Emotion Theory Of Prejudice

Prejudice has been one of the most outstanding topics in social psychology since the Social Distance Scale was published by Bogardus (1933), and recent literature has pointed to the specific intergroup emotions derive from the appraisal of intergroup threat in the real-world prejudice. In order to understand the role of emotions in prejudice formation and reduction, I will begin with a brief presentation of Intergroup Emotion Theory which proposes an alternative conceptualization of prejudice, and then move on to the analysis of contemporary phenomena of prejudice regarding as a social emotion. Further, I will discuss the prejudice-reducing process from the emotion perspective, especially the affective mechanism of intergroup contact process,

That is what Intergroup Emotion Theory (IET; Smith, 1993) highlights. The theory integrates the self-categorization theory (Turner, Hogg, & Oakes et al., 1987) and appraisal theories of emotions in the individual-level (Lazarus, 1991). When the group membership becomes salient, people tend to ‘self-stereotype’ themselves as having similar characteristics to other group members, which leads to sharing group-typical emotions within groups. Moreover, ‘centrality’ in ingroup identification generates the individuals’ sensitivity to different threats from outgroups (Leach, Van, & Zebel et al., 2008). The appraisal of such threats triggers intergroup emotions, and some prejudiced attitudes and discriminated behavior would appear later for dissipating the negative moods (Maitner, Mackie, & Smith, 2006). In regard to prejudice, differing from the traditional view of prejudice as an antipathetic attitude (Allport, 1954), Smith (1993, p. 304) has defined it alternatively as ‘a social emotion experienced with respect to one’s social identity as a group member, with an outgroup as a target’. Intergroup Emotion Theory admirably breaks the unidimensional construct of prejudice into complex and distinct components. In other words, prejudice is not some overall negative attitude toward an outgroup but possesses the emotion specificity as evaluating the contextually-specific

Differing emotional reactions, such as fear, anger, and disgust, could be aroused when individuals encounter with specific target groups in the different situations. For instance, the old-fashioned blatant sexism has been replaced by ambivalent sexism that elicits the appreciation when interacting with conventional females, in contrasting with hostility against unconventional ones who threaten the identity and power of males (Glick & Fiske, 2001). In addition, apart from prejudice with the sentiment cluster in one direction (i.e., negative or positive), some types of prejudice contain a mix of negative and positive emotions, like the ‘envious’ and ‘paternalistic’ prejudice. The former would appear when attaching to groups like the rich, while the latter associating with more vulnerable groups like the elderly and handicapped (Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, et al., 2002). Modern prejudice exists in a much subtle and implicit way. People today consciously deny their negative feelings toward stigmatized groups. The motivation to be socially appropriate, along with inescapable negative feelings, brings about psychological discomfort. Take the homophobia as an example; the appraisal of threats to traditional sexuality and health triggers fear and aversion toward homosexuality. However, individuals would attempt to conceal these negative emotions and attitudes for reflecting the