The power of talk: developing discriminatory group norms through discussion.

نویسندگان

  • Laura G E Smith
  • Tom Postmes
چکیده

Research has shown that group discussion can increase intergroup prejudice and discrimination. However, we know little about the process by which discussion has this effect. Therefore, four studies were conducted in a real-world context to investigate this process. Results suggest that discussing a negative societal stereotype (relative to individual rumination in Studies 1 and 3 and alternative discussions in Studies 2 and 3) increases intentions to engage in discrimination against the out-group target of the stereotype. This is mediated by the formation of an in-group norm which supports discrimination (Study 1) and the extent to which the discussion validates the stereotype (Study 2). A fourth study manipulated the extent to which consensus on the negative stereotype was reached through discussion. When the discussion ended in consensus, participants have greater intention to undertake collective action against the stereotyped out-group, mediated by a congruent in-group norm. These results provide evidence that the process by which discussion increases intergroup discrimination is via the formation of discriminatory local group norms.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Reclaiming the Secular: Developing Dialogic Skills for a Post-Secular Society

This research paper addresses secularization from both political and religious perspectives. One of its manifestations in the political sphere is that of globalization that can lead to alienation within society; and in the United Kingdom this is exemplified by Brexit. Within the religious sphere secularization is usually couched in oppositional terms. This paper reclaims the original use ...

متن کامل

Not Up for Discussion: Applying Lukes’ Power Model to the Study of Health System Corruption; Comment on “We Need to Talk About Corruption in Health Systems”

This companion paper suggests the potential benefits of applying Steven Lukes’ dimensions of power model to the study of corruption in health systems. Lukes’ model sets out three “faces of power” classified by their influence on political discourse, resulting in overt, covert and latent discussion of issues depending on the degree of their alignment with the agenda of d...

متن کامل

Politics and Power in Global Health: The Constituting Role of Conflicts; Comment on “Navigating Between Stealth Advocacy and Unconscious Dogmatism: The Challenge of Researching the Norms, Politics and Power of Global Health”

In a recent article, Gorik Ooms has drawn attention to the normative underpinnings of the politics of global health. We claim that Ooms is indirectly submitting to a liberal conception of politics by framing the politics of global health as a question of individual morality. Drawing on the theoretical works of Chantal Mouffe, we introduce a conflictual concept of the political as an alternative...

متن کامل

Global Health Warning: Definitions Wield Power; Comment on “Navigating Between Stealth Advocacy and Unconscious Dogmatism: The Challenge of Researching the Norms, Politics and Power of Global Health”

Gorik Ooms recently made a strong case for considering the centrality of normative premises to analyzing and understanding the underappreciated importance of the nexus of politics, power and process in global health. This critical commentary raises serious questions for the practice and study of global health and global health governance. First and foremost, this commentary underlines the impor...

متن کامل

The Ghost Is the Machine: How Can We Visibilize the Unseen Norms and Power of Global Health?; Comment on “Navigating Between Stealth Advocacy and Unconscious Dogmatism: The Challenge of Researching the Norms, Politics and Power of Global Health”

In his recent commentary, Gorik Ooms argues that “denying that researchers, like all humans, have personal opinions … drives researchers’ personal opinion underground, turning global health science into unconscious dogmatism or stealth advocacy, avoiding the crucial debate about the politics and underlying normative premises of global health.” These ‘unconscious’ dimensions of global health are...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • The British journal of social psychology

دوره 50 Pt 2  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2011