Stereotypes, Prejudice and
Group Conflicts
Stereotypes and system
justification
• Stereotypes emerge and are used to explain
some existing state of affairs, such as social or
economic systems, status or power hierarchies,
distributions of resources, divisions of social
roles, etc.
• Traits on which subordinate groups positively
differentiate themselves actually may serve to
reinforce the status quo.
• System justification: a psychological process
whereby an individual perceives, understands,
and explains an existing situation or
arrangement with the result that the situation or
arrangement is maintained.
System justification theory
(Jost, Banaji, 1994)
• People seek to justify the status quo (even
when it seems to conflict with personal or
group interests)
Examples for stereotyping as
system-justification
Ross, 1977: randomly assigned roles of „contestant” and
„questioner”
 „contestant” and observer identified the „questiner” as
more knowledgeable
Assignment to the role of slave leads both master and
slave to view the slave as „child-like” and „subservient”
Assignment to the role childbearer leads women and men
to see women as „nurturing” and men as „autonomous”
Stereotypes of the working class: unintelligent,
incompetent, dirty, and unreliable
 may serve as a rationalization of their economic plight
similarities between stereotypes of lower class and those
of African Americans in the U.S.  racial stereotypes
were inferred from economic disadvantage
Consequences
• The way to change stereotypes is to change
material reality
• Different groups across cultures should share
esssentially the same stereotype contents if they
share the same relative status in their respective
societies
• Even negative stereotypes of dominant groups
may serve the function of system-justification, as
long as they indicate that the group is somehow
well-suited for its status or role (men’s assumed
competitive qualities)
Taxonomy of Prejudices Based on the
Structural Relations between Groups
(Fiske and Glick, 2001)
high
envious prejudice
admiration
cooperative
competitive
interdependence
contemptuous prejudice
paternalistic prejudice
low
status
Admiration
• Relative status: high (or equal with the in-group’s
status)
• Interdependence: cooperative
• Stereotype: competent, warm
• Emotions: respect, admiration, affection
• Behavoir: defer
• Experienced by: subordinates toward generous
dominants upon whom they are dependent; ingroup members toward allies; unchallanged
dominants toward their own group
Contemptuous Prejudice
•
•
•
•
•
Relative status: low
Interdependence: competitive
Stereotype: not warm and incompetent
Emotions: disrespect, resentment, hostility
Behavior: avoid, exclude, segregate,
exterminate
• Experinced by: dominants toward subordinates
who are seen as illegitimate dependents (a
perceived drain on social resources)
Paternalistic prejudice
•
•
•
•
•
•
Relative status: low
Interdependence: cooperative
Stereotype: warm but incompetent
Emotions: patronizing affection, pity, liking
Behavior: personal intimacy, but role segregation
Experienced by:
dominants toward subordinates upon whom they
are dependent and toward „legitimate”
dependents; groups that pose no socioeconomic
threat
Envious Prejudice
•
•
•
•
Relative status: high (or equal with the in-group’s status)
Interdependence: competitive
Stereotype: competent but not warm
Emotions: envy, fear, resentment, hostility
gruging admiration of ablities
• Behavior: avoid, exclude, segregate, exterminate
• Experienced by:
dominants whose status is slipping and disadvantaged
groups toward successful minorities/dominants
+ the tradition of the scapegoat role in the society
Content of stereotypes
Emergence of new versions of
prejudices
• Changing roles and positions of sub-groups in society 
changing social reality
• Strong egalitarian norms (U.S.)
WITH (BUT)
• Strong commitment toward the ideology of meritocracy
(U.S.): the assumption that the progress of people
depends (only) on their own talent and achievement
• Competition
- group level (over real or symbolic resources: social
identity theory, Tajfel and Turner)
- individual level (over status depending on the level of
social dominance orientation of the individual, social
dominance theory: Sidanius and Pratto)
• Implicit activation of old prejudices and stereotypes
Changing social reality changes prejudices
high
envious prejudice
admiration
black professionals
business women
feminists
cooperative
interdependence
competitive
contemptuous prejudice
poor blacks
paternalistic prejudice
low
status
housewives