The mutability of prejudicial attitudes can be elucidated by taking into account the declines in cognition that tend to emerge as we age. This study aimed to assess whether there is a relationship between prejudice towards different ethnic groups and cognitive flexibility throughout adulthood. Ninety-five older adults and 118 younger adults were asked to complete an electronic survey encompassing measures of cognitive flexibility, social desirability, personality, optimism, empathy, ethnic attachment and prejudice. It was hypothesized that older adults would report lower levels of cognitive flexibility and higher levels of ethnic attachment in comparison to younger adults, which would in turn make the inverse relationship between cognitive flexibility and prejudice stronger in older participants. The results did not support the hypotheses predicting that there would be cohort differences in cognitive flexibility and ethnic attachment. As expected, there was a negative correlation between prejudice and cognitive flexibility, but it was only significant in younger adults before controlling for the influence of social desirability. Additionally, regression models predicting prejudice based on cognitive flexibility and ethnic attachment were significant before and after controlling for social desirability, but only in younger adults. Exploratory analyses indicate that the strength of the correlations between all study variables were generally lower in older adults. The findings presented here raise an argument for evaluating how the interplay between prejudice and cognitive flexibility may change in the later stages of life.

We examined how social norms and confrontations by targets of prejudice influence opinions of gay rights. During an experimental discussion participants were assigned to a 2 (Target: gay target present vs. Christian non-target present) x 2 (Social Support: no group support vs. support from 3 confederates) design. Dependent variables included participants’ public votes on gay rights policies, private post-discussion attitudes, and post-discussion reactions toward the discussion. Results showed that participants exposed to a group showed greater public endorsement of gay-rights than those interacting with the target alone. Gay targets facilitated greater public advocacy for gay rights than Christian targets, despite reporting more negative reactions post-discussion. Overall, participants became more pro-gay rights after the discussion, regardless of condition. These results support the role of social norms in reducing prejudice but also suggest that, contrary to the self-interest rule, targets of prejudice may garner greater support by standing up for their rights.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

<p>  </p> <p>Interpersonal confrontations are a powerful prejudice reduction strategy. However, they often come with social costs, or negative interpersonal consequences, for the confronter (e.g., dislike; Czopp et al., 2006). Across three studies, the present research examines whether and how interpersonal trust reduces the social costs typically associated with confrontation. Study 1 showed that the more participants trusted their confronter, the less negative their evaluations of their partner. Negative other-directed affect mediated this effect. Study 2 provided causal evidence that trust buffered confrontation’s social costs: Participants who underwent a trust-building exercise with their confronter reported fewer social costs than participants who did not. Finally, Study 3 showed that the effect of trust on social costs extends to an ecologically valid context: Confrontees reported fewer social costs in dyads with greater pre-existing trust (i.e., friends) than dyads with less pre-existing trust (i.e., strangers). The effect of trust on social costs was again mediated by negative other-directed affect. Overall, the present research integrates the confrontation and close relationship literatures to provide theoretically-novel and practically-important insight on how to reduce confrontation-related social costs.</p>

Uppsatsens syfte är att undersöka vilka stereotyper av terroristen som finns i det svenska samhället och hur dessa påverkar relationerna mellan människor. Utgångspunkten är att flera undersökningar pekar på att den mediala bilden av terroristen är kopplad till muslimer. Uppsatsens teoretiska referensram är kritisk diskursanalys och Ruth Wodaks diskurshistoriska ansats. Denna teori kopplar samman diskursiva praktiker med den historiska, mediala, politiska och sociala kontexten de är förankrade i. Analysen sker på tre nivåer. Först beskrivs språket enbart utifrån de lingvistiska uttrycken. Sedan analyseras texterna utifrån den historiska, mediala och politiska kontexten. Slutligen analyseras materialet utifrån den bredare socialhistoriska kontexten (”grand theories” eller stora berättelser), nämligen teorin om moderniteten och den postkoloniala teoribildningen. Materialet består av en enkätundersökning som främst används som del av kontexten och av kvalitativa intervjuer med sex informanter.Denna forskning visar på att stereotypen av terroristen finns hos informanterna. Denna stereotyp bekräftar hypotesen om att det är muslimen som är terroristen precis som i den mediala beskrivningen. Stereotypen av terroristen förändras när de intervjuade börjar reflektera och jämföra den första bilden av terroristen med andra historiska exempel och nutida mindre uppmärksammade exempel. De två bilderna tillhör två olika diskurser i vilka informanterna är involverade samtidigt. Vad gäller relationerna mellan människor påverkas dessa av stereotypen av terroristen. Fördomarna mot muslimer förstärks och kanske t.o.m. sprids till nya grupper i samhället. Stereotypen skapar rädsla och oro och förstärker individers känsla av en klyfta mellan öst och väst och mellan svenskar och invandrare. / The aim of this study is to investigate which stereotypes of the terrorist are present in the Swedish society. The aim is also to describe if and how these stereotypes affect human relations. The starting point is that several exempels of research show that the image of the terrorist media presents is linked to Muslims. The theoretical framework of this research is critical discourse analysis and Ruth Wodak’s discourse– historical approach. This theory links the discoursive practices to different extralinguistical contexts: history, media, politics and society in which the practices are embedded. The analysis is done on three levels. First the language is described just focusing on the linguistical expressions. Then the texts are analysed through the different contexts. Finally the empirical data is analysed through the broader socio–historical context (”grand” theories), in our study the theory of modernity and the postcolonial theory. The data consists of a survey that mostly serves as a part of the context and of qualitative interviews with six respondents.The results of this study show that a stereotype of the terrorist exists. This stereotype confirms the hypothesis that it is the Muslim who is the terrorist in the same way as in the descriptions of the media. Another result of the study is that the stereotype of the terrorist changes when the respondents begin to reflect and compare the first image of the terrorist with other historical or less media-covered exampels. The two different images of the terrorist belong to two different discourses which the respondents are involved in at the same time. The consequences on the human relations are that these are affected by the stereotype of the terrorist. The prejudices against Muslim are strengthened and may even spred to new social groups. The stereotype creates fear and weariness and strengthens the individuals feeling of a gap between East and West and between Swedes and immigrants.