Thus, the outgroup bias includes negative categorizations, feelings, or ideas about people who are not part of our ingroup. Outgroup biases also mean the person associates more desirable and positive traits to their in-group members as opposed to out-group members. Individuals also tend to overestimate the similarities within groups and the dissimilarities between groups. That means the person sees the individuals in another group as being very alike (out-group homogeneity effect), but they see the differences between separate groups as being much greater than they actually are. B.
Cultural Perspective Essay Marcus 1/16/18 Period 2 To what extent does one 's cultural identity affect the way they view others and the world? Overall, I have found that one 's cultural identity affects their view on others in a negative way most of the time. Very rarely did I find a positive view in my research. I am going to show you how some people 's cultural identity affects the way they view others and the world by using articles I have found. I have found positive and negative examples of how people view others and the world.
In this case, when people expect someone because of their race. When they can get an achievement, people see that because they have good genes. That means good genes can make successful without efforts. While if they cannot do it well that can make people disappointment and insult on them, which makes many stress and shame. Positive stereotype, it sounds like a good thing, but actually it 's a kind
Here the basic line of argument is that groups come into being in a psychological sense ‘not because their members necessarily are similar to one another (although they may be); rather, a group exists when people in it realize their fate depends on the fate of the group as a whole’ (Brown 1988: 28). Behaviour within a group: - After collecting experimental evidence, Lewin concluded that groups with a democratic setup were likely to perform better than ones with autocratic
Discrimination can be viewed from different theoretical frameworks: 1. The Social Identity Perspective (Tajfel & Turner, 1979): It holds that group members are motivated to protect their self‐esteem and achieve a positive and distinct social identity. This drive for a positive social identity can result in discrimination, which is expressed as either direct harm to outgroup, or more commonly and spontaneously, as giving preferential treatment to the ingroup, a phenomenon known as ingroup
Both extremes have positives and negatives. Being high in self-monitoring can have the effect of appearing very adaptable but on the negative side, people can appear to be phony or putting on an act (Lecture Ch. 3, p. 7). Being low in self-monitoring can be seen as being true to oneself but it can also be seen as being stubborn or insensitive to situations (Lecture
Women are expected to be more warm and communal, not dominant and agentic (Eagly & Karau, 1991). When women succeed in areas traditionally dominated by men, women are disliked and viewed more negatively (Heilman, et. al., 2004). If women use aggressive language they are seen as uncharacteristic and as having broken social rules. On the other hand, women who use more prosaically and less intense language are found to be more persuasive (Burgoon, Dillard, Doran, 1983).
Or by placing groups with other groups on more of a quotidian substructure in order to establish less competition and less trust issues among others. By taking out the element that can cause intergroup partialness can avail those participating in a group environment to visually perceive that each member, whether in their group or others, are key factors to being prosperous. Being able to observe other 's culture, style and individual character without discriminating from the commencement will avail each member find balance in their group and other 's they become involved in. No one group is better than the other. Each has separate implements that can make the facileness of intergroup cognations work
This great concept reflects that while we are attributing success to our internal characteristics, we are blaming others for any negative events and assigning failures to outside factors. Self-Serving Bias module describes that we do not always clarify things objectively, while we are making judgements about other people and events. Also, self-serving bias as a part of cognitive biases, gives an opportunity for people to protect their self-esteem which means that by attributing positive things to themselves, people improve their confidence and by blaming others for negative events, people avoid personal responsibility. In my opinion, it is not surprise that almost everyone in the world have faced such situations since self-serving bias works in every aspect of life. I also have faced such situations in which I assigned success to my own skills and blamed others for negative events.
Firstly, in the areas of decreasing stereotypes, focusing on the individual and having an open-minded attitude towards the uniqueness of different cultures may be beneficial to avoid stereotypes. (Agius & Ambrosewicz, 2003, p. 34) As stereotypes are unreasonable overgeneralizations of all members in one certain group, concentrating on the uniqueness of each individual might be helpful for people who stereotype others to recognize their misleading conceptions and to respect each individual of the stereotyped group. Additionally, being willing to learn more about the cultures and beliefs of people from different societies or different groups is considered an appropriate solution as well. When people stereotype others, they seem to hold on tightly to their stubborn beliefs and assumptions. Consequently, when people agree to learn more about different cultures, they will probably gain more knowledge about other people and other cultures, and from that point, they will perhaps become aware of their previous untrue perceptions and change their
Yet again, it really depends on the person and the situation. The situation affects the reaction based on to what extent the outsider’s perception is different from one’s true character or of what we hold to be true about ourselves. If a person is perceived to have a lot of negative traits, it would seem more likely for the person being misjudged to work harder to change the opinions. This would be assumed because most people want to be well liked and can be hurt when people say untrue and mean things about them. But, if a person is assumed to be better than they really are, there might not be such a rush to change their minds.
People with different backgrounds bring new information. Simply interacting with individuals who are different, forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort. But most people view diversity as a good thing because it gives people the chance to experience different things outside of what they are used to. Some studies show that the lack of consistency between races, sexes and cultures is due to mistrust, stereotyping, and more within-culture conversation and language problems. Diversity is a tricky thing to use and understand because it has both negative and positive effects on society such as education, violence and employment.