SCLoA Outcome Link: explain the formation of stereotypes
ONE HUGE MISTAKE! So in the recent paper 1, most of the class stuffed up the SCLoA SAQ - "explain the formation of stereotypes". So what I did was write all this stuff to do with stereotypes, including Bargh's experiment on the elderly stereotype, and Katz and Braley's survey on cultural stereotypes. Guess what? That doesn't explain the FORMATION of stereotypes!! It only supports the prevalence of stereotypes. A more appropriate theory for this question would be the theory of Social Identity, developed by Henri Tajfel. Tajfel proposed that stereotypes are based on cognitive processes - more specifically, the human tendency to group and categorize things. In doing so, we tend to exaggerate the differences between out-groups and also the similarities in in-groups.
Stereotypes are assumptions formed from prior experience and knowledge. The foundation of these stereotypes are formed from the establishment of social groups. Tajfel hypothesized that in line with the socio-cultural principle that all individuals have a need to belong, this forms in-groups where they are united by a social identity.
Within Tajfel’s experiment, he asked participants to evaluate pieces of art to determine which ones they preferred. They were shown images of works by artists Kladansky and Klee. However the participants were separated randomly. Regardless of this fact, the participants with the two groups were united over the fact that they hold the same views on artworks. His theory of the social identity theory began to suggest first, social categorization in which individuals identify different social groups which were in this case the two artists. Then, social identification came about as they assigned themselves to a particular group. This theory is in tangent to the understanding of formations to how we know groups work. Stereotypes are formed based on the assumption that individuals have about a certain group. Perhaps individuals of lower class would view upper class people as stuck up and snobby. This is also due to social comparison in which individuals try to find reasons on how they differ to the other group. This instant assumption that people make when seeing other groups is integral in the understanding of how stereotypes are formed. Now, we have a greater understanding that of how SIT forms stereotypes.
The above is essentially the stuff I should have talked about...
ONE HUGE MISTAKE! So in the recent paper 1, most of the class stuffed up the SCLoA SAQ - "explain the formation of stereotypes". So what I did was write all this stuff to do with stereotypes, including Bargh's experiment on the elderly stereotype, and Katz and Braley's survey on cultural stereotypes. Guess what? That doesn't explain the FORMATION of stereotypes!! It only supports the prevalence of stereotypes. A more appropriate theory for this question would be the theory of Social Identity, developed by Henri Tajfel. Tajfel proposed that stereotypes are based on cognitive processes - more specifically, the human tendency to group and categorize things. In doing so, we tend to exaggerate the differences between out-groups and also the similarities in in-groups.
Stereotypes are assumptions formed from prior experience and knowledge. The foundation of these stereotypes are formed from the establishment of social groups. Tajfel hypothesized that in line with the socio-cultural principle that all individuals have a need to belong, this forms in-groups where they are united by a social identity.
Within Tajfel’s experiment, he asked participants to evaluate pieces of art to determine which ones they preferred. They were shown images of works by artists Kladansky and Klee. However the participants were separated randomly. Regardless of this fact, the participants with the two groups were united over the fact that they hold the same views on artworks. His theory of the social identity theory began to suggest first, social categorization in which individuals identify different social groups which were in this case the two artists. Then, social identification came about as they assigned themselves to a particular group. This theory is in tangent to the understanding of formations to how we know groups work. Stereotypes are formed based on the assumption that individuals have about a certain group. Perhaps individuals of lower class would view upper class people as stuck up and snobby. This is also due to social comparison in which individuals try to find reasons on how they differ to the other group. This instant assumption that people make when seeing other groups is integral in the understanding of how stereotypes are formed. Now, we have a greater understanding that of how SIT forms stereotypes.
The above is essentially the stuff I should have talked about...