REDUCING PREJUDICE IN STUDENTS

Reducing Prejudice in Students

Reducing Prejudice in Students

Introduction

Prejudice is considered to have different sources, the main ones are the different forms of fear. (Schiappa, 2005) Stephan and Stephan integrated threat theory of prejudice is inclusive of different types of threat: the expectation that others will do mischief, the perception that the world view different from the other will create challenges to his; the presumption that interact to cause embarrassment, rejection, or ridicule, and the generation of fear of negative consequences because of negative stereotypes. They argue that several factors may influence the degree to which an individual believes that these sources of threat:

• Strong identification with one's own group (see section on issues of identity);

• The extent to which a policy has negative consequences for the individual;

• The quantity and, especially, the quality of previous contacts between the individual and the group;

• Knowledge of the individual in the group, intergroup conflicts before

• The degree of difference in status between the group of individuals and the other group

The higher these factors are more the individual feels threatened, and therefore, the more likely s / he will be prejudiced against members of this group.

A mantra heard children singing in fashion, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me." Words, in fact, can hurt; vicious language is part of the arsenal of Bigot and the tyrant himself. Attitudes, however, by themselves, are more likely to injure the owner of the target. If I avoid people who are different from me, I stunt my own growth and have little impact on the objective of my discontent. (Herek 1987), but each of us is likely to bring the attitude to behave, whether with sticks, stones, words, or something more subtle.

Unfortunately, prejudice is not simply an attitude that remains internal to its owner, it affects behavior. When negative attitudes on the basis of differences translate into behavior, discrimination and social inequality that it produces. Therefore, efforts to reduce prejudice are well advised to take social context into account when focusing on attitudes of individuals.

At least since the book on prejudice generative Allport in 1954, the contact hypothesis has been the backbone of a high percentage of efforts to reduce prejudice. In simple terms the hypothesis is that increased knowledge resulting from the multiplication of contacts will reduce levels of harm. The assumption is logical. Fear is a major cause of injury. In the case of the other, we have "a fear of the unknown, fear of the unknown. If fear is the father of prejudice, ignorance is his grandfather. "(Allport 1954). It is not only common sense, it is supported by research. In their meta-analysis of more than preliminary 200 research studies, Pettigrew and the troupe has found that "the first response to our request is that intergroup contact is generally relate negatively to prejudice" (2000, p. 98) [1].

Research

Of course, there are many warnings in the event of contact, the most widely discussed is that the contact must be ...