e s e c on d possibility is that pa re n t a l i nf lue nc e is largely culturally d e t e r m i n e d . In N o r th Ame ri ca n cul tur e, m o t h e r s are m o r e i n­ volved t han fathers in issues de al in g with he al th a n d weight, a n d fathers arc m o r e involved t ha n m o t h e r s with issues de al in g with sex identity. Thus, m o t h e r s woul d be t he pr ima ry i nf l ue nc e for att it udes toward H I V / A I D s a n d fatness, a n d fathers for ster eot yping a n d homosexuali ty. U n f o r t u ­ nately, t h e r e is n o evide nc e a b o u t the relative s tr engt h o f m o t h e r s ’ a n d fa­ t h e r s ’ c o n c e r n a b o u t race. Lo o k i ng over all t he re s e ar ch in this section, t h e r e is s om e evi dence that Whi te p a r e nt s have a consistent, b u t small effect on t h e ir a d o l e sc e nt chil-

268

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

clrcn’s prejudices. However, f or Black a n d Wh it e p a r e nt s o f 6- to 10-ycarolds, t he results are inc on si st en t for r a c e / e t h n i c pr ej ud ic e , a n d for y o u n g e r c h il dr e n, p a re n ta l i n f l u e n c e is e i t h e r n on e xi s t en t, o r for Blacks, in the o p ­ posite d ir ec ti on of p a r en t a l intent i ons. Because p a r e nt s arc the first m a j or a uthor ity figures in c h i l d r e n ’s lives, h ow is it t h a t d e g r e e o f pa re n t a l pr ej ud i ce has little c ons is te nt i m p a c t on c h i l d r e n ’s prejudi ce? T h e r e arc at least t h r e e possible answers to this q u e s ­ tion. First, p a r e nt s convey a large a m o u n t o f i nf o r m a t i o n to t he ir ch i ld re n, nearly all o f which is consist ent with ge n e ra li zed socictal n o r ms . Thus , i n a d ­ vertently, p a r e nt s m e di a t e culturally h e l d beliefs a n d values a b o u t the vari­ ous g r o u ps in the cul ture. S e c on d, t he re arc a variety o f aut hor it i es in the c ult ur e th at t e n d to convey the same kinds o f messages to everyone. Pe r­ h a ps ch il dr en assimilate this i n f o r ma t io n with s om e type o f averagi ng p r o c ­ ess. P a r e n t s ’ views may be i m p o r t a n t , b u t n o t the only i m p o r t a n t ones. T h i r d , the research r e p o r t e d was c ar r ie d o u t with p a r e nt s who mainly h a d m o d e r a t e views against o u t g r ou p s , a n d may n o t reflect t he effects o f ex­ t remist views on pr ej ud i ce a n d d iscr imi nat ion. P e r h ap s p a re n ts who are m e m b e r s o f t he Ame ri ca n Nazi party o r the Ku Klux Klan have a s t r o ng e r affect on t he ir ch il dr en t h a n the p a r e nt s utilized in these studies. We c o n c l u d e from this research a n d discussion t h a t e x a m i n i n g pa re nt al i n f l u e n c e provides little u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t he s our ces o f individual differ­ e nces in c h i l d r e n ’s prej udi ces, e x c cp t to suggest lo o k in g elsewhere. Pe r­ h a ps t he answer lies with peers, as Harris (1995) woul d have us believe. Let us e x a m i n e t h a t literature.

P EE R I N FL U E N C E S O N C H I L D R E N ’S P R EJ U DI C E C h il d r e n a n d a doles cent s arc initially a tt racted to a n d c ho o s e t he ir friends b ased on pcr cei vcd similarity to themselves ( A b ou d 8c M e n dc l s o n, 1996; N e w c o m b 8c Bagwell, 1995). T h e mo s t i m p o r t a n t characteristics u nd er l yi ng these choices arc age, sex, ethnicity, m u t u a l liking, a n d activity p re fe re nce s. To a lesser ex te nt , f o r m i n g f ri ends hi ps is also bas ed on similarity o f atti­ tudes a n d values. A do l es ce nt friends r e se mb l e each o t h e r in a wide r a ng e of attitudes a n d behavi or s such as s chool-related attitudes, a ca d cm ic achieve­ m e n t o ri e nt a ti on , smoki ng, dr in k i ng , sexual activity, d r u g use, aggression, a n d d e l i n q u e n c y ( A bo ud 8c M e n d e l s o n , 1996; B. B. Brown, 1990; R. B. Cairns 8c B. D. Cairns, 1994; H a r t u p 8c Stevens, 1997). L on gi t u di na l research i ndicates t ha t attitudes a n d behavi or s may be s h a p e d by a do l es c en t fr iends (R. B. Cairns 8c B. D. Cairns, 1994; Kandel, 1978; Lea 8c Duck, 1982; Savin-Williams 8c Be r nd t , 1990). T he se effects have b e en shown for s ub st an c e a bus e , d e l in qu en cy , e d u ca t i o n a l aspirations, aca­ dc mi c a c h ie v eme nt , al cohol a n d m a r i j u a n a use, a n d antisocial behavior.

PEER IN F L U E N C E S O N C H I L D R E N ’S P R E JU D IC E

269

Additionally, we saw in c h a p t e r 8 t ha t p re ju d i ce in c h i l d re n can be influ­ e n c e d t h r o u g h c o n t a c t with peer s t h r o u g h cooper at i ve l e a r ni n g in schools. Research by Slavin a n d M ad d e n (1979) with 10th graders in racially int e­ grat ed schools f o u n d that p e e r interaction, includi ng talk a bo u t race a n d participating on mi xed e thnic athletic teams, h a d positive effects on modify­ ing racial attitudes. And m o r e recently, A b o ud a n d Fenwick (1999) r e p o rt e d that for 8- to 11-year-olds, pairing high a n d low racially pr ej udi ced friends a n d asking t hem to discuss racial issues r c d u c c d pr ejudice for the high p r ej u­ diced friends, whereas having no effect on the low pr ej udiced ones. T a k e n t o g e th e r, all these studies strongly suggest t h a t fr iends can at least modestl y i nf lue nc e cach o t h e r ’s prejudices. This i nf lu enc e s h o ul d show up in positive c or re la ti ons in thei r attitudes. T h e dcck is stackcd in this d ir ec ­ tion. Significant positive correlations can conic a b o u t e it he r because friends initially chose cach o t h e r b ecause o f at ti t ude similarity, o r be ca use they i n ­ f l u c n cc d each o t h e r after they b e c a m e friends. So, fi nding positive c or r el a ­ tions with r es pe c t to p re j u d i c e s h o u l d c o m e as n o surprise. In o u r liter at ur e sear ch, we were able to find only t h r e e studies t h a t e x ­ a m i n e d the c or re la tions bet ween f r i e nd s’ p r e judi ce s a n d / o r sex role ster­ eotyping. T h e first was carricd o u t by Glock, Withnow, Piliavin, a n d S pe nc e r (1975) with m o r e t han 4,000 adol escent s fr om Gr a de s 8, 10, a n d 12, in t h r e e towns l ocated outside o f New York City. T h e dat a were collected in 1963, b u t were n o t analyzed a n d p u b l i s he d until 1975. Several analyses were p e r f o r m e d ; the two of greatest int erest involved White, non-Jewish adol es­ c e n t s ’ pr e ju d ic es toward Blacks a n d Jews. T h e m e a s u r e used was negative stereotypes o f each o f these two groups. To m e a s u r e the i nf lue nc e o f friends, the average scores o f cach p e r s o n ’s five best friends was c o m p a r e d with h i s / h e r own scores. Seven categories o f increasi ng pr ej ud i ce were identified. If fri ends were c i t h er chos e n for their c o r r e s p o n d i n g level of p re j ud i c e or were i n f l u e nc e d by cach o t h e r s ’ p r e j u ­ dice, t h e n it was e x p e c t c d t h a t the h i g h e r a p e r s o n ’s p r e ju di ce score, the h i g h e r woul d be his or h e r f r i e n d s ’ scores. Co r re la ti ons were n o t used, which would have m a d e t he results m o r e c o m p a r a b l e to those o f o t h e r s t ud ­ ies. Nevertheless, Glock et al. (1975) f o u n d t ha t for anti-Semitism, t he re was a statistically significant a n d m o d e s t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e be twe en a dol e s ­ c e n t s ’ a n d t h e ir f r i e n d s ’ scores in two o f the t h r e e towns. For the third town, the r el ati onship a m o n g scores was n o t significant. For Black p r e j u ­ dice, the scores across all t hr ee towns were c o m b i n e d , a n d n o rel at ionshi p was f o u n d b et ween a d o l e sc e nt s ’ scores a n d those o f t h e i r friends. T h u s, at best, a weak rel at ionshi p was o b t a i n e d for fr ie nds hi p in fl ue nc es in that study. T h e s e co n d study was car ricd o u t by A b o u d a n d Doyle (1996). T h e p a r ­ ticipants were C a n ad i a n 8- to 11-year-old White, Black, Ch ines e, a n d East I ndi an ch il dr e n. T h e p re jud ic e me as u re s used were the Mu lt ir e sp o n se Ra­

270

9.

PARE NTS, PEERS, AND PERSONALITY

cial Attitude test, focusing on Black, White, a nd Chinese children, a n d a projective test called the Picture Test of Cross-Race Peer Contact. In the lat­ ter test, the participants were shown pictures o f a White child a nd a Black child together in different settings (e.g., playing at rcccss, having lunch) a nd were asked to make up a story a b o u t cach picture dealing with the thoughts, feelings a nd behaviors o f both dcpictcd children. T h e stories were cod cd for the positive a n d negative reactions of the dcpict cd Black a nd White children, such as wants to be friends, likes, fights, leaves to play with others. Th e children were also asked to identify their friends. Each child was given a list of the same-sex children in their grade a nd was asked to indicate how g oo d a friend cach child was using the n u m b e r s from 5 (best friend) to 2 ( not a friend). T h e exp er i me nt ers consi dered two children friends if at least one o f them rated a n o t h e r as a 5 a n d was rated in turn by the o t h e r with a 4 or a 5. Nonf ri ends were those who rated cach o t h e r with a 2 or a 3. A child could be c o un t c d oncc as a friend to o n e ot he r child, a nd once as a no nf ri en d, d e p e n d i n g on the c or rc s po n dc n cc of ratings. T h e basic findings were that on n e it he r test o f prejudice were there any consistent correlations between the friends or nonfriends. For the friends, only o ne o f the 14 correlations was statistically significant, a nd for the nonf riends, two of the correlations were significant. The third e x p er i m e nt was carricd o ut by Ritchey a nd Fish be in (2001). In their study, over 400 15- a nd 17-ycar-old White Catholic school adolcsccnts c ompl e te d questionnaires that evaluated racc, homosexual , HIV/AIDs, a nd fat prejudice, a n d scx-rolc stereotyping. A factor of overall intolerance was also de t e r m i n e d using all five scales. T h a t is, scores on all five tests were positively intercorrclated, which resulted in a single scorc of intolerance. Friendship closeness was d e t e r m i n e d in a similar way to Ab oud a n d Doyle (1996). Each adolesccnt was asked to list up to his o r h e r five closest samesex classmates in the classroom. Closeness to friend was d e t e r mi n e d by their ratings on two questions dealing with how often they s ha re d private feelings a nd talked a b o u t things that they d i d n ’t want o t h e r peopl e to know. Two types of friendships were identified— reciprocal a nd unilateral friends. Reciprocal friends were those who listed each o t h e r as friends, irre­ spective o f degree o f closcness. Unilateral friends involved only o n e m e m b e r o f the pair identifying the o t h er as a friend. Ritchey an d Fishbein (2001) carricd o u t 84 multiple regression analyses across t he four types o f prejudices a nd sex-role stereotyping, a nd involving such variables as reciprocal friends, unilateral friends, d egree o f closeness, best friends, o ne versus two friends. They found only three o f the 84 Betas (a type o f correlation) to be statistically significant. Simply, this me ans that f ri ends’ prejudices a n d stereotyping were n ot associated with each other.

PEER IN F L U E N C E S O N C H I L D R E N ’S P R E JU D IC E

271

T h a t is, in this r esear ch, fr iends did n o t i nf lue nc e each o t h e r ’s prej udi ces a n d stereotyping. This is c onsistent with the A b o u d a n d Doyle (1996) r e ­ sults, a n d for racc p re j udi c e, c ons is te nt with the Glock c ta l . (1975) results. How can this be? Ritchey a n d Fishbein (2001) off er ed f o u r possible e x ­ p la na ti on s o f thei r results. First, the adolescents, on average, were relatively low in p re j ud ic e a n d st er eotypi ng for nearly all t he scalcs. It is possible that individuals at the high e x t r e me s a n d who b e l o n g to formal organi zati ons such at those in t he Ku Klux Klan, may c h o o s e or be i n f l u en c ed by friends w ho have similar sent ime nt s. A s e c o n d possibility is th at discussions o f p r ej ­ u dice a n d ster eot yping may be rare in a d o l e sc e nt s ’ i nt er ac ti ons with their f riends b e c aus e these issues are n or ma ll y relatively u n i m p o r t a n t to t he m in p e e r settings. This may especially be t he case for those a t t e n d i n g racially h o ­ m o g e n o u s schools as did the par tici pant s in this study. A th i r d possibility is th at adolescent s likely as su me t h a t t heir friends have very similar attitudes to themselves, a n d do n o t c ha l le nge t ha t ass u mp t io n . Several studies have f o u n d that even in such d o m a i n s as g r a d e p o i n t aver­ age, subst ancc use, a n d academically disruptive behavi or, adol escent s over­ estimate t he similarity o f their friends to themselves. A f our th possibility is t h a t a dolcs ccnts may n o t readily be i n f l uc n cc d by discr imi nat or y behaviors of t h e ir friends, leaving t he ir own pr ej ud i c e s a n d stereotypes intact. For e x ­ amp le , adol csccnts may readily e n g a g e in di scr iminat or y talk against Blacks or h o m o s e x u a l s or fat p e o pl e with t h e ir fri ends in o r d e r to r e m a i n p a r t o f the g r o up , even if such talk goes against their beliefs. We saw in c h a p t e r 1 t h a t t h e r e is often a d is cr epancy b etween att itudes a n d behavi or , consi st ent with this exp la na t io n. A lt h ou g h t he re are only t hr ee studies deal ing with the topic o f f r ie n d­ ship i nf luences on p re ju di ce a n d stereotyping, they do p o i n t to very similar conclusions. Wc know that fr iends often i nf lue nc e each o t h e r ’s attitudes a n d b e h a vi or a n d can i nf lu en ce cach o t h e r ’s pr eju di c es in c on t r o ll e d set­ tings, b u t they generally did n o t d o so in these t h r e e studies. T h e cautious scientific a p p r o a c h is to a ssume the veracity o f these studies a n d ac ce pt th ei r c oncl us i ons until f u r t h e r research calls their f indi ngs into qu es t ion. If p a r e nt s have only a m o d e s t effect on their c h i l d r e n ’s pr ejudi ces a n d st er eot ypi ng a n d fr iends have essentially n o i nf lue nc e, t h e n wh a t p r o d u c e s individual dif f er ences in p re ju d i ce a n d stereotyping? T h i n k i n g back to c h a p t e r 1 a n d the a u th or i ta r ia n personality, p e r h a p s the answer lies in p e r ­ sonality differences. It may be t he case t ha t o n e ’s personality pr edi sposes him o r h e r to a c cc p t o r to reject th e pr eju di c es a n d s t ereotypes t ha t arc p r o m i n e n t in the cul tur e. It is likely t ha t nearly all o f us know the p r o m i ­ n e n t attitudes a b o u t the various g r o up s in the cult ur e, b u t s o me o f us strongly believe t h e m , ot her s, weakly so, a n d still o t h e r s reject t he m. Maybe it is personality dif fer ences across p e o p l e t ha t p r o d u c c these o ut co me s.

272

9.

PARENTS, PEERS, AND PERSONALITY

PERSONA LI TY IN FL U EN C E S O N PREJUDICE P e r s o n a l i t y h a s b e e n d e f i n e d in v a r i o u s ways. At t h e c o r e o f t h e s e d é f in it i o n s a r e t h e i d e a s t h a t it is a h i e r a r c h i c a l l y o r g a n i z e d p a t t e r n o f re latively e n d u r i n g in te rn a l dispositions a n d b e h av io ral characteristics o f th e self that p a r t i a l l y d e t e r m i n e h o w a n i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r a c t s in t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . T w o s p e c if ic d e f i n i t i o n s a r e as follows. P e r v i n ( 1 9 9 6 ) d e f i n e d p e r s o n a l i t y as “t h e c o m p l e x o r g a n i z a t i o n o f c o g n i t i o n s , affects, a n d b e h a v i o r s t h a t gives d i r e c ­ I

/

ti o n a n d p a t t e r n ( c o h e r e n c e ) to t h e p e r s o n s ’s lif e ” (p. 4 1 4 ) . F u n d e r ’s (1 9 9 7 ) d e f i n i t i o n is “a n i n d i v i d u a l ’s t r a i t p a t t e r n s o f t h o u g h t , e m o t i o n , a n d b e h a v i o r , t o g e t h e r w ith t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l m e c h a n i s m s — h i d d e n o r n o t — b e h i n d t h o s e p a t t e r n s ” (p. 1). P e r s o n a l i t y , in p a r t , acts as a f il te r f o r d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h s ocia l i n f o r m a ­ ti o n will h a v e a n i m p a c t o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l , a n d t h e n a t u r e o f t h a t i m p a c t . T h u s , p e r s o n a l i t y m a y p r e d i s p o s e e a c h i n d i v i d u a l to e i t h e r a c c e p t o r re j e c t c e r t a i n c u l t u r a l m e s s a g e s a b o u t d o m i n a n t a n d s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s in s o c i­ ety. P a r e n t s , f r i e n d s , m e d i a , r e l i g i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a n d m a n y o t h e r social i n s t i t u t i o n s o f f e r a va ri e ty o f e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r so cial i n e q u a l i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g p r e j u d i c e s . P e r s o n a l i t y affe ct s w h i c h e x p l a n a t i o n s a r e a c c e p t e d a n d a b ­ s o r b e d i n t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l ’s s c h e m a s a b o u t so ci a l h i e r a r c h i e s , a n d w h i c h a r e n o t . W e l e a r n e d f r o m c h a p t e r 1, f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t t h o s e h i g h in t h e p e r ­ s o n a l i t y t r a i t o f a u th o ritarianism a c c e p t e x p l a n a t i o n s t h a t j u s t i f y a so ci a l h i e r ­ a r c h y in w h i c h c e r t a i n g r o u p s o c c u p y p o s i t i o n s o f p o w e r t h a t e n a b l e t h e m to d o m i n a t e o t h e r g r o u p s , s u c h as m e n v e r s u s w o m e n , W h i t e s v e rs u s Blacks, a n d C h r i s t i a n s v e r s u s Jew s. T h o s e low in a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m a r e m o r e likely to u n d e r s t a n d t h e s e e q u a l i t i e s in t e r m s o f d o m i n a n t g r o u p s ’ u s i n g p o w e r a n d r e s o u r c e s to m a i n t a i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n s a t t h e e x p e n s e o f s u b o r d i ­ nate groups. In t h e r e m a i n d e r o f th is s e c t i o n , we d is c u s s t h e i m p a c t o f f o u r p e r s o n a l ­ ity c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o n t h e a c c e p t a n c e o r r e j e c t i o n o f c u l t u r a l p r e j u d i c e s . T h e s e a r e religiosity, r i g h t - w i n g a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m , s o c i a l d o m i n a n c e o r i e n ­ t a t i o n , a n d h u m a n i s t i c e g a l i t a r i a n i s m . A l t h o u g h we a t t e m p t to d is cu s s e a c h s e p a r a t e l y , t h e r e s e a r c h o f t e n i n c l u d e s two o r m o r e o f t h e s e traits in t h e s a m e s t u d y , a n d h e n c e will o c c a s i o n a l l y b e d i s c u s s e d t o g e t h e r . Finally, a l­ m o s t n o n e o f t h e r e s e a r c h h a s b e e n c a r r i e d o u t w it h c h i l d r e n . R a t h e r , c o l ­ l e g e s t u d e n t s a n d o l d e r a d u l t s h a v e n e a r l y always b e e n t h e r e s e a r c h p a r t i c i ­ p a n t s . D o n ’t c h i l d r e n ’s p e r s o n a l i t i e s i n f l u e n c e t h e i r a c c e p t a n c e o f p r e j u d i c e s ? W e t h i n k so, a n d h o p e f u l l y in t h e f u t u r e , r e s e a r c h e r s will f o c u s o n th is q u e s t i o n .

Religious Beliefs and Practices Batson a n d B urris (1994) told us that

PERSONALITY INFLUENCES ON PREJUDICE

273

All m a j o r r el i g io n s in o u r society p r e a c h love a n d a c c e p t a n c e o f o t h e r s . T h e a c c e p t a n c e is to b e u n c o n d i t i o n a l , n o t q u a l i f i e d by r ace, c r e e d , sex, o r col or. C h r i s t i a n i t y in p a r t i c u l a r p r i d e s it self o n its m e s s a g e o f u n i v e r s a l l ove. If a r e ­ ligion c a n i n d e e d l e a d its followers to a d o p t a n d live s u c h a belief, t h e n it is a p o w e r f u l a n t i d o t e f or p r e j u d i c e — o n e o v e r l o o k e d by m o s t social p s y c h o l o ­ gists. (p. 149)

T h e y t h e n go o n to d o c u m e n t w h a t has b e e n f o u n d a b o u t th e r e la t io n s h i p b e t w e e n v arious types o f religiosity a n d p re ju d ic e . In t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n o f 4 4 f i n d i n g s in 3 6 s t u d i e s c a r r i e d o u t b e t w e e n 1 940 a n d 1 97 5, d e a l i n g w i t h t h e a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n p r e j u d i c e a n d a m o u n t o f r e ­ ligious i n v o lv e m e n t, they r e p o r t t h a t th e g r e a t e r the d e g r e e o f religious in ­ v o l v e m e n t , t h e higher t h e d e g r e e o f p r e j u d i c e . B a t s o n a n d B u r r i s ( 1 9 9 4 ) d i ­ vided the studies into th re e d iffe ren t m e a s u r e s o f religious in v o lv em en t— church

m e m b e r s h i p o r a t t e n d a n c e , s tren g th o f religious attitu d e , a n d

s t r e n g t h o f o r t h o d o x y o r co n se rvatism . T h e r e w ere essentially n o differ­ e n c e s in th e p a t t e r n across th es e m e a s u r e s . Overall, 34 fin d in g s s h o w e d a positive c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n in v o l v e m e n t a n d p r e ju d i c e , 8 s h o w e d n o clea r relationship, a n d only 2 sh o w ed a negative co rrelatio n. As t h e s e p a t t e r n s b e c a m e k n o w n d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d f r o m 1 9 4 0 t o 19 75 , m a n y s c h o l a r s b e c a m e ver y c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e a p p a r e n t n e g a t i v e i n f l u ­ e n c e o f r e l i g i os i ty . A l l p o r t a n d R o s s ( 1 9 6 7 ) a r g u e d t h a t t h e “w a y ” o n e was r e l i g i o u s was a n i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h a t h a d b e e n i g n o r e d in p r i o r r e ­ s e a r c h . T h e y s u g g e s t e d t h a t t wo t yp es , o r ways, o f b e i n g r e l i g i o u s w e r e likely to b e i n f l u e n t i a l . T h e y r e f e r r e d to t h e s e as “e x t r i n s i c ” v e r s u s “i n t r i n s i c ” o r i ­ e n t a t i o n s . A n extrinsic o rientation u s e s r e l i g i o n as a s e l f - s e r v i n g m e a n s t o n o n ­ r e l i g i o u s e n d s , s u c h as f o r m i n g g o o d s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d g a i n i n g p e r ­ s o n a l s e c u r i t y . A n in trin sic orientation views r e l i g i o n as a n e n d i n itself, a n d s e r v e s as a “m a s t e r m o t i v e ” i n o n e ’s life. A l l p o r t a n d Ros s ( 1 9 6 7 ) p r o p o s e d t h a t re ligious, intrinsically o r i e n t e d in dividuals s h o u l d find p r e ju d i c e in ­ c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e i r b e l i e f s , a n d b e r e l a t i v e l y l ow in p r e j u d i c e , w h e r e a s r e ­ ligious, b u t extrinsically o r i e n t e d individu als m i g h t fin d p r e ju d i c e c o m p a t i ­ b l e w i t h t h e i r b e l i e f s a n d b e r e l a t i v e l y h i g h in p r e j u d i c e . Batson a n d Burris (1994) su m m a riz e d research carried o u t th ro u g h 1977 a n d i n d e e d f o u n d t h a t intrinsically o r i e n t e d in div id u a ls h a d low er r a ­ cial p r e j u d i c e , e t h n o c e n t r i c i s m , a n d a n t i - S e m i t i s m t h a n e x t r i n s i c a l l y o r i ­ e n t e d p e r s o n s . B u t t h e s t o r y is m o r e c o m p l e x . In s t u d i e s t h a t i n c l u d e d p e r ­ s o n s w h o h a d l itt le o r n o i n v o l v e m e n t in o r g a n i z e d r e l i g i o n , r e s e a r c h e r s f o u n d t h a t t h e i n t r i n s i c a l l y o r i e n t e d w e r e n o less p r e j u d i c e d t h a n t h e n o n r e l i g i o u s . T h u s , a n i n t r i n s i c o r i e n t a t i o n is n e i t h e r c o m p a t i b l e w i t h n o r a n ­ tagonistic to p re ju d ic e . B a t s o n a n d B u r r i s ( 1 9 9 4 ) , b a s e d o n B a t s o n ’s e a r l i e r w o r k , p r o p o s e d still a n o t h e r m o d e l o f religious inv o lv em en t having th re e d im e n s io n s — religion as m e a n s , r e l i g i o n as e n d s , a n d q u e s t . T h e m e a n s a n d e n d s d i m e n s i o n s

274

9.

P A R E N T S , P E E RS , A N D P E R S O N A L I T Y

r o u g h l y c o r r e s p o n d to A l l p o r t a n d R oss’s (1967) extri ns ic a n d intr ins ic o r i­ e n t a t i o n s , respectively. Quest is a n e w d i m e n s i o n t h a t assesses the e x t e n t to w h ic h “t h e in div id ua l seeks to face re lig io us issues s u c h as p e r s o n a l m o r t a l ­ ity o r m e a n i n g in life in all t h e i r c o m p le x it y , yet resists clear-cut, p a t a n ­ swers” (p. 157). T h e y also m a d e an i m p o r t a n t di s ti nc ti on b e t w e e n p r e j u ­ dices “p r o s c r i b e d ” ( p r o h i b i t e d ) by t h e i r h o m e c h u r c h , s u c h as rac ism , a n d th o s e n o t p r o s c r i b e d , su ch as h o m o s e x u a l p r e j u d i c e . In t h e i r s u m m a r y o f r e s e a r c h f in d i n g s t h r o u g h 1990, u s i n g th e th r e e d i m e n s i o n a l m o d e l , Batson a n d Burris (1994) c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e intrinsic o r i e n t a t i o n to reli gio n was r e l a t e d to low p r e j u d i c e w h e n th e t a r g e t o f th e p r e j u d i c e was p r o s c r i b e d , fo r e x a m p l e , race. H o w e v e r, it was c o r r e l a t e d with h ig h p r e j u d i c e w h e n th e t a r g e t was n o t p r o s c r i b e d , for e x a m p l e , h o ­ mo sex ua lit y. T h e e xtri ns ic o r i e n t a t i o n to r e lig io n was r e l a t e d to h ig h p r e j u ­ dice only w h e n th e ta r g e t o f th e p r e j u d i c e was p r o s c r i b e d . It was u n r e l a t e d to n o n p r o s c r i b e d targets. Q u e s t , o n th e o t h e r h a n d , was r e l a t e d to low lev­ els o f p r c j u d i c c for b o t h p r o s c r i b e d a n d n o n p r o s c r i b c d targets. W h a t d o c s m o r e r e c e n t r e s e a r c h show? Fisher, D e r is o n , Policy, C a d m a n , a n d J o h n s t o n (1994) e x a m i n e d th e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n intrinsic ( e n d s ) , extri ns ic ( m e a n s ) , a n d q u e s t re lig io us o r i e n t a t i o n s in p r e d o m i n a n t l y W h i t e C hri s ti a n co lle ge s t u d e n t s a n d t h e i r a t t i t u d e s to w a r d gays a n d lesbians (a n o n p r o s c r i b c d p r e j u d i c e ) . U n li k e th e s u m m a r y f in d i n g s o f Bat son a n d Burris ( 1 9 9 4 ) , Fis he r c t al. (1994) f o u n d t h a t b o t h e xtri nsi c a n d intrinsic o r i e n t a t i o n s w e re positively c o r r e l a t e d with p r e j u d i c e t ow a rd gays a n d lesbi­ ans. C o n s i s t e n t with Batson a n d Burris, h o w e v e r, was t h e f i n d i n g t h a t q u e s t scor es w e re m o d e s t l y negatively c o r r e l a t e d with p r e j u d i c e . D u c k a n d H u n s b c r g c r (1999) s t u d i e d reli gio us o r i e n t a t i o n a n d p r e j u ­ dice a m o n g a g r o u p o f 17- to 56-ycar-old a d o l e s c e n t s a n d adults. T h e y u s e d th e Batson a n d Burris (1994) t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l scale o f re li g io u s o r i e n t a ­ tion, the p r o s c r i b e d p r e j u d i c e o f ra ci sm , a n d th e n o n p r o s c r i b c d p r e j u d i c e o f h o m o p h o b i a . C o n s i s t e n t with th e Batson a n d Burris (1994) s u m m a r y r e ­ sults, rac e p r e j u d i c e was ne gatively c o r r e l a t e d with t h e in tr in si c ( e n d s ) a n d q u e s t o r i e n t a t i o n s , w h e r e a s with an ext rin si c ( m e a n s ) o r i e n t a t i o n , it was positively c o r r e l a t e d . F o r h o m o s e x u a l p r e j u d i c e , t h e r e was a positive c o r r e ­ lation for intr ins ic o r i e n t a t i o n , b u t ne ga ti ve c o r r e l a t i o n s for ext rin si c a n d q u e s t o r i e n t a t i o n s , partially c o n s i s t e n t with th e Batson a n d Burris (1994) su m mary. Finally, Case, F is h b e in , a n d Ri tchey (2000) s t u d i e d reli gio us o r i e n t a t i o n a n d p r c j u d i c c a m o n g a large g r o u p o f p r e d o m i n a n t l y W h i t e co lle ge stu ­ d e n ts . T h e y u s e d th e e n d s (i n t ri n s ic ) , m e a n s ( e x t r i n s i c ) , a n d q u e s t o r i e n t a ­ tions, a n d f o u r p r e j u d i c e m e a s u r e s — ra c e ( p r o s c r i b e d ) , f e m a le s ( n o n p r o ­ s c r i b c d ) , h o m o s e x u a l s ( n o n p r o s c r i b c d ) , a n d obesity ( n o n p r o s c r i b c d ) . In a d d i t i o n th ey statistically a nal yz e d th e p r e j u d i c e m e a s u r e s a n d f o u n d a sin ­ gle h i g h e r o r d e r f a c to r o f i n t o l e r a n c e t h a t i n c l u d e d all f o u r m e a s u r e s .

P E R S O N A LIT Y I N F L U E N C E S O N P R E JU D IC E

275

T h e i r pr incipal f i ndi ngs were t h a t an e n d s or i en t a t i o n was positively c o r r e ­ lated with all f our m e a s u r e s o f p re j udi c e, i n c on si s t en t with the Batson a n d Burris (1994) s u mma ry , a n d with the single factor o f i n t ol er an ce . T h e quest o r ie nt at i o n was negatively c o rr e la t ed with pr ej ud i c e against females a n d h o m o s e x u a l s ( bot h n o n p r o s c r i b c d ) , u n c o r r c l a t c d with race a n d obesity p re ju di ce , b u t negatively c o rr e la t ed with i n to l er a nc e , consi st ent with Bat­ son a n d Burris. T h e m e a n s o r ie n ta t io n was positively c o rr e la t ed with p r e j u ­ dice against h o mo s e x u a l s a n d u n c o r r c l a t c d with t he o t h e r individual m ea s­ ures a n d with in t o l e r an c e, inco ns is te nt with Batson a n d Burris. W h a t can we c o n c l u d e fr om these last studies in relation to Batson a n d Burris (1994)? Basically, t h r e e p a t te r ns e m e r g e . First, a q u e st o r i e n t a t i o n is consistently negatively c o rr e la t ed with p re judi c e , w h e t h e r to religiously pr o sc r ib e d or to n o n p r o s c r i b c d targets. Se c on d, an intrinsic ( ends) o r i e n ­ tation is consistently positively c o rr e la t ed with n o n p r o s c r i b e d targets of p re judi ce , b u t inconsistently c or r el a te d with p ro s cr i be d targets. T h i r d , an extrinsic ( me a ns ) o r ie nt at i o n is inconsistently c o rr e la t ed with p r os cr i be d or n o n p r o s c r i b c d targets of prcj udi cc. O t h e r r es e ar c her s h a d earlier no ti ce d p r o b l e m s with the co n s tr u ct i o n of the intrinsic a n d extrinsic o ri en ta t io n me as ur es, a n d were also t r o u b l e d by the findings t h a t those with a d e e p c o m m i t m e n t to thei r religion, t ha t is, the intrinsically o r e n d s o r i e n t e d , were highly p r e j u d i c e d to targets n o t p r o ­ scribed by t he ir c h u r c h . T h e “intrinsics” s o m e ti m e s gave the a p p e a r a n c e of b e i n g u n p r e j u d i c e d by their attitudes toward the p r os cr i be d gro u p s. So, does b e i n g highly religious lead o n e to b e i n g highly pr e ju d ic ed ? Re c en t re­ search has r e f r a m e d the issue slightly, a n d has instead l o o k e d at religious f u nd a m e n t a l i s m a n d aut ho r it ar ia ni sm in relation to p re jud ic e . It builds on the findings de al in g with the q ue st ori e n t at i o n . H u n s b e r g c r (1995) s u m m a r i z e d the r es ear ch de ali ng with q u e st a n d has also c o n c l u d e d t h a t it is negatively rel at ed to p re judi c e, in g re at p ar t b e ­ cause p e o p l e high in q ue st arc o p e n to c h a ng e , arc willing to face exi st en­ tial questi ons, a n d will c on s i de r d o u b t s a n d c hal lenges to t he ir religious beliefs. To s o me ext ent , ques t is the opp os i te of f u n d a m e n t a l i s m a n d a u ­ t hor it ar i anism. In fact, Alt emcyer a n d H u n s b c r g c r (1992) f o u n d in a large s a mp le of adult s t h a t q u e s t a n d r eligious f u n d a m e n t a l i s m wer e c o r r e l a t e d - .7 9, a n d q u e s t a n d a ut hor i ta ri an is m were c o rr e la t ed -. 67. W h a t is fundam entalism ? Alt cmeyer a n d H u n s b c r g e r (1992) d e f i ne d it as a religious o ri e nt a t io n distinct from religious o r t ho do xy . Religious f u n d a ­ mentalists assume t ha t they have t he basic, e n d u r i n g , essential t ruths a b o ut G o d a n d all o f h u ma n it y . T h ey believe t hat these t rut hs arc o p p o s e d to the forces o f evil, a n d are the only t rut hs t h a t can de fe at these forces. T h ey also believe th at if you follow these truths, you will have a special relat i onship with God. To c ha lle nge these truths is to e n g ag e in evil acts. Alt emcyer a n d H u n s b e r g c r (1992) c o n s t r u ct e d T h e Religious F u n d a m e n t a l i s m Scalc, a n d

276

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

r elated it to p re ju di ce toward various e t h n i c gro up s , hostility towards h o ­ mosexuals, a n d puni tiveness toward criminals. In all cases, f u nd a me n t al i s m was positively c or r el at ed with pr ej ud i c e a n d punitiveness. Mor eover , it c o r­ r el at ed highly with right-wing a ut ho ri ta ri an i sm. Alt cmeycr (1996), in r e ­ viewing these a n d o t h e r findings, answe re d the quest i on as to why f u n d a ­ mentalists arc m o r e p r e j u d i c e d t han others. He stated t ha t it is because it is “a religious mani fest at ion o f right-wing a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m ” (p. 161). Two o t h e r studies are relevant to this discussion. L. Wylie a n d Forest (1992) f o u n d t ha t with a g r o u p o f a du lt n o n c ol l c gc st udent s, religious f u n ­ d a m en t a l i sm , right-wing a uth o ri ta r ia n is m, a n d various m e a s u r e s o f p r e j u ­ dice were positively i n tc r co r rc l at c d. However, mul t i pl e regression analyses sh owe d t ha t a ut ho ri ta ri an is m was still positively c o rr e la t ed with p r e ju di ce after c ont ro ll in g for f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , b u t f u nd a m e n t a l i s m was u n c o r r c ­ l atcd with p r ej udi ce after c on t r o l li ng for a ut ho ri t a r i a ni s m. In o t h e r words, f u n d am e nt a l i sm is c o rr e la t e d with p re j ud i c e be c aus e it is c o r r el a te d with authoritarianism. Unf or tu na te ly , the m a t t e r is n o t settled so neatly. Laythe, Finkcl, a n d Kirkpartick (2001) e x a m i n e d the r elat i onshi ps a m o n g right-wing a u t h o r i ­ tarianism, f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , a n d race a n d h o m o s e x u a l p r cj u d ic c in college student s. T h e y also p e r f o r m e d c or r el at ions a n d mult i pl e regression analy­ ses. T h e y too f o u n d s tr ong positive c or re la tions a m o n g all the variables. However, in the mult i pl e regression analyses, b o t h a ut ho r i t ar i ani s m a n d f u n d am e nt a l i sm were f o u n d to correl ate with bo t h types o f pr ej udi ce. C o n ­ trolling for f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , a u t h o r i ta r ia n is m was positively c o rr e la t ed with racc a n d h o m o s e x u a l pr ej ud i ce , a n d c on tr ol li ng for a ut ho ri t a r i a ni s m, f u n d am e nt a l i sm was negatively c o rr e la t e d with racc p r ej udic e, b u t posi­ tively c o rr e la t ed with h o m o s e x u a l pr ej udi ce . T h e a u t h o r s suggest t ha t relig­ ious f u nd a m e n t a l i s m has two c o m p o n e n t s in relation to pr ejudi ce, an a u ­ t hori tari an o n e th at leads to p r e j u d i c e d attitudes a n d a religious o n e that may lead to o r inhi bi t p r e j u d i c e d attitudes. W h a t can we c o n c l u d e a b o u t the personality characteristic o f religiosity in relation to prejudi ce? First, the way in which o n e is religious d e t e r m i n e s the e x t e n t to which a p er s on will be p r ej ud i ce d. Se co n d, those for w ho m re­ ligion is a q u e st for finding p er so na l t r ut hs a n d t r ut hs a b o u t G o d a n d h u ­ m a n n a t u r e will t e n d to be relatively low in pr ejudi ce. T h e s e p e o p l e are in i m p o r t a n t ways the opp os it e o f f undament ali st s. T h i r d , f u n d a me nt al is ts t e n d to be relatively p r e j u d i c e d individuals. Much o f this p re j u d i c e stems from thei r also b e i ng right-wing aut ho r ita ri a ns . However, t h e r e is so me evi­ d e n c e th at f u n da m e n t a l i s m may have effects i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f a u t h o r it a r i ­ anism. It is clear from all the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d r e se ar ch t h a t s tr ong religious beliefs a n d c o m m i t m e n t s are n o t a powerful a nt id o te for prej udi ce. Finally, it may be useful to s peculate on t he relation be twe en g e n e t i c / e volutionary factors a n d religiosity. Specifically, an a r g u m e n t can be m a d e

PERSONALITY INFLUENCES ON PREJUDICE

277

that the quest religious orientation is closely related to the factor of o u t ­ gr ou p attraction. Persons high in quest arc n o t regular c hur ch attendees, welcomc challenges to acccpted religious d ogma, a n d arc o pe n to change a nd to new world views. Two o f the questions from Altcmcyer a n d Hunsb e r g c r ’s (1992) quest scale that c a pt ur cd this orientation are: “Religious d o u b t allows us to learn,” a n d “T h e real goal of religion o u g h t to be to make us wonder, think, a nd search, n o t take the word o f some earlier teach­ ings” (p. 132). People high in quest are seekers o f new points o f view of p o ­ tential value to their cognitive a nd spiritual lives. All this suggests that they would be drawn to a n d pe r ha p s be inspired by ccrtain teachings a n d values held by peopl e outside o f their c u r r cn t religious group. T h e quest scales do n o t tap this idea directly, bu t instead focus on the individual’s search for meani ng. However, in this search, the attraction to ou tgr oup s may be e n ­ hanced. Right-Wing Authoritarianism Most o f the discussion in this section comes from a very engaging series of books a u t ho r ed by Altemeyer (1981, 1988, 1996). Each book builds on the previous one, with the last book, The Authoritarian Specter, i ncorporating most of the major findings and conclusions of the earlier ones. More r ecent research, for example, Case, Fishbein, a nd Ritchey (2001), Duck a nd Hunsbe rge r (1999), a nd Huns b e rg er , Owusu, a nd Duck (1999) was highly sup­ portive of the results described by Altemeyer (1996). W h at is right-wing authoritarianism (RWA)? It is a combi nat ion of three attitudinal clusters that arc f ou n d in varying degree in all persons. These three clusters were part of the original authoritarian personality scale (the F scale) described by Ad o r no et al. (1950), which consisted of nine “anti­ d e mo c ra t ic ’ characteristics. T he attitude questions assessing the thr ee clus­ ters are different for the F scale a nd the RWA scale, b ut the underlying c on­ cepts are essentially the same. The three RWA clusters are: authoritarian submission, authoritarian ag­ gression, a n d conventionalism. Authoritarian submission refers to the belief that one shoul d submi t to the perceived authorities in a culturc. You should accept at face value their statements a n d actions, a nd be willing to comply with their instructions. In its simplest terms, you act on the principle that the authorities know best. Authoritarian aggression is the willingness to harm others, either physically, psychologically, or financially, whom you believe that the authorities in the culturc want to see h a r m e d, or would approve of your h a r mi n g them. Authoritarian aggression serves, in part, to preserve the authority structure of a culture. Conventionalism refers to being strongly co mmit ted to a n d a d h er i ng to the social conventions or traditional social nor ms o f a culturc. People scoring high on this clustcr believe that the a u ­

278

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

t horities in the c ul t ur e strongly s u p p o r t these n or ms . Al temeyer believes t h a t these n o r m s are also religion-based, b u t Case et al. (2001) sh o we d that this as su mp ti o n is n o t necessary to the descri pt ion o f t he att it ude cluster. In a large n u m b e r of statistical analyses, Al temeyer a n d o t h e rs have f o u n d t h a t the t h r e e att itude clusters arc highly i n t c r c o r r el a t c d with each o t h er , so m u c h so, th at it ma ke s a g o o d deal o f sense to c o n s i d e r t he m as b e i n g part o f a single personality characteristic— RWA. T h e m o s t r e c e n t versions o f the RWA test consist o f 30 items t h a t are typi­ cally s cored on a 7- or 9-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. However, Case ct al. (2001), by el imi na ti ng i tems c o n f o u n d e d with relig­ ion, p re ju d i ce against w o m e n , a n d p r e ju di ce against h omo s ex u a l s , r e d u c e d the n u m b e r o f eligible items to eight. A n d instead o f a 7- o r 9-point scalc, they used a 4-point scale. Despite these dr a ma t i c c ha ng es, RWA was still f o u n d to correl ate positively with p rc ju di cc against w o m e n a n d h o m o s e x u ­ als, t h o u g h n o t as highly as the cor rel at ions f o u n d with the Alt eme ye r q u e s­ ti onnair e. A l t e m e y c r’s (1981, 1988, 1996) version o f t he RWA has b e e n u sed a n d validated with collcgc s t u de n ts a n d n o n s t u d c n t adults in No r t h America, South Africa, G h a n a , Australia, a n d Russia. T h e scalc r a t h e r c o n ­ sistently pr edi cts a u th o r i t a r i a n submi ssi on, a u th o ri t a r ia n aggression, a n d co n vent ionali sm. In the realm o f a u th o r i t a r i a n aggression, f or ex a mp le , those high on RWA, relative to low scorers, give l o n g e r prison t er ms in hy­ p ot het ical crimi nal trials, a n d in the Milgram o b e d i e n c e to a ut hor it y p a r a ­ digm (e.g., Milgram, 1963), set h i g h e r levels o f s hock for e rr or s m a d e by “l e a r ne r s. ” In add it io n , those high on RWA arc m o r e likely to a no ny mo u s ly self-report assaults against w o m e n , a n d arc m o r e likely to v o l un t e er to help the g o v e r n m e n t e l imi na te un de s ir a bl e g r o u p s such as c o mm un i st s , h o m o ­ sexuals, m e m b e r s o f religious cults, a n d radicals. In the realm o f p r ej ud ic e, across a wide r ang e o f cultures, RWA scores have b e e n f o u n d to cor rel at e bet ween .30 a n d .70 with various types o f p re j­ udice. T h e average c or rel ati on is pr ob ab l y be twe en .40 a n d .50, which is c o n s i d e r e d m o d e r a t e , as c on t r a st e d with m o d e s t o r strong. College stu­ d en t s as well as thei r p a r e nt s typically show cor rel ati ons o f .40 to .50 b e ­ tween RWA a n d e t h n o c e n t r i s m , b u t in s ome cultures, the c or rel ati on has b e e n r e p o r t e d as high as .69. It is typically b etween .40 a n d .50 for h o m o s e x ­ ual p re judi c e, b u t for hostility toward h o m os e xu a l s the c or relat ion has r a n g e d from a b o u t .50 to .70. Pr ej udi ce against feminists a n d a d h e r e n c e to t r aditional sex roles cor re la te with RWA at values b etween .30 to .70. Co rr e la ti on s on RWA b et ween college s tu d en t s a n d t h e ir p a r e nt s aver­ age a b o u t .40. Al tcmeyer has collected dat a on t h o u s a n d s o f p a r e n t - c h i l d pairs o f scores, typically st ud en ts in i n t r od u ct o r y psychology courses at the University o f Ma ni t o ba , a n d their m o t h e rs , fathers, o r b ot h. T h e s tudent s fill o ut the RWA scale for c our se crcdit, a n d the p a r e nt s arc asked by thei r c hi l d r e n to fill it o u t so t ha t the ch i ld r en can receive extr a c our se crcdit.

P E R S O N A LIT Y I N F L U E N C E S O N P R E JU D IC E

279

Do chi l d r en i nh e r it RWA from t h e i r pa re nt s, o r d o they learn it from t h e m? Pl omi n (1990) r e p o r t e d that the gcnctic i n h e r i t a n c e o f certain p e r ­ sonality characteristics, psychopat hology, a n d i ntelligence is a b o u t 40% to 50%, with family e n v i r o n m e n t a l i nf lu e nc es b e i n g be twe en 5% a n d 10%. As de sc ri be d earlier, this is d e t e r m i n e d by b eh avi or genetics analyses. A h e ­ rn cyer (1996) r e p o r t e d on a set o f studies th a t a t t e m p t e d to evaluate this is­ sue for RWA. U nf o rt u na t el y th e results arc n o t highly consistent. W h e n the cor re la tions for identical a n d fraternal twins, r e a r ed t o g e t h e r or r e a r ed apart , are c o m p a r e d , the identicals have relatively high correlations, a n d the fraternals, s o me t i me s high a n d s o me t i me s low correlations. O n bal­ ance, it a p p e ar s t ha t genes a c c o u n t for, at most, 30% o f individual differ­ e nces in RWA. But the Ma ni t o ba a d o p t i o n study tells a n o t h e r story. A m o n g the t h o u s a n d s o f s t u d e n t - p a r e n t pairs o f scores, a small n u m b e r involve a d op ti o ns , specifically, 44 s tudents , 35 adoptive m o t h e r s , a n d 40 adoptive fathers. T h e c or rel ati ons b etween m o t h e r s or fathers a n d their a d o p t e d c hi l d r e n on the RWA averages a b o u t .55, h i g h e r than t he cor re la ti on o f .40 for genetically rel at ed p a r e nt s a n d ch il dr en . T h e s e latter results are i n c o m ­ patible with b eh avi or genetics th e o r y in t h a t t he c or rel ati ons for biologi­ cally r el at ed p ar en t s a n d c hi ld r en s h o u l d be the s ame (if g en es play no role) or substantially h i g h e r (if they d o) th an for a d o p t e d c h i ld re n a n d p a r ­ ents. Nevertheless, the a d o pt i o n results do strongly suggest th at t h e r e arc s t r on g e n v i r o n m e n t a l in flu en ce s for a cq u ir i ng RWA. W h a t is the n a t u r e o f these influences? Al temeycr (1996) a d o p t e d a so­ cial l ea rn in g t he or y a p p r o a c h ( Ba n du r a, 1977) to answer i ng this quest ion. T h e essential idea is th a t we learn to b e c o m e a u t h or i t a r i a n , o r not, t h r o u g h the r e i n f o r c e m e n t s given to us by par ent s, peers, t eachers, me di a , in short, all the various social i nfl uences in o u r lives. Al t cmcyer believes t ha t t he p e ­ riod of a d ol es ce nc e is especially i m p o r t a n t , in c l u d i ng ages 18 to 22, the col­ lege years. T h e social e x p e r i en c es at earlier ages start to s ha pe o u r attitudes a n d values, b u t RWA tends to take its final form d u r i n g these later years. Al tcmcyer (1996) r e p o r t e d that the RWA c or relat ions a m o n g best friends in college is a b o u t .30. H e r e p o r t e d t h a t RWA declines a b o u t 10% or m o r e over the c ourse o f 4 years o f collcgc, especially for those wh o have high RWA scores. A n d h e r e p o r t e d t h a t having ch i ld re n after collcgc t en d s to raise o n e ’s RWA scores relative to those wh o did n o t have ch il dr en . RWA scores do n o t inevitably go up or down following collcgc g ra d ua t io n . In sum, gcnct ic i n h e r i t a n c e p r obably lays the g r o u n d w o r k for ac qu i r i ng an a u th or i ta r ia n personality. It likely o pe r at e s by m a k i n g the d e ve lo pi ng in­ dividual susceptible to b e i n g i n f l u e n c e d by a variety o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l e x p e ­ riences. It is possible t h a t t e m p e r a m e n t plays a p a r t in this, b u t t he re is a p pa r en t ly no p u b l i s h e d research t ha t has linked t e m p e r a m e n t to a u t h o r i ­ tarianism. Also, wc do n o t know the c h i l d h o o d a n t e c e d e n t s to RWA in that t he re is n o c h i l d ’s version o f the scalc. We know t ha t p a r e n t s a n d peers, a

280

9.

P A R E N T S , P E E RS , A N D P E R S O N A L I T Y

col lc gc e d u c a t i o n , a n d b e c o m i n g a p a r e n t i n f l u e n c e level of RWA. N o o n e o f th e se i n f l u e n c e s s e e m s p o w e r f u l e n o u g h to tr a n s f o r m h i g h RWAs to low o n e s , b u t c u m ul a ti ve l y t h e i r effects a r c s tr on g. A l t c m e y e r (1996) e n d e d his b o o k with a list o f 50 o u t c o m e s o f st udie s t h a t s tro ng ly d i f f e r e n t i a t e b e t w e e n th o s e s c o r i n g h ig h a n d low o n RWA. As h e says, th e s e d o n o t p a i n t a p r e tt y p i c t u r e o f th e h ig h scor ers . In a d d i t i o n to th e o u t c o m e s a l re a d y n o t e d for p r c j u d i c c a n d e t h n o c c n t r i c i s m , s o m e o f th e m o s t re l e v a n t fo r t h e p r e s e n t dis cussion are: T h o s e with h i g h RWAs a c c e p t u n f a i r a n d illegal a b u s e s o f p o w e r by g o v e r n m e n t a u t h o r i t i e s ; w e a k e n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l g u a r a n t e e s o f l ibert y, s u c h as t h e Hill o f R i gh ts ; g o eas y o n a u ­ thorities w h o c o m m i t crim es a n d p e o p l e w h o attack m inorities; are highly self-righteous; uncritically a c c e p t insufficient e vid en ce th a t s u p p o r t s th e ir b e ­ liefs; h e l p c a u s e a n d i n f l a m e i n t e r g r o u p c o n f l i c t ; a n d s e e k d o m i n a n c e o v e r o t h e r s by b e i n g c o m p e t i t i v e a n d d e s t r u c t i v e in s i t u a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g c o o p e r a ­ tion. (pp. 3 0 0 -3 0 1)

F r o m a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p o i n t o f view t h e r e s e a r c h o n RWA fits m o s t c o m f o r t a b l y with th e f a c to r o f a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e . In a sense, h ig h RWAs are “e x t r a s t r e n g t h ” a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t o r s . As we have a r g u e d several tim es in this b o o k , all o f us a r e p r e d i s p o s e d to a c c e p t, believe, a n d act o n w h a t th e a u t h o r i t i e s in o u r c u l t u r e tell us o r show us. W i t h o u t this p r e d i s p o ­ sition, we w o u ld n o t have evolved in to t h e species we are. As with an y trait o r c h ar ac te ri s ti c , t h e r e a r c b o u n d to be su bs ta nt ia l i n d i ­ vidual d i f f e r e n c e s a m o n g m e m b e r s o f a g r o u p , b e it h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r o r p o s ti n d u s t r ia l. W h e n i n t e r a c t i n g with n o n s o c i e t a l p e r s o n s , b e i n g a h igh RWA ca n be s e e n as b c n c f i t t i n g th e h o m e society. T h i s is especially t r u e d u r i n g times o f in te r s o c i e ta l conflict. D u r i n g p e a c e f u l times, if th e a u t h o r i ­ ties p u r s u e p e a c e f u l activities a n d u r g e t h e i r followers to d o similarly, t h e n a h i g h RWA will also b e n e f i t th e h o m e society. A h i g h RWA c an b e c o m e d e ­ structive w h e n c e r ta in l e a d e r s / a u t h o r i t i e s f r o m within a society u r g e t h e i r followers to d i s c r i m i n a t e a g a in s t o t h e r g r o u p s within th e s a m e society. T h i s leads to th e list o f d a n g e r o u s o u t c o m e s s h o w n by A l t e m e y e r ’s a n d o t h e r ’s re s e a r c h . As n o t e d in c h a p t e r 8, h ow e ver , th e si tu a ti o n is n o t h o p e l e s s in t h a t m e t h o d s a n d a p p r o a c h e s exist to a m e l i o r a t e p r e j u d i c e a n d d i s c r i m i n a ­ tion. I a s s u m e t h a t th ese will wo rk with c h i l d r e n a n d a d o l e s c e n t s w h o are o n t h e p a t h to h ig h RWA.

Social Dominance Orientation Si d a niu s a n d P r a t t o (1999) n o t e d t h a t o n c e p e o p l e m o v e d fr o m th e h u n t e r g a t h e r e r m o d e o f s u b si s te n c e , a n d e c o n o m i c s u r p lu s e s c a m e to be p a r t a n d pa r c e l o f th e se n e w e r c u lt u re s, t h e n social h i e r a r c h i e s e m e r g e d . Basically, t h e r e w ere g r o u p s o f p e o p l e w h o s t e p p e d f or w a rd to c o n t r o l th e s u rp lu s es

PERSONALITY INFLUENCES ON PREJUDICE

281

a nd thus b c camc d o m i n a n t in the culturc. Often these groups were b o u n d together by family tics, b u t o t h e r characteristics such as political affiliation, language, religion, a n d racc also served this b i ndi ng function. Wh er e there arc d o m i n a n t groups, there are, o f necessity, subor di nat e ones. As we discussed in c hapt cr 1, the d o m i n a n t gr oups wish to maintain their advantages, a n d the subor di nat e ones often try to c ha nge their own status. Sidanius a nd Pratto (1999) described the myths a n d belief systems that these groups p r o m o t e as cither “hi erarchy e n h a n c i n g ” (for the d o m ­ inants) or “hierarchy equalizing” (for the subordinates). Politically, the d om in an t s a t te mp t to establish social policies a n d establish laws that sup­ p or t their social position, a nd the subordinates, who have less power, try to c hangc the laws in o r de r to p r o m o t e their interests. Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, a nd Malle (1994) defi ned social d o m i n a n c e orientation (SDO) as the ex te n t to which o n e desires that o n e ’s in g ro u p d o m in a te an d be s u p e rio r to o u tgrou ps. We co nsid er SDO to be a g eneral attitudinal orien tatio n toward in te rg ro u p relations, reflecting w h e th e r o n e generally prefers such relations to be equal, versus h ierarchical, th a t is, o rd e r e d along a su p e r io r- in fe r io r di­ m ension. (p. 742)

Two o f the items from the SDO scale are: “To gel a he a d in life, it is some­ times necessary to step on o t h e r g r o u p s ”; a nd “Inferior gr oups should slay in their place.” SDO is different from both RWA a nd i nt erpersonal d omi na nc e . N on e of ihe items on the SDO scale, for example, deal with obeying authorities, p r o ­ tecting them from radical elements, getting rid of troublemakers, or sup­ porti ng old-time values or traditions. T he RWA scale largely focuses on individuals, whereas the SDO scale exclusively focuses on groups. More im­ portantly, research by Pratto el al. (1994), Whitley (1999), a nd Sidanius a nd Pralto (1999) re po r te d that correlations between scores on the RWA a nd SDO scales are low and generally statistically nonsignificant. Addi­ tionally, Whitley (1999) fo u n d that the two personality characteristics are differentially related to various c o mp o n e n t s of prejudice. Interpersonal d o m i n a n c e is a personality measure that assesses wh e th er persons like to be in charge of social situations, w he t he r they are assertive, forceful, or decisive and domi ne er in g. Persons who score low in in te r pe r­ sonal d o m i n a n c e are accepting of the cu r r en t social situation, do n ot try to direct others, and are r a th e r unassuming. Pralto et al. (1994) related two of the most reliable tests of interpersonal d o m i n a n c e to individual’s scores on SDO. T he correlations were very low and statistically nonsignificant. Wh at does SDO predict? Sidanius a nd Liu (1992) found SDO to be posi­ tively correlated with “belief in racial superiority, caste-maintenance or ien­

282

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

tation, s u p p o r t o f the G u l f War, a n d approval of police b e ha vi or in the b e a t ­ ing o f R od ne y King” (p. 685). Pratto et al. (1994) f o u n d SDO to be positively c o rr e la t ed with anti-Black racism, nat ional ism, sexism, cultural elitism, a n d patriotism, a n d to be negatively c or r el at ed with policies s u p­ p o r t i n g social pr o gr a ms , equal t r e a t m e n t o f d if f er e nt races a n d ethnicities, w o m e n ’s rights, a n d gay a n d lesbian rights. Research has f o u n d SDO to be positively c or r el at ed with racism (Sidanius, Pratto, 8c Bobo, 1996); with rac­ ism a n d h o m o s e x u a l pr ej ud ic e (Whitley, 1999); a n d with p r e ju di ce against w o m en a n d h o mo s e x u a l s (Case ct al., 2001). In m o s t cases, the correlat ions were in t he r an ge o f .40 to .50. As would be e x p e c t e d from the items o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e a n d fr om the un d er l yi ng theory, those g r o u p s lower in social status woul d have a lower SDO t ha n those with a h i g h e r societal rank; thus, w o m e n s h o ul d have a lower SDO t ha n m e n , a n d African A me ri ca ns a lower SDO t ha n E u r o p e a n Amer icans. T h e se exp e ct at io ns are c o n f i r m e d by t he empi ri cal research. Sidanius, Pratto, a n d Rabinowitz (1994) m e a s u r e d SDO, e t hn i c status, a n d a t t a c h m e n t to o n e ’s e t h ni c g r o u p for White, Black, a n d Hi spani c mal e a n d female collcgc students. T h e r e was ge ne r al a g r e e m e n t across st ud en ts c o n ­ c e r n i n g the social status o f the various e t hn ic gr o u p s. In all cases, males h a d h i g h e r SDO scores t ha n females, h i g h e r status g r o up s h a d h i g h e r SDO scores than l ower status gr ou p s, a n d g r o u p a t t a c h m e n t was positively c o r r e ­ lated with g r o u p status, c o n f i r m i n g all pr edi cti ons. C ons is te nt with these findings, Sidanius, Pratto, a n d Bobo (1994) f o u n d males to have a h i g h e r SDO t han females across the following d e m o g r a p h i c variables: ethnicity, n ati on o f birt h, e d u ca t i o n , i n c o m e , religion, political conservatism, a n d racism. Also consi st ent were the results o f Sidanius, Levin, a n d Pratto (1996) in c o mp a r i s o n s o f African-American a n d Europ ea n- Am e r ic an collcgc s tudents. T he y f o u n d t ha t SDO scores were h i g h e r for Whi te t h a n Black student s; m o r e o v e r, Black a n d Whi te a g r e e m e n t with the cultural beliefs a n d myths legitimizing social status di fferences were dis­ p ro p o r t i o n a t e l y skewed in favor o f the Whites. T h a t is, t he disparity in a g r e e m e n t with the cultural belief system was g r e a te r t ha n woul d be e x ­ p e ct e d from dif fer ences in SDO scores. Finally Pratto ct al. (2000) assessed g e n d e r dif fer ences in SDO, the rela­ tionship b etween SDO a n d sexism, a n d the r ela ti ons hi p b etween SDO a n d within-culture e t hn ic p rc ju d i cc for six sampl es o f collcgc a n d n o n co l l e gc adults in C a n ad a , Taiwan, Israel, a n d C hi na . T h e q u es t i on n ai r es were writ­ ten in the native l an gu a ge a n d were a d m i n i s t e r e d by a native speaker. T h e m a jo r results were t ha t in all cultures, SDO a n d sexism were positively c or ­ related, a n d in t hr ee o f the cultures, SDO a n d e t hn i c p re ju d i ce wer e also positively c or rel at ed. For bo t h C a n ad i a n samples, for o n e o f the two Israeli samples, a n d for the Ch in es e s ample, m e n h a d reliably h i g h e r SDO scores than w o m e n . T hu s , despite striking cultural a n d ideological differences

P E R S O N A LIT Y I N F L U E N C E S O N P R E JU D IC E

283

across t he f o u r societies, SDO a p p e a r s to o p e r a t e in similar ways to those f o u n d for N o r t h Ame ri ca n adults. J os t a n d E. P. T h o m p s o n (2000) p r ovi ded an i nt er es ti ng analysis o f the di scr epanci es b etween Whi t e a n d Black Ame r ic a ns on the SDO scale. T h e a u t h o r s a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e SDO scalc, m e a s u r e s o f self-esteem, e t h n o c c n ­ trism, neu r o t ic is m, a n d various ideological scales to f our diff er ent samples o f Black a n d Whit e college s tudent s. A sophi st icat ed statistical analysis d e ­ t e r m i n e d t ha t the SDO can b e t t e r be u n d e r s t o o d as b eing c o m p o s e d o f two positively c or r el at ed factors r a t h e r t ha n the single “social d o m i n a n c e o r i e n ­ t a t i o n ” factor r e p o r t e d in previous research. T h e se two factors arc i de nt i­ fied as opposition to equality a n d support for group-based dominance. For b ot h, Whites score h i g h e r th an Blacks, as would be e xp ec te d. A m o n g the p r inci pal f indi ngs were these: (a) T h e o p p o s it i on to equality factor was positively c or r el at ed with self-esteem a n d e t h n o c e n t r i s m for Whites, b u t negatively c o rr e la t ed to b o th for Blacks; (b) op po sit io n to equality was positively c or r el at ed with n eur ot ici sm for Blacks, b u t negatively for Whites, with the reverse h o l d i n g for the factor o f s u p p o r t for g r ou p b ased d o m i n a n c e ; a n d (c) op p o si tio n to equality was negatively c or r el at ed with i n g r o u p favoritism for Blacks, b u t positively c or r el at ed for Whites. T h e various ideological scales did n o t reliably differentiate the two factors for the two racial gr oups. T he s e results strongly i ndicate t h a t the SDO scalc has very di ff er ent m e a n i n g s a n d pe rs on a l a n d social c o n n e c t i o n s for Black a n d Whi te college st udent s. It w o ul d be o f interest to m a k e c o m p a r a b l e assess­ m e n t s for males a n d females, as well as o t h e r d o m i n a n t a n d s ub o r d i n a t e g r o u p s in a culture. From a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view, Sidanius a n d Pratto (1999) suggested t h a t social d o m i n a n c e o r i e n ta t io n has its roots in the factor o f inclusive fit­ ness. We have previously a r g u e d t h a t inclusive fitness is highly consi st ent with behavi oral manif est at ions of i n g r o u p favoritism. S o me writers, i n c l ud ­ ing Sidanius a n d Pratto, m a i n t a i n that inclusive fitness is also r elated to dis­ cri mi na ti on a n d hostility against o u t g ro u p s . However, we are p e r s u a d e d t h a t theoretically, o u t g r o u p d is cr imin ati on is m o s t comf or tabl y u n d e r s t o o d as having its basis in t he g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y f act or of i n t e r g r o u p hostility. Both factors e m e r g e d t h r o u g h int er ac ti on s with m e m b e r s of o t h e r tribes, b u t in mu lti cult ur al societies, they b e c o m e i na pp r o p r i a t e l y d ir e ct e d to o u t g r o u p s within the society. In closely e x a m i n i n g the SDO scale, e l e me n ts rel at ed to b o t h factors can be disc er ne d. P e r h a p s b o t h g c nc t i c / c v o l u ltionary factors are involved with SDO. H u m a n it a r i a n is m- E ga l it ar i an is m T h e H u m a n i t a r i a n - E g a l i t a r i a n Scalc is a 10-itcm q u es t i o n n a i r e d ev e lo p ed by I. Katz a n d Hass (1988). T h e i n t e n t o f the scalc is to assess the st rength of a value system he ld by m a n y p e o pl e who have a “c o m m u n a l ” o u tl oo k on

284

9.

P A RE N TS , PEERS, AND PER S O N A LIT Y

t he ir cul ture. By this is m e a n t t h a t all m e m b e r s o f a c ul tu rc are c o n s i de r ed to be equal e l e m e n t s o f the s ame c o m m u n i t y , deserving o f kindness, r e ­ spect, a n d aid in times o f n e e d. S o m e o f the items in the scale are: “O n e s h o u l d be ki nd to all p e o p l e ”; “A g o o d society is o n e in which p e o pl e feel re­ sponsi ble for o n e a n o t h e r ”; “Acting to p r o t e c t t he rights a n d interests of o t h e r m e m b e r s o f the c o m m u n i t y is a m a j or obligation for all p e rs o n s. ” T h e att itudes e m b o d i e d in the scalc are o p p o s e d to m o r e individualistic values, such as is exe mp l if ie d in the Pr ot est an t work ethic. In fact, I. Katz a n d Hass (1988) d e v e lo p e d such a scalc a n d evaluated it in the s ame study. T h e y p r e ­ di cted t h a t h u ma n i t a r i a n i s m - e g a l i t a r i a n i s m woul d be negatively c or re la ted with anti-Black at ti tudes a n d positively c o rr e la t ed with pro-Black attitudes, in c on t r a s t to oppos it e p re d ic t i on s for the P r ot es t an t work ethic. In two ex­ tensive e x p e r i m e n t s with Whi te college st udent s, all p re di ct io n s for both scales were s u p p or t e d . T h r e e o t h e r r e c e n t e x p e r i m e n t s have tested p re di ct io ns b as ed on the H um a n i t a r i a n i s m - E g a l i t ar i a n i s m Scale. In t he first, p r e d o m i n a n t l y Whi te college s t u de n ts from Arkansas were given this qu e s t i o n n a i r e a l on g with at­ titude m e a s u r e s assessing p re ju d i ce against Blacks, as well as positive atti­ tudes toward t he m (Glover, 1994). C o ns i st ent with the findings o f I. Katz a n d Hass (1988), s tu d e n ts high in h u m a n it a ri a n i s m - e g a l i t a r i a n i s m were high in positive Black attitudes a n d low in Black prej udi ce. In the s e c on d, the H um an i t a r i a n i s m- E g a l i t ar i a n i s m Scalc was used to as­ sess attitudes toward illegal i m mi g r a n t s (p r es uma bl y Mexican) , toward le­ gal Mexican Amer icans , a n d toward an i n c i de n t in which illegal Mexican i mm i g ra n t s were b e a t en by the police (Cowan, Martinez, Sc Mcndiol a, 1997). T h e subjects were s tudents, o f several di ff er ent ra ce s/ et hn i ci t ies , from t h r e e local c o m m u n i t y colleges n e a r Los Angeles. Across all r ac ia l/ e t hni c gro u ps , those s tu d en t s wh o were high in h u m a n i t a r i a n i s m - e g a l i t a r i ­ anism, relative to those who s cor ed low, h a d m o r e positive attitudes toward illegal i mmi gr ant s, he ld fewer negative stereotypes toward illegal i m m i ­ grants, were m o r e positive toward legal Mexican Amer icans , a n d were m o r e negative toward the police b eat ings o f illegal immi gr ants. Finally, Case et al. (2001) stu di ed the r ela ti ons hi p b et ween h u m a n i t a r i an- eg a li t a ri an attitudes a n d p r cj u d ic c against w o m e n a n d h o mo se xu al s , using a large s a mp le o f p r e d o m i n a n t l y Whi te collcgc students. In t he ir sta­ tistical analysis o f the c o n t e n t o f t he H u m a n i t a r i a n i s m - E g a l i t a r i a n i s m Scalc, they f o u n d t ha t the scalc assessed t hr ee mo d er a te l y c o rr e la t ed fac­ tors, which they ident ifi ed as “k in d ne s s , ” “equality,” a n d “obligation to o t h ­ ers.” T h e y c o m b i n e d t he factors, however, into a single score. Cons is tent with the j u s t covered previous resear ch, h um a ni t a r i a n i s m - e ga l i t a r i a n i s m was f o u n d to be negatively c or r el a t ed with bo th h o m o s e x u a l p re j ud i c e a n d p r ej ud i ce against w o m e n .

SUMM ARY

285

A lt h ou g h the n u m b e r o f studies is limited, thei r results arc highly consis­ tent. It can be c o n c l u d e d t h a t a m o n g collcgc st udents, at least, a h u m a n i t ar ia n- c gal it ar ia n personality is associated with low pr ej udice. T h e c or r el a ­ tions arc n o t strong, however, m o st falling in the r a n ge o f .30 to .40, similar to those for quest, b u t lower than those for RWA a n d SDO. T h e likely g eneti c- evol ut ionar y u n d e r p i n n i n g s o f h u m a ni t a r i a n i s m- e ga l i ­ tarianism are those t h a t Fishbein (197(5) identified as reci procal obligations a m o n g m e m b e r s o f h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r gr oups. T h e ability a n d p r op en si t y to form reci procal obligations arc seen as canalized b e ha vi or characteristics t h a t were essential to t he effective f u nc t i o n i n g o f these gr oups. C. M. T u r n b u l l (1972), in discussing the Ik, a f o r m e r h u n t c r - g a t h c r e r g r o u p who were f or ce d to a b a n d o n that subsistence m o d e , evaluates h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r int er ac ti ons as follows: . . . hunters frequently display those characteristics that we find so admirable in man: kindness, generosity, consideration, affection, honesty, hospitality, compassion, charity, and others. This sounds like a formidable list of virtues, and so it would be if they were virtues, but for the hunter they arc not. For the hunter in his tiny, close-knit society, these are necessities for survival; without them society would collapse. It is a far cry from our society, in which anyone possessing even half these qualities would find it hard indeed to survive, yet, we are given to thinking that somehow these are virtues inherent in man. (p- 31)

SUMMARY T h r e e b r o a d classes o f i nf luences on individual di fferences in p r ej udi ce were e x a m i n e d . T h e first d e al t with p ar e nt a l influences. T h e results o f eight investigations wer e e x a m i n e d a n d c o m p a r e d . T h r e e o f the studies, utilizing only o n e o f the pa re nt s, f o u n d m o d e s t c o rr el ati ons b etween p a r e n t s ’ child r ea r in g a p p r o a c h e s o r their prejudices, a n d their c h i l d r e n ’s prejudices. Two studies, dea li ng with Black m o t h e r s a n d t he ir chi l d r en , f o u n d o ppos ite effects to those e x p e c t e d based on child r e ar i ng practices, in that the chil­ d r e n b e c a m e m o r e p r e j u di c ed against Blacks following ccrtain pa re nt al practices. Two studies car r icd o u t in E n g l a n d a n d C a n a d a , with 7- to 10year-old chi l dr en a n d c i t h e r th ei r m o t h e r s only, o r bot h par ent s , f o u n d no c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b et ween p a r e n t s ’ a n d c h i l d r e n ’s pr ejudices. Finally, o n e study with a dol escent s a n d bo t h o f th ei r biological p a r e nt s f o u n d m od e s t co r r el at io ns be twe en p a r e n t s ’ a n d c h i l d r e n ’s prejudices. However, m o t h e r s a n d fathers h a d di ff er en t i nf luences t ha t c o r r e s p o n d e d to the cultural roles t h a t the p a r e nt s differentially held. C o n s id e ri n g all m e n t i o n e d r esearch,

286

9.

PARE NTS, PEERS, AND PERSONALITY

parents have, at best, a mo d es t influence on the d e v el o p me n t o f their chil­ d r e n ’s prejudices. Despite the large n u m b e r o f studies that have been p e r fo r me d in recent years c o nc er ni ng p ee r influences on c h i l dr e n’s a n d adolescents’ attitudes, values, a n d behavior, only thr ee studies were f ound, carricd o ut within the past 30 years, that dealt with prejudice. In one, prejudice against Jews and Blacks were assessed in non-Jewish, White adolescents living in towns o u t ­ side o f New York City in 1963. In this study, m o de st c or re sponde nc es a m o n g friends were f ound in two of the three towns for anti-Semitism, b ut no relationship was fo un d for prejudice against Blacks. In a n o t h e r study, carried o ut in Ca na da with different r ac ia l/e thni c gr oups o f preadolescents, no significant correlations were fo u n d a m o n g f ri ends’ r ac ia l/ e thni c prejudices. In the third ex p e r ime nt, carricd o ut with White American adolescents, dealing with four different types o f prejudice a nd scx-role stereotyping, no systematic relationship was f ou nd between f ri ends’ prejudices or stereotyping. It can be c o nc lu dc d from this research, m eager t hough it is, that friends have essentially no influence on cach o t h e r ’s prejudices. Two possible explanations for these findings are that it may be rare in c h i l d r e n ’s a n d adolcsccnts’ interactions with their friends to discuss these issues, a nd moreover, children a n d adolcsccnts likely assume that their friends hold similar attitudes to their own, even t ho ug h they may not. In the realm of personality influences, the view was taken that personal ­ ity differences may differentially lead individuals to accept or reject pr ej u­ dices a n d stereotypes that arc p r o m i n e n t in the culture. Nearly all the re­ search employed adults as the research participants. Four br o a d types of personality traits were e xa mi ne d. T h e first dealt with religiosity. Based on a large n u m b e r of studies, the maj or conclusions that can be drawn are, first, that the way in which one is religious de te r mi ne s the extent to which a p e r ­ son will be prejudiced. Second, those for whom religion is a quest for find­ ing personal truths a n d truths a b ou t God a n d h u m a n n atur e , will tend to be relatively low in prejudice. Third, religious fundamentalists t end to be relatively prej udiced individuals, b u t fourth, mu c h of this prejudice stems from their also being RWAs. It is d e a r from this research that strong relig­ ious beliefs a n d c om mi t me n ts are n o t an antidote for prejudice. T h e r esearch dealing with RWA has its origins in the research by Ador no ct al. (1950) on the F Scalc. RWA consists of three o f the nine attitude clus­ ters that were identified on the F Scalc— authoritarian submission, a u th o ri ­ tarian aggression, a n d conventionalism. These three clusters arc highly intcrcorrelated a nd t oget her yield a single RWA scorc. A large n u m b e r of studies using the RWA scalc have yielded a highly consistent picture. Ba­ sically, those high on RWA arc prejudiced against almost any conceivable minority g r ou p in a culturc. Correlations on RWA between parents and

SUMM ARY

287

th ei r college s t u d e n t chi l d r en arc m o d e r a t e , as are c or r el at ions a m o n g friends. T h e r e is s o me evidence for a m o d e s t gcnctic i n f l u e nc e on RWA, b u t t he re is s t r o n ge r e vi dence for no nf ami l y e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences. From a g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view, the research on RWA fits mo st c o m f o r t ­ ably with the factor o f aut hor i ty a c cc pt an c c . In a sense, high RWAs arc “e x ­ tra s t r e n g t h ” au th or it y acceptors. SDO is a n o t h e r powerful personality trait t h a t i nfluences pr ej udice. SDO m e a s u r e s “the e x t e n t to which o n e desires t h a t o n e ’s i n g r o u p d o m i n a t e a n d be s u p e r i o r to o u t g r o u p s ” (Pratto et al., 1994, p. 742). T h o s e hi gh in SDO believe it is s o me t i m e s necessary to step on o t h e r g r o u p s in o r d e r to ge t a h e ad , a n d t ha t inferi or g r o u ps s h o u l d stay in th ei r placc. SDO is u n c o r r c l a t c d with c i t h er RWA o r i n t e r p er s on a l d o m i n a n c e . A large n u m ­ b e r o f e x p e r i m e n t s have consistently f o u n d t h a t SDO is rel ated to pr cjudi c c against nearly all s u b o r d i n a t e gro up s , against s u p p o r t i n g social p r o g r a m s de si g n e d to he lp s u b o r d i n a t e gr oups, a n d against civil rights o f s u b o r d i n a t e gr ou ps . Males have h i g h e r SDOs than females, a n d Whites, h i g h e r t ha n Blacks. T h e p r c d i c t c d effects o f SDO on pr cj udic c a n d e t hn o c c n t r i s m have b e e n f o u n d across a wide r a ng e of d e m o g r a p h i c variables in the U ni t e d States, as well as in o t h e r count ries. From a g c n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view, SDO is m o st likely relat ed to inclusive fitness a n d o u t g r o u p hostility. Finally, a few studies have e x a m i n e d the relation b et ween a h u m a n i t a r ian- eg a li t a ri an personality a n d pr ejudi ce. This trait assesses the s tr engt h of a value system in which all m e m b e r s o f a c ul tu re arc c o n s i d e r e d to be equal e l e me n t s o f the same c o mm u n i t y , deservi ng o f kindness, respect, a n d aid in times o f n e e d. In e x p e r i m e n t s with varied e t h n i c / r a c i a l g r o u p s of college student s, high scorers on this trait were f o u n d to be consistently less p r e j u ­ di ced a n d less di scr iminator y toward s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s t h a n low scorers. From a g c n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y view, the roots of h u m a n i t a r i a n i s m - e g a l i t a r i ­ anism are likely the canalizcd characteristic o f reci procal obl igations f o u n d in h u n t c r - g a t h c r c r gr oups, be c aus e reci procal obl igations were essential to the effective f u n ct i o ni n g o f these groups.

C hapter

10

R e c a p itu la tio n

D O M I N A N T AND S U B O R D I N A T E G R O U P S As I reflect a b o ut the intellectual j o u r n e y 1 have b e en on while writing this book, my mi n d keeps being drawn to the worldwide h or ro r s currently being p r o d u c e d by prejudice a n d discrimination. T h e N o r t h e r n Irish Protestants a n d Catholics are still violent o pp o n e n t s , the Bosnian Serbs a n d Muslims have yet to sit t o g e th e r a nd discuss peace, a n d the Palestinians a n d Israelis are still killing each o t her . Religious a n d / o r et hnic differences underl ay the violence in these cultures. I think, too, a b o u t the abolition o f a pa r th e id in Sout h Africa a n d the election of a Black pr es i de nt in that t o r t ur ed yet h o p e ­ ful country. Knowing the agonizing history o f African Americans, peace an d equality will n o t c o m e quickly there, b ut progress will occur. T h e a c c o u n t I ’ve given in this b o o k describes p r e ju di ce a n d d is cr i mi na ­ tion by the d o m i n a n t toward s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u ps as be in g an integral p a rt o f the social knowledge o f N o r t h A m e ri c a n c u l t u r e — they are e x p e c t e d a n d no rma ti ve r eact ions by g r o u p m e m b e r s . T hu s , the a bs ence, n o t p r es e nc e, o f pr ej ud i ce a n d di scr imi nat i on in individuals m i g h t be a surprise. P r e ju ­ dice a n d d is c r imi na ti on are sust ai ned b ecause m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o up s b ene fi t from t h e m . T h e se m e m b e r s , such as Whi te males, e n s u r e the c o n t i n u e d well-being o f thei r family a n d friends by m a i n t a i n i n g a n d r e ­ inf or ci ng thei r value systems in all the m a j o r social institutions o f t he soci­ ety— family, schools, me di a, religion, politics, business, justice system, a n d a r m e d forces. C h i l d r e n in the d o m i n a n t g r o u ps are socialized to i n c o r p o ­ rate these values a n d beliefs into their social kno wl ed ge a n d to act in ways consistent with t ha t knowl edge. Given the c onsi st ent r e i n f o r c e m e n t chil­ 288

D O M IN A N T AND S U B O R D I N A T E G R O U P S

289

d r e n receive for h o l d i n g t he values o f th e d o m i n a n t g r o u p , they b e c o m e adol csccnt s a n d t he n adults c o m m i t t e d to these values. Peopl e arc seekers o f consistency. W h e n e x p e r i e n c es o c c ur t ha t do n o t c omf or ta bl y fit with what wc believe a n d “k n o w ” to be true, wc find ways to explain the discrepancies. We often creat c categories called exceptions or spe­ cial cases to do so. T h e social knowl ed ge t ha t in cl ud e s p r cj udi cc a n d dis­ c ri mi na ti on towar d o u t g r o u p s is constantly b e i ng c h a l l e ng e d by reality. “T h e U n i t e d States Secretary o f State is Black? He looks a lm os t W h i t e . ” “T h e Pr esi de n t o f a F o r t u ne 500 c o m p a n y is a wo ma n? S h e ’s pr ob ab ly very m a s c u li ne . ” “A y o u n g m a n with Down S y n d r o m e is a television star? T h e r e ’s n o t a n o t h e r like h i m . ” “A d e a f p e rs on is now a collegc pr esi dent ? H e used to be h e a r i n g . ” S om e t i me s the n u m b e r of e x c e pt io n s m o u n t up a n d can no l o n g e r be easily seen as except ions. T h e n m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u p find diff er ent ways to disqualify others, for e x a mp l e , “Affirmative action u n ­ fairly go t t he m w h e re they a r e .” T h e stigmas a t t a c h e d to s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s are d e e p in o u r s u b c o n ­ sciousness. In s ome cultures, for e xa mp le , the c o n t a m i n a t i o n o f w o m e n d u r i n g m e n s t r u a t i o n p revents t h e ir c o n t a c t with m e n until the flow has s t o p p e d . But the p ot e nt ia l for c o n t a m i n a t i o n is always pr es ent . T h e s u b o r ­ d i na te g r o u ps in No rt h A me ri ca n cul tures arc seen as having the possibility o f c o n t a m i n a t i n g others. Ch i l d r e n seem to learn this at an early age, b u t the costs o f a c qu a i n t a n c c s h i p or f r ie nd s hi p with o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s arc not very high, a n d thus these fr ie n d sh ips o r a c q u ai nt a nc es h i ps can occur. M e m b e r s o f the s u b o r d i n a t e g r o up s in Nor t h Ame ri ca n cult ures have also b e e n socialized by t he value system o f t he d o m i n a n t gr oups. This u s u­ ally leads to a deval uat ion of o n e ’s own g r o up . T hu s, Blacks, females, the deaf, a n d the mental l y r e t a r d e d grow up believing t h a t th ei r g r o u p is infe­ r ior to the d o m i n a n t groups. Mor eover , m e m b e r s of s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u ps of­ ten act in ways t hat p e r p e t u a t e the belief in thei r inferiority, as was seen in the discussion o f pa tr ia rc hy a n d female socialization. I painfully e x p e r i e n c e d this s elf-denegration by Blacks a n u m b e r o f years ago w h e n I was practi ci ng family therapy. T h e wife o f a middle-class Black c o u pl e rel at ed an i n c i d e n t w he n she a n d h e r h u s b a n d we n t to a movie t h e ­ a te r in a Whit e n e i g h b o r h o o d . She d e sc ri be d the st range looks a n d extra distance given h e r a n d h e r h u s b a n d by the o t h e r p a t r o n s while waiting in line. But the p a r t t h a t stays with m e was h e r s t a t e m e n t t ha t p r i or to leaving h o m e for the movie, she b a t h e d a n d p u t on p e r f u m e to e n s u r e th at she was clcan a n d smell ed g ood. She said she did n o t want to o f f end any o f the Whi te p e o pl e s he wo ul d e n c o u n t e r . Bccause societies arc o p e n systems, the values o f the d o m i n a n t g r ou p s are n o t static b u t are susceptible to a variety o f i nf luences bo th within a n d o utside of the culture. I m mi g ra t i o n by dif fe re nt e t h n i c / r a c i a l g r o u p s has h a d p r o f o u n d effects in c ha l le n g i n g the alleged superiority o f E u r o p e a n

290

10.

R E C A P I T U L A T IO N

Amer icans. An i n o r d i na t e n u m b e r o f academi cal l y a n d artistically t al en te d individuals arc o f Asian d csccnt . Gifted Hi spanic political leader s have e m e r g e d in the past dc c ad c . A n d o f cour se, t h e r e is n o sh or t a g e o f w o m en a n d African A me ri ca ns who have s u c c c c d c d academically, artistically, polit­ ically, a n d economically. Equal o p p o r t u n i t y is b e c o m i n g m o r e o f an Ame ri ca n reality th an in p r e ­ vious de cades , a n d this has often led to d o m i n a n t a n d s u b o r d i n a t e g r ou p s p e r f o r m i n g equally in a wide variety o f tasks a n d settings. Because o f this, sexism, racism, a n d “h a n d i c a p p i s m ” arc b e i ng c h i p p e d away with each pass­ ing d c c ad c , b u t long- hel d values by the d o m i n a n t g r o u p s in the c ul tur c arc still strongly believed.

CULTURAL CHANGE T h e positive c h a n ge s in t he t r e a t m e n t o f females, African Ame ri c ans , the deaf, a n d the ment all y r e t a r d e d were clearly seen in the historical sections o f earlier c h a pt e r s on the t a rge t gr oups. T h e c h a n ge s d e sc r ib e d were quite m a r k e d a l t h o u g h t h e r e were setbacks a l o n g the way. In the Col oni zati on P e ri od ( 1 6 0 7 - 17 70 ) , for e x a mp l e , w o m e n ’s placc was in a n d a r o u n d the h o m e , t e n d i n g th ei r g a r d en s a n d r ea ring ch i ld re n. Bccausc families were e conomi cal ly self-reliant, w o m e n h a d ma jor e c o n o m i c functions. However, schools were usually elosed to girls, w o m e n coul d n o t legally own l an d or businesses i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f t he ir hu s b a n d s , vote, sit on j u r i e s , h o l d public office, o r be an official o f t he c h u r c h . In the last p e r i od , Postwar Growth a n d C h a n g e (1945 to the p r e s en t ) w o m e n arc very definitely o u t o f the h o m e a n d into schools, c h u r ch e s, the judiciary, the political a n d e c o n o m i c ma rk et pl a ce , a n d even the military. S om e o f t he great est gains were m a d e in times o f war, w he n new d e m a n d s a n d o p p o r t u n i t i e s o p e n e d for t h e m. However, w o m e n t hemselves c rc a tc d m a n y o f these o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h r o u g h political skills they h a d a c q u ir e d over m a n y years o f fighting social i n e qu i ­ ties. Despite the gains, pr ej ud ic e a n d d i scr imi nati on toward these g r o u p s still exist. M e m b e r s o f t he most d o m i n a n t g r o up , th at is, Wh i te males, view o t h e r g r o u p s as b e i ng inferior, f r equentl y basing this assessment on “scien­ tific” evidence. T h e d o m i n a n t g r o u p has a t t e m p t e d to c ont r ol the sexuality, e d u c at i o n, a n d j o b o p p o r t u n i t i e s for all four s u b o r d i n a t e target gr oups. As the laws have c h a n g e d s u p p o r t i n g equity a n d equality, m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t c ul tu r c have h a d to find m o r e covert m e a n s for m a in t a i n i n g dis­ c ri mi na ti on . T h e “old boys” networ k is still intact a n d powerful. T h e positive c h a n g c s in di scr i minat ion a n d pr cj ud ic c did n o t o c c ur solely be ca us e o f “e n l i g h t e n e d ” self-interest o r t h r o u g h the acquisition of a ne we r a n d h i g h e r m o r al sense by Whi te males, a l t h o u gh a little o f bo th

C UI z r U RAL C H A N G E

291

pr ob ab l y played a part. A b r a ha m Lincoln wished to abolish slavery b ccause it was wr ong, b u t his initial political stance was to limit its spr ead. Moreover, it is clear from his writings t h a t he was n o t particularly i nt er est ed in social i nt egr ati on o f the races. A l t h o u g h I as s u me t h a t pr ej u d ic e toward the f o u r t arget g r o up s has d e ­ clined across historical time, t h e e x t e n t o f this de cli ne is n o t clear. Ho w­ ever, it is obvious t h a t overt di scr imi nati on has dramatically de cr ea sed . From these histories, it a p p e ar s t h a t t h r e e factors t o g e t h e r led to the posi­ tive c h a n gc . First, m e m b e r s o f the target gr ou p s, or t h e ir family, h a d to strongly advocate for themselves. T h e y h a d to publicly decl ar e t h a t their t r e a t m e n t by the d o m i n a n t c ul t ur e was prejudicial. T h e y h a d to organize a n d col laborat e with g r o u p m e m b e r s to c o m b a t this unfairness. S ome of o u r mo st powerful a n d e l o q u e n t sp ee c he s a n d l i terature were p r o d u c e d by these p e op l e. Every time I h e a r Martin L u t h e r King, J r . ’s “1 have a d r e a m ” sp ee ch , I ge t chills. T h e self-advocates a p p e a l e d to o u r sense o f just ice a n d fairness, b u t also to t he fears wc have a b o u t social unrest. Self-advocacy by s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s is insufficient by itself to p r o d u c c substantial positive social c h a n g c unless it leads to r evolution. It often i n ­ duces inc re asi ng n u m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u p to take u p th ei r cause. It is likely th at d o m i n a n t g r o u p m e m b e r s already believed th at t r e a t m e n t o f a pa rt ic ul a r s u bo r d i n a t e g r o u p was unfair. Lincoln, after all, did n o t invent abolition. S o m e m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u p were a wa k en e d by the self-advocates of the s u b o r d i n a t e gr ou p s, a n d s ome o f the f o r m e r were r e ­ awa ke ne d; thei r s u b m e r g e d feelings o f justice a n d fairness r e e m e r g e d . With the c on s ta n t pr es sur e p r ov ide d by the s u b o r d i n a t e gro u p s, d o m i n a n t g r o u p m e m b e r s s ti mu la te d cach o t h e r to advocate for c h a n gc . In m a n y cases, these d o m i n a n t g r o u p advocates e n a c t e d c h a n gc s themselves. T he y c ou l d o p e n u p j o b o r e d u c a ti on a l o pp or t un i ti e s. T h e y c ould h e lp int egr ate n e i g h b o r h o o d s , c h u r ch e s , a n d private clubs. T h e y c o u l d e x t e n d thei r h a n d in fr ie nd sh ip to m e m b e r s o f s u b o r d i n a t e gr oups. T h e se arc all i m p o r t a n t acts. But they usually do n o t go m u c h b e y o nd the local level. W i d e s pr e ad c h a n ge s in d i scr imi nati on o c c u r r e d w h e n powerful m e m ­ bers o f the d o m i n a n t g r o u p m a d e c h a n gc s in the law. T he se c ha nge s occ u r r c d b ecaus e o f the c o n t i n u e d self-advocacy by s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s a n d advocacy from m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t g r o up . C h a n g e s in th e law offer o p p o r t u n i t i e s for e n f o r c e m e n t . Initially this m u s t be c ar ric d o u t by the d o m i n a n t g r o u p (who may d ra g t h e i r feet) b u t eventually, s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p m e m b e r s gain positions o f p o w e r to e nf or c e the laws themselves; they sit on juries, arc j u d g es , lawyers, a n d police. W h e n the laws c ha n ge , s o m e o f the official p o w e r he l d by the d o m i n a n t g r o u p is t r an sf er r ed to s u b ­ o r di n a t e gr oups; this is a r e m a r k a b l e process. Several years ago I h e a r d a talk a b o u t this by a Black state t reasurer. He said t hat w he n the Whi t e c o m ­ m u n i ty trusts you with thei r m on ey, you know you have m a d e real progress.

292

10.

R E C A P I T U L A T IO N

G EN ETIC/EV O LUTIO NA RY PREDISPOSITIONS

Un de r ly i ng the culturally per sist ent acts o f p r ej ud ic e a n d d is c ri min ati o n is a s tr ong g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p redis pos it i on to m a k e significant distinc­ tions b et ween o n e ’s own a n d o t h e r gr oups. O u r analysis shows t ha t we are f u n d am e nt a l l y tribal beings. In h u m a n evolutionary history, the tr ibe— a genet ical ly a n d culturally r e l a t ed c o m m u n i t y o f subsi stence g r o u p s — e m e r g e d as o u r central m o d e o f social o rgani zat ion. This is d i f f er ent from t h a t o f gorillas, c h i m p a n z ee s , a n d b o n o b o s , for w ho m the single subsistance g r o u p is the p ri ma r y social or ga n. Di fferent subsistance g r o u ps for t he m are actual o r p ot e nt ia l ene mie s; for h u m a n s , it is di ff er ent tribes. For the apes, an o ut s i de r is an individual who is n o t known; for h u m a n h u n t e r g ather er s, an o u t si d er is n o t only u n k n o w n , b u t also a p e r son wh o is n o t a m e m b e r o f the tribe. P e o p l e are i de nt if i ed as tribal m e m b e r s by the various p e r c e p t u a l “b a d g e s ” they display: l an g ua ge , dialect, dress, specific behavioral habits, a n d customs. Because o f t he i m p o r t a n c e o f badges, we have d e v e lo pe d e x ­ quisite sensitivities to recogni ze t h e m. Failure to identify out siders can lead to physical h a r m o r d ea t h. Spying by foreign agent s is a m o d e r n version of the a t t e m p t to co n c ea l o n e ’s t rue tribal (nat ional ) identity in o r d e r to h a rm the enemy. T h e two ma jo r genetically p r e d i s p o s e d effects o f d is tingui shi ng “own g r o u p ” from “o t h e r g r o u p ” are t ha t we favor m e m b e r s o f o u r own tribe r ela­ tive to outsiders, a n d are wary o f a n d often hostile to m e m b e r s o f o t h e r tribes. T h e f o r m e r effect is p a r t o f the n a t u r e o f Darwinian selection p r o c ­ esses. T h e latter is a featur e of i n t e r g r o u p relations seen in the gorillas, c h i m p a nz e es , b o n o b o s , a n d h u m a n h u n t e r- g at h e r er s . We infer t h a t i n t e r­ g r o u p hostility is an a n c i e n t evolved characteristic d at in g back to at least the c o m m o n a nc e st or o f the f ou r species. T h e se two predisposi tions lead to very simple a n d very safe ways o f i n te ra ct in g with o t h e r s — be friendly to tribal m e m b e r s , be wary of t hos e from o t h e r tribes. It is i m p o r t a n t to p o i n t o u t t ha t these are behavioral predispositions, n o t reflexes. Individual l ea rn in g plays a p a r t in d e t e r m i n i n g how these predisposit i ons develop into b eha v­ ioral i nt er acti on te nd e n c ie s. We learn t h a t s ome tribal m e m b e r s are to be a voi ded a n d t h a t s o me outsi der s can be trusted. A thir d g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p redi sposi tion directly relates to t he c o m ­ plexity o f h u m a n h u n t e r - g a t h e r e r societies relative to the apes, a n d i ndi­ rectly to t he d e v e l o p m e n t of p r ej udi ce a n d di scrimi nati on: a ut hor it y a c c ep ­ tance. In o r d e r to be a c o n t r i b u t i n g m e m b e r o f these societies, o n e has to a cq ui re an i n o r d i n a t e a m o u n t of diverse i n f o rma t io n in a relatively s h o r t p e r i o d of time. L e a r n i n g by c o nd i t i on i ng , trial a n d e rr or , a n d imitation are i n a d e q u a t e to c o m p l e t e the task. Author it y a c c e pt a nc e directs us to ac ce pt

G E N ET I C / E VO L U T I O NARY PR E DI $ P O $1T IO N $

293

as t ru e the messages t r an s mi tt e d by t he a u th or it ie s in o u r cul ture. In its m o st positive ma ni f es ta tio n, cultural auth or it ie s share their wisdom a n d kn owledge, which i ncl udes pe rs o na l histories as well as t he history o f the culturc. In h u n t e r - g a t h c r c r societies, which are egalitarian, this kno wl ed ge is relatively b e ni gn r e g a r d i n g status di ff er ences a m o n g m e m b e r s . S om e o f the knowl ed ge directs tribal m e m b e r s to a t t e n d to bad ge s t h a t distinguish t h e m from outsiders. In industrial societies, however, t he a u t h o r i t i e s ’ k no wle dge a n d wisdom i nc l ud e “k n o w n ” characteristics o f d o m i n a n t a n d s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u ps a n d t h us serve to m a i n ta i n the p o w er a n d status o f the d o m i n a n t ones. This is p a r t o f t h e basis o f p r c ju di cc a n d discrimi nat ion. Fr om a d e v e l o p m e n t a l pe rspe ct ive , a u t h o r i t y a c c e p t a n c e o p e r a t e s by a b o u t age 2 years. Own g r o u p p r e f e r e n c e s a n d i n t e r g r o u p hostility, h ow ­ ever, start to c o m e i nto play w h e n c h i l d r e n ar e o l d e r a n d have a c q u i r e d a g r o u p identity. S o m e o f the m o s t salient g r o u p s in o u r society ar c b ased on sex, et hn ic it y, a n d p r e s e n c e o r a b s e n c e o f disabilities. Be ca us e o f physical a n d b e h a v i o r a l d i f f e r e n c e s ( b a d g e s ) b e t w e e n t he se g r o u p s , dis­ t i n c t i o n s a m o n g t h e m readi ly o c c u r . M o r e o v e r , societal a u t h o r i t i e s i n d i ­ cat e t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h e s e g r o u p s is i m p o r t a n t . T h u s , a u t h o r i t y ac­ c c p t a n c c a n d g r o u p p r o c e ss e s r e i n f o r c e e a c h o t h e r a n d c n h a n c c status d i f f e r e nc es a m o n g g r o up s . Howe ve r, a u t h o r i t y a c c c p t a n c c can also work to c o m b a t p r e j u d i c e if t h e cult ur al a u t h o r i t i e s b o t h pr ac ti ce a n d p r e a c h egalitarian a c c e p t a n c e a n d r e s p ec t for m e m b e r s o f t he s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u ps in the culture. Psychological r e s e a rc h in di ca te s t h a t g r o u p i de nt i f i c at i o n starts to e m e r g e at a b o u t age 3 years a n d is stable by age 4. Over th e n e x t 3 years, by age 7, c h i l d r e n ’s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of g r o u p processes has grown substantially. T h e se findings suggest t ha t t he n a t u r e of p r e ju di ce a n d d i scr i mi nat ion will c h a n g c in systematic ways be twe en ages 4 a n d 7. T h e r e is a f o u r t h g c n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y factor t h a t can o p e r a t e against the d e v e l o p m e n t o f p re ju di ce a n d d is cr imi nat ion toward t he o u t si d e r— o u t g r o u p attractiveness. Owi ng to the often d el et er i ou s effects of gcnctic drift a n d i n b r e e d i n g in h u n t c r - g a t h c r e r gr o u ps , t h e r e was a necessity for g e n e flow into the tribe in o r d e r to ma in ta in its viability, especially in times of m a r k e d e n v i r o n m e n t a l c hanges. T h e m o s t likely s our ce of g e n e flow is mi gr ati on from o t h e r tribes. In o r d e r to psychologically s u p p o r t this m i g r a ­ tion, processes m u s t have d e v e l o pe d t h a t m a d e aspects of t he o ut si d er seem attractive to the ho st tribe. This led to e i t h e r a cc c pt an c e o f t he ou ts id er into the tribe, o r occasionally, i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f specific att ributes o f the o u t ­ sider into t he tribe. T h e n e t effect o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness is to mitigate o u t g r o u p hostility. W h e n o u t g r o u p attractiveness is c o u p l e d with aut hor it y a c ce p ta nc e , it may be possible to o ve r co me the p r o p r c j u d i c e effects o f i n­ clusive fitness a n d o u t g r o u p hostility.

294

10.

R E C A P I T U L A T IO N

DEVELOPM ENT OF PREJUDICE AND D IS C R IM IN A T IO N

As d ef i ne d, p r e j ud i ce a n d di scr imi nati on arc dif fe re nt b u t typically r elated psychological p h e n o m e n a . N u m e r o u s studies with adults show th a t t h e re is often a discr epancy be twe en the two— be twe e n attitudes a n d overt b eh a v­ ior. O n e o f the p ri ncipal distinctions b etween m e a s u r i n g p r cj udi cc a n d dis­ cri mi na ti on in ch i ld re n is th at the f o r m e r primarily assesses r ea ct ions to u n ­ known ot her s, wher eas the latter assesses react ions to k n own peers. T h u s, it s h o u l d n o t be surpri si ng that individuals may be pr e j u d i c e d toward a p ar ti c­ ul ar g r o u p , in t h e abstract, b u t have friendly relations with familiar p e er s of t h a t g r o u p . T h e converse may also hold. Pr ejudice seems to be closely tied to the a c c c p t an c c o f cultural values, wh er e as d is cr imi nat ion se ems m o r e closely tied to o n e ’s e x p e r i e nc es in a par ti cular c ont ext . T he se c o n s id e r­ ations suggest t h a t p re ju di ce a n d di scr iminati on ma y have di ff er en t devel­ o p m e n t a l paths. In add i ti on to the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d , p r e ju d ic e a n d di scr i minat ion may develop differently d e p e n d i n g on t he involved t arget gro up s . It is possible t h a t o u r g c n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y he ri t a ge differentially p r e di s p os e d us to r e ­ s p o n d to the ba dg es displayed by d if f er ent gr oups. This q ues ti on has not b e en e xp l or e d. However, we know t h a t in each c ul tu r e the various d o m i ­ n a n t a n d s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s arc differentially valued. Moreover, i ndivi du­ als arc often m e m b e r s o f d o m i n a n t a n d s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u ps at the same time; f or e xa mp l e , Whi te females arc m e m b e r s o f the d o m i n a n t Whi te g r o u p, b u t the s u b o r d i n a t e female g r o up . We do n o t know the calculus p e o p l e use for c o m b i n i n g a n d evaluating these combi na t io ns . T h e research surveyed in this b o o k s u p p o r t s the m e n t i o n e d ideas. Pr ej u­ dice a n d di scr imi nat i on have dif fe re nt d e v e l o p m e n t a l trajectories, which a dditionally vary with the ta rge t g r o u ps b e i n g e x a m i n e d . In all cases, p r e j u ­ dice d oe s e m e r g e by age 4 years. T h e r e a f t e r , opposite-sex p re j udi c e, racc p r ej ud ic e, a n d pr ej udic e toward t he me ntal ly r e t a r d e d show dif f er en t ager cl at cd patterns. For all t hr ee g ro u pi ng s , m a ny p re di ct io n s based on ge­ n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y c o n s i de r at io n s were s u p p o r t e d . For e x a m p l e , males were generally m o r e p r e j u d i c e d th an females, a n d i n g r o u p - o u t g r o u p b e ­ havioral di fferences (badges) were c o rr e la t ed with d e g r e e o f prej udice. Pr edict i ons b ased on c u l t u r al /h i st o ri c al c ons i de r at i o n s were d i ff er e n­ tially s u p p o r t e d for opposite-scx a n d race pr ej udi ce . For opposite-sex p r e j u ­ dice, females were m o r e likely th an mal es to acqui re oppositc-scx knowl ­ e d g e , b e h a v i o r , a n d values. T h e a g e - r e l at e d d c c l i n c in o pp os i t e- s ex p r ej ud i ce was g r e at e r for femal es th an males. Also, femal e self-esteem was strongly associated with male values b ut male self-esteem was n o t associated with femal e values. For racc p re judi c e , Blacks were m o r e likely to acqui re kn owledge, behavior, a n d values o f Whi t e cultural n o r m s t h a n t he c o n ­

D E V E L O P M E N T O F P R E JU D IC E AND D IS C R IM IN A T IO N

295

verse. However, the p re di ct io ns c o n c e r n i n g self-esteem a n d age-related d e ­ creases in p r ej ud ic e were n o t s u p p o r t e d . T h e d i scr epancies be twe e n oppositc-sex a n d racc pr e judi ce c o n c e r n i n g t he c ul t ur a l/ h i st o ri c a l p r e di c t io n s arc quite interesting. T h e d o m i n a n t cul­ turc a pp a re n tl y gives a c onsist ent a n d life-long message a b o u t the relative value o f males a n d females a n d Whites a n d Blacks. T h e r e arc few o p p o s i n g g r o u p s t h a t successfully c on tr a di c t those values de al in g with g e n d e r ; in a sense, t h e r e c a n n o t be be ca us e the salient cultural n o r m s are those o f Whi te males, n o t just those of males. T hu s, females can o p p o s e males, b u t h ow d o they o p p o s e Whites, especially be c aus e the majority arc themselves White? Additionally, m os t females form families with males, a n d thus b e ­ c o m e p a r t of a system t h a t s u p po r t s ma le values. For the Blacks, t h e r e is a s t r on g o p p o s i n g g r o u p th at often successfully c ontr adict s the Whi te values. Blacks can form highly s uppor ti ve a n d n u r t u r a n t rel at ions with o t h e r Blacks. T o s ome e xt ent, they have a s epar ate c ult ur e from Whites a n d that c ult ur c often provides a solid g r o u n d i n g for positive self-esteem a n d racial pri de. T o get a l on g in a p r e d o m i n a n t l y Whi t e cult ur e, however, they have to be k no wl ed g e ab le a b o u t Wh i te values, behaviors, a n d nor ms. T h e di scr imi nat i on l iterature is m u c h m o r e c o m p li c at e d t ha n t ha t for p re ju di ce b ccause the various me a su r es o f d is cr imin ati on often lead to dif­ f e r e n t conclusions. Using observational m e t h o d s , race a n d opposite-sex dis­ cri mi na ti on arc clearly seen in 4-ycar-olds, increase to a b o u t age 8, a n d d e ­ cline o r level off until a dole sc enc e. In classroom settings, as o p p o s e d to free play, females b u t n o t ma le s evi dence racc d iscr imi nati on. Di scri mi nat ion toward the deaf a n d mental ly r e t a r d e d are also strongly p r e s e n t in 4-ycarolds a n d r ema i n high t he re a ft er , with no par ti cular age t r e n ds seen. With best fr iends soci omct ri c data, all f o u r g r o u pi n gs show very m a r k e d d is cr imin ati on at all ages, especially after age 8. I n g r o u p - o u t g r o u p f r i e nd ­ ships i n f r eq ue nt ly o c c u r in all g ro u pi n gs , for e xa mp le , n o n r c t a r d c d with me ntal l y r e t a r d e d peers. Roster-and-ratings m e a s ur e s indicate far less dis­ c ri mi na ti on t ha n best fr i ends measur es. C h i l dr e n a n d ado lc sc cn ts arc m u c h m o r e likely to di scr imi nate in social t ha n a ca d cm ic settings. T h u s ch il dr en from d if fe re nt g r o u ps wh o willingly he lp each o t h e r with schoolwork will usually n o t c at l u n c h t o ge t he r , a n d certainly n o t h a n g o u t with the s ame set o f friends. T h e s e findings r ei nf o r ce the idea t ha t for d isc ri min a­ tion, c o n t e x t is very i mp o rt a nt . For all f ou r gr oupi ngs, t her e is firm s u p p o r t for the view t hat behavioral differences un d e rl i e s ome o f the observed discrimination. Males a n d fe­ males, Blacks a n d Whites, mentally r e t a r de d a n d n o n r e t a r d c d , d e a f a n d he a ri ng often act a n d interact differently from cach o the r. Certainly lan­ guage use varies across these gr oups (the ex tr eme , of course, is d e a f vs. h e a r ­ ing), b u t the types o f social skills e mploye d in interactions arc often discrep­ ant. Given t h a t b a d gi n g m e c h a n i s m s arc deeply i n g r ai n e d in o u r genetic

296

10.

R E C A P I T U L A T IO N

m a k eu p , it is n o t surprising that in gr ou ps ancl o u t g r ou p s s houl d be sensitive to behavioral nuances. O f course, because culture catcgorizcs p eopl e into these groups, we t e n d to exaggerate even slight differences a m o n g t h em. We probably also “perceive” differences t hat arc m o r e i ma gi ne d than real. T h e r e was consi st ent s u p p o r t for the two age-related shifts— at ages 4 a n d 7— in d i sc ri mi na ti on p r e d i c t e d by the g r o u p identity liter at ur e (the shifts were also seen in the pr ej ud ic e l it er at ur e) . T h e s e f indi ngs i ndi c ate d t h a t social cognitive d e ve l o p m e n t a l processes play a role in the early devel­ o p m e n t o f p re j ud i c e a n d d is cr imi nati on. T h a t is, as the n a t u r e o f c h i l d r e n ’s social u n d e r s t a n d i n g c hanges, the ways in which they e n a c t p re ju d i ce a n d di scr imi nati on also c ha ng c. Finally, essentially n o n e o f the o t h e r g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p r ed i ct i o n s or those b ased on c ul t u r al /h i st o ri c a l c o ns i de r at io n s were s u p p o r t e d in the di scr imi nati on li terature (in m a n y cases n o dat a were available). Al t h o u gh the di sc re pa nc y h e r e with the p re ju d i ce lit er atur e s u p p o r t s t he idea that the u n d e rl yi n g processes b etween t he two arc very different, it is n e v e r t h e ­ less puzzling. In my 1976 book, I stated t h a t “e vol uti onary processes are f u n ­ d ame nt al ly involved with the acquisition o f i n f o rma t io n or knowl ed ge a b o u t the e n v i r o n m e n t a l n ic he o f t he species” (p. 86). Knowledge was r e ­ lated to effective action in the e n v i r o n m e n t . Pr esumably cultural knowl­ e dg e has similar positive effects on action. But the research shows m a ny gc­ n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y a n d several c u l t u r a l/ h is t o r ic a l links with knowl e dg e ( pr ejudi ce) a n d few with action ( d is cr imi n a t io n) . O n e possible e x p l a n a ­ tion for this d i l e m m a is t ha t d iscr iminat ion is based on a n u m b e r o f gener al a n d specific knowl e dg e c on s id er a ti on s i n c l u d i ng p r ej ud i ce , a n d these m us t be w ei gh ed be for e action is taken. Pr ej udice is m o r e o r less p u r e knowle dge which only implies action, b u t d o e s n o t r e q ui r e it.

M O D I F Y I N G P RE J U D I C E AND D I S C R I M I N A T I O N Pr ejudi ce a n d discr imi nat ion will be e l im in a te d w he n per cei ved a n d b e ­ lieved di fferences b et ween g r o u ps arc r e c o n s t r u c d as di fferences within gr oups. T h a t is, w h e n A me ri ca ns view all Ame ri c ans as b e l o n g i n g to the s ame g r o u p as o p p o s e d to di f f e re n t a n d o p p o s i n g ones, th e n t he cor e p r o b ­ lem will di sa ppe ar . Everyone knows t ha t p e o pl e differ from each o ther . T h e s e differences are usually a c c e p t ed by i n g r o u p m e m b e r s ; b u t w he n they a p p e a r in m e m b e r s o f o ut gr o up s , they are often identified as b e i n g u n a c ­ ceptable. T h e goal o f t r a n s fo r mi n g “b e t w e e n ” to “w i t hi n ” is occasionally achieved. For e x a mp le , a sense o f “w e ” as o p p o s e d to “us versus t h e m ” o c ­ curs d u r i n g crises, t he p r i m e e x a mp l e b e i ng wartime. But crises arc n e i t h e r no rma ti ve n o r desirable.

M O D IF Y IN G P R E JU D IC E AND D I S C R IM IN A T IO N

297

An alternative goal is to a t t e m p t to c h a n g c p e o pl e such t ha t they ac ce pt a n d equally value m e m b e r s o f o t h e r gr oups. T h a t is, c n c o u r a g c p e o p l e to ma i n ta i n t he b el ief t ha t i n g r o u p s a n d o u t g r o u p s are different, a n d yet n o t favor t he ir own g r o u p or disfavor others. I t hi nk t h a t this goal flies in the face of inclusive fitness a n d o u t g r o u p hostility consi der ati ons, a n d h e n c e , is likely to fail. However, systematic utilization o f o u t g r o u p attractiveness c o u ­ pl ed with a ut hor ity a c e p t a nc c has n o t b e e n tried or st udi ed. T h u s , to s ome ext ent, this issue is still o p e n . We saw t ha t mer ely p u t t i n g ch i ld r en t o g e t h e r as in school des eg re ga tio n a n d m i xe d g e n d e r classes h a d essentially n o i m p a c t on modi fyi ng pr ejudi c e a n d d iscr imi nat ion. However, cooper at i ve l e a r ni ng was very effective in re­ d u c i n g discr imi nat ion, b ut h a d a lesser effect on r e d u c i n g p rej udice. Mains t r e am i n g o f disabl ed ch il dr e n a n d a dol escent s h a d a m o d e r a t e effect on d ec re as i ng p re ju d i ce a n d discr imi nat ion toward t he m by t he n o n d is a bl e d. Research on m e d i a effects, role-playing simulations, a n d individuati on all in di ca te d s ome effectiveness in d ec re asi ng pr ej udi ce. No dat a were avail­ able for di scri mi nat ion. T h e s e a p p r o a c h e s were successful for a variety of reasons, b u t wh at they s e e m e d to s har e was i mp li ed or explicit c o m m u n i t y sanction. T h a t is, the au thor it y s tr uc t ur e o f the school or o t h e r c o m m u n i t y institutions “s t a t ed ” t h a t m e m b e r s o f t he various g r o u p s s h o u l d be t r e at e d with fairness a n d r e ­ sp ec te d as individuals. This, of course, capitalizes on the g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n ­ ary factor o f au t ho r i ty ac c cp t anc c. A n o t h e r s h a r ed aspect in these success­ ful a p p r o a c h e s is that directly or indirectly, they h e l p e d individuals see that m e m b e r s o f di ff er ent g r o u p s were similar in m a n y ways to o n e ’s own g r o u p. As per cci ved dif f er ences b e c o m e d i m i n is h ed , it is a s h o r t step to view o th er s as m e m b e r s o f o n e ’s own g r ou p. N o single o n e o f t he a f o r e m e n t i o n e d a p p r o a c h e s was successful in r e ­ d u ci n g p re ju d i ce a n d d is cr imi nat ion across all i n g r o u p s a n d o ut gr o up s . This is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e b ccause the processes u n d e rl y i ng t he m arc m ul t i ­ ple, a n d as we previously n o t e d , p re j ud i ce a n d d iscr iminat ion vary with d e ­ v e lo pm en t a l status a n d target g r o u p . We r e c o m m e n d , however, t ha t c o o p ­ erative l e a r ni n g in i nt e gr a te d a n d m a i n s t r e a m e d schools s h o ul d be the li n c hp i n for c ha ng e. It e m b o d i e s an essential i n g r e d i e n t for m a i n t a i n i n g g r o u p c o h e s i o n — c o op e r a t i o n . It has b e e n shown to be effective in r e d u c ­ ing di scr imi nat i on, a n d it is at least as effective as o t h e r a p p r o a c h e s in p r o ­ m o t i n g a c a de m i c a c h ie v em e nt . Integral also in o u r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n is the i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f t e ac hi ng m e t h o d s o r c o n t c n t th at p r o m o t e sclf-accept ance a n d a c c c p t an c e o f individuals who differ from ourselves. Thi s a p ­ p r o a c h has b e e n shown to effectively r e d u c e p re judi c e. Films a n d roleplaying s h o u l d periodically be e m p l oy e d b ccause they too, have b e e n effec­ tive in r e d u c i n g prej udi ce.

298

10.

RE CAPITULATIO N

T h e strongly implied message of the pro po s e d dramatic changcs is that the authority structure of all o u r c ommu n it ie s should e ndorse, even m a n ­ date, these changes. We c a n no t readily c h angc the gcnctic structure o f o ur species as a means o f eliminating prejudice a nd discrimination. But wc can positively use the characteristics with which wc arc endowed. T h e paradox in o u r proposal is as follows. Prejudice a n d discrimination serve to maintain the power a n d status o f the d o m i n a n t groups. T hese arc typically the same gr oups whose me m b e r s arc the authority figures in o u r culturc. Wc arc p r o ­ posing that the authority figures initiate changcs that will ultimately r e duc e their own power a n d status t h r ou g h the m e r g er o f i ngroups a nd outgroups. O f course, if the authority structure can be pe rsu ade d to sec these changcs as p r om o t i n g their self-interest, t hen it is n o par adox at all.

PARENTS, PEERS, AND PERSONALITY Related to the issue of modifying prejudice a nd discrimination is the issue of the causes of individual differences in t hem. Al though it is widely b e ­ lieved that parents are the primary agents in their children's dev e l op me nt of prejudice, a n u m b e r of r ec ent studies have shown lhat parental influ­ ences, al best are modest. Parents seem lo have the most consistent effects on their adolescent children, b u t m ot he rs a nd fathers have differential in­ fluences. Fathers mainly i nfluence sex-typed prejudices, a nd mot hers, the r e ma ining ones. This may have to do with the cultural roles lhal mot her s a nd fathers inhabit. The few studies dealing with friendship influences are even mo r e sur­ prising, especially in light of some psychologists’ views that peers carry the most weight for i nfluencing ch i l d r e n ’s a nd adol escent s’ behavior. In short, friends have been fo u nd to have essentially no influence on prejudice de ­ velopment. But, research shows lhat in controlled environments, friends can have a strong influence in modifying prejudice. The likely reasons for the discrepancy are that friends normally do not lalk a bo u t prejudice, and that friends assume that they share the same altitudes. The largest a nd most reliable influence on prejudice de ve lo pme nt is personality. Two personality traits— religious quest a nd a h u m a n i t a r i a n / egalitarian o ri enta ti on— have been consistently fo un d lo be negatively cor­ related with prejudice. And two o t he r personality traits— right-wing a u t h o r ­ itarianism a nd social d o m i n a n c e o r i e n t a l i o n — have b e e n consistently fo un d to be positively correlated with prejudice. T h e latter seems to be m o r e a powerful influence lhan the former, that is, correlations with preju­ dice are higher. T h e obvious question to ask is: Whe re do the personality differences come from? Plomin (1990) showed for a wide range of personality, intellec­

A FINAL N O T E

299

tual, a nd a b n or m a l characteristics, that the gcnctic influence of parent s is substantial. T h e limited research that has been carricd o ut with RWA has been inconsistent in identifying gcnctic influences. However, social envi­ r on me nt al influences in adults have reliably emerged. We know little about the sources of SDO, quest, or humanitarianism/egalitarianism in children or adults. If we can uncover the sources of these personality differences, then we may be in a position to rear children so as to maximize the antiprejudice traits, a nd minimize the proprejudicc traits. The available research docs not give even the faintest cluc as to where to look. For example, parental effects on prejudice in young children arc almost nonexistent. To what extent do parents shape their c hi ld re n’s personality? It is n ot clear, even, that the a n ­ swer lies in the family. This paucity of data should not be taken as a motive for withdrawal, b ut r a th e r as a challenge for research action.

A FINAL N O T E I have been discussing the ideas in this book with friends a nd colleagues for several years. Two related questions keep recurring. D o e sn ’t the g e ne t i c / evolutionary view m e a n that prejudice a nd discrimination will always be with us? How does the g e neti c/ evol ut ionary view help us at te mp t to modify prejudice a nd discrimination? I tell them, in response to the first question, that the underlyi ng pressures for prejudice a nd discrimination will always be with us. This implies t hat we have lo be closely vigilant and make strong efforts to c omba t these tendencies. In r esponse to the second, I tell them that we have to make use of the u n ­ derlying processes toward different ends. It is n ot in o u r genes to be preju­ diced and discriminatory against g r oups within o u r society, but it is in o ur genes to favor i ng rou p me mbe rs , to disfavor o ut gr o up member s, to occa­ sionally find o ut g ro u p m e mb e rs attractive, and to accept what authorities tell us. T h e latter two are the keys lo successful change. It often takes c ou r ­ age for the authorities to take new positions on these matters. Fortunately, they occasionally do so, as President T r u m a n did in racially integrating the a rm e d forces a nd as the Congress and President J o h n s o n did in passing civil rights legislation. But the authorities should take the lead in identify­ ing the most positive characteristics in o ut gr ou p me mbe r s, those that we all could admi re and emulate. O n e c ann ot legislate changes in o u r hearts a nd souls. Prejudiced atti­ tudes, by their nature, are relatively unresponsive lo new and contradictory information. Certainly new messages from authorities will speed the pr oc­ ess of change, but because these attitudes infuse a large n u m b e r of o ur be­ liefs a nd actions toward o u t g r o u p me mbe rs , additional e xperiences will be required. My belief is that challenging discrimination is m o r e likely to sue-

300

10.

R E C A P I T U L A T IO N

c ccd in modi fyi ng p rc j ud i cc th an c h al le ng i ng p r e j ud i ce directly. M a n d a t e d cooperati ve i nter acti ons b et ween i n g r o u p s a n d o u t g r o u p s is likely to be the mo st successful set o f new e x p e r i e nc es for a c co mp li s h i n g this goal. Finally, I believe t ha t o u r success in modi fyi ng p re j u d i c e a n d d i sc r imi na ­ tion in c hi ld r en will be severely limited unless p r ej u d ic e a n d di scr imi nati on are mo d if i ed in adults. Adults n o t only have to create the c ir cumst ances t h a t will p r o m o t e c h a n g e in o u r c hi ld r en , b u t wc m u s t also give a c onsi st ent message based on o u r own behavior. T o do otherwise is to belie the e a r n e s t ­ ness o f o u r i nt enti ons.

References

Aboud, F. E. (1988). Children and prejudice. Oxf or d: Basil Blackwell. Aboud, F. E., & Doyle, A. B. (1996). Parent al a n d p e e r influences on c h i l dr e n’s racial atti­ tudes. International Journal o f Intercultural Relations, 20, 3 71 -3 8 3 . Aboud, F. E., & Fenwick, V. (1999). Expl ori ng a n d evaluating school-based interventions to r edu ce prejudice. Journal o f Social Issues, 55, 7 67 -7 8 6 . Aboud, F. E., 8c Mendelson, M . J . (1996). D e te rmina nt s o f friendship selection a n d quality: Development al perspectives. In YV. \1. Bukowski, A. F. Newcomb, 8c W. H. H a r t u p (Eds.), The company they keep (pp. 87- 114). New York: C a m b r i d g e University Press. Aboud, F. E., 8c Mitchell, F. G. (1977). Ethnic role-taking: T h e effects o f p r e fe r en ce a n d selfidentification. International Journal o f Psychology, 12, 1-17. Abr amenkova, V. V. (1983). J o i n t activity in the d e v el o pm e n t o f a h u m a n e attitude toward preschool peers. Soviet Psychology, 22, 38-55. Acton, H. M., 8c Zarbatany, L. (1988). Interaction a n d p e r f o rm a nc e within cooperative groups: Effects on n o n h a n d i c a p p c d s tude nt s’ attitudes toward their mildly mentally r e ­ t a rd ed peers. American Journal o f M ental Retardation, 93, 16-23. Ador no, T. W., Frcnkcl-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. J., 8c Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authori­ tarian personality. New York: H a rp e r. Albert, A. A., Sc Porter, J. R. (1988). C h i l d r e n ’s g e n d e r role stereotypes: A sociological inves­ tigation o f psychological models. Sociological Forum, 3, 184-210. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature o f prejudice. Ca mb r i dg e, MA: Addison-Wesley. Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious ori ent at ion a n d prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 4 32 -443. Alper, S. W., 8c Leidy, T. R. (1970). T h e i mpact of i nformat ion transmission t h r o ug h the tele­ vision. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33, 55 6- 562. Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Wi nni peg: University o f Manitoba Press. Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies o f freedom: Understanding right-wing authoritarianism. San F r a n ­ cisco: Jossey-Bass. Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian spector. Ca mb r i dg e, MA: H a r va r d University Press. Altemeyer, B., & Hu n s bc r gc r , B. (1992). Authoritarianism religious f un da me nta li sm, quest, a n d prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2, 113-133.

301

302

RE F E RE NCE S

Andrews, P. (1985). I m p r ov e d timing o f h o m o n o i d evolution with a DNA clock. Nature, 314, 4 98 -4 9 9 . Antia, S. I). (1982). Social i nteractions o f partially m a i n s t r e a me d h e a r i ng - i mp a i r ed children. American Annals o f ihe Deaf, 127, 18-25. Apt heker , H. ( 1 9 7 1).Afro-American history: The modern era. Sccaucus, NJ: T h e Citadel Press. Archie, V. W., 8c Sherrill. C. (1989). Attitudes toward h a n d i c a p p e d peers of m a i n s tr ea me d c hi l dr en in physical education. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 3 19- 32 2. A rmor , I). J. (1972). T h e evidence on busing. Public Interest, 28, 90-126. Ar ms tr on g, B., J o h n s o n , I). W., 8c Balow, B. (1981). Effects o f cooperative vs. individual learning exper iences on inte rpe rs ona l attraction between l earning-disabled a n d n o r ma lprogrcss el ement ar y school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6, 102-109. Arnold, D., & Tr embl ay, A. (1979). Interaction o f d e a f a n d he ar ing preschool children. Jour­ nal o f Communication Disorders, 12, 2 45 - 251. Bagley, C., 8c Young, L. (1988). Evaluation o f color a nd ethnicity in y ou ng children in J a ­ maica, G ha na , E ng l an d, a n d Ca na da . International Journal o f Intercultural Relations, 12, 4 5- 60. Bak, J. J., &: Siperstein, G. N. (1987a). Effects o f mentally r e t a r d e d c h i l dr e n’s behavioral c o mp e t e nc e on n o n r e t a r d e d p e e r s ’ behaviors a n d attitudes: T o w a r d establishing ecologi­ cal validity in attitude research. American Journal o f Mental Deficiency, 92, 3 1- 39. Bak, J. J., 8c Siperstein, G. N. (1987b). Similarity as a factor effecting c h a ng e in c h i l d r e n ’s at­ titudes toward mentally r e t a rd e d peers. American Journal of M ental Deficiency, 91, 5 24 -531. Baker, | . G., 8c Fishbein, H . I). (1998). T h e d e v e lo p me n t o f prej udi ce towards gays a n d lesbi­ ans by adolescents. Journal o f Homosexuality, 36, 8 9- 100. Ballard, M., G o r m a n , L., Gottlieb, J., 8c Kaufman, M . J . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . I mp ro v i ng the social status o f m a i n s t r e a m e d r e t a rd e d children. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 69{5), 605-61 1. Ba nd ur a, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-IIall. Barber. R. W. (1968). The effects o f open enrollment on anti-Negro and anti-White prejudices among junior high students in Rochester, New York. U np ub li s h e d doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester. Baruch, G. K., 8c Barnett, R. C. (1986). F a t h e r ’s participation in family work a n d c h i l dr e n’s sex-role attitudes. Child Development, .57, 1210-1223. Batson, C. I)., 8c Burris, C. T. (1994). Personal religion: Depressant o r sti mul ant o f prejudice a n d discrimination? In M. P. Z an na & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The psychology o f prejudice: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 7, pp. 149-170). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Benderly. B. L. (1980). Dancing without music. Washi ngton, DC: Gallaudet University Press. Berger, E. M. (1952). T h e relationship between e xp re ss ed self-acceptance a n d exp r es se d ac­ cept ance o f others. Journal o f Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 7 78 - 782. Berry, \1. F., & Blassingame, J. W. (1982). Long memory: The Black experience in America. New York: Oxf or d University Press. Be th le he m, I). W. (1985). A social psychology o f prejudice. New York: St. M a rt i n ’s Press. Bettelheim, B. (1943). Individual a n d mass behavior in e x t r e m e situations. Journal of Abnor­ mal and Social Psychology, 38, 4 17 -4 5 2 . Beuf, A. H. (1977). Red children in while America. Philadelphia: University o f Pennsylvania Press. Bigler. R. S., 8c Libcn, L. S. (1993). A c ognitive-developmental a pp r o a ch to racial ster eotyp­ ing a n d reconstructive m e m o r y in Eur o- Amer i can chi ldren. Child Development, 64, 1507-1518. Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1905). Me th od e s nouvelles p o u r le diagnostic d u niveau intellectual des a n o r m a u x [New m e t h o d s for the diagnosis o f the intellectual level o f the abnormal]. L ’A nnee Psychologique, 11, 191-244. Blaney, N. I ., S t e ph a n, C.. Rosenfield, D., Ar ons on, E., 8c Sikes. J. (1977). I n t e r d e p e n d e n c e in the classroom: A field study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 69(2), 121-128.

REFERENCES

303

Brackett, D., 8c Henniges, M. (1976). Communicative interaction of preschool hearing im­ paired children in an integrated setting. The Volta Review, 78, 276-285. Braine, L. G., Pomerantz, E., Lorber, D., 8c Krantz, L). (1991). Conflicts with authority: Children's feelings, actions, and justifications. Developmental Psychology, 27, 829-840. Branch, C., 8c Newcombe, N. (1980). Racial attitudes of Black preschoolers as related to p a ­ rental civil rights activism. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 26, 425-428. Branch, C., & Newcombe, N. (1986). Racial attitude development a mo n g young Black chil­ dren as a function of parental attitudes: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study. Child Development, 57, 712-72 1. Brand, E. S., Ruiz. R. A., & Padilla, A. M. (1974). Ethnic identification and preference: A r e­ view. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 860-890. Brewer, N., 8c Smith, J. M. (1989). Social acceptance of mentally retarded children in regular schools in relation to years mainstreamed. Psychological Reports, 64, 375-380. Brody, G. H., & Stoncman, Z. (1981). Selective imitation of same-age, younger, and older peer models. Child Development, 52, 717-720. Brody, G. H., 8c Stoneman, Z. (1985). Peer imitation: An examination of status and c o m p e ­ tence hypotheses. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 146, 161-170. Brown, B. B. (1990). Peer groups. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliot (Eds.),/!/ the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 171-196). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Brown, P. M., 8c Foster, S. B. (1991). Integrating hearing and deaf students on a college c am­ pus. American Annals o f the Deaf, 136, 21-27. Brown, R. (1965). Social psychology. New York: Free Press. Brown, R. (1986). Social psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press. Brown v. Board of Education. 347 U.S. 483 (1954). 349 U.S. 294 (1955). Bukowski, W. M., Gauze, C., Hoza, B., & Newcomb, A. F. (1993). Differences and consistency between same-sex and other-sex peer relationships during early adolescence. Developmen­ tal Psychology, 29, 255-263. Buss, D. M. (1994). T h e strategies of h uma n mating. American Scientist, 82, 238-249. Bussey, K., &: Bandura, A. (1992). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing gender develop­ ment. Child Development, 63, 1236-1250. Byrnes, D. A., 8c Kiger, Ci. (1990). Th e effect of a prejudice-reduction simulation on attitude change. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20(4), 341-356. Byrnes, M. (1990). The regular education initiative debate: A view from the field. Exceptional Children, 56(4), 345-351. Cairns, R. B., 8c Cairns, B. D. (1994). Lifelines and risks. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Caldera, Y. M., Huston, A. C., & O'Brien. M. (1989). Social interactions and play patterns of parents and toddlers with feminine, masculine, and neutral toys. Child Development, 60, 70-76. Campbell. E. Q. (1956). The attitude effects o f educational desegregation in a Southern community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University. Cantwell, D. P. (1990). Depression across the early life span. In M. Lewis 8c S. M. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of developmental psychopathology (pp. 293-309). New York: Plenum Press. Carlson, J. M., & lovini, J. (1985). T h e transmission of racial attitudes from fathers to sons: A study of Blacks and Whites. Adolescence, 20, 233-237. Carrigan, P. M. (1969). School desegregation via compulsory pupil transfer: Early effects on elemen­ tary school children. Ann Arbor, MI: Public Schools. Carter, D. E., DeTine, S. L., Spero, J., 8c Benson, F. W. (1975). Peer acceptance and schoolrelated variables in an integrated j uni or high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 267-273.

304

REFERENCES

Case, K. A., Fishbein, II. I)., 8c Ritchey, P. N. (2000, August). The personality o f prejudice and discrimination against four target groups. Pa p er pr e se nt e d at the a n nu a l meet ings of the American Psychological Association, Washingt on. DC. Case, K. A., Fishbein, H. D., & Ritchey, P. N. (2001, August). Gender roles, personality, prejudice and discrimination against women and homosexuals. Pa p er pr es e n t ed at the a n nu a l meetings o f the American Psychological Association. San Francisco, CA. Cavalli-Sforza, I.. I.., Sc Bo d me r , W. F. (197 1). The genetics o f human populations. San Francisco: W. H. F r e e m a n 8c Co. Cha nc e, M. R. A. (1975). Social cohesion a n d the structure o f attention. In R. Fox (Ed.), Biosocial anthropology (pp. 93- 113). L on do n: Malaby Press. Cherry, F., 8c Byrne, D. (1977). Authoritarianism. In T. Blass (Ed.), Personality variables in so­ cial behavior (pp. 109-133). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrcnce Erlbaum Associates. Clark, K. B. (1963). Prejudice and your child (2nd ed.). Boston: Beacon Press. Clore, G. I.., & Jeffrey, K. M. (1972). Emot ional role-playing, attitude c ha nge , a n d attraction toward a disabled p er son. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 25(1), 105-1 1 1. C o h e n , E. (1984). T h e d es eg r eg a te d school: Probl ems in status, power a n d int er et hni c cli­ mate. In N. Miller & M. B. Brewer (Eds.), Groups in contact: The psychology o f desegregation (pp. 77-96). New York: Academic Press. Colby, A.. Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., 8c Lieber man, M. (1983). A l ongitudinal study of mo ra l d e ­ v elopment. Monographs o f the Society for Research in Child Development, 48( 1-2). Cole, K. N., Mills, P. E., Dale, P. S., & J en k i ns , J. R. (1991). Effects o f preschool integration for children with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 55(1), 3 6- 45. C o n d o n , M. E., York, R., Heal, L. W., 8c Fortschneider, J. (1986). Acceptance o f severely h a n d i c a p p e d students by n o n h a n d i c a p p e d peers. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 11, 21 6- 219. Cook. S. W. (1972). Motives in a conceptual analysis o f attitude r elated behavior. In J. Brigham 8c T. Weissbach (Eds.), Racial altitudes in America: Analysis and findings o f social psy­ chology (pp. 250-261). New York: H a r p e r & Row. Co o p e r, L., J o h n s o n , I). W., J o h n s o n , R. T., & Wilderson, F. (1980). T h e effects o f c o o p e r a ­ tive, competitive a n d individualistic e xpe rie nc es on i nt er p e rs on a l attraction a m o n g h e t ­ e ro ge n eo u s peers. Journal o f Social Psychology, 111, 2 43 - 253. Cowan, G., Martinez, L., & Mendiola, S. (1997). Predictors o f attitudes toward illegal Latina immigrants. Hispanic Journal o f Behavioral Sciences, 19, 4 03 -4 1 5 . Cross, W. E. (1987). A two-factor theory o f Black identity. In J. S. Phinney & M. J. Rother am (Eds.), Children’s ethnic socialization (pp. 117-133). Beverly Hills: Sage. Dahl, H. G., H o r sm a n, K. R., 8c Arkell, R. N. (1978). Simulation o f exceptionalities for e le ­ me n ta ry school students. Psychological Reports, 42, 5 73 - 574. Damico, S. B., 8c Sparks, C. (1986). Cross-group contact o ppor tuni ti e s: I mp a ct on i n t e r p e r ­ sonal relationships in d ese g re g a t ed mi dd le schools. Sociology o f Education, 59, 113-123. Da mon, W., 8c Ha rt , D. (1988). Self-understanding in childhood and adolescence. New York: C a m ­ br idge University Press. Davey, A. G. (1983). Learning to be prejudiced: Growing up in multiethnic Britain. L on do n: E d ­ ward Arnold. Davis, W. E. (1989). T h e r e gu la r educati on initiative debate: Its promises a n d probl ems. E x­ ceptional Children, 55(5), 4 40 -4 46 . Dentler, R. A., 8c Elkins, C. (1967). I n t e r gr o u p attitudes, a cademic p e r f o r m an c e, a n d racial composition. In R. A. Dentler, B. Mackler, 8c M. E. WTa r sh a uc r (Eds.), The urban R ’s (pp. 61-77). New York: Praeger. DeVos, G., 8c Wagat suma, H. (Eds.). (1966). Ja p a n ’s invisible race. Berkeley: University o f Cali­ fornia Press.

RE F E RE NCE S

305

DeVries, D. L.t Edwards, K. J., 8c Slavin, R. E. (1978). Biracial l earni ng t eams a n d race r el a­ tions in the classroom: Four Held e x p e ri me n ts using t ea ms -g a me s- t ou rn ame n t s. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 70(3), 3 5 6 - 362. Dobzhanskv, T . (1962). M ankind evolving. New Ilaven: Yale University Press. Donaldson. J. (1980). C h a n g i n g attitudes toward h a n d i c a p p e d persons: A review a n d analy­ sis of research. Exceptional Children, 46(1), 5 04 - 514. Dovidio, J. F., Br igham, J. D., J ohns on, B. T., 8c Ga er tne r, S. L. (1996). Stereotyping, p r e j u ­ dice, a n d discrimination: A n o t he r look. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stango, 8c M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 276- 319) . New York: T h e Guilford Press. Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., 8c Ga er t ne r, S. L. (2000). Reduci ng c o n t em p o r a r y prejudice: C o m b a t i n g explicit a nd implicit bias at the i ndividual a n d int er gr oup level. In S. O s k a m p (Ed.). Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 137-164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Doyle, A. B., & Aboud, F. E. (1995). A l ongi tudinal study o f White children's racial prejudice as a social-cognitive d ev e l op me nt . Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 41, 2 09 -2 2 8 . Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903). The souls o f Black folk. Chicago: A. C. McClurg 8c Co. Duck, R. J., 8c H u n s b er g er , B. (1999). Religious orient at ion a n d prejudice: T h e role o f relig­ ious proscription, right-wing authoritarianism a n d social desirability. International Journal for the Psychology o f Religion, 9, 157-179. Duckitt, J. (1992). Psychology a n d prejudice: A historical analysis a nd integrative framework. American Psychologist, 4 7 , 1182-1193. Dundes, A. (1973). Mother wit from the laughing barrel: Readings in interpretation o f Afro-American folklore. Engl ewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ehrlich, II. J. (1973). The social psychology o f prejudice. New York: Wiley. Eisenberg, N., Wolchik, S. A., H e r n a n d e z , R., & Pasternack, J. F. (1985). Parental socializa­ tion o f yo un g c h i l dr e n’s play: A short-t erm longitudinal study. Child Development, 56, 1506-1513. Eiscnstadt, S. N. (1956). From generation to generation. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Elam. J. J., 8c Sigelman, C. K. (1983). Devel opmental differences in reactions to children la­ beled mentally r et a rd e d. Journal o f Applied Developmental Psychology, 4, 3 03- 31 5. Elser, R. (1959). T h e social position o f he ar in g h a n d i c a p p e d children in the r eg ul a r grades. Exceptional Children, 2.5, 3 05 -309. E me r to n , R. G., & R o th m an , G. (1978). Attitudes towards deafness: H e a r i n g students at a he ar in g a nd d e a f college. American Annals o f the Deaf, 123, 5 88 -593. Erikson. E. H. (1963). Childhood and society (Rev. ed.). New York: No rt on. Et augh, C., & Liss, M. B. (1992). H o m e , school a n d pl ayroom: T r a i n i n g g r o u n d s for adult g e n d e r roles. Roles, 26, 129-117. Evans, C. L. (1969). The immediate effects o f classroom integration on the academic progress, selfconcept and racial attitudes o f Negro elementary children . U n p u b l i s h e d doct oral dissertation, N o r th T ex as State University. Evans, J. II. (1976). C h a n g i n g attitudes toward disabled persons: An e x p e r im e nt a l study. Re­ habilitation Counseling Bulletin, 19, 5 72 -5 7 9 . Evans, S. M. (1989). Born for liberty. New York: T h e Free Press. Eysenck, II. J. (1992). Roots o f prejudice: Genetic or e nvir onmental ? In J. Lynch, C. Modgil, & S. Modgil (Eds.), Prejudice, polemic or progress? (pp. 21-41). L o n d on : I‘he F al me r Press. Fagot, B. I. (1985). Beyond the r ei n f o r c em en t principle: A n o t h e r step toward u n d e r s t a n d i n g sex role d e ve l op me n t. Developmental Psychology, 21, 1097-1104. Fagot, B. I., 8c H a g an , R. (1985). Aggression in toddlers: Responses to the assertive acts of boys a n d girls. Sex Roles, 12, 34 1- 351. Fagot, B. I., H a g an , R.. Leinbach. M. D., & Kronsberg, S. (1985). Differential reactions to as­ sertive a nd communicati ve acts o f t od dl e r boys a n d girls. Child Development, 56, 1499-1505.

306

RE F E RE NCE S

Fagot, B. I., 8c Leinbach, \1. D. (1989). T h e y o u n g chil d’s g e n d e r schema: E nv ir on me nt al in­ put, i nternal organization. Child Development, 60, 66 3- 672. Finkelstein, N. W., & Haskins, R. (1983). Ki n de rg a rt en children pr ef er same-color peers. Child Development, 54, 5 02- 50 8. Fischer, K. W., 8c Bullock, L). (1984). Cognitive d e v e l o p me n t in school-age children: C o n c l u­ sions a n d new directions. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Development during middle childhood: The years from six to twelve (pp. 7 0- 146). Washi ngton, DC: National Academy o f Sciences Press. Fishbein, II. D. (1976). Evolution, development, and children's learning. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear. Fishbein. H. D. (1984). The psychology o f infancy and childhood. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Fishbein, II. D. (1992). T h e d e v el o pm e nt o f p e e r prejudice a nd discrimination in children. In J. Lynch, C. Modgil, 8c S. Modgil (Eds.), Cultural diversity and the schools. L o n do n : T h e Fa lme r Press. Fishbein, II. D., & Imai, S. (1993). Preschoolers select playmates on the basis o f g e n d e r a nd race. Journal o f Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 3 03 -316. Fishbein. II. 1)., Stegelin, D., 8c Davis, N. (1993. June) . Playmate preferences among urban multi­ cultural preschool children . Pa p er p re s en te d at the Annual C on fe re nc e o f the National Asso­ ciation for t he Educat ion of Y oung Chil dren, Anaheim, CA. Fisher, R. D., Derison, D., Policy, C. F. Ill, C a d m a n , J., 8c J o h n s t o n , D. (1994). Religiousness, religious o rientation, a n d attitudes towards gays a n d lesbians. Journal o f Applied Social Psy­ chology, 24, 6 14 -630. Fiske, S. T. (2000). I n t e r d e p e n d e n c e a nd the r educti on o f prejudice. In S. O s k a m p (Ed.), Re­ ducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 115-136). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associ­ ates. Forbes, H. I). (1985). Nationalism, ethnocentrism, and personality. Chicago: University o f C h i ­ cago Press. Foster, S., & Brown, P. (1989). Factors influencing the academi c a n d social integration o f he ar in g i mp a ir ed collcgc students. Journal o f Postsecondary Education and Disability, 7, 78-96. Franklin, V. P. (1984). Black self-determination: A cultural history o f the faith o f the fathers. Westport, CT: Lawrence Hill 8c Co. Fr ederickson, G. M., 8c Knobel, D. T. (1980). A history o f discrimination. In T. F. Pettigrew, G. M. Fr ederickson, D. T. Knobel, N. Glazer, & R. U e d a (Eds.), Prejudice (pp. 30-87). Ca mb r i dg e , MA: H a r v ar d University Press. Freidl, E. (1975). Women and men: An anthropologist’s view. New York: Holt, Ri nehar t, 8c Winston. F r e ud , S. (1917). Introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. New York: WAV. Nort on. F r i e d ma n , P. (1980). Racial p r ef er ences a n d identifications o f White e lementar y school chil­ d r e n. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 5, 2 56 -2 6 5 . Funde r, D. C. (1997). The personality puzzle. New York: Nort on. G a n n o n , J. R. (1981). D eaf heritage: A narrative history o f deaf America. Silver Spring, MD: N a ­ tional Association of the Deaf. G a r d n e r , E. B., Wright, B. I)., & Dec, R. (1970). The effects busing Black ghetto children to White suburban schools. Unpub li she d ma nus cr ipt. (ERIC D oc u me n t R ep ro du ct io n Service No. ED 048 389). Gar th, C. E. (1963). Self-concept o f Negro students who transferred and did not transfer to formerly all-White high schools. U n p u bl i sh e d doctoral dissertation. University o f Kentucky. Genesee. F., 8c Ga nd a ra , P. (1999). Bilingual education p ro g r ams : A cross-national p e r s p e c ­ tive. Journal o f Social Issues, 55, 6 65 -686. Gilbert, D. T. (1991). How m en ta l systems believe. American Psychologist, 46, 107-119.

RE F E RE NCE S

307

Clock, C. Y., Withnow, R., Piliavin, J. A., & Spencer , M. (1975). Adolescent prejudice. New York: H a r p e r & Row. Glover. R. (1994). Using mor al a n d epistemological r ea soning as predict ors o f prejudice. The Journal o f Social Psychology, 134, 6 33 -6 4 0 . Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma, notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-IIall. Gol dber g, S. (1960). Probability, an introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Goodall, J., Ba nd or a, A., B e r g m a n n , E., Busse, C., M e ta ma , H., M p o n g o , F.., Pierce, A., & Riss, I). (1979). I nt e r c om mu n it y interactions o f t he c h im p a n z e e pop u la ti on o f the G o mb e National Park. In D. A. H a m b u r g &: E. R. McCown (Eds.), The great apes (pp. 13-53). Menl o Park, CA: T h e B e nj a mi n/ Cu mm i ng s Publishing Co. G o o d m a n , H., Gottlieb, J., & Harri son, R. (1972). Social accept ance o f EMRs integr at ed into n o n - g r a d e d e le me nt a r y school. American Journal o f M ental Deficiency, 76, 4 12 -4 17 . G o o d m a n , M . E. (1952). Racial awareness in young children. Ca mb r i dg e, MA: Addison-Wesley. Go r n, G. )., Gol dberg, M. E., 8c K a nu ng o, R. N. (1976). T h e role o f educat ional television in c ha n gi n g the i n t er g ro u p attitudes of chi ldren. Child Development, 47, 2 77 - 280. Gottlieb, G. (1991). Ex pe ri me nt al canalization o f behavioral d e ve lo pme nt : Th e or y . Develop­ mental Psychology, 27, 4- 13. Gottlieb, J., C ohe n, L., 8c Goldstein, L. (1974). Social contact a n d p er sonal ad j us t me nt to a t ­ titudes toward cducablc mentally r e t a r d e d children. Training Bulletin, 71, 9-16. Gottlieb, J.. Se mme l, M. I., & Vel dman, D. J. (1978). Correlates o f social status a m o n g m a i n s t r e a me d mentally r e t a rd e d children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 3 96 -406. Gottlieb, J., & Switsky, H. N. (1982). Dev el op me nt o f school-age c h i l d r e n ’s stereotypic atti­ tudes toward mentally r e t a rd e d chi l dren. American Journal o f M ental Deficiency, 86, 5 96 - 600. Graffi, S., 8c Minnes, P. M. (1988). Attitudes o f p ri ma ry school children toward the physical a p p e a r a n c e a n d labels associated with Down s yndr ome . American Journal o f M ental Retar­ dation, 93, 28-35. G r a h a m. D. L. R., 8c Rawlings, E. I. (1991). Bo nd in g with abusive dati ng partners: Dynamics o f Stockholm S y ndr ome . In B. Levy (Ed.), Dating violence: Young women in danger (pp. 119-135). Seattle: Seal Press. Graves, S. B. (1999). Television a n d pr ej udice r educt ion: Whe n docs television as a vicarious ex p e r ie nc e m ak e a difference? Journal o f Social Issues, 55, 7 07 - 728. Gr ee n, J., 8c G e ra r d, II. (1974). School desegregati on a nd ethnic attitudes. In H. Fr omk in 8c J. Sherwood (Eds.), Integrating the organization, a social psychological analysis (pp. 291-311). New York: Free Press. Greenfield, P. M., & Childs, C. P. (1991). De ve l opme nt al continuity in biocultural context. In R. C o h e n 8c A. W. Siegel (Eds.), Context and development (pp. 135-159). Hillsdale, NJ: Law­ rence Er lbaum Associates. Groce, N. E. (1985). Everyone here spoke sign language: Hereditary deafness on M artha’s Vineyard. Ca mb r i dg e , MA: H a r v ar d University Press. Grusec, J. E. (1971). Power a nd the internalization of self-denial. Child Development, 42, 9 2- 10 5. Guralnick, M. J. (1980). Social interactions a m o n g preschool children. Exceptional Children, 46, 2 48 -253. Guralnick, M. J., 8c Gr o om , J. M. (1987). T h e p e e r relations of mildly delayed a nd n o n h a n d i ­ c a pp e d preschool children in m a i n s t re a me d pl aygroups. Child Development, 58, 1556-1572. Guralnick, M. J., & G r o o m, J. M. (1988a). Fr iends hi ps o f preschool c hi ldren in m a i n ­ s tr e am e d groups. Developmental Psychology, 24, 5 95 -604. Guralnick, M. J., & G r o o m, J. M. (1988b). Peer interactions in m a i n s t r e a m e d a n d specialized classrooms: A comparat ive analysis. Exceptional Children, 45(5), 4 15 -4 2 5 .

308

RE F E RE NCE S

Haller, J. S., Jr., 8c Haller, R. M. (1974). The physician and sexuality in Victorian America. Urbana: University o f Illinois Press. Hal li nan. M. T. (1981). Recent advances in sociometry. In S. R. Asher 8c J. M. G o tt ma n (Eds.), The development o f children's friendships (pp. 9 1- 115). New York: C a m b r id g e Un iv e r­ sity Press. Ha mi lton, I). L., 8c Trolier, T. K. (1986). Stereotypes a nd stereotyping: An overview o f the cognitive a p p ro a ch . In J. F. Dovidio Sc S. L. G a e r t n e r (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 127-163). New York: Academic Press. Ha mi lton, W. I). (1964). T h e genetical evolution o f social behavior. Journal o f Theoretical Biol­ ogy, 7, 1-16, 17-52. Ha mi l to n, W. D. (1975). In na te social apti tudes in ma n: An a p p r oa c h from evolutionary g e ­ netics. In R. Fox (Ed.), Biosocial anthropology (pp. 133-155). L o n do n : Malaby Press. Ha n d l er s, A., & Austin, K. (1980). I mp r ov in g attitudes o f high school students toward their h a n d i c a p p e d peers. Exceptional Children, 47(3), 2 2 8 - 229. H ar d in g , V'. (1981). There is a river: The Black struggle for freedom in America. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Harris, J. R. (1995). W h e re is the c hil d’s e n v ir o nm e n t? A g r o u p socialization theory o f devel­ o p m e n t . Psychological Review, 102, 4 58 -4 8 9 . Ha r te r, S. (1993). Causes a nd consequences of low self-esteem in c hi l dren a nd adolescents. In R. F. Baumei st cr (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle o f low self-regard (pp. 87-116). New York: Plenum. H a rt u p, W. W., & Stevens, N. (1997). Fr iendships a nd adap t at i o n in the life course. Psycholog­ ical Bulletin, 121, 3 55 - 370. H a y d e n - T h o m s o n , I.., Rubin, K. H., & Hymcl, S. (1987). Sex pr ef er ences in sociometric choices. Developmental Psychology, 23, 558—562. Heller, M . (1987). T h e role of language in the f ormation o f ethnic identity. In J. S. Phi nney 8c M. J. Rothcr am (Eds.), Children's ethnic socialization (pp. 180-200). Beverly Hills: Sage. He mp hi l l , L., & Siperstein, G. N. (1990). Conversational c o m pe t e n ce a nd p e e r r esponse to mildly r e t a rd e d chi ldren. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 82, 128-134. H e r m a n , B. E. (1967). The effect o f neighborhood upon the attitudes o f Negro and White sixth grade children toward different racial groups. U n p u bl i s h e d doctoral dissertation, University o f Connecticut. Hertel, R. (1991). C h a n g i n g negative attitudes o f able-bodied children toward their h a n d i ­ c a pp e d peers: T h e novel stimulus a nd equal status hypothesis. Dissertation Abstracts Inter­ national, 51, 5 029 -5 13 2 . (University Microfilms No. 9107074) H e t h e r i n g t o n , E. M. (1965). A d e v e lo p me n ta l study o f the effects o f sex o f the d o m i n a n t p a r ­ e nt on sex-rolc preference, identification, a n d imitation in children. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology 2, 188-194. Higgins, P. C. (1980). Outsiders in a hearing world. Beverly Hills, C.A: Sage. H i n de , R. A. (Ed.). (1983). Primate social relationships. L o n d on : Blackwell Scientific Publica­ tions. Hoover, R., Sc Fishbein, II. D. (1999). T h e d e ve l o p m e n t o f prejudice a nd sex role s ter eotyp­ ing in White adolescents a n d White young adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychol­ ogy, 20, 4 49 -4 6 0 . H o m e y , K. (1945). Our inner conflicts. New York: W.W. No r t on. Houser , B. B. (1978). An ex a mi n a t io n o f t he use o f audiovisual m e di a in re duc in g prejudice. Psychology in Schools, 15, 116-121. Hrdy, S. B. (1999). Mother nature. New York: Pant heon. Hu ns b er g er , B. (1995). Religion a nd prejudice: T h e role o f religious fu n d a me nt al is m, quest, a n d right-wing a u t h o r it a ri a ni sm . Journal of Social Issues, 51, 113-129.

RE F E RE NCE S

309

H u n s b er g er , B., Owusu, V., Sc Duck, R. (1999). Religion a n d prejudice in G h a n a a n d C a n ­ ada: Religious fu n d a me nt al is m, right-wing aut hor itar iani sm, a n d attitudes toward h o m o ­ sexuals a n d wome n. International Journal for the Psychology o f Religion, 9, 181-194. Hus, Y. (1979). T h e socialization process o f h e ar i n g- i mp a ir ed children in a s u m m e r day c amp. The Volta Review, S I , 146-156. Hust on, A. C. (1983). Sex-typing. In P. H. Müssen (Ed.). Handbook o f child psychology (Vol. 4, p p . 387- 467) . New York: Wiley. Hus to n, A. C. (1985). T h e d e ve l o p m e n t o f sex-typing: T h e m e s from re ce nt r esearch. Devel­ opmental Review, 5, 1-17. Irwin, C. J. (1987). A study in t he evolution o f et hnocentr is m. In V. Reynolds, V. Falger, & I. Vine (Eds.), The sociobiology o f ethnocentrism (pp. 131-156). Athens: University o f Georgia Press. Isaacs. II. R. (1965). In d ia ’s ex-touchables. New York: J o h n Day. Janis, I. L., 8c King, B. 'I’. (1954). T h e influence o f role-playing on o pi ni on c ha nge . Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49, 2 11 - 218. J a r re t t, O. S., & Quay, L. C. (1984). Crossracial a ccept ance a nd best friend choice. Urban Ed­ ucation, 19, 21 5- 225. J en ki ns, J. R., Pious, C. G., & Jewell, M. (1990). Spccial education a n d t he r egular education initiative: Basic assumptions. Exceptional Children, 56(6), 4 79 - 491. J en ki ns, J. R., Spelts, M. L., & O d o m , S. L. (1985). I nt eg r at i n g n o r ma l a nd h a n d i c a p p e d p r e ­ schoolers: Effects o n child d e v el o p me n t a nd social interaction. Exceptional Children, 52(1), 7-17. J o h n s o n , L). W., & J o h n s o n , R. T. (1981). Effects o f cooperative a n d individualistic l e a rning e xpe rie nc es on i nte re thni c interaction. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 75, 4 44 -4 49 . J o h n s o n , D. W., 8c J o h n s o n , R . T . (1982). Effects o f cooperative, competitive, a n d i ndividual­ istic l earni ng exper iences on cross-ethnic interaction a n d friendships. The Journal o f Social Psychology, 118, 4 7- 58. J o h n s o n , D. W., 8c J o h n s o n , R . T . (1985). Relationships between Black a nd White students in i nt er g r o u p c oope ra ti on a n d competition. The Journal o f Social Psychology, 725(4), 4 21 -4 2 8 . J o h n s o n , I). W., & J o h n s o n , R. T. (1992). I m p l e m e n t i n g cooperative learning. Contemporary Education , 6 3 , 173-180. J o h n s o n , D. W., & J o h n s o n , R. T . (2000). T h e t hr ee Cs o f r ed uc i ng prejudice a n d di s c r imi na ­ tion. In S. O s k a m p (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 239- 268) . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. J o h n s o n , D. W., J o h n s o n , R . T . , 8c Maruyama, G. (1983). I n t e r d e p e n d e n c e a nd int er per sonal attraction a m o n g h e t e r og e ne o us a n d h o m o g e n e o u s individuals: A theoretical f o rmu l a­ tion a nd a meta-analysis of the research. Review o f Educational Research, 53, 5- 54. J o h n s o n , D. W., J o h n s o n , R. T., 8c Scott, L. (1978). T h e effects o f cooperative a n d individual­ ized instruction on s t ud e nt attitudes a nd achi evement . The Journal o f Social Psychology, 104, 207- 216. J o h n s o n , R. T., Rynders, R., J o h n s o n , D. W., Schmidt, B., 8c Ha id er , S. (1979). Interaction between h a n d i c a p p e d a n d n o n h a n d i c a p p e d teenager s as a function o f situational goal structuring: Implications for ma in st re a mi ng . American Educational Research Journal, 16, 161-167. Jolly, A. (1972). The evolution o f primate behavior. New York: Macmillan. J o n e s , E. E. (1985). I nt e rpe r sona l distancing behavior o f he a ri ng -i mp a i r ed versus normalh e a ri n g children. The Volta Review, 87, 2 23 - 230. Jost, J . T . , & T h o m p s o n , E. P. (2000). G ro u p- ba s e d d o mi n a n c e a n d opposition to equality as i n d e p e n d e n t predi ctors o f self-esteem, e t hnoc ent r ism, a n d social policy attitudes a m o n g African Americans a n d Eu r op e an Americans. Journal o f Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 2 0 9 - 232.

310

REFERENCES

Kandel, I). B. (1978). Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships. American Journal of Sociology, 84 , 427-436. Kanner, L. (1964). A history of the care and study of the mentally retarded. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Karlins, M., Coffman, T. L., Sc Walters, G. (1969). On the fading of social stereotypes: Studies in three generations of college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 1-16. Karnes, M. L)., Sc Lee, R. C. (1979). Mainstreaming in the preschool. In L. Katz (Ed.), Current topics in early childhood education (Vol. 2, pp. 13-42). Norwood. NJ: Ablex. Katz, I)., Sarnoff, 1., Sc McClintock, C. M. (1956). Ego defense and attitude changc. Human Relations, 9 , 27-45. Katz, D., Sarnoff, I., Sc McClintock, C. M. (1957). T h e measurement of ego defense as related to attitude change. Journal of Personality, 25, 465-474. Katz, I. (1979). Some thoughts about the stigma notion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulle­ tin, 5, 447-460. Katz, I. (1981). Stigma: A social psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associ­ ates. Katz, I., Sc Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893-905. Katz, P. A. (1973). Stimulus predifferentiation and modification of children’s racial attitudes. Child Development, 44, 232-237. Katz, P. A. (1983). Developmental foundations of ge nd e r and racial altitudes. In R. L. Leahy (Ed.), The child’s construction of social inequality (pp. 41-78). New York: Academic Press. Katz, P. A., & Boswell, S. (1986). Flexibility and traditionality in children’s g ender roles. Ge­ netic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 112, 105-147. Katz, P. A., Sohn, M ., Sc Zalk, S. R. (1975). Perceptual concomitments of racial attitudes in u r ­ ban grade school children. Developmental Psychology, 11, 135-144. Katz, P. A., Sc Zalk, S. R. (1978). Modification of children’s racial attitudes. Developmental Psy­ chology, 14, 447-461. Kennedy, P., Sc Bruininks, R. H. (1974). Social status of hearing impaired children in regular classrooms. Execeptional Children, 40, 336-342. Kennedy, P., Northcott, W., McCauley, R., Sc Williams, S. M. (1976). Longitudinal sociometric and cross-sectional data on mainstreaming hearing impaired children: I m ­ plications for preschool progr ammi ng. The Volta Review, 78, 71-81. Kerig, P. K.. Cowan, P. A., Sc Cowan, C. P. (1993). Marital quality and gender differences in parent-child interaction. Developmental Psychology, 29, 931-939. Kiger. G. (1992). Disability simulations: Logical, methodological and ethical issues. Disability, Handicap and Society, 7(1), 71-78. King, B. T., & Janis, I. L. (1956). Comparison of the effectiveness of improvised versus n o n ­ improvised role-playing in producing opinion change. Human Relations, 9, 177-186. Kochman, T. (1987). T h e ethnic compone nt in Black language and culture. In J. S. Phinney & M. J. Rotheram (Eds.), Children’s ethnic socialization (pp. 219-238). Beverly Hills: Sage. Kohlbcrg, L., Sc Ullian, I). Z. (1974). Stages in the development of psvchosexual concepts and attitudes. In R. C. Friedman, R. M. Richart, Sc R. L. Vande Wiele (Eds.), Sex differences in behavior (pp. 209-222). New York: Wiley. Koslin, S., Amarel, M., & Ames, N. (1969). A distance measure of racial attitudes in primary grade children: An exploratory study. Psychology in Schools, 6, 382-385. Krantz, M. (1987). Physical attractiveness and popularity: A predictive study. Psychological Re­ ports, 60, 723-726.

REF ERENCES

311

Kraus, S. (1972). Modifying prejudice: Attitude c ha ng e as a f unction o f the race o f the c o m ­ muni cat or. In A. Brown (Ed.), Prejudice in children (pp. 183-195). Springfield, IL: Th oma s. Kuhn, D., Nash. S. C., & Brucken, L. (1978). Sex role concepts o f 2- a n d 3-year-olds. Child Development, 49, 4 45 -451. Lachat, M. (1972). A description and comparison of the altitudes o f White high school seniors toward Black Americans in three suburban high schools: A n all White, a desegregated, and an integrated school. U n p u bl i sh e d doctoral dissertation, T e a c he r s College, Col umb ia University. Ladd, G., Munson, II., & Miller, J. (1984). Social integration o f d e a f adolescents in s ec o n d ­ ary-level m ai ns te am e d p ro gr ams. Exceptional Children, 50, 4 2 0 - 428. LaFr eni er e, P.. Strayer, F. F., & Gauthier, R. (1984). T h e e m e r g e n c e of same-scx preferences a m o n g preschool peers: A d ev e lo p me n ta l ethological perspective. Child Development, 55, 1958-1965. Lamb, B. C. (2000). The applied genetics o f plants, animals, humans and fungi. L on do n: I mper ial College Press. Lamb, M. E., Easterbrooks, M. A., 8c I l o l de n , G. W. (1980). Rei nf or ce me nt a n d p u n i s h m e n t a m o n g preschoolers: Characteristics, effects, a n d correlates. Child Development, 51, 1230-1236. Lamb, M. E., 8c Ro o pn a ri ne , J. L. (1979). Peer influences on sex-role d e v el o pm e n t in p r e ­ schoolers. Child Development, 50, 1219-1222. Lane, H. (1984). When the mind hears: A history o f the deaf. New York: R a n d o m House. Lange, I.. (1983). Wo ma n is not a rational animal: O n Aristotle’s biology o f r e pr o du c ti o n. In S. H a r d i n g & M. B. Hintikka (Eds.), Discovering reality (pp. 1-15). Dor dr echt, Holl and: D. Reidel Publishing Co. Langer, E. J., Bashner, R. S., 8c Chanowitz, B. (1985). Decreasing prejudice by increasing dis­ crimination. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1 13-120. La Piere, R. T . (1934). Attitudes versus actions. Social Forces, 13, 2 30 - 237. Laythe, B., Finkel, D., 8c Kirkpatrick, L. E. (2001). Predicting prej udi ce from religious f u n d a ­ mentalism a n d right-wing authoritarianism: A multiple-regression a p pr o ac h . Journal for the Scientific Study o f Religion, 40, 1-10. Lazar, A. L., Gensley, J. T., & O r p et , R. E. (1971). C ha n g i n g attitudes o f young mentally gifted children toward h a n d i c a p p e d persons. Exceptional Children, 37, 6 00 - 602. Lea, M., & Duck, S. W. (1982). A mo de l for the role o f similarity o f values in friendship devel­ o p m e n t . British Journal o f Social Psychology, 21, 301- 310. L eder ber g, A. R., Ryan, H. B., 8c Robbins. B. L. (1986). Peer interaction in y o un g d e a f chil­ dr en: T h e effect of p a r t n e r h ea r in g status a n d familiarity. Developmental Psychology, 22, 6 9 1 - 700. L er ne r, G. (1986). The creation o f patriarchy. New York: O xf or d University Press. Lever, J. (1978). Sex differences in the complexity of c h i l dr e n’s play a n d games. American So­ ciological Review, 43, 4 71 - 483. Levy, G. D., & Fivush, R. (1993). Scripts a nd ge nd er : A new a p p r o a c h for e x a mi n in g gender role dev el op me nt. Developmental Review, 13, 126-146. Levy-Shiff, R., & Hof fma n, M. A. (1985). Social behavior o f he a ri ng - i m pa i re d a n d normallyh e a ri n g preschoolers. British Journal o f Educational Psychology, 55, 111-118. Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts (G. W. Lewin, Ed.). New York: H a r p e r 8c Row. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: H a r p e r 8c Brother. L i e be rma n, L. (1990). RF.I: Revisited . . . again. Exceptional Children, 56, 5 61 - 562. Liebert, R. M., 8c Sprafkin, J. (1988). The early window: Effects o f television on children and youth. Elmsford, NY: Pe rg a mo n . Lobel, T. E., Bemp ec ha t , J., Gewirtz, J. C., Sho k e n- To pa z, T., & Bashe, E. (1993). T h e role of g e nd er - re lat ed i nformat i on a n d self - endor sement o f traits in p re ado le s c en t s’ inferences a n d j u d g e m e n t s . Child Development, 64, 1285-1294.

312

RE F E RE NCE S

Locksley, A., Ortiz, V., 8c H e p b u r n , C. (1980). Social categorization a n d discriminatory b e ­ havior: Ext inguishing the mi ni mal i n t e r gr ou p discrimination effect. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 7 73 - 783. L omba rdi , I). N. (19(53). Factors affecting changcs in attitudes toward Negr oes a m o n g high school students. Journal o f Negro Education, 32, 129-136. Lou, M. W. (1988). T h e history o f language use in t he education o f the d e a f in the United States. In M. Str ong (Ed.), Language learning and deafness (pp. 75-98). New York: C a m ­ bridge University Press. Lu ms de n, C. J., & Wilson, E. O. (1981). Genes, mind and culture. C a mbr idge : H ar va r d Un i v e r ­ sity Press. Lytton, H., 8c Romney, D. M. (1991). Parents* differential socialization of boys a n d girls: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 2 67 - 296. Maccoby, E. E. (1988). G e n d e r as a social category. Developmental Psychology, 24, 7 55 -765. Maccoby, E. E. (1990). G e n d e r a n d relationships: A d eve lo p me n ta l account. Amertcan Psychol­ ogist, 45, 513- 520. Maccoby, E. E., 8c Jacklin, C. N. (1987). G e n d e r segregation in chi l dhood. In E. H. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 20, pp. 239- 287) . New York: Aca­ d emic Press. Ma nn, I.., & Janis, I. I.. (1968). A follow-up study on t he long-term effects o f e moti onal roleplaying. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 8, 3 39 -3 4 2 . Marger, M. N. (1991). Race and ethnic relations ( 2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Margo, B. C. (1983). Modifying attitudes toward physically h a n d i c a p p e d children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 56, 1002. Marsh, V., 8c F r i e d ma n , R. (1972). C h a n g i n g public attitudes toward blindness. Exceptional Children, 38, 4 26 -4 2 8 . Martin, C. L. (1989). C h i l d r e n ’s use o f g e nd e r- r el at ed i nf or ma ti on in ma ki ng social j u d g e ­ ments. Developmental Psychology, 25, 80-88. Martino, L., & J o h n s o n , I). W. (1979). Cooperat i ve a n d individualistic e xpe rie nc es a m o n g disabled a nd n o r m a l chi ldren. The Journal o f Social Psychology, 107, 177-183. Massad, C. M. (1981). Sex role identity a nd a dj us t me n t d u r i n g adolescence. Child Develop­ ment, 52, 1290-1298. Mayr, E. (1997). This is biology: The science o f the living world. Ca mb r id g e, MA: H a r v a r d U niversity Press. McCauley, C., 8c Stitt, C. L. (1978). An individual a n d quantitative me as u r e of stereotypes. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 92 9- 910. McCauley, R. W., Bruininks, R. H., 8c Kennedy, P. (1976). Behavioral interactions of hear i ng i mp ai r e d children in regular classrooms. The Journal of Special Education, 10, 2 77 -284. McConnell, S. R.. & O d o m , S. L. (1986). Sociometrics: Peer - ref er enced measures a n d the as­ sessment o f social c ompe te nc e. In P. S. Strain, M. J. Guralnick, 8c H. M. Walker (Eds.), Children’s social behavior (pp. 215- 284) . New York: Academic Press. McGuire, W. J . (1985). Attitudes a nd attitude change. In G. Lindzey 8c E. Ar onson (Eds.), Handbook o f social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 233- 346) . New York: R a nd o m House. McHalc, S. M., Bartko, W. T., Crout er , A. C., 8c Perry-Jenkins, M. (1990). C h i l d r e n ’s h o u se ­ work a n d psychosocial functioning: T h e med i at i ng effects o f p a r e n t s ’ sex-role behaviors a n d attitudes. Child Development, 61, 1413-1426. McKirdy, L. S.. & Blank, M. (1982). Dialogue in d e a f a n d h ea r in g preschoolers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 25, 4 87 -4 9 9 . M cWhirt, W. J. (1967). The effects o f desegregation on prejudice, academic aspiration, and the selfconcept o f tenth grade students. U n p u bl i s h e d doctoral dissertation, University o f South Carolina. Meier, A., 8c Rudwick, E. (1976). From plantation to ghetto (3rd ed.). New York: Hill & Wang.

RE F E RE NCE S

313

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal o f Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 3 71 - 378. Miller, M., Richey, D. D., & L a m m er s, C. A. (1983). Analysis o f gifted s tude nts ’ attitudes t o ­ ward the h a n d i c ap p ed . Journal for Special Educators, 19, 14-21. Milner, D. (1983). Children and race. L o n do n : Sage. Moore, J. W., Hauck, W. E., & D en ne , T. C. (1984). Racial prejudice, interracial contact, a nd personality variables. Journal o f Experimental Education 52, 168-173. Moores, D. F. (1982). Educating the deaf ( 2nd ed.). Boston: H o u g h t o n Mifflin. Mosher, 1). L., & Scodel, A. (1960). Relationships between e t hn oc en t ri sm in children a n d the e thnoc ent r i sm a n d aut hor it ar ian r ea ri n g practices o f their mot her s. Child Development, 31, 369- 376. Musselman, C. R., Lindsay, P. H., & Wilson, A. K. (1988). An evaluation o f r ecent t r ends in preschool p r o g r a m m i n g for he a ri ng -i mp a i r ed c hi ldren .Journal o f Speech and Hearing Dis­ orders, 53, 71-88. Nash, G. B., Jeffrey, J. J., Ilowe, J. R., Frederick, P. J. , Davis, A. F., 8c Winkler, A. M. (General Eds.). (1990). The American people (2nd ed.). New York: H a r p e r 8c Row. Newcomb, A. F., 8c Bagwell, C. L. (1995). C h i l d r e n ’s friendship relations. Psychological Bulle­ tin, 117, 3 06 -347. Norvell, N., 8c Worchel, S. (1981). A r e e xa m i na t io n o f the relation between equal status c o n ­ tact a n d i n te r gr ou p attraction. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 9 02 -908. O ’Brien, M. (1992). G e n d e r identity a n d sex roles. In V. B. Van Hasselt & M. H e rs en (Eds.), Handbook o f social development (pp. 325- 345) . New York: Plenum. O ’Bryan, M. C., Fishbein, H. D., 8c Ritchey, P. N. (1999, April). Parental influences on adoles­ cents’ prejudicial attitudes. P a p e r p re s en t e d at the Society for Research on Child De ve l op­ ment , Albuquerque, NM. P a d d e n , C., & H u m p h r i e s , T. (1988). D eaf in America: Voices from a culture. Ca mb r id ge , MA: H ar va r d University Press. Parish, T., Ohlsen, R., & Parish, J. (1978). A look at m a i ns t r e a m i n g in light o f c h i l d r e n ’s atti­ tudes toward t he h a n d i c a p p e d . Perceptual and Motor Skills, 46, 1019-1021. Pasanella, A. L., 8c Volkmon, C. B. (1981). Teaching handicapped students in the mainstream (2nd ed.). C o lumbus , O i l : Merrill. Passin, H. (1955). Untouchability in the far east. Monumento Nipponica, 2, 27-47. Patchen, M. (1982). Black-W hite contact in schools. West Lafayette, IN: P ur d ue University Press. Patterson, C. J. (1992). Ch i ld r en of lesbian a n d gay parents. Child Development, 63, 1025-1042. Patton, J. R., Payne, J. S.. & Beirne-Smith, M. (1990). M ental retardation (3rd ed.). Columbus, O H : Merrill. Pervin, L. A. (1996). The science of personality. New York: Wiley. Peters, W. (Pr o d u c e r 8c Director). (1985). A class divided [Film]. Washington, DC: Public Broadcast Station Video. Petersen, A. C., C ompá s, B. E., Br ooks-Gunn, J ., St emmier , M., Ey, S., 8c Gr ant, K. E. (1993). Depression in adolescence. American Psychologist, 48, 155-168. Pettigrew, T. F. (1971). Racially separate or together? New York: McGraw-Hill. Pettigrew, T. F., & T r o p p , L. R. (2000). Does i n t e rg r ou p contact reduce prejudice? Recent meta-analytic findings. In S. O s k a m p (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 9 3 - 114) . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Phillips, F.. L. (1951). Attitudes toward self a n d others: A br i e f que st ionna ir e r e po r t . Journal o f Consulting Psychology, 15, 79-81. Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents a n d adults: Review o f research. Psycholog­ ical Bulletin, 1 0 8 . 4 99 - 51 4.

314

RE F E RE NCE S

Piaget. J. (1948). The moral judgem ent o f the child. New York: Free Press. (Original work p u b ­ lished 1932) Piaget, J. (1971). Biology and knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Plomin, R. (1990). Nature and nurture: An introduction to human behavioral genetics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole. Plomin, R., & Daniels, D. (1987). Why are children in the same family so different from one anot her ? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 1-60. Pomer leau, A., Bolduc, D., Maleint, G., & Cossette, L. (1990). Pink o r blue: Envi ro n me nt al g e n d e r stereotypes in the first two years o f life. Sex Roles, 22, 3 59 -367. Porter, J. D. R. (1971). Black child. While child. Ca mb r id g e, MA: H a r v a r d University Press. Pratto, F., Liu, J. H., Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Shih, M., Bachrach, II., 8c Hegar ty, P. (2000). S o­ cial d o mi n a n c e ori ent ati on a n d the legitimization o f inequality across cultures. Journal o f Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 3 69 -409. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., 8c Malle, B. F. (1994). Social d o mi n a n c e o r i e nt a ­ tion: A personality variable predi cti ng social a n d political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 7 41 -763. Pr e si d en t ’s C o m m it t e e on Mental Ret ardat ion (1976). Changing patterns in residential services fo r the mentally retarded. Washi ngt on, DC: U.S. G o v e rn m en t Printing Office. Pr es i de nt ’s Co mm it t e e on Mental Retardation. (1977). M ental retardation past and present. Washi ngton, DC: U.S. G o v e r n m e n t Printing Office. Qualls, R. C., Cox, M. B., 8c Schehr, T . L. (1992). Racial attitudes on c ampus: Are t he re g e n ­ d e r differences? Journal o f College Student Development 33, 5 24 -529. Quigley, S. P., 8c Paul, P. V. (1986). A perspective on academi c achievement . In D. M. L u te r ma n (Ed.), Deafness in perspective (pp. 55-86). San Diego: College-Hill Press. Rapier, J., Adelson, R., Carey, R., 8c Croke, K. (1972). C h a n g es in c h i l d r e n ’s attitude toward physically h a n d i c a p p e d . Exceptional Children, 39, 2 19 -223. Reynolds, V. (1987). Sociobiology a nd race relations. In V. Reynolds, V. Falger, & I. Vine (Eds.), The sociobiology o f ethnocentrism (pp. 208- 215) . Athens: University o f Georgia Press. Ritchey, P. N., 8c Fishbein, II. D. (2001). T h e lack o f an association between adolescent fri ends’ prejudices a n d stereotypes. Merrill-Pallmer Quarterly, 47, 188-206. Roberts, C., 8c Zubrick, S. (1992). Factors influencing the social status o f c hi ldren with mild a cademi c disabilities in r e gu la r classrooms. Exceptional Children, 59(3), 192-202. Robinson. J. W., & Preston, J. D. (1976). Equal-status contact a nd modification o f racial p r e j ­ udice: A r ee xa mi na ti on of the contact hypothesis. Social Forces, 54(4), 9 11 -9 2 4 . Roe v. Wade 410 U . S .1 13 (1973). Rogers, M., Miller, N., 8c H e n n i g a n , K. (1981). Cooperati ve ga me s as an intervention to p r o ­ mo te cross-racial acceptance. American Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 5 1 3 - 516. Rossi, A. S. (1977). A biosocial perspective on p a re nt in g. In A. S. Rossi, J. Kagan, 8c T . K. H ar ev en (Eds.), The family (pp. 1-31). New York: No rt on. Rotatori, A. F., Schwenn, J. I)., 8c Fox, R. A. (1985). Assessing severely and profoundly handi­ capped individuals. Springfield, II.: T h om as . R o th e ra m, M. J., & Phinney, J. S. (1987). Introduct ion. In J. S. Phi nney & M. J. Ro th er am (Eds.), Children’s ethnic socialization (pp. 10-28). Beverly Hills: Sage. Ro ther am- Bor us , M. J., & Phinney, J. S. (1990). Patt erns o f social e xpectations a m o n g Black a n d Mexican-American children. Child Development, 61, 5 42 -556. Rubin, I. M. (1967a). Increased self-acceptance: A me a ns o f r educi ng prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 2 33 -238. Rubin, I. M. (1967b). T h e r e duc tion o f prej udi ce t h r ou gh laboratory training. Journal o f A p­ plied Behaviorial Science, 3(1), 29-50. Ryan, M. P. (1975). Womanhood in America. New York: New Viewpoints.

REFERENCES

315

Rynders. J. E., Johnson, R. T., Johnson, I). W., & Schmidt, B. (1980). Producing positive in­ teraction a mong Down Syndrome and n on handi capped teenagers through cooperative goal structuring. American Journal of Menial Deficiency, 85, 268-273. Sacks, O. (1989). Seeing voices: A journey into the world of the deaf. Berkeley: University of Cali­ fornia Press. Salford, P. L., & Rosen, L. A. (1981). Mainstreaming: Application of philosophical perspec­ tives in integrated kindergarten programs. Topics in Early Childhood Education, 1, 1-10. St. J o h n , N. H. (1975). School desegregation outcomes for children. New York: Wiley. Savin-Williams, R. C., Sc Berndt, T. J. (1990). Friendship and peer relation. In S. S. F'eldman Sc G. R. Ellliot (F.ds.),/!/ the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 277-307). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Scarr, S. (1992). Developmental theories for the 1990s: Development and individual differ­ ences. Child Development, 63, 1-19. Schlesinger, H. (1986). Total communication in perspective. In I). M. Lutcrman (Ed.), Deaf­ ness in perspective (pp. 87-116). San Diego: College-Hill Press. Schofield, J. W. (1979). T h e impact of positively structured contact on intergroup behavior: Does it last u nd er adverse conditions? Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 280-284. Schofield, J. W., & Francis, W. L). (1982). An observational study of peer interaction in r a ­ cially mixed “accelerated" classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 722-732. Schofield, J. W., & Sagar, II. A. (1977). Peer interaction patterns in an integrated middle school. Sociometry, 40, 130-138. Schütz, H., 8c Six, B. (1996). How strong is the relationship between prejudice and discrimi­ nation? A meta-analytic answer, international Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20(3/4), 441-462. Sedlick. M., &: Penta, J. B. (1975). Changing nurse attitudes toward quadriplegics through use of television. Rehabilitation Literature, 36, 274-278. Seidner, J. (197 1). Effects of integrated school experience on interaction in small bi-racial groups. U npublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California. Selman, R. L. (1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding. New York: Academic Press. Semaj, L. (1980). T h e development of racial evaluation and preference: A cognitive a p ­ proach. The Journal of Black Psychology, 6, 59-79. Serbin, L. A., Sc Sprafkin, C. (1986). T h e salience of g e nd e r and the process of sex typing in 3- to-7-year-old children. Child Development, 57, 1 188-1 199. Seyfarth, R. M. (1983). Grooming and social competition in primates. In R. A. I li nde (Ed.), Primate social relationships (pp. 182-190). London: Blackwell Scientific Publications. Shapiro, H. (1988). White violence and Black response. Amherst: T h e University of Massachu­ setts Press. Sheare, J. B. (1974). Social acceptance of EMR adolescents in integrated programs. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 78, 678-682. Sheerer, E. T. (1949). An analysis of the relationships between acceptance of and respect for self and acceptance of and respect for others in 10 counseling cases .Journal of Consulting Psychology, 13, 169-175. Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., White, B. J., Hood, W. R., 8c Sherif, C. W. (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: The robbers-cave experiment. Norman. OK: University of Oklahoma Book Exchange. Sherif, M., Sc Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony and tension. New York: Harper. Shrum, W., Sc Cheek, N. H., Jr. (1987). Social structure during the school years: Onset of the degroupi ng process. American Sociological Review. 52, 218-223. Shrum, W., Cheek, N. H.. Jr., 8c Hunter. S. M. (1988). Friendship in school: Gender and r a ­ cial homophily. Sociology of Education, 61, 227-239.

316

RE F E RE NCE S

Sidanius, J., Levin, S., 8c Pratto, F. (1996). Consensual social d o m i n a n c e orientat i on a n d its correlates within the hierarchical structure o f Amer ican society. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 38 5- 408. Sidanius, J., 8c Liu, J. 11. (1992). T h e Gu l f War a n d the Rodney King beating: Implications o f the g ene ra l conservatism a n d social d o mi n a n c e perspectives. The Journal o f Social Psychology, 132, 6 85 - 700. Sidanius, J., 8c Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance. Ca mb r id g e , MA: C a m b r i d g e University Press. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo. L. (1994). Social d o m i n a n c e orient at ion a n d the political psy­ chology o f g e nd e r: A case o f i nvariance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 9 9 8 - 1011. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo. L. (1996). Racism, conservatism, affirmative action a n d intel­ lectual sophistication: A ma t te r o f principled conservatism o r g r o u p d omi na nc e? Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 4 76 -4 9 0 . Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., 8c Rabinowitz, J. (1994). G e nd e r, et hnic status, i n g r o up a t ta c hme n t a nd social d o mi n a n c e or ientation. Journal o f Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 194-216. Siegal, M. (1987). Are sons a nd d a u gh t er s t reated m o r e differently by fathers than by m o t h ­ ers? Developmental Review, 7, 183-209. Signorella, M. L., Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (1993). Development al differences in chil­ d r e n ’s g e n d e r schemat a about others: A meta-analytic review. Developmental Review, 13, 147-183. Signorielli, N., 8c Lears, M. (1992). Chi l dren, television, a n d concept ions about chores: Atti­ tudes a n d behaviors. Sex Roles, 27, 157-170. Silverman, I., &: Shaw, M. (1973). Effects o f s u d d e n mass school desegr egat ion on interracial interactions a n d attitudes in one s outhe rn city. Journal o f Social Issues, 29(4), 144-142. Singer. 1). (1966). Interracial attitudes o f Negro and White fifth grade children in segregated and un­ segregated schools. U n p u bl i s h e d doctoral dissertation, Te ac he rs College, Columbia U n i ­ versity. Singleton, L. C., & Asher, S. R. (1977). Peer preferences a nd social interaction a m o n g thirdg r a d e c hi l dr en in an int egrat ed school district. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 69, 3 3 0 - 336. Singleton, L. C., &: Asher, S. R. (1979). Race integration a nd c h i l d r e n ’s p e e r preferences: An investigation o f d ev el op me nt al a n d c o h or t differences. Child Development, 50, 9 36 - 941. Siperstein, G. N., 8c Chatillon, A. C. (1982). I m p o r t a n ce o f perceived similarity in i mprovi ng c h i l d r e n ’s attitudes toward mentally r e t a rd e d peers. A merican Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86, 4 53 -4 5 8 . Siperstein, G. N., Budoff, M., 8c Bak, J. J. (1980). Effects of the labels “mentally r e t a r d e d ” a nd “r e t a r d ” on the social acceptability o f mentally r e t a r d e d children. American Journal of M ental Deficiency, 84, 5 96 - 601. Slavin, R. E. (1977). How s tudent l ea rning teams can integrate the d es eg re ga ted classroom. Integrated Education, 7 5(6), 5 6- 58. Slavin, R. E. (1979). Effects o f biracial learning teams on cross-racial friendships. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(3), 3 81 -387. Slavin, R. E., 8c C oo pe r, R. (1999). I mp r ovi ng i n t c r gr ou p relations: Lessons learned from co­ operative l ea rning p r o gr a ms . Journal o f Social Issues, 55, 6 47 - 66 4. Slavin, R. F.., 8c M a d d e n , N. A. (1979). School practices that impr ove race relations. American Educational Research Journal, 16, 169-180. Slavin, R. E., & Oickle, E. (1981). Effects o f cooperative l earni ng teams on s t ud e n t achieve­ m e n t a n d race relations: T r e a t m e n t by race interactions. Sociology o f Education, 54, 174-180. Sluckin, A. M & Smith, P. K. (1977). Two a p p r oa c he s to the concept o f d o m i n a n c e in p r e ­ school children. Child Development, 48, 9 17 - 923.

RE F E RE NCE S

317

S m etan a, J . G. (1986). Preschool c h ild r e n ’s c o nceptio ns o f sex-role transgressions. Child De­ velopment, 57, 8 6 2 -8 7 1 . Smith, G. J. (1985). Facial a nd full-length ratings o f attractiveness r elated to the social i n t e r­ actions o f y o un g children. Sex Roles, 12, 28 7- 293. Snyder, L., Apolloni, T., 8c Cooke, T. P. (1977). I nt eg r at ed settings at the early c hi ldhood level: T h e role o f n o n r e t a r d e d peers. Exceptional Children, 43, 2 62 - 266. Soder, M. (1990). Prejudice o r ambivalence? Attitudes toward persons with disabilities. Dis­ ability, Handicap Society, 5, 227- 241. Sp cc lma n, 1)., 8c Hof fma n, C. 1). (1980). Personal space assessment o f the d e v e l op m en t o f r a ­ cial attitudes in integr at ed a nd segr egat ed schools. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 136 , 3 0 7 - 308. Spence, J. T., & Hel mr ei ch , R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimen­ sions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University o f T ex a s Press. Spencer, M. B. (1983). C h i l d r e n ’s cultural values a n d p ar e nt a l r ea r in g strategies. Developmen­ tal Review, 3, 3 51 - 370. Spencer, M. B., 8c Ma rks tr om- Ada ms , C. (1990). Identity processes a m o n g racial a n d ethnic minority c hi ldren in America. Child Development, 61, 2 90 -3 1 0 . Stager, S. F., 8c Young. R. D. (1981). I n t e r gr o u p contact a n d social outcomes for ma ins tr ea m EMR adolescents. American Journal o f M ental Deficiency, 85, 4 97 -5 0 3 . S te ph a n, W. G. (1977). Cognitive differentiation a nd i n t e r gr ou p per cepti on. Sociometry, 40, 50-58. St ep ha n, W. G. (1985). I n t e r gr o u p relations. In G. Lindzey 8c E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 599- 658) . New York: R a n d om House. S te ph a n, W. G., 8c Finlay, K. (1999). T h e role o f e m p a t h y in i mpr ovi ng i n t e r gr ou p relations. Journal o f Social Issues, 55, 7 29 - 744. St ep ha n, W. G., 8c Ste ph an , C. W. (2000). An in te gr ate d t hr eat theory of pr ejudice. In S. O s k a m p (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23-45). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Stevenson, H. W., 8c Stevenson, N. G. (1960). Social interaction in an interracial nursery school. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 61, 37-75. Stevenson, M. R., & Black, K. N. (1988). Pa te rna l absence a nd sex-role devel op me nt : A meta-analysis. Child Development, 59, 793- 814. Stokoe, W. C.. J r . (1960). Sign language structure (Rev. ed.). Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press. Stotland, E., Katz, D.. & Patchen, M. (1972). T h e r educt ion of prejudice t h r o u g h the arousal o f self insight. In J. Brigham & T. Wcissbach (Eds.), Racial attitudes in America: Analysis and findings o f social psychology (pp. 262- 273) . New York: H a r p e r 8c Row. Strain, P. S. (1985). Social a n d nonsocial d e t e r mi n a nt s of acceptability in h a n d i c a p p e d p r e ­ school chi l dren. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 4, 4 7- 58 . Strain, P. S., 8c Kerr, M. M. (1981). Mainstreaming of children in schools. New York: Academic Press. Strayer, F. F., & T r u d el , M. (1984). Devel opment al c hanges in the n a t u r e a nd function of so­ cial d o mi n a n c e a m o n g y ou ng chil dren. Ethology and Sociobiology 5, 2 79 -2 9 5 . Strum, S. C. (1987). Almost human. New York: N or t on . Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory o f psychiatry. New York: W. YV. No r ton. Tajfel, II. (1981). H um an groups and social categories. Ca mb r id g e, Engl and: C a m b r i d g e U n i ­ versity Press. Tajfel, H., 8c T u r n e r , J. C. (1986). T h e social identity theory o f i n t e r g r o up behavior. In S. Wor chel 8c W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology o f intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7-24). C h i ­ cago: Nelson-IIall Publishers. Tawney, J. W. (1981). A cautious view o f m a i n s t r e a mi ng in early education. Topics in Early Childhood Education, 1, 25-36.

318

RE F E RE NCE S

Taylor, A. R., Asher, S. R., Sc Williams, G. A. (1987). T h e social a dap ta ti on o f m a i n s t re a me d mildly r e t a rd e d children. Child Development, 58, 1321-1334. Taylor, M. C. (2000). Social cont ext ual strategies for re d u c in g racial discrimination. In S. O s k a m p (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 71-92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Terry, R., Sc Coie, J. D. (1991). A c omp a ri s o n of m e t h o d s for defining sociometric status a m o n g children. Developmental Psychology, 21, 8 67 - 880. T h o m p s o n , D. B. (1999). Different spatial scales of nat ural selection a nd g en e flow: T h e evo­ lution o f behavioral geo gr ap h ic variation a n d phenot ypic plasticity. In S. A. Foster & J. A. Endl er (Eds.), Geographic variation in behavior: Perspectives on evolutionary mechanisms (pp. 33-51). New York: O xf or d University Press. Thrall, P. II.. Richards, C. M., McCauley, I). E., 8c Antonovics, J. (1998). M e t ap op ul at io n col­ lapse: T h e consequences o f limited gene-flow in spatially struct ured populations. In J. Bascompte 8c R. V. Sole (Eds.), Modeling spatiotemporal dynamics in ecology (pp. 83-104). Berlin, Ge rma ny: Springer-Verlag. Ti ndal e, N. B. (1974). Aboriginal tribes o f Australia. Berkeley: University of California Press. T o n n e s m a n n , W. (1987). G r o u p identification a n d political socialization. In V. Reynolds, V. Falger, Sc I. Vine (Eds.), The sociobiology o f ethnocentrism (pp. 175-189). Athens: University o f Georgi a Press. I'ooby, J., & DcVore, I. (1987). T h e reconstruction o f h om in i d behavioral evolution t hr ough strategic model ing. In W. G. Kinzey (Ed.), The evolution o f human behavior: Primate models (pp. 183-237). Albany: State University o f New York Press. T re nt , R. (1957). T h e relation between expr essed self-acceptance a n d expr essed attitudes t o­ wards Negr oes a nd Whites a m o n g Ne gr o children. Journal o f Genetic Psychology, 91, 25-31. Turiel, E. (1983). The development o f social knowledge. New York: C a m b r i d g e University Press. T ur nbul l, A. P., Sc Blacher-Dixon, J. (1981). Preschool ma i ns tr ea ming: An empirical a nd conceptual review. In P. Strain Sc M. Kern (Eds.), Mainstreaming o f children in schools (pp. 71-100). New York: Academic Press. T ur nbul l, C. M. (1972). The mountain people. New York: Si mon & Schuster. Van B ou rg on d i en . M. E. (1987). Chi ldr en' s responses to r e t a rd e d peers as a function o f so­ cial behaviors, labeling, a n d age. Exceptional Children, 53, 4 32 -4 3 9 . Vandell, D. L., An d e rs on , L. I)., E h r h a r d t , G., Sc Wilson, K. S. (1982). I n t e g ra t e d h e ar i n g a nd d e a f preschoolers: An a t te mp t to e n h a n c e h e a ri n g chil dren's interactions with d e a f peers. Child Development, 53, 1354-1363. Vandell, D. L., 8c Geor ge, L. B. (1981). Social interaction in h ea r in g a n d d e a f preschoolers: Successes a n d failures in initiations. Child Development, 52, 6 27 -635. Van den Bcr ghc, P. L. (1981). The ethnic phenomenon. New York: Elsevier. Vaug hn , B. E., 8c I.anglois, J. II. (1983). Physical attractiveness as a correlate o f p e e r status a n d social c o mp e te n ce in preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 19, 5 61 -567. Vaughn, G. M. (1987). A social psychological m o d e l o f et hni c identity d ev el op me nt . In J. S. Phinney & M . J . Ro th er am (Eds.), Children's ethnic socialization (pp. 73-91). Beverly Hills: Sage. Voeltz, L. M. (1980). C h i l d r e n ’s attitudes toward h a n d i c a p p e d peers. American Journal of M ental Deficiency, 84, 4 55 -4 6 4 . Voeltz, L. M. (1982). Effects o f st ruct ured interactions with severely h a n d i c a p p e d peers on c h i l d r e n ’s attitudes. American Journal of M ental Deficiency, 86, 3 80 -390. W a d d in g to n , C. H. (1957). The strategy o f genes. L on do n : Allen Sc Unwin. W a d d in g to n , C. H. (1960). The ethical animal. L o n do n : Allen Sc Unwin. Wal kerdi ne, V. (1981). Sex, power, a n d pedagogy. Screen Education, 38, 14-24. Wal kerdi ne, V. (1990). Schoolgirl fictions. L o n d on : Verso. Wallin, J. E. W. (1955). Education o f mentally handicapped children. New York: H a rp e r.

REF ERENCES

319

War ri ng, D., J o h n s o n , 1). W., Ma ru y a ma , G., 8c J o h n s o n , R. T. (1985). I mp a ct o f different types o f cooperative learning o n cross-ethnic relationships. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 77, 53-59. Watson. M. W., 8c Fischer, K. W. (1980). D e ve lo p me nt o f social roles in elicited a n d s p o n t a n e ­ ous behavi or d u r i n g the preschool years. Developmental Psychology, 16, 48 3- 494. Webster, S. W. (1961). T h e influence o f interracial contact on social acceptance in a newly i n ­ t egr at ed school. Journal o f Educational Psychology, 52, 292- 296. Weigel, R. H., Wiser, P. L., 8c Cook, S. W. (1975). T h e impact o f cooperative l e a rning e x p e r i ­ ences on cross-ethnic relations a n d attitudes. Journal o f Social Issues, 3/(1), 2 19 -244. Weiner, M. J., 8c Wright, F. E. (1973). Effects o f u n d e r g o i n g arbitrary discrimination u p o n subsequent attitudes toward a minority g r ou p. Journal o f Applied Social Psychology, 3(1), 9 4 - 102. Weisncr, T. S., 8c Wilson-Mitchell, J. E. (1990). No nconvent ional family life-styles a nd sex typing in six-year olds. Child Development, 61, 1915-1933. Westervelt, V. D., 8c McKinney, J. D. (1980). Effects o f a film on n o n h a n d i c a p p e d c h i l d r e n ’s attitudes toward h a n d i c a p p e d chil dren. Exceptional Children, 46(4), 2 94 - 296. Whitley, B. E., J r. (1999). Right-wing authorit ari anism, social d o m i n a n c e or ientation, a nd prejudice. Journal o f Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 126-134. Wh i tmo re , P. G. (1956). A study o f school desegregation: Attitude change and scale validation. U n ­ published doctoral dissertation. University o f Tennessee. Wicker, A. W. (1969). Attitudes versus actions: T h e relation o f verbal a n d overt behavioral r e ­ sponses to attitude objects. Journal o f Social Issues, 25, 4 1- 78. Williams, J. E., Best, D. L., 8c Boswell, D. A. (1975). T h e m e a s u r e m e n t o f c h i l d r e n ’s racial atti­ tudes in the early school years. Child Development, 46, 4 94 -5 0 0 . Williams, J. E., 8c Mo rl an d, J. K. (1976). Race, color, and the young child. C ha p el Hill: Un i ve r ­ sity o f No rt h Carolina Press. Wilson, E. O. (1980). Sociobiology: The abridged edition. C ambr i dg e: Ha rv ar d University Press. Wilson. R. S. (1978). Synchronies in mental d evel op me nt : An e pi genetic perspective. Science, 202, 9 39 - 948. Wolfensberger, W. (1976). T h e origin a n d na tu r e o f o u r institutional models. In President's Committee on M ental Retardation. Changing patterns in residential services for the menially re­ tarded. Washi ngton, DC: U.S. G o v e r n m e n t Printing Office. W r a n gh a m , R. W. (1987). African apes: T h e significance o f African apes for reconstructing h u m a n social evolution. In W. G. Kinzey (Ed.), The evolution of human behavior: Primate models (pp. 51-71). Albany: State University o f New York Press. Wylie, L., 8c Forest, J. (1992). Religious f un da me nt al is m, right-wing aut horitarianism a nd prejudice. Psychological Reports, 71, 1291-1298. WTylie, R. E. (1974). I nt egr ati ng h a n d i c a p p e d a n d n o n h a n d i c a p p c d preschool children: Ef­ fects on social play. Childhood Education, 51, 3 60 - 364. Yee, M. D., 8c Brown, R. (1992). Self-evaluations a n d i nt e rg ro u p attitudes in children aged t h r e e to nine. Child Development, 63, 6 19 -6 2 9 . York, J., Vander cook, T., MacDonal d, C., Heise-Neff, C., & Caughey, E. (1992). Feedback about int egrati ng middle-school students with severe disabilities in general education classes. Exceptional Children, 58, 2 44 -2 5 8 . Zalk, S. R., & Katz, P. A. (1978). G e n d e r attitudes in children. Sex Roles, 4, 34 9- 357. Zetlin, A. G., 8c Mu r ta u g h , M. (1988). Fr ie nd sh i p p a t te r ns o f mildly l ea rning h a n d i c a p p e d a n d n o n h a n d i c a p p e d high school students. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 92, 4 47 -5 5 4 . Ziegler, S. (1981). The effect o f cooperative l earning teams for increasing cross-ethnic friendship: Additional evidence. Human Organizations, 40(3), 264- 268. Zigler, E., & H o d a p p , R. M. (1986). Understanding mental retardation. New York: C a m b r i dg e University Press.

This page intentionally left blank

A u th o r In d e x

A A b o u d , F. E., 4, 84, 85, 86, 186, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 251, 254, 256, 257, 260, 266, 268, 269, 270 A b ra m e n k o v a , V. V., 70, 71 Acton, H. M., 128 Adel s on, R., 234, 235 A d o r n o , T. W., 23, 24, 254, 265, 277, 286 Albert, A. A., 160 Allport, G. W., 2, 3, 5, 6, 20, 21, 22, 31, 32, 222, 223, 226, 231, 273, 274 Al per, S. W., 248 Al temeyer , B., 26, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280 Am arei, M., 227 Ames, N., 227 A n d e r s o n , L. D., 100, 101 Andrews, P., 48 Antia, S. D., 100, 102 An t o n o vies, J., 63 Apolloni, T., 237 A p t h e k e r , II., 172, 179 Archi e, V. W., 234 Arkell, R. N., 252 A r m o r , I). J., 227 A r m s t r o n g . B.. 241, 246 A r n o l d , D., 100 A r o n s o n , E., 241, 244, 245

Asher, S. R., 126, 127, 204, 205, 206, 209, 210, 234, 235, 238 Austin, K., 252

B Bach rach, H., 282 Bagley, C., 203 Bagwell, C. L., 268 Bak, J. J., 120, 121, 122, 128, 129 Baker, J. G., 201 Ballard, M., 241, 246 Balow, B., 241, 246 B a n d o r a , A., 61 B a n d u r a , A., 162, 279 Ba rbe r, R. W., 227 Ba r ne t t, R. C., 150, 151, 158 Bartko, W. T., 150, 151 B a ru c h, G. K., 150, 151, 158 Bashe, E., 163 B as hn e r, R. S., 256, 257 Batson, C. D., 272, 273, 274, 275 Bei rne-Smi th, M., I l l , 112 B e m p e c h a t , )., 163 Be nde rly, B. L., 91, 92, 96 B e ns o n, F. W., 210, 212 Berger, E. M., 255 B e r g m a n n , E., 61

321

322

A U T H O R INDEX

B e r n d t , T. J., 268 Berry, M. F., 174, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182 Best, D. L., 227 B e t h l e h e m , I). W., 9 B e t t e l he i m, B., 19 Beuf, A. H. , 187, 188 Bigler, R. S., 13, 157 Binct, A., 115 Blacher-Di xon, J., 232 Black, K. N., 152 Blaney, N. T., 241, 244, 245 Blank, M., 103 Blassi ngame, J. W., 174, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182 B o b o , L., 282 B o d m e r , W. F., 63 B ol duc , D., 148 Boswell, D. A., 227 Boswell, S., 157 Brackett, D., 100 Br ai ne, L. G., 57 B r a nc h , C., 265 Br an d, E. S., 84, 85 Brewer, N., 234 B r i g h a m , J. D., 9 Brody, G. H., 59 B r oo ks - Gu nn , J., 159 Brown, B. B., 268 Brown, P. M „ 106, 107 Brown, R., 9, 11, 23, 24, 25, 26, 70, 71, 77 B r u c k e n , L., 160 B r ui ni nks, R. H., 100, 101, 102, 103, 104 Budoff, M., 120, 121, 122 Bukowski, W. M., 167, 168 Bullock, D., 144 Burris, C. T „ 272, 273, 274, 275 Buss, D. M., 63 Busse, C., 61 Bussey, K., 162 Byrne, D., 23, 26 Byrnes, D. A., 251 Byrnes, M., 237

c C a d m a n , J., 274 Cairns, B. D., 268 Cairns, R. B., 268 C a l de ra , Y. M., 150 C a m p b e l l , E. Q., 227 Cantwell, D. P., 159

Carey, R., 234, 235 C a r l s o n , J. M 265 C a r ri g a n , P. M., 227 Ca r te r , D. E., 210, 212 Case, K. A., 274, 277, 278, 282, 284 C a ug h e y, E., 234, 235 Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., 63 C h a n c e , M. R. A., 51 Chanowit z, B., 256, 257 Ch at i li o n , A. C., 120, 121 C h e e k , N. H., Jr., 164, 166, 21 1 C he rr y, F., 23, 26 Childs, C. P., 44, 45 Clark, K. B., 182, 183, 181, 185, 266 Clore, G. L.. 251 C o f f m a n , T. L., 9, 10 C o h e n . E., 222 C o h e n . L., 234 Coie, J. D., 87, 88 Colby, A., 144 Cole, K. N., 236 C o m p a s , B. E., 159 C o n d o n , M. E.. 119, 121 Co ok , S. W., 240, 243, 244, 245, 255 C o o k e , T. P., 237 C o o p e r , L., 237, 241, 242, 244, 246, 247 C o o p e r , R., 222, 238 C o r m a n , L., 241, 246 Cossette, L., 148 C owa n, C. P., 149 Cowan, G., 284 C owa n, P. A., 149 Cox, M. B„ 202 C r o k e , K., 234, 235 Cross, W. E., 186, 188 C r o u t e r , A. C., 150, 151

D Dahl. H. G., 252 Dale, P. S., 236 Damico, S. B.. 206 D ä m o n , W., 57, 144 Daniels, D., 46, 47 Davey, A. G., 266 Davis, A. F., 134, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 Davis, N., 204 Davis, W. E.. 237 Dee. R.. 227 D e n n e , T. C., 201, 202

323

A U T H O R INDEX

D e n t ie r , R. A., 227, 230 De ris on , D., 274 D e Ti n e , S. L., 210, 212 De Vo r e, I., 49, 51 DeVos, G., 16, 17, 18, 19 DeVries, D. L., 241, 244, 247 Dobzh an sk y, T., 63 D o n a l d s o n , J., 224, 238 Dovidio, J. F., 9, 239 Doyle, A. B., 251, 266, 269, 270 Du Bois, W. E. B.. 191 Duck, R. J., 274, 277 Duck, S. W., 268 Duckitt, J., 31 D u n do s, A., 190

E E as te rb r oo k s, M. A., 155, 156 Edwards, K. J., 241, 244, 247 E h r h a r d t , G., 100, 101 Eh r li ch , II. J., 3, 4, 6, 9 Ei senber g, N., 149, 150 Eisenstadt, S. N., 69 Elam, J. J., 120 Elkins, C., 227, 230 Elser, R., 104 E m e r t o n , R. G., 105 E t a u g h , C., 158 Evans, C. L., 134, 227, 228 Evans, J. H., 224 Evans, S. M., 28, 135 Ey, S., 159 Eysenck, H. J., 46, 47, 264

F Fagot, B. I., 150, 154, 155, 156 Fenwick, V., 256, 257, 269 Finkei, D., 276 Finkeistein, N. W., 205 Finlay, K., 251, 260 Fischer, K. W., 73, 74, 144 Fi shbein. H. D., 31, 32, 39, 44, 46, 49, 50, 51, 84, 115, 120, 133, 150, 151, 158, 201, 202, 204, 205, 206, 250, 267, 270, 271, 274, 277, 278, 282, 284, 285, 296 Fisher, R. D., 274 Fiske, S. T., 255 Fi vu sh, R.. 157

Forbes, H. D., 23 Forest, J., 276 Fo r t s c h n e i d e r , J., 119, 121 Foster, S. B., 106, 107 Fox, R. A., 112 Francis, W. D., 206, 207 Fr ankli n, V. P., 172 Fr eder ick, P. J., 134, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 F r e d er i ck s o n , G. \1., 7 Freidl, E., 28 Frenkel-Brunswick, E., 23, 24, 254, 265, 277, 286 F r e u d , S., 67 F r i e d m a n , P., 227 F r i e d m a n , R., 252 F u n d e r , D. C., 272

G G a e r t n e r , S. L., 9, 239 G a n d a r a , P., 222 G a n n o n , J. R., 91, 92, 93, 96 G a r d n e r , E. B., 227 G a r t h , C. E., 227 Ga u t h i e r . R., 165 Ga uz e, C., 167, 168 G en e se e , F., 222 Gensley, J. T., 238 G e o r g e , L. B., 100, 101 G e r a r d , H., 227 Gewirtz, J. C., 163 Gibbs, J., 144 Gilbert, D. T., 59 Glock, C. Y., 269, 271 Glover. R.. 284 G of f m a n , E., 13, 14 G o l d b e r g , M. E., 248, 249 G o l d b e r g , S., 12 Gol ds tein, L., 234 Go od al l , J., 61 G o o d m a n , H., 234, 235 G o o d m a n , M. E., 204 G o r n , G. J., 248, 249 Got tl ieb, G., 39, 41, 42, 46 Gottlieb, J.. 119, 126, 127, 234, 235, 241, 246 Graffi, S., 119, 120, 121 G r a h a m , D. L. R., 19, 20 G r a n t , K. E., 159 Graves, S. B., 248, 250

324

A U T H O R INDEX

G r e e n , J., 227 G re e nf i e l d , P. M., 44, 45 G r oc e, N. E., 91 G r o o m , J. M., 123, 124, 126, 128, 236 Gr us ec, J. E., 58 Gur al ni ck , M. J., 123, 124, 126, 128, 236

H H ag a n , R., 154 H a id e r, S., 237, 240, 245 Haller, J. S., Jr., 139 Haller, R. M., 139 H a l l i n a n, M. T., 86, 87 H a m i l t o n , D. L., 9, 12 H a m i l t o n , W. D., 53, 54, 55 H a n d l e r s , A., 252 H a r d i n g , V., 172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 182 Harris, J. R., 263, 268 H a r r i s o n , R., 234, 235 H ar t , D., 57, 144 H a r t er , S., 158 H a r t u p , W. W., 268 Harvey, O. J., 75, 220 Haskins, R., 205 Hass, R. G., 283, 284 H au c k, W. E., 201, 202 H a y d e n - T h o m s o n , L., 165 Heal. L. W., 119, 121 Hegart y, P.. 282 Heise-Neff, C., 234, 235 Heller, M., 189 H e l m r e i c h , R. L.. 158, 159 H e m p h i l l , L., 120, 122 H e n n i g a n , K., 240, 244 H e n n i g e s , M.. 100 H e p b u r n , C., 77 H e r m a n , B. E., 227 H e r n a n d e z , R., 149, 150 H er t el , R.. 237 H e t h e r i n g t o n , E. M., 58 Higgins, P. C., 92 H i n d e , R. A., 50, 61 H o d a p p , R. M., 111, 112 H o f f m a n , C. D., 227 H o f f m a n , M. A., 100 H o l d e n , G. W., 155, 156 H o o d , W. R., 75, 220 H o o v e r , R., 202 H o r n e y , K., 67 H o r s m a n , K. R., 252

H o u s e r , B. B., 248, 249 Il owe , J. R., 134, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 Hoz a, B., 167, 168 Hr dy, S. B., 54 H u m p h r i e s , T., 91, 92, 94, 97 H u n s b e r g e r , B., 274, 275, 277 H u n t e r , S. M., 165, 166, 211 Hus, Y., 103, 104 H u s t o n , A. C., 145, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 157,158 H yme l, S., 165

I Imai. S., 204, 205, 206 Iovini, )., 265 Irwin, G. J., 51, 55, 67, 68 Isaacs, H. R., 16, 17, 18, 19

J Jacklin, C. N., 165 Janis, I. L., 251 Jarrett, O. S., 209, 210 Jeffrey, J. J., 134, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 Jeffrey, K. M., 251 J e nk in s, J. R„ 236, 237 Jewell, M., 237 J o h n s o n, B. T., 9 J o h n s o n , D. W.. 124, 126, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 244, 245, 246, 247 J o h n s o n , R. T., 124, 126, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 244, 245, 246, 247 J o h n s t o n , D., 274 Jolly, A., 60 Jones, E. E., 102 Jost, J. T., 283

K Ka nde l, D. B., 268 K a n n e r . L., 112, 114 K a n u n g o , R. N., 248, 249 Karlins, M., 9, 10 Karnes, M. D., 232 Katz, D., 255, 256 Katz, I.. 14, 15, 34, 85, 86, 283, 284

325

A U T H O R INDEX

Kat/., P. A., 84, 85, 86, 148, 157, 161, 201, 239, 240, 243, 244, 256, 257 Ka u f ma n , M. J., 241, 246 Kawakami, K., 239 Ke n n e dy , P., 100, 101, 102, 103, 104 Kerig, P. K., 149 Kerr, \1. M., 118 Kiger, G., 251, 254 King, B. T., 251 Kirkpatrick, L. E., 276 Knobel, D. T., 7 K o c h m a n , T., 189 Kohlbe rg, L., 144 Koslin, S., 227 Krant/., D., 57 Krantz, M., 207 Kraus, S., 248, 249 K ro n s be rg , S., 154 K uh n, D., 160

L Lachat, M., 223, 227 L ad d , G., 105, 106 L a Fr en i er e, P.. 165 L a m b , B. C., 63 L a m b , M. E., 155, 156 L a m m e r s , C. A., 233, 234 l .ane, H., 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 La nge , L., 27 L a n ge r , E. J., 256, 257 Langlois, J. II., 207 La Piere, R. T., 7 Laythe, B., 276 Lazar, A. L., 238 Lea, M., 268 Lears, M., 148 L e d e r b e r g , A. R., 101 Lee, R. C., 232 Leidy, T. R., 248 L e i n ba c h, M. D., 150, 154 L er n er, G., 27, 28, 29 Lever, J., 62 Levin, S., 282 Levinson, D. J., 23, 24, 254, 265, 277, 286 Levy, G. D., 157 Levy-Shiff, R., 100 Lewin, K., 38, 223, 224 L iben, L. S., 13, 157 L i e b e r m a n , L., 237

L i e b e r m a n , M., 144 L i e b e n , R. M., 248 Lindsay, P. H., 102 Liss, M. B., 158 Liu, J. H., 281, 282 Lobel, T. E., 163 Locksley, A., 77 L o m b a r d i , D. N., 227 L o rb e r, D., 57 Lou, M. W., 93, 94, 95, 96 L u m s d e n , G. J., 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 56 Lytton, II., 149

M Maccoby, E. E., 165, 167 M a c D o n a l d , C., 234, 235 M a d d e n , N. A., 269 Maleint, G., 148 Malle, B. F., 281, 282 M a n n , L., 95, 251 Ma rg cr , M. N., 6, 22, 31, 32 Ma rg o, B. C., 252 Ma r ks tr om- Ad a ms, C., 86 Marsh, V., 252 Ma rt i n , C. L., 162, 163 Mar tinez, L., 284 Ma r ti n o , L., 240, 246 Ma r uy a ma , G., 237, 241, 242, 244, 245, 247 Massad, C. M., 158, 159 Mayr, E., 51 McCauley, C., 11 McCauley, D. E., 63 McCauley, R. W., 100, 101, 102, 103, 104 McCl int ock, C. M., 255, 256 M c C o n n e ll , S. R., 86, 87, 88 Mc Gu i re , W. J., 84, 251 M c Ha l e, S. M., 150, 151 McKinney, J. D., 248, 249, 250 McKirdy, L. S., 103 Mc Whir t, W. J., 227 Meier, A., 172, 173, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182 M e n d e l s o n , M . J . , 268 M e nd io l a, S., 284 M e t a m a , H., 61 Mi lgram, S., 278 Miller, J., 105, 106 Miller, M., 233, 234 Miller, N., 240, 244

326

A U T H O R INDEX

Mills, P. E., ‘2 36 Mil ner, D., 4, 7, 8, 9 M i n n e s , P. M., 119, 120, 121 Mitchell, F. G., 200 M o o r e , J. W., 201, 202 Moor es, D. F., 91, 93, 96, 97 M o r l a n d . J. K., 85, 199, 201, 202 M o s h e r , D. L., 264 M p o n g o , E., 61 M u n s o n , H., 105, 106 M u r t a u g h , M., 125 Musselin an, C. R., 102

N Nas h, G. B., 134, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 Nash, S. C., 160 N e w c om b, A. F., 167, 168, 268 N e w c o m b e , N., 265 N o r t h c o t t , W., 103, 104 Norvell, N., 222

o O ’Brien, M., 150, 157, 158 O Bryan, M. C., 267 O d o m , S. L., 86, 87, 88, 236, 237 O h l s e n , R., 233, 234 Oickle, E., 241, 244 O r p e t , R. E., 238 Ortiz, V., 77 O wus u, V., 277

P P a d d e n , C., 91, 92, 94, 97 Padilla, A. M., 84, 85 Parish, J., 233, 234 Parish, T., 233, 234 Pasanella, A. L., 112, 118 Passin, H., 16, 17 Pa ste rna ck, J. F., 149, 150 P a t c h e n , M., 202, 208, 209, 211, 255, 256 P a t te r so n, C. J., 152, 153 Pa tt on , J. R., 111, 112 Paul, P. V., 92, 96, 97 Payne, J. S.. 111, 112 Pe nt a , J. B., 238 Perry-Jenkins, M., 151

Pervin, L. A., 272 Peters, W., 251, 253 Pe te rs e n, A. C., 159 Pettigrew, T. F., 229, 242, 245 Phillips, E. L., 255 P hi nn e y, J. S., 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 205 Piaget, J., 32, 57, 73, 74, 188 Pierce, A., 61 Piliavin, J. A., 269, 271 Pious, C. G., 237 P l om i n , R., 46, 47, 263, 279, 298 Polley, C. F., III, 274 P o m e r a n t z , E., 57 P o m c r l e a u , A., 148 Po rt er , J. D. R., 204 Po rt er , J. R., 160 Pratt o, F., 280, 281, 282, 283, 287 P r e st on , J. I)., 222

Q Qualls, R. C., 202 Quay, L. C., 209, 210 Quigley, S. P., 92, 96, 97

R Rabinowitz, J., 282 Rapier, .]., 234, 235 Rawlings, E. I., 19, 20 Reynolds, V., 55 Richards, C. M., 63 Richey, D. D., 233, 234 Riss, D., 61 Ritchey, P. N., 267, 270, 271, 274, 277, 278, 282, 284 Rob b i ns, B. L., 101 Rober ts , C., 126, 127, 234, 235 R o b i ns o n, J. W., 222 Rogers, M., 240, 244 R o m ne y , D. M., 149 R o o p n a r i n c , J. L., 155 Rosen, L. A., 232 Rosenfiel d, D., 241, 244, 245 Ross, J. M., 273, 274 Rossi, A. S., 48 Rotat ori , A. F., 112 R o t h e r a m , M . J . , 187, 188, 189, 190, 205 R o t h e r a m- B o r u s , M . J . , 190, 191

327

A U T H O R INDEX

Roth m a n , Ci., 105 R ub in, I. M., 254, 255, 256 R ub in, K. H., 165 Rudwick, E., 172, 173, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182 Ruiz, R. A., 84, 85 Ryan. H. B.. 101 Ryan, M. P., 28, 134, 135 Rynder s, J. E., 124, 126, 240, 247 Ryndcr s, R., 237, 240, 245

S Sacks, O., 91 Safford, P. L., 232 Sagar, H. A., 206 St. J o h n , N. H., 229 S a n f or d, R. N., 23, 24, 254, 265, 277, 286 Sarnoff, I.. 255, 256 Savin-Williams, R. C., 268 Scarr, S., 46 S c h e h r , T. L., 202 Sc hl esi nger , H., 97 Sc h mi d t, B., 124, 126, 237, 240, 245, 247 Schofield, J. W., 206, 207, 223 Schut z, H., 8 S c h w e n n , J. D., 112 Scodel , A., 264 Scott, I.., 242 Scdlick, M., 238 Se i dn e r, J., 227 S e l m a n , R. L., 104, 144 Semaj , L., 202 S e m m e l , M. I., 126, 127 Se rbi n, L. A., 157 Seyfarth, R. M., 51 S ha p ir o , H., 179, 180 Shaw, M., 227, 230 S h e a r e, J. B., 234, 235 S h e e r e r , E. T., 255, 256 Sherif, C. W., 75, 220 Sherif, M., 75, 220 Sherrill, C., 234 Sh ih, M., 282 S h o k c n - To p a z , T., 163 S h r u m , W., 164, 166, 211 Sidanius, )., 280, 281, 282, 283, 287 Siegal, M., 149 Si ge lma n, C. K., 120

Signorielli, N., 148, 157 Sikes, J., 241, 244, 245 Si l verman, I., 227, 230 Sim o n , T., 115 Singer, D., 227, 230 Sin gl e to n , L. C., 204, 205, 206, 209, 210 Siperstei n, G. N\, 120, 121, 122, 128, 129 Six, B., 8 Slavin, R. E., 222, 238, 241, 244, 217, 269 Sluckin, A. M., 72, 73 S m e t a n a , J. G., 57, 158 S m i t h , G. J., 207 Smi th , J. M., 234 Smi th , P. K., 72, 73 Snyder , L., 237 So de r, M., 85 S o h n , M., 84, 85 Sparks, C., 206 S p e c l m a n , D., 227 Spelts, M. L., 236, 237 S p e nc e , J. T., 158, 159 S p e n c e r , M. B., 86, 265, 269, 271 S pe r o , J., 210, 212 Sprafkin, C., 157 Sprafkin, J., 248 Stager, S. F., 126, 129 Stallworth, I.. M., 281, 282 Stegelin, D., 204 S t e m m i e r , M., 159 S t e p h a n , C., 63, 241, 244, 245 S t e p h a n , W. G., 8, 32, 63, 227, 228, 251, 260 Stevens, N., 268 St evenson, H. W., 204 St evenson, M. R., 152 St evenson, N. G., 204 Stitt, C. L., 1 1 S t o n e m a n , Z., 59 St ot la nd , E., 255, 256 Strain, P. S., 118, 126 Strayer, F. F., 70, 73, 74, 165 S t r u m , S. C., 51 Sullivan, H. S., 67 Switsky, H. N., 119

T Tajfel, H., 76, 77 Tawney, J. W., 232 Taylor, A. R., 126, 127, 234, 235, 238

328

A U T H O R INDEX

Taylor, M. C., 259 Terry, R., 87, 88 T h o m p s o n , D. B., 63 T h o m p s o n , E. P., 283 Thr all , P. H., 63 T i n d a l e, N. B., 54 T o n n e s m a n n , W., 69 T o ob y, J., 49, 5 1 T r em b l a y , A., 101 T r e n t , R., 255 T ro lie r, T. K., 9, 12 T r o p p , L. R., 242, 245 T r u d e l , M., 70, 73, 74 Tur ici , E., 57, 144 T u r n b u l l , A. P., 232 T u r n b u l l , C. M., 285 T u r n e r , J. C., 76, 77

u UIlian, D. Z., 144

V Van B o u r g o n d i e n , M. E., 121, 122 Vandell , D. L., 100, 101 Van d e n B e r gh e, P. L., 68, 69 V a n d e r c o o k , T., 234, 235 V a u g h n , B. E., 207 V a u g h n , G. M., 188, 191, 192 V e l d m a n , D. J.. 126, 127 Voeltz, L. M., 119, 121 V o l k m o n , G. B., 112, 118

w W a d d i n g t o n , C. H., 32, 39, 40, 41, 55, 56, 57 W a ga t s u ma , II., 16, 17, 18, 19 Wa l k e r d i n e , V., 29, 30, 142 Wallin, J. E. W., 112 Walters, G., 9, 10 Wa r ri ng , D., 241, 242, 244, 245, 247 Wa tso n, M. W., 73, 74 We bs t er , S. W., 227

Weigel, R. H., 240, 243, 244, 245 W e i n e r , M . J . , 253 We is ne r, T. S., 151 Wcstervclt, V. D., 248, 249, 250 Whi te, B. J., 75, 220 Whitley, B. E., Jr., 281, 282 W h i t m o r e , P. G., 227 Wicker, A. W., 7 Wi l d e rs o n , F., 241, 242, 244, 246, 247 Williams, G. A., 126, 127, 234, 235, 238 Williams, J. E., 85, 199, 201, 202, 227 Williams, S. M., 103, 104 Wilson, A. K., 102 Wilson, E. O., 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 53, 54, 56 Wilson, K. S., 100, 101 Wilson, R., 46 Wilson-Mitchell, J. E., 151 Wi n k le r, A. M., 134, 172, 173, 174, 175, 177, 178, 1 7 9 , 1 8 0 , 181 Wiser, P. L., 240, 243, 244, 245 Wi t h n o w, R.. 269, 271 Wolchik, S. A., 149, 150 W o l f en s be r ge r, W., 113, 114 W or c h el , S., 222 W r a n g h a m , R. W., 49, 51, 60, 61, 62 Wright, B. D., 227 Wr i g ht , F. E., 252, 253 Wylie, L., 276 Wylie, R. E., 236

Y Yee, M. D., 70, 71, 77 York, J., 119, 121, 234, 235 Yo ung, L., 129, 203 Yo ung, R. D., 126

Z Zalk, S. R., 84, 85, 161, 201, 239, 240, 243, 244, 256, 257 Za rba ta ny, L., 128 Z e t li n , A. G., 125 Ziegler, S., 240, 243, 244 Zigler, E., I l l , 112 Zubr ick, S., 126, 127, 234, 235

S u b je c t I n d e x

A A c ad e mi c p e r f o r m a n c e , 2 3 6- 2 3 7 a n d social a c ce p t a n c e , 2 1 0- 2 13 Activity p r e f e r e n c e scales, 2 2 4 - 2 2 5 A d o p t i o n design ( m e t h o d o l o g y ) , 4 6 - 47 African A me ri ca n s , see also Blacks; Slavery cul tur al history, 172- 182, 192-195 rights, 176-178, 181, 195 “divided c o nsc io u sn ess ,” 191 Age-related di f f er en c es in p r e j u d i c e and d is c ri mi na t io n, 213, 221 Aggression, see also Hostility a u t h o r i t a r i a n , 27 7- 27 8 a n d socialization o f sex-typing, 154-155 Aggressor, identi ficati on with, 19 A I D S / H I V , p re j ud ic e against p e o p l e with, 267 Altruism, 55 Ambivalence, 15, 86 A m e ri c a n Association on Me nt al Deficiency (AAMD), 116 A m e r i c a n Sign L a n g u a g e (ASL), 9 4- 95 , 9 7 - 9 8, see also Signing Ame r ic an s, most f r e q u en tl y cited s t e re o ­ types for, 10 Anti-Semitism, 23 - 25 Apes, see also P r ima te h e ri ta g e a n d i n t e r g r o u p hostility, 60 -6 3

O l d Wor ld m o nk e ys a n d , 49-51 Attitudes, 4, 84, see also Beliefs affective d i m e n s i o n , 4 unreasonable, 6 A u th o r i t a r i a n a ggressi on, 2 7 7 - 2 7 8 A u t h o r it a ri a n personality, 2 3- 26 , 3 4- 35 , 265 Authoritarian Personality, The ( A d o r n o ct al.), 2 3 - 2 6, 254 criticisms of, 2 5 - 2 6 Authoritarian Specter, The (Alt emeyer), 2 7 7 - 28 0 A ut h o r i ta r ia n submi ss i on , 277 A u t h o r it a ri a ni sm , right-wing, 26-27, 2 76 - 28 0 , 2 86 - 28 7 Authorit y, 56 Au t ho r i t y a c cc p t a n c e , 5 7 - 5 9, 80, 2 9 2 - 2 9 3 Aut ho r ity -b ea ri n g systems, 5 5 - 5 9

B B adgi ng, 67, 129, 214, 292 B a dg ing m e ch a n i s m s , 66, 9 8 - 9 9, 236 Base rate o f k n o wl e dg e a b o u t a g r o u p , 11-12

Bayes’ Rule, 12 Behavioral role, 73 Belief a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f ideas, 59

329

330

SUBJECT INDEX

Beliefs, 84 cognitive d i m e n s i o n s of, 3 Bicultural socialization, 191 Bilingualism in d e a f c h il d r e n , 98 Black i n t o n a t i o n , 188-189 Blacks, see also African Americans; Slavery d o m i n a n t feelings o f Whites toward, 15 mo st fr e q u e n tl y cited st ereotypes for, 10 Blindness, 2 5 2 -2 5 3 B o u n d a r y m a i n t a i n i n g m a rk e rs , 189-190 Brown v. Board o f Education, 182-185, 220, 225

C Can alization , 40-41, 46 of beh avi or , e xper ie nti al , 41 Caste systems, 16-17 Castes, s c h e d u l e d , 17 C at ego ri zat ion , 5, 12 psychological c o n s e q u e n c e s , 12-13 Centrality of beliefs, 3 Christianity, pa tri a rc hy a n d the historical roots of, 27 Christianization o f Blacks, 19 Cognitive dis so na nc e, 14-15 Colon izati on p e r i o d (1 6 0 7 - 1 7 7 0 ) , 135, 173-174, 290 Col or M e a n in g Test (C M T ), 199-200, 203 “C o lo r in g test,” 184 C o m m u n i t y s a nc tio n, 2 2 2 -2 2 3 , 237 C o m p e t i t i o n , g r o u p , 75, 77-78 Com pe tit ive studies, 247 Conservatism, political a n d e c o n o m i c , 24 -2 5 C o n t a c t Th e ory , 2 22 -2 23, 231, 23 7- 23 8, 247, 2 5 0 -2 5 1 , 253, 258, 260 C o n t a m i n a t i o n , fear of, 17-18 C o n v e n t i o n a l i s m . 277-2 78 Cooperation de fi n e d , 223 a n d g r o u p identity, 221, 223 C o o pe r at iv e in te ra ct io n, 231, 2 37-2 39 , 261 studies on, 239- 242 a n d di s cr im in a ti o n toward th e dis­ ab led , 24 5-2 47 an d racial a n d e th n ic p re ju d ic e a n d discrimination, 242-245

C o u n c i l for Ex c e p ti o n a l C h il d rt rn (CEC), 116 C ultu ra l c h a n g e , 290-291 Cultu ra l n o r m s , historical evolution of, 32 Cultu ra l sociogenetic system (CS-G system), 5 5 -5 6 Culturally le a r n e d be hav ior , types of, 42 C u lt u re , see also specific topics m e a n i n g o f the t e r m , 53

D Darwinian fitness, 64-65 D e a f c hi ld re n e d u c a t i o n a l history of A m e ri c a n , 90 -9 8, 108, 192-195 bilingualism, 98 oral m e t h o d s , 9 3 -9 7 “e x c e p t i o n a l , ” 106 friend sh ips , 103-107 schools for A m e ri c a n , 94, 105- 107 D e a f individuals, d is cr im in a tio n toward, 214 - 216 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 98 -1 0 8 Deafness, n a t u r e of, 9 2 -9 3 D e h u m a n i z a t i o n , 16 De institutionalization, 1 17 D ep res si on, types of, 159 Descartes, R e n e , 59 D es e gr e ga ti on, 2 25 -2 26 , 259, see also Segre ­ gation de fi n e d , 229 studies o n , 2 26 -2 30 types of, 229 Different and the Same (video), 250 Disabled pe rs on s, see also D e a f c hild re n are n o t d e val ue d, 85 av oid anc e a n d patroni/.ation of, 15 dis crim in at io n toward c oop er ativ e in te ra ctio n a n d , 2 45 -2 47 m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c on si de ra tio ns , 86 -8 9 pre j u d i c e against, 84 -8 6 Dis crim ina tio n, see also Prejud ice a n d dis­ crim in a ti o n ; specific topics de f in e d , 6-7 , 33, 86 justifying, 14—15 m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n s id e ra ti o n s in assess­ ing, 8 6 -8 9 , see also Meas ures of p re j­ udice a n d discri min at ion Dissonance, cognitive, 14-15

331

SUBJECT INDEX

Doll test, 183-185, 187-188, 266 D o m i n a n c e , 22, see also Social d o m i n a n c e o r i e nt a t i o n d e f in e d, 50 s u p p o r t for g r o u p- b as e d, 283 D o m i n a n c e hie ra rc hi es , 5 0 - 5 1 , 76, see also Status di f fer ences D o m i n a n t a n d s u b o r d i n a t e g r ou ps , 2 8 8- 2 90 Down S y n d r o m e , 121-122, 124

E E a r n e d r e p u t a t i o n , e m p h a s i s o n, 2 1- 2 2 E c o n o m i c c o m p e t i t i o n , 194 E d u c a t i o n , 26, 93, 136, 178, 194, 232, see also u nder D e a f c h i l d r en ; Me nt al r e ta r da t io n E d u ca t io n for All H a n d i c a p p e d C h il d r e n Act, 117, 232 Egalitarianism, see H u m an it a ri a n- eg a li ta r ia n at tit udes E mp a th y , 238, 254, 258, see also Roleplaying si mul at ions E n cu l t u r a t i o n , 42 Equality, see also H u ma n it a ri a n- eg a li ta r ia n at tit udes o pp o s i t i o n to, 283 for w o m e n , 136, 140 Equity theory, 7 7 - 78 E t h n i c awareness, 187 d e f i n e d , 186 E t h n i c g r o up s , d e f i n e d , 186 E thni c identity d e f i n e d , 186 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 185-192 Et h ni c m a rk e rs , 6 8- 69 E t h n i c p r e f e r e n c e , see Racial a n d e t hn ic p r ef e r e n c e s E t h n o c e n t r i s m , 2 4- 25, 55, 265 E uge ni cs , 114-116 Evol ut ionar y causes, see also Darwinian fitness; G c n c t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y p r ed i s­ posi t ions u lt ima te vs. p r o x i m a t e , 51 E xc ept ions , 289 E x p a n s i o n a n d Civil Wa r p e r i o d ( 1 8 2 5 - 18 6 5 ) , 136- 138, 1 75- 177 Expressive intensity, 188-189

F F scalc ( Pot ent ial f or Fascism Scale), 24-26 Families, see also P a r e nt s c o n v en t i o n a l , 151 Family type, a n d socialization o f sex-typing, 151-154 Fascism, see F' scale Fear o f c o n t a m i n a t i o n , 17-18 Females, see also Opposit e-sex d i s c ri m i na ­ tion; Sex-typing; W o m e n b r e e d in t heir n at al g r o u p , 61 r ole in A m e ri c a n society, cul tur al history of, 134- 142, 192-195 Femi ni sm, 28, 137-138, 140 F o r c e d / f i x e d c ho ic e mat er ial s a n d m e t h ­ ods, 85, 87 Free c hoi ce a ssessment p r o c e d u r e s , 87 F ri ends , see also P e e r i n f l ue nc es o n p r e j u ­ dice best, 204, 2 11 - 21 2 Fr iendships, 125, 128 o f d e a f c h i l d r e n , 103-107 s a m e -v s . opposite-sex, 166-168 types of, 124, 270 F u n d a m e n t a l i s m , religious, 2 7 5 - 2 7 6

G Gal l a ud e t, T h o m a s H., 9 3- 9 5 G e n d e r identity, 150 a n d s elf-perception, 145-147 G e n d e r p r e f e r en ce s , attitudes, a n d values, 1 45-147, see also Opposi te-sex dis­ c r i mi na t io n ; Sex-typing racial a n d , 211 G e n d e r - r e l a t e d be ha vi or al e n a c t m e n t a n d a d o p t i o n , 145-147 G en e- c ul t u r e c oe vol ut ion, circuit o f c au s a ­ tion in, 4 2- 44 G e n e flow, 6 5 - 6 7 Genes, M in d , a n d C ulture ( L u m s d e n &: Wil­ s o n ) , 4 1- 4 4 G e n e ti c drift, 6 5 - 66 G e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y pre di s po si ti on s , 32, 35, 53, 63, 80, 119, 143-144, 2 9 2 - 29 3 to right-wing a u th o r i t a r i a n i s m , 2 7 9 - 28 0 G e n e ti c fitness, 44

332

S U B J E C T I ND EX

Genet i cs, be havi or , 4 6 - 4 7, 80 G en o ty pe s , 3 1- 3 2 G e r m a n s , m o s t f r e q u en t ly cited stereotypes for, 10-11 G o d , viewed as ma sc u l in e, 27 Grandi osi ty, 25 G r e c o - R om a n i n f l u e nc e on status o f w o m e n , 2 7- 28 G r o u p b e l o n gi n g n e ss , 224 G r o u p e x p e r i m e n t s , “m i n i m a l , ” 7 6- 7 7 G r o u p ident ifi cat ion, g e n d e r di ff er ences in, 62 G r o u p identity, d e v e l o p m e n t of, 6 9 - 7 4 G r o u p i dentity f o r m a t i o n , 77, see also C o o p ­ e ra ti o n G r o u p m e m b e r s h i p , see I n g r o u p - o u t g r o u p c o m p a ri s o n s ; O u t g r o u p attractive­ ness G r o u p s , s t r u c t u r e a n d f u n c t i o n i n g of, 6 0- 6 2

I n d i vi d ua t i on , 254, 262 d e f i n e d , 254 o f o t he rs , 2 56 -2 58 a n d self-acceptance, 2 5 4 - 2 5 5 res ear ch o n adults, 2 5 5- 2 56 r e se ar ch o n c h i l d r e n , 255 I n g r o u p favoritism, 129, 220, 236 I n g r o u p - o u t g r o u p c o mp a ri so n s, 12-13 I n te gr at io n, racial, 229, see also D e s e gr e ga ­ tion Int el ligence q u o t i e n t ( I Q ), 26, 115 I n te r ac t io n (s) d e f i n e d , 238, see also C o o p e ra t i v e i nt er ac ­ tion friendly c ont a ct s vs. unf r ie nd ly , 2 0 8- 20 9 I n t e r g r o u p anxiety, 63 I n t e r g r o u p b ehavi or , 74-78 I n t e r g r o u p hostility, 6 0 - 6 3 , 77, 81 I n t e r g r o u p rel at ionships, 61 I nt er r acial a vo id an ce , 2 08 - 20 9 I n t i m a t e c o nt ac t , 237, 247

H H e a r i n g aids, 100 Historical i nf luences, e m p h a s i s o n, 21- 22 H I V / A I D S , p r e j u di c e against p e o p l e with, 267 H ol oc au st , 23 H o m o s e x u a l p ar en t s, 152-153 H o m o s e x u a l p r e j ud i c e , 2 74 - 27 6 , 284 H os ta ge s , b o n d i n g with c apt or s, 19-20 Hostility, see also Aggression i n t e r g r o u p , 6 0- 63 , 77, 81 o u t g r o u p , 293 H u m a ni t a r i a n -e ga l i t a r i a n at titudes, 2 83 - 28 5 , 287 H u n t e r - g a t h e r e r he ri ta ge , 5 1 - 5 3 H u n t c r - g a t h e r c r mi nd s, 78 - 80 in p os ti ndus t r ial bodi es, 48-51

J J a p a n , u n t o u c h a b l e status in, 16-18 Jews, see also H o lo c au s t anti-Semitism, 2 3- 2 5 m o s t f r eq ue nt ly citcd stereot ypes for, 10 J o s e p h P. Ke n ne d y, Jr. F o u n d a t i o n , 116 J u d a i s m , pa tr ia rc hy a n d the historical roots of, 27

K K no w le dg e st ruct ur es , 44

I L I dent i f icat ion with t he aggressor, 19 I n b r e e d i n g d ep r e ss io n, 54, 64 Inclusive e d u c a t i o n , 232 Inclusive fitness, 5 3 - 5 5, 66, 81, 283 I ndia, u n t o u c h a b l e status in, 16-18 I nd iv i du a ti n g i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t g r o u p m e m b e r s , 11-12

Law, c h a n g c s in, 195, 299, see also specific topics Lewinian T h e or y , 2 23 - 22 4 , 2 31 - 23 2 , 238, 2 4 7 - 24 8 , 251, 254, 258, 260-261 L o n e males, 60-61

333

SUBJECT INDEX

M M a i n st r ea m in g, 98, 117-118, 127, 2 32 - 23 3 , 259- 261, see also De af individuals, dis­ c r i mi n a t i o n toward, d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r e j u d i ce a n d d is c ri mi n a t i on studies, 233-236 social a n d a c a de m i c skill studies, 2 36 - 2 3 7 M a r t h a ’s Vineyard, 9 1- 9 2 Mayan cultures, 44 Me as u r e s o f p r e j u d i c e a n d di sc ri mi na ti on , 5, 2 2 1 - 2 22 , 2 2 4 - 2 2 5 Medi a, a n d p r e j u d i c e a n d di s cr iminati on r e d u c t i o n , 2 48 - 25 0 , 261 Me nt al r e ta r da t io n causes, 111-112 d is c r imi n at io n toward p e o p l e with, 2 1 4 - 21 8 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 123-131 e d u c a t i o n a l history o f A m e r i c a n c hi ld re n with, 111-118, 192-195 i n c i d e nc e , 111 p r e j u d i ce towar d p e o p l e with, 2 14 -2 18 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 118-123 "Mis identi fi cat ion” (racial identity d e v e lo p ­ m e n t ) , 187-188 M o d e l i n g be ha vi or , c h i l d r e n ’s, 5 8 - 5 9 Moral inferiority, beliefs a b o u t , 14, 17 Moral values, 5 6- 5 7 More Than Meets the Eye ( c u r r i c u l u m ) , 257 M u l t i g r ou p m e m b e r s h i p , 69

N Na t i on a l Association for R e t a rd e d C h i l d r e n , 116 Na t i on a l Association for t he A d v a n c e m e n t o f C o l o r e d P e o pl e (NAACP), 179-181 Nat io na l T e c h n i c a l Institute f or t he Deaf ( N T I D ) , 1 0 5 - 10 6 Nature o f Prejudice, The ( Allport), 2 - 3 Netsilik Eskimos, 55 N or ma t iv e theori es, 22

O O b e d i e n c e to aut hor it y, 5 7- 58 , see also A u ­ thority a c c c p t an c c O n e i d a C o m m u n i t y , 136-137

Opposit c-scx di s cr i m i na t i on , 2 13 - 21 6 , see also Femal es; G e n d e r p r e fe r en ce s ; Sex-typing c oo per ati ve i nt er ac ti on a n d , 242 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 164-168 Opposi te- sex p r e j ud ic e , 2 1 3 - 2 16 , 284 a n t e c e d e n t s , 142-143 c oo p e ra t i v e int er ac ti on a n d , 242 cul tur al n o r m s a n d , 144-145 development of d i re ct me a s ur e s, 159-164 i nd i re ct me as u r es , 156-159 g e n e t i c / e v o l u t i o n a r y predi sposi t ions, 143-144 O u t g r o u p attractiveness, 53, 6 3- 67, 220, 293

P P a re n t a l in fl ue n c es o n p r e j ud ic e , 26 4 - 2 6 8, 29 8 -2 9 9 Parents, see also Families h o m o s e x u a l , 152- 153 socialization o f sex-typing, 148-151 Patriarchy, a n d fe ma le socialization, 27-31 P e e r assessments, 8 8 - 89 P e e r i nf lue nc es on p r e j u d i c e , 26 8- 27 1, 2 9 8 - 29 9 socialization o f sex-typing, 154-156 P e e r ratings, 8 7 - 88 Pe rs o n a l At tr ibutes Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (PAQ) , 1 58-159 Personality, de fi ni t i on s of, 272 Personality in fl ue nc es o n p r e j ud ic e , 272, 2 9 8 - 2 9 9, see also specific personality factors P h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l i nf luences, e m p h a s i s on,

21 P he no t yp e s , 31 Pluralism, 193 Postwar Gr owt h a n d C h a n g e p e r i o d (1945 to p r e s e n t ) , 140-142, 180- 181, 290 Power-conflict theories, 22, see also D o m i ­ n a n c e ; Status di ff er ences Pr ej ud i ce , see also specific topics a n d b ehavi or , 7 - 8 , 3 3 - 3 4 definitions, 3 -6 essential i ng r ed ie n t s, 2 m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e ra t io n s in assess­ ing, 8 4 - 8 6 o r d i n a r y p r e j u d g m e n t s vs., 2 - 3

334

S U B J E C T I ND EX

P r c ju di cc a n d d is c ri mi na t io n , see also specific topics causes, see also A u t h o r it a r i a n per sonal ity individual a n d c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l influ­ enc es , 2 0 - 2 3 , 8 9 - 9 0 , 119 p r e s e n t t h e or et i c al view, 3 1 - 33 d e v e l o p m e n t , 2 94 - 29 6 m o d i f y i n g / r e d u c i n g , 2 2 1 - 2 2 2 , 2 96 - 30 0 , see also specific topics m u l ti p l e factor a p p r o a c h to, 2 58 - 26 0 r el at i on sh ip b et we e n, 7 o f t arget g r o up s , c o m p a r i s o n of, 2 1 3 - 2 1 6 Prejudice and Your Child ( Cl ark), 183 Pr e s c h o o l Racial Att itu de Me as u r e , S e c on d Version ( PR A M II), 85, 199, 2 0 2 - 20 3 , 265, 266 Pr i ma te he ri ta ge , 4 8- 49 , see also Apes Projective Prejudice Test, 85 Prosperity, Dep re ssi on , a n d Wor ld War II p e r i o d (1920-1945), 139-140, 179-180 Ps y cho dy na mi c i nf luences, e m p h a s i s on, 21-22

R e c o ns t r u c t i o n , W o r l d W a r I, a n d Suffrage p e r i o d (1865-1920), 138-139, 177- 179 Re g ul a r e d u c a t i o n initiative, 232 Rejection, feeling of, 15 Religion, see also Christianity intrinsic vs. extrinsic o r i e n t a t i o n views of, 2 73 - 27 5 m e a n s a n d e n d s d i m e n s i o n s , 27 3- 27 4 Religious beliefs a n d practices, 5 - 6 , 17, 2 72 - 27 7 Religious q ue st , 2 7 3- 27 5 Revoluti on a n d C o n so l id a ti on p e r i o d ( 1 7 7 0 -1 8 2 5 ) , 135-136, 174-175 Right-wing a u th o r i t a r i a n i s m (RWA), 2 6- 27, 2 7 6 - 28 0 , 2 8 6 - 2 87 R o c he s t e r Institute o f T e c h n o l o g y (RIT), 105- 106 Role-playing si mul at ions, 2 5 1- 2 5 4 studies o n, 2 5 2 - 25 3 R o m a n i n f l u e n c e o n status o f w o m e n , 27-28 Roster-and-rating scales, 2 09 - 21 0 , 212

Psychological t he or i es , 22

s R Racial a n d e t h n i c d i sc r im in at io n, 2 1 3 - 21 8 co o pe ra ti ve i nt er ac ti on a n d , 2 42 -2 45 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 2 0 3 - 2 04 age-rel at ed di fferences, 213 beh av io ra l observations, 2 04 - 20 8 self-reports, 2 08 - 20 9 so ci ome tr ic e x p e r i m e n t s , 2 0 9 - 2 1 3 Racial a n d e t h n i c p r e f e r en ce s , 183-184, 204, 205, see also Racial a n d c t hn ic discrim ination d e f i ne d , 1 86 - 18 7 Racial a n d e t h n i c p r e j ud i c e , 2 1 3 - 21 8 c oo p e r at i ve i nt e ra c ti on a n d , 2 42 -2 45 d e f i ne d , 4 d e v e l o p m e n t of, 199-200 Black c h i l d r e n a n d a dol escents, 2 02 - 20 3 Wh i te c h i l d re n a n d a dol escent s, 200 -2 02

essentia] i ng r ed ie nt s, 2 Racial c ons tancy, 187-188, 192 Racial g r o up s , d e f in e d, 186 Reciprocal vs. unil at er al f ri en ds h i ps , 124

Salience o f beliefs, 3 Sc ap e g o a t i n g , 14 Se g r e g a t e d n e i g h b o r h o o d s , as safety nets, 18 S e g r eg a ti on , see also Brown v. Board o f E du­ cation-, D e scgr cga tio n racial seating, 206 same-sex, 167 Self, e g o - a l i e n / d e n i e d aspects of, 254 Self-acceptance, 2 5 4 - 2 5 6 d e f i n e d , 254 Self-advocacy by s u b o r d i n a t e g r o u p s , 291 Self-concept, 188 Self-esteem, d e f i n e d , 254 Self-individuation, 2 5 4- 2 56 Scx-rolc s t er eotypi ng, 160-161 Sex-typed constructs, 145-147 Sex-typed c o n t e n t , 145- 147 Sex-typing, see also Females; Opposit e-sex p r ej u d ic e d e f i ne d , 134 socialization of, 145-148 family type a n d , 151-154 p a r e n t s ’, 148-151 peers, t eachers, a n d , 154-156

335

SUBJECT INDEX

Sexuality, w o m e n ’s, 135, 137, 139-142, 152- 158 Shakers, 136 Si gning, see also A m e ri c a n Sign L a n g u a g e vs. oral m e t h o d s o f e d u c a t i o n , 93 “S i gn i n g ” c o m m u n i t i e s , 9 1- 9 2 Sit uat ional a n d p e r s on a l factors m e d i a t i n g be ha vi or , 7 - 8 Sit uat ional infl uences, e mp h a s i s o n, 21, 22 Slavery, African-American, 172-175 psychological c o n s e q u e n c e s , 19-20 Social di s ta nc e scale, 224, 249, 250 Social d o m i n a n c e o r i e n t a t i o n ( SDO) , 2 78 - 28 3 , 287, see also D o m i n a n c e Social l e a r ni n g theor y, 279 Social n e tw or k, 60 Social Psychology o f Prejudice, The ( Eh rl ic h) , 3 -4 Social role, 73 Sociobiology, 54 So ciocult ur al in f lue nc es , e m p h a s i s o n, 2 1- 22 S o c i o e c o n o m i c status (SES), 26 Special cases, 289 Spinoza, Be ne di c t de, 59 “S t a l k / a t t a c k , ” 6 1- 6 2 Status di fferences, 17, 22, 56, 59, 76, 231, see also Authority; C o n t a c t Th eo r y ; Dorn i n a n c e Stereotypes, 3- 4, 8 - 1 3 , 34, 63, 84 a n d deci si on m a k i ng , 12 def ini tions a n d m e a ni n gs , 8 - 9 m o s t f r e qu e nt l y cited, 9 - 1 0 sex-role, 160, see also Sex-typing Stigma, Notes on the M anagement o f Spoiled Identity ( G o f f m a n ) , 13 Stigmas, 1 3- 16, 34, 92 a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s o f b e i n g stigmatized, 16-19 S to c kh o lm S y n d r o m e , 19-20, 34 Subsi st ence g r o u p s , 52 Suffrage, 138-139, 177-178, 181 Sympathy, 15-16

T T e a c h e r n o m i n a t i o n s a n d t e a c h e r ratings, 88

T e a c h e r socialization o f sex-typing, 154- 156 “T er r it or i al d e f e n s e , ” 62 Te st i ng c o nt e x t , i m p a c t on e x p r e ss e d atti­ tudes, 85 T h r e a t t h e o ry o f p r e j ud ic e , i n t e gr at ed, 63 “T o u g h n e s s ” o f g r o u p m e m b e r s , p e rcei ved, 72 Tr i be m e m b e r s , 81, see also H u n t e r gatherer minds i dent ifi cati on of, 6 7- 69 Twin design ( m e t h o d o l o g y ) , 47

u U n d e r s t a n d i n g ideas, a n d (dis)believing t h e m , 59 U nt ou ch abi l i ty , 16-18, 34 e voluti on of, 17-18

V Values, 5 6- 57 , see also G e n d e r p r ef e re n ce s , at titudes, a n d values Vot ing rights, 138- 139, 177-178, 181

w W he e lc h ai r s, c h i l d r e n in, 250 W o m e n , see also Females; Oppos it e- sex p r e j­ udice collusion with ma le p e r p e t r a t o r s , 30 e m p l o y m e n t , 137-138, 140-142, 150-151 equality, 136, 140 rights, 13 4- 13 5, 138- 139 sexuality, 135, 137, 13 9- 14 2, 152- 153 t r ea te d as sex objects, 30-31 W o m e n ’s m o v e m e n t , 141, see also Fe minis m

Z Zi na ca nl e co s, 44 -4 5