Sham reasoning, Humpty Dumpty, and the burden of proof.

Slife and Reber ask of psychologists that they recognize their prejudice against theism and the incompatibility between theistic and naturalistic worldviews. Yet, the subtext of their article is that theism and naturalism are equally valid and that psychology’s secularism is a mistake. Given that theism is not beyond reason, the only sufficient ground for charging psychologists with prejudice is if (i) theism has survived serious attempts at conceptual and empirical test, and (ii) psychology ignores or disguises this fact. So, the grounds for believing in the reality of a supernatural existent are highly relevant to the authors’ allegation. However, their concept of God affords no such grounds. They disavow the logic involved in the ordinary meaning of the term “incompatible” and they ignore a crucial distinction between conditions of existence and qualities of things or processes. The consequence is that either God is this-worldly, and there is no ontological basis to Slife and Reber’s incompatibility thesis, or God’s mode of existence is quite different from the mode of existence of ordinary things and all the problems of dualism follow. Either way, their charge of prejudice is without foundation. The burden of proof rests with the defender of theism and, for now, psychology’s secularism can be considered a mark of the discipline’s (sometimes questionable) rationality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Is there a pervasive implicit bias against theism in psychology?

To address the title question, the authors first conceptualize the worldview of theism in relation to its historical counterpart in Western culture, naturalism. Many scholars view the worldview of naturalism as not only important to traditional science but also neutral to theism. This neutrality has long provided the justification for psychological science to inform and even correct theistic understandings. Still, this view of neutrality, as the authors show, stems from the presumption that these two worldviews are philosophically compatible. The authors’ review of the traditional candidates for compatibility suggests not only that these candidates fail to reconcile naturalism and theism but also that these worldviews are fundamentally incompatible. Therefore, attempts to use the insights gleaned from a naturalistic worldview to inform or correct the understandings of a theistic worldview could constitute a significant prejudice against theism and theists. The authors then provide practical examples of this prejudice in the following: (1) mainstream psychology and its history, (2) research design and explanation in the psychology of religion, and (3) interpretations of important philosophers and scholars relevant to psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The problem of prejudice in plural worlds.

This is to agree with Slife and Reber that the field of psychology has been negatively biased toward theism. However, accusations of bias or prejudice typically presume that with an even assay of available evidence, that such dispositions would be erased. In a world of multiple constructions of reality, morality, and justice, such an assumption is wholly unwarranted. The present article approaches the presence of multiple worlds from a social constructionist perspective. Proposed are a number of arguments to support an approach toward difference that emphasizes transformative dialogue, that is, dialogue among conflicting parties or standpoints that moves toward mutual viability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Overcoming contradiction in the four-dimensional dialectic of action.

Author argues that the implicit bias against theism is part of a larger pattern of ignoring the realm of illusion (Pruyser, 1983) and related products of culture. In response, each psychologist must develop an integrated theory that incorporates four dimensions of human experience: intrapersonal, interpersonal, impersonal, and transpersonal. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perceptions of religiously based discrimination among Christian students in secular and Christian university settings.

The authors utilized a modified version of Herek’s (1986, 1993) Sexual Orientation Survey to assess experiences of religiously based prejudice and discrimination reported by conservative Christian students at public (N = 96) and private religious (N = 96) university settings. Apart from hearing more prejudicial verbal comments, participants attending a secular university did not report experiencing higher levels of actual discrimination and prejudice than respondents attending a Christian university, with one exception: being discriminated against by university faculty. Symptoms of depression and anxiety were not related to perceptions of religiously based prejudice among participants. These findings neither support claims of widespread prejudice against conservative Christian students at secular universities nor permit the complete dismissal of such concerns, particularly among university faculty. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

White juror bias: An investigation of prejudice against Black defendants in the American courtroom.

Racial prejudice in the courtroom is examined through a historical sketch of racism in the legal system, a review of psychological research on White juror bias, and a study investigating White mock jurors' judgments of a fictional trial summary. The central hypothesis is that salient racial issues at trial activate the normative racial attitudes held by White jurors. In previous eras, these racial norms encouraged overtly anti-Black prejudice. But in modern America, many Whites embrace an egalitarian value system and try to behave in an appropriately nonprejudiced manner when race is salient. Therefore, contrary to the intuition of many scholars and researchers, contemporary White jurors are more likely to demonstrate racial bias against a Black defendant in interracial trials without blatantly racial issues. Empirical data suggest that this pattern of bias is not limited to one type of crime or one type of racial issue. Practical implications and future research directions are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Fanning the flames of prejudice: The influence of specific incidental emotions on implicit prejudice.

Three experiments examined the impact of incidental emotions on implicit intergroup evaluations. Experiment 1 demonstrated that for unknown social groups, two negative emotions that are broadly applicable to intergroup conflict (anger and disgust) both created implicit bias where none had existed before. However, for known groups about which perceivers had prior knowledge, emotions increased implicit prejudice only if the induced emotion was applicable to the outgroup stereotype. Disgust increased bias against disgust-relevant groups (e.g., homosexuals) but anger did not (Experiment 2); anger increased bias against anger-relevant groups (e.g., Arabs) but disgust did not (Experiment 3). Consistent with functional theories of emotion, these findings suggest that negative intergroup emotions signal specific types of threat. If the emotion-specific threat is applicable to prior expectations of a group, the emotion ratchets up implicit prejudice toward that group. However, if the emotion-specific threat is not applicable to the target group, evaluations remain unchanged. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Religious orientation and overt versus covert racial prejudice.

Tested the prediction that being more religious in one way—as an intrinsic end in itself—would be associated with displaying less racial prejudice when the prejudice was overt, but not when it was covert. It was also predicted that being more religious in another way—as an open-end quest—would be associated with displaying less racial prejudice even when the prejudice was covert. An attributional ambiguity technique developed by M. L. Snyder et al (see record 1981-05489-001) was used. 44 White undergraduates interested in religion chose between sitting with a Black person or a White person to watch a movie. In the overt prejudice condition, the same movie was being shown in both locations; in the covert prejudice condition, 2 movies were being shown. Although not all predicted relations were statistically reliable, the pattern of correlations was consistent with both predictions. An intrinsic orientation to religion was significantly negatively correlated with choosing to sit with the White person in the overt condition, but this correlation was close to zero in the covert condition. Only the quest orientation to religion was significantly negatively correlated with choosing to sit with the White person in the covert condition. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The regulation of explicit and implicit race bias: The role of motivations to respond without prejudice.

Three studies examined the moderating role of motivations to respond without prejudice (e.g., internal and external) in expressions of explicit and implicit race bias. In all studies, participants reported their explicit attitudes toward Blacks. Implicit measures consisted of a sequential priming task (Study 1) and the Implicit Association Test (Studies 2 and 3). Study 3 used a cognitive busyness manipulation to preclude effects of controlled processing on implicit responses. In each study, explicit race bias was moderated by internal motivation to respond without prejudice, whereas implicit race bias was moderated by the interaction of internal and external motivation to respond without prejudice. Specifically, high internal, low external participants exhibited lower levels of implicit race bias than did all other participants. Implications for the development of effective self-regulation of race bias are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Gender, ethnic, and body type biases: The generality of prejudice in childhood.

From a very young age, children show signs of prejudice. However, it is not clear whether those who are the most biased in one domain (e.g., gender) are also the most biased in other domains (e.g., ethnicity). This study addressed the issue using multiple measures of prejudice (negative bias) in 3 domains: gender (male, female), ethnicity-language (French Canadian, English Canadian), and body type (overweight, normal weight). The flexibility of attitudes (i.e., the belief that people from different categories can possess similar traits) was also assessed. A total of 254 children (127 boys, 127 girls) in kindergarten to Grade 6 participated. Children demonstrated clear biases against groups to which they did not belong, although attitudes became more flexible and prejudice declined somewhat with age. There was little predictive power across domains; that is, there was no evidence that prejudice represents a general characteristic that differentiates children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Gender-specific models of homosexual prejudice: Religiosity, authoritarianism, and gender roles.

Utilizing moderated hierarchical multiple regression analyses, the researchers examined the relative roles of right wing authoritarianism (RWA), religious fundamentalism (RF), general religiosity, sex, gender role traits, and self-discrepancy along gender role traits in predicting multiple dimensions of prejudice toward homosexuals. The goal was to identify gender-specific correlates of homosexual prejudice. Findings revealed that RWA exhibited a consistently positive relationship with prejudice, which along the Condemnation-Tolerance dimension of prejudice was stronger for men. Also, RF's and general religiosity's relationship with prejudice was consistently fully mediated by the presence of RWA. Gender roles were inconsistently correlated with dimensions of prejudice, and the interaction of masculine gender roles and perceived self-discrepancy from gender roles was only significant in predicting the Condemnation-Tolerance homosexual prejudice scale. Lastly, for females, general religiosity was a significant positive predictor for only the Condemnation-Tolerance and Neutral Contact Apprehension homosexual prejudice scales. Implications are reviewed related to authoritarianism as a universal correlate of homosexual prejudice, RF's and RWA's distinctiveness, perceived self-discrepancy from masculine gender roles as a male-specific correlate of homosexual prejudice, and general religiosity as a female-specific correlate. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A note on Rokeach's theory of prejudice.

"Rokeach's hypothesis that prejudice can be accounted for by differences in the belief systems between two persons, or between a person and members of a racial or religious group, was tested and rejected. Rokeach's own experimental confirmation of his hypothesis is due to an artifact of his method of measuring prejudice. His position is re-evaluated in the light of the present findings." From Psyc Abstracts 36:01:3GD84T. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The use and abuse of religious beliefs in dividing and conquering between socially marginalized groups: The same-sex marriage debate.

This article discusses the use and abuse of religious beliefs and their role in divide-and-conquer strategies. Divide-and-conquer strategies are engaged to disrupt potential coalitions between and among marginalized group members, specifically sexual minority groups and people of color. Tensions between these groups have been exacerbated by the debate on same-sex marriage and comparisons between the discriminatory treatment of each group. A component of this discussion includes a brief exploration of one of the historical abuses of religious doctrine used to legitimize the marginalization of people of color and sexual minorities in the United States. For African Americans, one form of marginalization was reflected in criminalizing interracial marriage, and for members of sexual minority groups, a form of marginalization is denying group members the right to marry. The author also explores culturally competent and respectful disciplinary and clinical responses to religiously derived prejudice against sexual minority group members and people of color and discusses the implications for multicultural discourse. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The modern face of prejudice and structural features that moderate the effect of cooperation on affect

Facial muscle activity and self-reports were examined for racial bias in 3 studies. In the first 2 experiments, While participants imagined cooperating with a Black or White partner. Experiment 1 manipulated reward structure in the context of cooperating with a deficient partner. Experiment 2 manipulated partner deficiency and willingness to expend compensatory effort. On both facial EMG and self-report measures, joint rewards produced more negative affect than independent rewards. However, all partners were liked more when they were willing to try to compensate for their deficits. In addition, more liking was reported for Black partners, but EMG activity indicated bias against Blacks. Experiment 3 investigated individual differences in prejudice. Again, a greater preference for Blacks than Whites occurred on self-report measures, but in their facial muscle activity, high-prejudiced participants exhibited bias against Blacks.     

From automatic antigay prejudice to behavior: The moderating role of conscious beliefs about gender and behavioral control.

Two experiments tested whether the relation between automatic prejudice and discriminatory behavior is moderated by 2 conscious processes: conscious egalitarian beliefs and behavioral control. The authors predicted that, when both conscious processes are deactivated, automatic prejudice would elicit discriminatory behavior. When either of the 2 processes is activated, behavioral bias would be eliminated. The authors assessed participants' automatic attitudes toward gay men, conscious beliefs about gender, behavioral control, and interactions with gay confederates. In Experiment 1, men's beliefs about gender were heterogeneous, whereas women's beliefs were mostly egalitarian; men's responses supported the predictions, but women's responses did not. In Experiment 2, the authors recruited a sample with greater diversity in gender-related beliefs. Results showed that, for both sexes, automatic prejudice produced biased behavior in the absence of conscious egalitarian beliefs and behavioral control. The presence of either conscious process eliminated behavioral bias. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The politics of clinical judgment: Early empirical returns.

Reviews research pertinent to charges that clinicians' judgments are biased against minority and counternormative persons. Evaluative prejudice is found to be a more circumscribed phenomenon than critics of the mental health establishment have forecast. Clinical analogues in which patient race, sex, and value attributions were systematically varied have generally yielded null or marginally supportive results. Social-class designation has been more consistently found to affect psychological appraisals, but even here the drawing of a bias inference is precluded by the rival interpretation of effective environmental-cue utilization by clinicians. Evidence that practitioner political values or experience moderate patient labeling effects has likewise proved unconvincing. Methodological strategies are suggested for strengthening empirical tests of political bias formulations per se by reducing the logical compellingness of the expectancy-cue utilization explanation for any patient attribution effects obtained. (2? p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A value-congruent bias in the forgiveness forecasts of religious people.

Given the weak and potentially tenuous association between religiosity and actual forgiveness reported in the literature, why is it that religious people consistently predict they would forgive interpersonal offenses? Using a newly devised method for testing multiple mediator models, two studies were conducted to examine the hypothesis that religious people’s forgiveness values mediate the relationship between religiosity and forgiveness forecasts, independent of self-perceived past forgiveness tendencies. The first study focused on predicted forgiveness of hypothetical offenders, and the second examined forecasted forgiveness of those responsible for the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001. In both studies, the mediating role of forgiveness values (independent of past forgiveness tendencies) was established, suggesting a value-congruent bias in religious people’s forgiveness forecasts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Implicit prejudice and stereotyping: How automatic are they? Introduction to the special section.

This special issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cognition addresses issues of the measurement and the malleability of implicit prejudice and stereotypes. The findings raise fundamental questions about the assumptions underlying the assessment of implicit prejudice, particularly with regard to the widely used Implicit Association Test (A. Greenwald, D. McGhee, & J. Schwartz, 1998) and the assumption of extant models of prejudice and stereotyping that implicit biases are automatically and invariantly activated when perceivers come in contact with members of stigmatized groups. Several of the articles show that contextual manipulations produce reductions in implicit manifestations of prejudice and stereotyping. The articles in this issue, in challenging conventional wisdom, are thought provoking and should be generative in the field's ongoing efforts to understand the role of implicit (and explicit) processes involved in prejudice and stereotyping. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Prejudice and perception: The role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon.

Two experiments used a priming paradigm to investigate the influence of racial cues on the perceptual identification of weapons. In Experiment 1, participants identified guns faster when primed with Black faces compared with White faces. In Experiment 2, participants were required to respond quickly, causing the racial bias to shift from reaction time to accuracy. Participants misidentified tools as guns more often when primed with a Black face than with a White face. L. L. Jacoby's (1991) process dissociation procedure was applied to demonstrate that racial primes influenced automatic (A) processing, but not controlled (C) processing. The response deadline reduced the C estimate but not the A estimate. The motivation to control prejudice moderated the relationship between explicit prejudice and automatic bias. Implications are discussed on applied and theoretical levels. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)