Prejudice is “an attitude toward a particular group or member of a group, based on characteristics assumed to be common to all members of the group.” (Psychology First, 2006: 97) Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay There are different theories about how prejudice develops in individuals and groups. One theory of how this appears in groups is social identity theory (SIT) developed by Tajfel and Turner (1979). One theory of how this appears in individuals and groups is the Authoritarian Personality Theory (APT) developed by Adorno et al. (1950). SIT is built around the idea that we psychologically categorize ourselves and others into groups. The groups we belong to become the “in-group,” while the groups we consider ourselves not to be a part of constitute the “out-group.” The fundamental assumption of SIT is that when we are in the “in-group,” we actively seek out the negative aspects of the “out-group” in order to increase our self-image. We unconsciously look for reasons why we are superior, such as intelligence or appearance. For example, if we are part of the winning team in a quiz and we perform poorly ourselves, which may even cost our team points, since our team was successful, we have a positive attitude towards ourselves. The biases produced by SIT could be reduced by encouraging and facilitating cooperation between groups. Sheriff's Experiment (1961) Robber's Cave presented (Woods, 2006, p.107). This could be achieved by having two rival groups work together to solve a common problem. The practicality of this solution depends on the size of the group and its age, as it would be quite easy to convince two groups of children to cooperate rather than two groups of adults with polarizing political views. Although research such as that of Tajfel et al. (1971) supports SIT's assertion that state biases often arise from categorization in society. It is criticized for the implication that prejudice is therefore a natural human feeling and that, therefore, more serious forms of prejudice (racism, homophobia) could be justified as "human nature". ' Also. Weatherall (1982) argues that this theory is found mainly in Western and European cultures (UK, France), as he claims that children from other societies (India, Philippines) were more generous towards out-groups and that as such, SIT can only explain how prejudice results from social conditioning (Billingham, 2008, p.165). Adorno et al (1950) theorized that certain people possessed a certain personality which he called "authoritarian personality" (AP), which became known as authoritarian personality theory (APT). APT suggests that people with AP will resent situations where there was no right or wrong answer, would remain persistent in their personal opinions and beliefs, and would often act in a hostile manner toward those they viewed as " inferior", while showing their obedience to those with higher employment or social status. Individuals with this personality are believed to be more prejudiced towards other individuals or groups due to their high self-confidence, unwavering beliefs, and aggressive mentality. However, authoritarian personalities must alsopossess positive humanistic qualities, as they are often quick to accept responsibility for their actions. have good speaking skills and show that they care a lot about those they consider part of their “group”. PA is thought to be the result of harsh parenting, including punishment for disobedience. Adorno hypothesized that this strict discipline during childhood might cause children to become overly respectful and submissive to authority as they become adults and to expect the same respect and submission from those who are weaker than them as they progress through life, directing their natural aggression toward weaker targets rather than weaker ones. to deal with it through compromise or forms of therapy. This would in turn cause further PAs via their offspring, creating a cycle. “Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues that children should learn” (Stranding, 2012). A common AP vision on children's education. There is evidence for APT: Adorno developed a scale to measure authoritarianism called the F scale (F for fascism due to AP types generally having far-right political views). The F scale predicts that those with PA are submissive only to authority figures and that those higher on this scale would be more likely to obey higher authorities in extreme orders. For example, a PA would be much more likely to harm others when ordered to do so, such as delivering powerful electric shocks in experiments such as the Milgram experiment conducted in 1963, where participants were given ordered to deliver electric shocks to another participant. Yet there is also evidence against the APT, for example that not everyone who is prejudiced conforms to the AP type and the theory does not explain how entire groups (fascist political parties, religious sects) can maintain biases. prejudice, because for this, all members would have to have an AP, which is highly implausible, this can however be explained by conformism and de-individualization. We can reduce bias in authoritarian personalities by ceasing to exist the authoritarian personality. For example, raising children without displaying strict personalities and teaching them exactly why they cannot behave in a certain way, instead of punishing them without explanation because they would consider the only reasoning being punished to be disrespect to the authority of the parents. In theory, they would grow up demonstrating prosocial behavior. Prosocial behavior is behavior that benefits another society, such as paying taxes and cooperating to achieve goals. The main factors affecting prosocial behavior include social learning theory (SLT) and each individual's personality. SLT is the process by which individuals are trained by their environment to adhere to the rules and manners approved by their culture. This increases prosocial behavior to the extent that society benefits from and therefore approves of acts such as assisting others, obeying the law, and showing respect, while many members of society disapprove of antisocial behavior. However, SLT could also lead to antisocial behavior depending on the individual's environment, upbringing, and personality. This is demonstrated in Bandura's Bobo doll experiment (1961), where different groups of children saw separate videos of an adult playing with a Bobo doll. A video showed the adult playing nicely with thedoll and the other showed the very aggressive adult with the doll performing acts such as throwing the doll against a wall and hitting it. The children were then left alone in a room with the doll. Children shown the “cute” video gently played with the doll, pretending to feed it food and dress it in hats, etc., proving that SLT could lead to pro behavior. social. Conversely, children who were shown the clip of violent behavior acted similarly when left in a room with the doll, hitting it violently and even attacking it in ways not shown on the video, such as picking up a toy gun and pointing it at the doll. This is clear evidence of SLT because the children acted the way they did because they had seen someone else act that way. However, Bandura's Bobo doll study is criticized for its lack of ecological validity, because it was so controlled that the behavior committed by the children cannot be considered to reflect real-life aggressive behavior and that they responded to demand characteristics and acted aggressively to please the adults observing them. . A connection between prejudice and SLT is shown in the Banduras Bobo doll experiment, as the children acted directly violently towards the doll, showing that they were prejudiced against the doll alone, as they did not act also violently towards other dolls or objects. Antisocial behavior engages in activities that cause negative effects in society and in people's lives, for example by committing crimes like theft, vandalism and verbal or physical abuse of others, etc. A common factor affecting antisocial behavior is deindividualization. Deindividualization occurs when a person temporarily loses their sense of identity and responsibility and associates themselves as part of a group and transfers responsibility to the other. result of their behavior on the group as a whole. “Immersion in a group to the point that one loses a sense of self-awareness and feels less responsible for one's actions. Example: Groups of excited, riotous sports fans celebrating a big victory may end up committing acts they would never do alone, such as vandalism or arson” – Psyché-Central 2008. Deindividualization can lead to an increase in antisocial behavior, including prejudice when people do not take responsibility for their own actions. Deindividualization is particularly problematic in many current global issues. Examples of this are terrorists wearing masks or violent gangs acquiring matching facial tattoos, although this can also come from the SIT. It is also evidence that humans de-individualize consciously, but simultaneously, to some extent, deliberately, so that the group they are a part of may in their eyes be responsible for their antisocial or violent behavior, as opposed to them- themselves personally and therefore avoid any internal responsibility. or guilt for the actions they commit. Obedience is a change in behavior ordered by another person or group (Breckler, 2006). For example, when a person picks up trash that they have thrown on the ground on the orders of an authority figure. Factors affecting obedience are both dispositional and situational. Dispositional factors could be explained by Adorno's authoritarian personality theory as well as the fact that some people genetically are naturally obedient. The factors.