how implicit and explicit attitudes are related to public stigma l.
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
How Implicit and Explicit Attitudes are Related to Public Stigma

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 63

How Implicit and Explicit Attitudes are Related to Public Stigma - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 171 Views
  • Uploaded on

How Implicit and Explicit Attitudes are Related to Public Stigma. John B. Pryor, Ph.D. Department of Psychology Illinois State University. Some of my collaborators. Glenn Reeder Eric Wesselmann Kip Williams Jim Wirth Arati Patel Andrew Monroe. Outline of today’s talk.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'How Implicit and Explicit Attitudes are Related to Public Stigma' - kat


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
how implicit and explicit attitudes are related to public stigma

How Implicit and Explicit Attitudes are Related to Public Stigma

John B. Pryor, Ph.D.

Department of Psychology

Illinois State University

some of my collaborators
Some of my collaborators
  • Glenn Reeder
  • Eric Wesselmann
  • Kip Williams
  • Jim Wirth
  • Arati Patel
  • Andrew Monroe
outline of today s talk
Outline of today’s talk
  • Dual Process Theory – an overview
  • Study 1: How Implicit and Explicit Attitudes are Related to Behavioral Reactions to Obesity Stigma
  • Study 2: How Implicit Attitudes Moderate Stigma-by-Association Effects based Upon Arbitrary Associations
  • Study 3: How Implicit Attitudes Moderate Stigma-by-Association Effects based Upon Knowledge Structures
a dual process model of reactions to public stigma
Reflexive Processes

Immediate, spontaneous reactions

Often emotional

May reflect instinctual processes

May reflect associative processes

Rule-based Processes

Thoughtful, deliberative reactions

Take time to unfold

Control processes

Bring into play attributional considerations – why questions

A dual-process model of reactions to public stigma
theoretical connections to attitudes
Reflexive

Processes

Explicit

Attitudes

Theoretical Connections to Attitudes

Implicit

Attitudes

Rule-based

Processes

Empirical Measures

Theoretical Processes

general hypotheses
General Hypotheses
  • Implicit anti-stigma attitudes will be predictors of automatic behaviors in response to stigmatized persons.
  • Explicit attitudes will be predictors of controlled behaviors toward stigmatized person.
  • Explicit attitudes will correlate with other deliberative thought processes regarding stigmatized persons. Implicit attitudes will not.
  • Implicit attitudes will moderate stigma-by-association effects. Those with more negative implicit attitudes toward a stigma will exhibit stronger stigma-by-association effects. Explicit attitudes will not moderate such effects.
pictograph judgments implicit anti fat attitudes amp
Pictograph Judgments: Implicit Anti-Fat Attitudes (AMP)
  • Before and after photos of 30 women taken from Weight Watchers website

Judgment

of

Meaning

1 second

1 second

Judgment

of

Meaning

measuring behavioral reactions to a stigmatized person using cyberball

Measuring Behavioral Reactions to a Stigmatized Person Using Cyberball

An online game of “catch”

Participants control an animated hand that tosses a ball to 2-3 other players who in turn toss the ball to each other or the participant

Other players are actually “virtual confederates” whose tossing behavior can be programmed

cyberball game
Cyberball Game

Megan

Ashley

Sara

when other players ostracize someone the prevailing norm is to try to include that person
When other players ostracizesomeone, the prevailing normis to try to include that person

Megan

Megan

Megan

Ashley

Sara

Me

how is adherence to an inclusion norm affected by the presence of a powerful stigma
How is adherence to an inclusion norm affected by the presence of a powerful stigma?

Although 2/3 of Americans are

overweight, fat stigma remains one

of the most powerful stigmas in

contemporary US. Many studies have

found that heavyweight White women

are particularly likely to be stigmatized

by their weight.

measure of implicit anti fat attitudes

Preview

Other

Players

Play

Cyberball

Basic Procedure

& Design

ostracism

of obese

player

1 obese

& 2 non-obese

players

Assess

Anti-fat

Attitudes

inclusion

of obese

player

measure

of explicit

anti-fat

attitudes

measure

ofimplicit

anti-fat

attitudes

ostracism

of non-obese

player

3

non-obese

players

inclusion

of non-obese

player

slide18

Participants received photos of the other 3 players prior to the Cyberball game. In half the conditions, one of the other players was obese. We altered photos to make the same person appear obese or normal weight.

Obese

Control

Control

slide19
Deliberative Behavior: After first receiving the ball, how many turns did the participant delay in tossing the ball to the target?

Megan

Ashley

Sara

slide20

F(1,84) = 6.27, p < .02

(means adjusted

for covariates)

slide21

*

F(1,84) = 5.85, p < .02

* p <.01

automatic behavior did the participant hesitate when deciding to toss the ball to the target
Automatic Behavior: Did the participant hesitate when deciding to toss the ball to the target?

Megan

Ashley

Sara

slide23

Ostracism X Obesity X Implicit Bias

F(1,84) = 13.21, p < ,01

(means adjusted

for covariates)

slide24

*

*

*

* p <.01

correlations
Correlations

*

*

*

*

* p < .05

conclusions of study 1
Conclusions of Study 1
  • Inclusion norms were weaker when people interacted with a stigmatized person. Participants generally threw the ball less to fat women
  • Explicit attitudes moderated the impact of a stigma upon more controlled behaviors
  • Implicit attitudes moderated the impact of a stigma upon more automatic behaviors.
  • Explicit attitudes were related to other deliberative processes like attribution of blame and motivations to control prejudice
goffman s concept of courtesy stigma
Goffman’s concept of courtesy stigma

Example from Goffman (1963):

Dear Ann Landers:

I am a girl 12 years old who is left out of all social activities because my father is an ex-convict….AN OUTCAST

Stigma is spread by social structure associations. “Thus, the loyal spouse of a mental patient, the daughter of an ex-con, the parent of the cripple, the friend of the blind, the family of the hangman, are all obliged to share some of the discredit of the stigmatized person to whom they are related (p. 30).”

stigma by association social group membership
Stigma-by-association:Social Group Membership

stigma

kinship

chosen affiliations

racial/ethnic categories

group labels

stigma by association arbitrary associations
Stigma-by-association:Arbitrary Associations

stigma

Arbitrary

Association

proximity

similarity

stigma by association knowledge structure associations
Stigma-by-association:Knowledge Structure Associations

Knowledge

Structure

stigma

world knowledge

ideographic knowledge

study 2 stigma by association
Study #2: Stigma-by-Association

Hypotheses:

  • An arbitrary association to an African American man can result in the devaluation of a job applicant
  • This stigma-by-association effect will be moderated by implicit anti-Black attitudes.
slide36

Main effect for race:

F(1,174) = 6.46, p < .04

Test for AMP as Moderator:

F(1,168) = 16.57, p < .01

study 3 reactions to a person with lung cancer

Study #3: Reactions to a Person with Lung Cancer

Hypothesis:

Reactions to a non-smoker with lung cancer will be moderated by implicit anti-smoker attitudes

slide38
c

stigma

Smokers

The association between smoking and lung cancer is part of most people’s knowledge structure

Lung

Cancer

experimental design
Experimental Design

story type

Smoker

With

Lung

Cancer

Non-smoker

With Lung

Cancer

Person

With

Breast

Cancer

order

Implicit

Measure/

Cancer

Story

Cancer

Story/

Implicit

Measure

measure of implicit attitudes toward smokers
Measure of Implicit Attitudes toward Smokers
  • How pleasant is the painting?

1 second

1 second

  • How pleasant is the painting?

abstract painting

signal photo

rating

slide44

Explicit Attitudes toward women who smoke cigarettes, women with breast cancer and women with lung cancer were measured with feeling thermometers

research questions
Research Questions
  • Will participants react more negatively to a person with lung cancer than a person with breast cancer? Does it matter whether the lung cancer was caused by smoking?
  • Will people react more negatively to a smoker with lung cancer than a non-smoker with lung cancer?
  • How do implicit attitudes toward smokers relate to reactions toward smokers and non-smokers with lung cancer?
  • Does blame mediate the difference between reactions toward smokers and non-smokers with lung cancer?
slide47

c

a

b

F(2,133) = 22.27, p < .01

Tukey HSD: a=b>c

slide48

c

b

a

F(2,133) = 117.11, p < .01

Tukey HSD: a=b>c

slide49
Concept of ModerationA moderator variable changes the impact of the independent variable upon the dependent variable

Barron & Kenny (1986)

Moderator

variable

Independent

variable

Dependent

variable

  • CONDITIONS OF PROOF OF MODERATION
  • Independent variable is correlated with dependent variable
  • Independent variable is NOT correlated with moderator variable
  • Moderator variable is correlated with dependent variable, maybe
    • in some conditions, but not others
  • Interaction of IV and ModV enhances the prediction of the DV
relationships of possible moderators to cancer story manipulation
Relationships of Possible Moderators to Cancer Story Manipulation
  • Implicit Anti-Smoker Attitudes F(2,130) = .39, NS
  • Explicit attitudes toward women who smoke F(2,130) = .85, NS
  • Explicit attitudes toward women with lung cancer F(2,130) = 2.82, NS
  • Explicit attitudes toward women with breast cancer F(2,130) = .85, NS
tests of moderator x cancer story interactions where blame is the dv
Tests of Moderator X Cancer Story Interactions where Blame is the DV
  • AMP F(2,121) = 2.15, NS
  • Attitudes toward women who smoke F(2,121) = .66, NS
  • Attitudes toward women with lung cancer F(2,121) = .57, NS
  • Attitudes toward women with breast cancer F(2,121) = .21, NS
tests of moderator x cancer story interactions where sympathy is the dv
Tests of Moderator X Cancer Story Interactions where Sympathy is the DV
  • Implicit Anti-Smoker Attitudes F(2,121) = 3.38, p = .04
  • Explicit attitudes toward women who smoke F(2,121) = .85, NS
  • Explicit attitudes toward women with lung cancer F(2,121) = 4.69, p = .01
  • Explicit attitudes toward women with breast cancer F(2,121) = 5.90, p < .01
conclusion about moderators
Conclusion about moderators
  • Implicit attitudes moderate the relationship between type of cancer and sympathy for a person with cancer: people with stronger implicit anti-smoker attitudes had less sympathy for a non-smoker with cancer
  • Explicit attitudes about women with lung cancer also moderated sympathy- people with more positive attitudes toward women with lung cancer had more sympathy for a non-smoker with lung cancer
slide56

Concept of MediationA mediator is an intervening psychological process or state through which the independent variable affects the dependent variable

Barron & Kenny (1986)

Mediator

variable

Independent

variable

Dependent

variable

  • CONDITIONS OF PROOF OF MEDIATION
  • Independent variable is correlated with dependent variable
  • Independent variable is correlated with mediator variable
  • Mediator variable is correlated with dependent variable
  • When IV and MV are simultaneously correlated with DV,
  • then relationship between IV and DV is reduced
test of mediation the values below represent unstandardized regression coefficients
Test of MediationThe values below represent unstandardized regression coefficients

Blame

-.39*

1.39*

Non-smoker

vs. Smoker

Sympathy

.76*

.21

Sobel Test of difference between .76 & .21:

4.40, p < .01

Conclusion: Blame completely mediates the

difference in sympathy for non-smokers vs.

smokers with lung cancer

test of mediation the values below represent unstandardized regression coefficients58
Test of MediationThe values below represent unstandardized regression coefficients

Blame

-.37*

1.63*

Breast cancer

vs. Smoker

Sympathy

.86*

.20

Sobel Test of difference between .86 & .20:

3.98, p < .01

Conclusion: Blame completely mediates the

difference in sympathy for women with breast

cancer vs. smokers with lung cancer

conclusion about mediation
Conclusion about mediation
  • Blame is a mediator between the type of cancer and the degree of sympathy people feel for someone with cancer
  • People have less sympathy for someone with lung cancer who smokes than someone who does not smoke because they blame the smoker more than the non-smoker
  • People have less sympathy for a person with with lung cancer who smokes than someone with breast cancer because they blame the smoker more than the person with breast cancer
conclusions about correlations
Conclusions about correlations
  • Implicit attitudes (AMP) do not correlate with measures of beliefs or motivations to control prejudice
  • Some explicit attitudes do correlate with some measures of beliefs about smoking and motivations to control prejudice
slide62

Conclusions of Today’s Talk

General implicit anti-stigma attitudes correlate with automatic negative behaviors toward individuals who are stigmatized.

General explicit anti-stigma attitudes correlate with deliberative negative behaviors toward individuals who are stigmatized.

General explicit anti-stigma attitudes are correlated with blaming the stigmatized and concerns about political correctness

General implicit anti-stigma attitudes moderate stigma-by-association effects.

slide63

Conclusions of Today’s Talk

General implicit anti-stigma attitudes correlate with automatic negative behaviors toward individuals who are stigmatized.

General explicit anti-stigma attitudes correlate with deliberative negative behaviors toward individuals who are stigmatized.

General explicit anti-stigma attitudes are correlated with blaming the stigmatized and concerns about political correctness

General implicit anti-stigma attitudes moderate stigma-by-association effects.

ad