Cite this article as:

Bocharova E. E. Structural Peculiarity of Discriminatory Attitudes of the Personality. Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Educational Acmeology. Developmental Psychology, 2019, vol. 8, iss. 2, pp. 146-156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18500/2304-9790-2019-8-2-146-156


UDC: 
316.6
Language: 
Russian

Structural Peculiarity of Discriminatory Attitudes of the Personality

Abstract: 

The purpose of the study presented in the article is to investigate structural peculiarities of discriminatory attitudes empirically. The study was conducted on a sample (N=168), mean age 27,63 years, the sample was mostly composed of females (78,6%). In the course of study we used the following psycho-diagnostic toolset: a questionnaire that was specifically developed for the investigation, Yanoff-Bulman’s “Scale of Basic Beliefs” (M. A. Padun and A. V. Kotelnikova’s adaptation). It is supposed that there are differences in the content of structure-forming variables of individual discriminatory attitudes. Differences in the content of the cognitive component of discriminatory attitudes were traced. Manifestation of negative valency of discriminatory attitudes was recorded in the following cases: “I have prejudices against representatives of another group”; “If someone has external signs of belonging to another group, it makes me worried”; “If I see a representative of this group in a public place, and he/she behaves too freely, I will make a remark concerning his behaviour”; “When I see a representative of this group in the street, I think it would be better for him/her to stay at home”; “If there is a person in a family, who is a representative of this group, then this family should live its own special life and not to seek any privileges.” In this case, we observe readiness of an individual to increase social distance from representatives of other groups. Manifestation of negative ambivalence of discriminatory attitudes was noted in the following case: “I think that students who came to us to study cannot behave so freely and actively”; “Representatives of some groups are allowed too much”; “Presence of some clearly distinguished features should be taken into account when hiring a person.” Let us point out that the logic of discriminatory attitudes actualization is associated with the following attributions “I do not have, but he/she has”, “Sorry, but it cannot be otherwise”, “I have – he/she does not have”. The applied aspect of the problem under study can be implemented in the development of preventive programs to reduce the risk of discriminatory behavior.

References

1.  Ryaguzova E. V. Socio-cultural Paradox (Antinomy) Distinction between «I – Other». Izv. Saratov univ. (N. S.) Ser. Filosofi ya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika [Izv. Saratov. Univ. (N. S.), Ser. Philosophy. Pedagogy. Psychology], 2016, vol. 16, iss. 1, pp. 85–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2016-16-1-85-89 (in Russian).
2.  Dontsov A. I., Perelygina E. B., Zotova O. Yu., Mostikov S. V. Trust as a factor of psychological security in interethnic interaction. Sotsial’naia psikhologiia i obshchestvo [Social Psychology and Society], 2018, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 21–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2018090202 (in Russian).
3.  Shamionov R. M. Sootnosheniye diskriminatsionnykh ustanovok i avtoritarizma pravogo tolka [Ratio of Discriminatory Attitudes and Right-Wing Authoritarianism]. Strakhovskiye chteniya-2018: materialy mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf.: sb. nauch. tr. / pod red. M. S. Tkachevoj (otv. red.), M. V. Grigor’evoj, R. M. Shamionova [Strakhov Readings: collection of research papers]. Saratov, 2018, pp. 364–368 (in Russian).
4.  Bocharova E. E. Soderzhatel’nye harakteristiki «predmetnogo polja» diskriminacionnyh ustanovok [Content Characteristics of the “Subject Field” of Discriminatory Attitudes]. Vestn. RUDN. Ser. Psikhologiya i pedagogika [RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics], 2018, no. 13, pp. 308–322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2018-15-3-308-322 (in Russian).
5.  Al Ramiah A., Hewstone M., Dovidio J. F., Penner L. A. The social psychology of discrimination: theory, measurement and consequences. In: L. Bond, F. McGinnity, H. Russell, eds. Making equality count: Irish and international research measuring equality and discrimination. Dublin, 2010, сhapter 5, pp. 84–112.
6.  Bhugra D. Social discrimination and social justice. International Review of Psychiatry, 2016, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 336–341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2016.1210359
7.  Rotter J. B. Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. American Psychologist, 1971, vol. 26, no. 5, рp. 443–452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031464
8.  Abramov V. V. On one of the approaches to the study of intergroup relations and effects. Mir psikhologii [The World of Psychology], 2008, no. 3, pp. 254–258 (in Russian).
9.  Ryaguzova E. V. Social’naya psihologiya lichnostnyh reprezentaciy vzaimodejstviya «Ya – Drugoy». Saratov, 2011. 304 p. (in Russian).
10. Gervais M., Fessler D. On the deep structure of social affect: Attitudes, emotions, sentiments, and the case of «contempt». Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2017, no. 40, pp. 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16000352
11. Burns T. Towards a Theory of Structural Discrimination: Cultural, Institutional and Interactional Mechanisms of the «European Dilemma». In: G. Delanty, R. Wodak, P. Jones, eds. Identity, Belonging and Migration.  Liverpool University Press, 2011,  pp. 152–172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5949/UPO9781846314537.009
12. Klenova M. A. Characteristics of objects of discriminatory attitudes among youth. Materialy mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. «21 vek: fundamental’naya nauka i tekhnologii» [Proceedings of the International Scientifi c and Practical Conference «21st Century: Fundamental Science and Technology»]. North Charleston, USA, 2018, pp. 111–114 (in Russian).
13. Mackie D., Smith E. From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups. N. Y., 2002, 270 p.
14. Schwarz N., Clore G. How do I feel about it? Informative functions of affective states. In: Fielder K., Forgas J., eds. Affect, cognition, and social behavior. Toronto, 1988. P. 44–62.
15. Armitage C. J., Conner M.  Attitudinal ambivalence: A test of three key hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2000, no. 26, pp. 1421–1432.
16. Barrett L. F.  Solving the emotion paradox: Categorization and the experience of emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2006, no. 10, pp. 20–46.
17. Russell J. A., Carroll J. M. On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 1999, no. 125, pp. 3–30.
18. Mitina O. V., Padun M. A., Zelyanina A. N. Development of the Russian version of the «Test of implicit positive and negative affect». Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 2017, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 113–130 (in Russian).
19. Osin E. N. Measurement of Positive and Negative Emotions: Development of the Russian-language Analogue of the Panas Technique. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal VShE [Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics], 2012, no. 4, pp. 91–110 (in Russian).
20. Dorofeev V. A., Mochalova Yu. A. Positive and negative ambivalence of trust to the teacher between students with different styles of pedagogical leadership.  Psikhologopedagogicheskie issledovaniya [PsychologicalEducational Studies], 2018, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 114–124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/psyedu.2018100210 (in Russian).
21. Talaska C. A., Fiske S. T., Chaiken S.  Legitimating racial discrimination: A meta-analysis of the racial attitudebehavior literature shows that emotions, not beliefs, best predicts discrimination. Social Justice Research, 2008, no. 21, pp. 263–296.
22. Padun M. A., Kotel’nikova A. V. Personal basic beliefs research method of R. Janoff-Bulman. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 2008, no. 4, pp. 98–106 (in Russian).

Full text (in Russian): 
Short text (in English):