‘What’s So Funny ‘Bout Peace, Love and Understanding?’ Further Reflections on the Limits of Prejudice Reduction as a Model of Social Change

Abstract

This paper aims to encourage greater reflexivity about the limits of prejudice reduction as a model of social change, particularly when applied to societies characterised by historically entrenched patterns of inequality. We begin by outlining some underlying values and assumptions of this model. We then elaborate how our research on political attitudes in post-apartheid South Africa has led us to question, qualify and sometimes reject those assumptions and move towards a 'contextualist' perspective on the efficacy of different models of social change. We agree that the project of getting us to like one another may be crucial for producing change in some contexts. In other contexts, however, it is an epiphenomenon that distracts psychologists from the main causes of, and solutions to, problems such as race, class, or gender discrimination. In still others, with an irony that is evidenced increasingly by research, prejudice reduction may actually contribute to the very problem it is designed to resolve. That is, it may diminish the extent to which social injustice is acknowledged, rejected and challenged.

Are allies who we think they are?: A comparative analysis

“…Given previous research that suggests that women are more likely to be allies and activists than men (e.g., Fingerhut, 2011, andMontgomery &Stewart, 2012; for evidence of the ways in which sexism in the form of self-objectification thwarts women's engagement in social justice activism, however, see Calogero, 2013) Finally, despite the contribution this work makes to identifying potentially unique features of allies, it does little to explicate the processes by which allies come to develop these characteristics (Gonzalez et al, 2015). The concept of recategorization (Dovidio, Gaertner, Validzic, & Matoka, 1997;Fingerhut, 2011), by which members of different social identity groups build connection around a shared superordinate identity, might help explain how alliances form between members of different social identity groups (note, however, that coming to share a superordinate identity may also undermine a recognition of group inequality; see, e.g., Banfield & Dovidio, 2013;Dixon, Durrheim, Kerr, & Thomae, 2013). Recent and extensive qualitative analysis of both in-group and ally activism (Curtin et al, 2016) suggests that being a member of a disadvantaged group (even if it is not one for which one is engaging in activism), experiences that illuminate one's own privilege, and-perhaps most critically-engaging in activism before taking on the activist/ally activist identity are key factors that facilitate becoming an ally.…”

‘Plugging the gap’: shared education and the promotion of community relations through schools in Northern Ireland

“…The statement, ‘some of my best friends are Catholic/Protestant …’ followed by a ‘but’, and a positive endorsement, ‘they are really nice’, is a commonly repeated parody for the type of relationships between individual Catholics and Protestants that allow the preservation of hostile attitudes towards the outgroup. Even where positive attitudes are generalised to the group as a whole, as studies of SEP have indicated they are, some research has suggested that contact—particularly that which focuses on similarities (and avoids matters of contention)—can have an ironic ‘sedative’ effect on the political attitudes of disadvantaged groups (Dixon et al ., ). In particular, such contact may reduce perceptions of injustice among minority group members and decrease their likelihood of engaging in collective action to improve their situation (Wright & Lubensky, ; Dixon et al ., , ).…”

“…Even where positive attitudes are generalised to the group as a whole, as studies of SEP have indicated they are, some research has suggested that contact—particularly that which focuses on similarities (and avoids matters of contention)—can have an ironic ‘sedative’ effect on the political attitudes of disadvantaged groups (Dixon et al ., ). In particular, such contact may reduce perceptions of injustice among minority group members and decrease their likelihood of engaging in collective action to improve their situation (Wright & Lubensky, ; Dixon et al ., , ). Acknowledging this apparent tension between prejudice reduction approaches, with their emphasis on harmony and commonality, and collective action approaches, which require attention to intergroup differences, Dixon et al .…”

Sin and Implicit Bias

“…The strategies to combat implicit bias just mentioned have critics, however, and the Church should pay heed to their criticisms as well. A team of researchers studying strategies aimed at "prejudice reduction" in South Africa found that such strategies may distract "from the main causes of, and solutions to" problems of racial discrimination, and may even exacerbate these problems by "diminish[ing] the extent to which social injustice is acknowledged, rejected, and challenged" (Dixon et al, 2013). They note that prejudice reduction typically involves the "reduction of the salience of intergroup boundaries," and the "creation of 'positive' intergroup emotions such as liking and trust," whereas collective action, which "strives to rupture the status quo" and bring systemic change to unjust social institutions, tends to involve a strengthening of intergroup boundaries and the intensification of feelings of anger and outrage, which increase group conflict (Dixon et al 2013, 245-246).…”