Course: Social Psychology, NYU | Source: Final Exam Word List Difficulty: Intermediate | Prerequisites: Persuasion & Group Influence notes; basic understanding of attitudes and social cognition
Tags: prejudice, stereotype, discrimination, implicit bias, explicit bias, dual attitude system, right-wing authoritarianism, RWA, social dominance orientation, SDO, just world phenomenon, realistic group conflict, Sherif, Robbers Cave, minimal group paradigm, Tajfel, subtyping, own-race bias, outgroup homogeneity, illusory correlation, stereotype threat, scapegoating, aggression, hostile aggression, instrumental aggression, frustration-aggression hypothesis, displacement, aggressive cues, Berkowitz, Bandura, Bobo doll, social learning, media violence, desensitization, relative deprivation
Prejudice and aggression are two of the most consequential topics in social psychology. Prejudice examines how and why people form negative attitudes toward entire groups, how those attitudes translate into behaviour, and what maintains them even in the face of contradictory evidence. Aggression asks what makes people harm others, from biological underpinnings (hormones, brain structures) to social learning and environmental triggers. Both topics build on the attitudes and group influence material covered earlier in the course, and they connect forward to altruism (the flip side of aggression) and conflict resolution.
Prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination are distinct but related: prejudice is the attitude, stereotypes are the beliefs, discrimination is the behaviour. Aggression comes in multiple forms and is explained by biological, frustration-based, and social learning theories. Media exposure and environmental cues can amplify aggressive behaviour, while relative deprivation helps explain collective resentment.
Prejudice
A negative prejudgement of a group and its individual members. Prejudice is an attitude, combining feelings (affect), beliefs (cognition, i.e. stereotypes), and a predisposition to act (behaviour, i.e. discrimination).
Stereotype
A generalised belief about a group of people, assigning identical characteristics to all members regardless of individual variation.
Think of it as: the cognitive component of prejudice, the mental picture you carry of "what that group is like."
Discrimination
Unjustified negative behaviour toward a group or its members, based on group membership rather than individual merit.
In simple terms, prejudice is what you feel, stereotypes are what you believe, discrimination is what you do.
Dual attitude system (implicit vs. explicit bias)
People can hold two different attitudes simultaneously: an explicit attitude they consciously endorse, and an implicit attitude that operates automatically and may contradict the explicit one. Implicit biases are typically measured by reaction-time tasks such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT).
Think of it as: what you say you believe vs. what your automatic reactions reveal.
Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA)
A personality orientation characterised by submission to established authority, aggression toward those who violate conventional norms, and adherence to social conventions. People high in RWA tend to show higher levels of prejudice.
Social dominance orientation (SDO)
The degree to which a person desires their in-group to dominate and be superior to out-groups. High-SDO individuals prefer hierarchical group relations and tend to endorse policies that maintain inequality.
In simple terms, RWA is about obedience to authority and tradition; SDO is about wanting your group on top.
Just world phenomenon
The belief that the world is fair and people get what they deserve. This belief can lead to victim-blaming: if something bad happened to someone, they must have done something to deserve it.
Realistic group conflict theory
Prejudice arises when groups compete for scarce resources. Competition breeds hostility; cooperation reduces it.
Sherif's (1954) Robbers Cave study
Boys at a summer camp were divided into two groups. When placed in competition, hostility and prejudice rapidly developed. When given superordinate goals (goals requiring cooperation between the groups), hostility decreased.
Think of it as: the classic demonstration that competition creates prejudice and cooperation dissolves it.
Importance of belonging
Humans have a fundamental need to belong to social groups. Threats to belonging (ostracism, rejection) produce pain-like neural responses and can drive people to conform, seek acceptance, or lash out.
Minimal group paradigm
Even arbitrary and meaningless group distinctions (e.g., being assigned to "Group A" vs. "Group B" based on a coin flip) are enough to trigger in-group favouritism and out-group discrimination.
Tajfel's (1970) study
Participants were divided into groups based on trivial criteria (preference for paintings by Klee or Kandinsky). Even with no interaction, competition, or history, participants allocated more resources to their own group. This demonstrated that mere categorisation is sufficient to produce in-group bias.
Subtyping
When a group member contradicts the stereotype, people create a subcategory ("she's an exception") rather than revising the stereotype. This preserves the original generalisation by isolating the counter-example.
Own-race bias (cross-race effect)
The tendency to more accurately recognise faces of one's own racial group than faces of other racial groups.
Outgroup homogeneity effect
The perception that members of an out-group are more similar to each other than members of one's own in-group ("they all look/act alike").
Illusory correlation
The perception of a relationship between two things (such as a minority group and a negative behaviour) when no such relationship exists, or when it is weaker than perceived. Unusual events are more memorable, so rare groups paired with rare behaviours get disproportionate mental weight.
Stereotype threat
The apprehension people feel when they are at risk of confirming a negative stereotype about their group. This anxiety consumes cognitive resources and can impair performance on the very task the stereotype targets.
Think of it as: worrying about confirming the stereotype becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Scapegoating
Displacing aggression onto a target group that is visible, relatively powerless, and not the actual source of frustration. Historically, minority groups have been scapegoated during economic downturns or social upheaval.
RWA and SDO are the two major individual-difference predictors of prejudice.
RWA predicts prejudice against groups seen as threatening social order (immigrants, non-conformists).
SDO predicts prejudice in contexts of group competition (opposition to affirmative action, support for hierarchy).
The just world phenomenon adds a cognitive layer: if people deserve what happens to them, then disadvantaged groups must be at fault for their own position.
Realistic group conflict theory explains intergroup hostility through competition for jobs, territory, or resources. Sherif's Robbers Cave study is the landmark demonstration.
The minimal group paradigm (Tajfel) shows that competition is not even necessary: mere categorisation is enough to produce favouritism. This suggests that in-group bias is a default cognitive tendency.
Subtyping protects stereotypes from disconfirmation. When people encounter a group member who defies the stereotype, they carve out an exception rather than updating the rule.
Own-race bias and outgroup homogeneity: people have more perceptual experience with their own group, leading to finer-grained distinctions within it and a blurred perception of out-group members.
Illusory correlation: minority groups and uncommon behaviours are both statistically unusual. When they co-occur, the pairing is especially memorable, inflating the perceived link between the group and the behaviour.
Stereotype threat: the threat of confirming a negative stereotype creates anxiety that diverts working memory away from the task, impairing performance. Steele and Aronson's studies showed that simply making racial identity salient before a test reduced performance among African American students.
Scapegoating is a specific application of the frustration-aggression theory to intergroup relations.
Frustrated individuals displace aggression onto a convenient, often powerless, out-group.
Historical pattern: anti-Semitic violence in Europe correlated with economic downturns. Lynchings in the American South correlated with drops in cotton prices.
Real-world application: political rhetoric that blames economic problems on immigrant groups is a modern example of scapegoating dynamics.
Aggression
Behaviour intended to harm another person who does not wish to be harmed. Classified along two dimensions: physical vs. social (relational), and hostile vs. instrumental.
Physical aggression
Aggression that harms through physical force (hitting, kicking, weapon use).
Social (relational) aggression
Aggression that harms through damage to social relationships (spreading rumours, exclusion, gossip).
Hostile aggression
Aggression driven by anger, with the primary goal of causing harm. The harm itself is the end.
Instrumental aggression
Aggression used as a means to achieve some other goal (money, status, territory). The harm is a tool, not the point.
In simple terms, hostile aggression is hot (emotional); instrumental aggression is cold (calculated).
Raine, Buchsbaum, & LaCasse's (1997) PET-scan study
Used PET scans to compare brain activity of murderers pleading not guilty by reason of insanity with matched controls. Found reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex of the murderers, a region associated with impulse control and decision-making.
Think of it as: biological evidence that the brain's "brake pedal" may be weaker in some violent offenders. This does not prove causation or excuse behaviour.
Testosterone
A hormone associated with dominance and aggression. Higher testosterone levels correlate with increased aggression, but the relationship is bidirectional: winning a competition raises testosterone, which in turn may increase aggressive readiness. Testosterone is a facilitator, not a sole cause.
Frustration-aggression theory
Frustration (the blocking of goal-directed behaviour) always produces some instigation to aggress. The original formulation (Dollard et al., 1939) was strong: frustration always leads to aggression, and aggression is always preceded by frustration. This has been revised; frustration increases the readiness to aggress, but does not always produce it.
Displacement
When the source of frustration is unavailable or too powerful to aggress against, the aggressive impulse is redirected toward a safer target. The classic example: a worker berated by a boss goes home and snaps at a spouse.
Aggressive cues theory (Berkowitz)
Frustration produces anger (a readiness to aggress), but whether aggression actually occurs depends on the presence of aggression-associated cues in the environment (e.g., weapons). This differs from the original frustration-aggression theory by adding an intermediate step: frustration creates arousal, and cues determine whether that arousal becomes aggression.
Think of it as: frustration loads the gun; aggressive cues pull the trigger.
Social learning theory (Bandura)
Aggression is learned through observation and imitation of role models, and maintained by reinforcement (rewards for aggressive behaviour). People do not need to experience frustration to aggress; they can learn aggression vicariously.
Observational learning and modelling
Learning by watching others and replicating their behaviour. Central to Bandura's explanation of how children acquire aggressive scripts.
Bobo Doll studies (Bandura, 1961/1963)
Children who watched an adult model act aggressively toward a Bobo doll subsequently imitated that aggression. Children who watched a non-aggressive model, or no model, showed significantly less aggression. Demonstrated that aggression can be learned purely through observation.
Desensitization
Repeated exposure to violent media reduces emotional and physiological reactivity to violence over time. People become less disturbed by real-world aggression after habitual exposure to fictional aggression.
Relative deprivation
The perception that one is worse off relative to some comparison standard (another group, one's own past, one's expectations). Relative deprivation can fuel resentment and collective aggression even when absolute conditions are improving.
In simple terms, it is not how poor you are that makes you angry; it is how poor you feel compared to others.
The Raine et al. PET-scan study is a key piece of evidence for biological underpinnings of violence. Reduced prefrontal cortex activity suggests impaired impulse control.
Testosterone facilitates aggression but is not deterministic. Social context modulates its effects.
Biological factors create a predisposition; they do not operate in isolation from situational and learned factors.
The original frustration-aggression hypothesis was too absolute (all frustration leads to aggression, all aggression stems from frustration). Revised versions acknowledge that frustration is one of many instigators.
Displacement redirects aggression when the true source is untouchable. This is the mechanism behind scapegoating at the group level.
Berkowitz's aggressive cues theory adds environmental triggers: a frustrated person in a room with a weapon is more likely to aggress than the same frustrated person in a room without one (the "weapons effect").
Bandura's Bobo Doll studies showed that children learn aggression by watching aggressive models, even without direct reinforcement.
Four steps in observational learning: attention (notice the model), retention (remember the behaviour), reproduction (be able to imitate), motivation (expect reinforcement or have seen the model rewarded).
TV and mass media affect violence through several pathways: teaching aggressive scripts, desensitizing viewers, shaping norms about acceptable conflict resolution.
Desensitization is gradual: repeated exposure to violent content lowers emotional and physiological reactivity. Studies show that heavy media-violence consumers show less empathy and less helping behaviour toward real victims.
Real-world application: debates about video game violence and media ratings draw directly on this research. The evidence suggests a modest but reliable effect of media violence on aggressive behaviour and attitudes.
People who objectively have more may feel more aggrieved if their reference group has even more.
Relative deprivation helps explain urban unrest, revolutions, and social movements. The French and Russian revolutions occurred after periods of rising expectations followed by sharp reversals.
Real-world application: wage inequality research consistently shows that perceived unfairness relative to peers is a stronger predictor of dissatisfaction than absolute income level.
Students often treat prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination as interchangeable. They are distinct: attitude, belief, and behaviour, respectively.
Students sometimes think implicit bias and explicit bias must align. The dual attitude system shows they frequently diverge.
Students confuse the frustration-aggression hypothesis with aggressive cues theory. The original hypothesis says frustration directly causes aggression. Berkowitz adds that frustration causes anger (readiness), and environmental cues determine whether aggression actually occurs.
Students assume the Bobo Doll study proves that media violence causes real-world violence. It demonstrates observational learning of aggression in a controlled setting. The leap to real-world violence involves many additional variables.
⚠️ Be able to define and distinguish prejudice, stereotype, and discrimination with examples. This is a near-guaranteed exam item.
⚠️ Know the difference between RWA and SDO, including what each predicts.
⚠️ Sherif's Robbers Cave study and Tajfel's minimal group paradigm are both commonly tested. Know the design, findings, and the theoretical point each makes.
⚠️ Be able to explain how aggressive cues theory builds on (and differs from) the frustration-aggression hypothesis.
⚠️ Know the Bobo Doll study's method, findings, and what it does and does not demonstrate.
⚠️ Understand stereotype threat well enough to apply it to a novel scenario (e.g., women and maths performance, elderly and memory tasks).
True or False: Stereotypes are the behavioural component of prejudice.
Fill in the blank: The __________ paradigm demonstrates that merely being assigned to an arbitrary group is enough to produce in-group favouritism.
True or False: Frustration always leads directly to aggression, according to the revised frustration-aggression theory.
Fill in the blank: In Bandura's Bobo Doll study, children who observed an aggressive model later showed __________ levels of aggression than children who observed a non-aggressive model.
True or False: Relative deprivation refers to one's absolute economic standing.
Answers: 1. False (stereotypes are the cognitive component; discrimination is the behavioural component). 2. Minimal group. 3. False (frustration increases readiness to aggress, but other factors determine whether aggression occurs). 4. Higher. 5. False (it refers to perceived standing relative to a comparison group or standard).
Q: A hiring manager genuinely believes she treats all applicants equally, yet a reaction-time test reveals she associates certain ethnic names with negative words more quickly. Explain this using the dual attitude system.
A: She holds an explicit attitude of fairness (consciously endorsed) and a conflicting implicit attitude (automatic negative association with certain ethnic groups). The dual attitude system predicts that implicit attitudes can influence behaviour, especially under time pressure or cognitive load, even when explicit attitudes are egalitarian.
Q: Two groups of schoolchildren are competing for a single trophy. Hostility develops. The teachers then introduce a problem that both groups must work together to solve. Hostility decreases. Identify the theory, the original study, and the principle that reduced conflict.
A: Realistic group conflict theory, demonstrated by Sherif's Robbers Cave study (1954). The principle that reduced conflict was the introduction of superordinate goals, which are goals that require intergroup cooperation.
Q: After a factory closes, a local politician blames immigrants for taking jobs. Explain this pattern using two concepts from the course.
A: The factory closure creates frustration (blocked economic goals). The frustration-aggression hypothesis predicts aggression, but the true source (global economic forces) is too abstract to attack. Displacement redirects the aggression onto a visible, relatively powerless group. At the collective level, this is scapegoating.
Q: A student reads that violent crime rates have been falling for decades, yet the same student feels that the world is more dangerous than ever. How might desensitization and media exposure explain this disconnect?
A: Heavy media exposure to violent content can create a mean-world perception (cultivation theory) while simultaneously desensitizing the viewer to the emotional impact of violence. The student's feeling reflects the disproportionate representation of violence in media, not actual crime statistics.
Prejudice connects forward to Conflict & Peacemaking: realistic group conflict theory reappears in discussions of the prisoner's dilemma and superordinate goals. Scapegoating ties to Aggression through the frustration-aggression-displacement chain. Stereotype threat connects back to Group Influence (evaluation apprehension creates the same performance anxiety). The aggression material links forward to Altruism & Helping as a mirror image: the same social learning processes that teach aggression also teach prosocial behaviour.
Prejudice, stereotype, discrimination, implicit bias, IAT, Implicit Association Test, explicit bias, dual attitude, automatic attitude, RWA, right-wing authoritarianism, SDO, social dominance orientation, just world hypothesis, victim blaming, Sherif, Robbers Cave, realistic conflict, competition and prejudice, Tajfel, minimal group, in-group favouritism, subtyping, own-race bias, cross-race effect, outgroup homogeneity, they all look alike, illusory correlation, availability heuristic, stereotype threat, Steele, Aronson, scapegoat theory, aggression types, hostile aggression, instrumental aggression, physical aggression, relational aggression, Raine PET scan, prefrontal cortex, testosterone and aggression, Dollard frustration-aggression, displacement, Berkowitz weapons effect, aggressive cues, Bandura social learning, Bobo doll, observational learning, modelling, media violence, desensitization, cultivation theory, relative deprivation, rising expectations