What was the result of your IAT, and do you feel that the test produced valid results in your case?
o In your opinion, is it difficult to accurately measure prejudice? Why or why not?
o Describe other measurements sociologists use to calculate prejudice
3 answers
How can we possibly discuss your IAT, and whether or not they are valid for you?
My results were terrible -- because I didn't take it.
It's a dud if it's supposed to measure prejudice because nothing can objectively measure such complex emotions and behaviors.
I haven't read the text so I don't know how sociologists calculate prejudice.
What about you? What did you find? What do you think?
It's a dud if it's supposed to measure prejudice because nothing can objectively measure such complex emotions and behaviors.
I haven't read the text so I don't know how sociologists calculate prejudice.
What about you? What did you find? What do you think?
If you do not define an abbreviation (IAT), it is difficult for readers to know what you mean.
Assuming that the IAT is a paper and pencil test, many people feel uncomfortable in admitting their prejudices, leading to less valid results.
There used to be a "Nonesuch" test, which asked something like, "Out of 100 people in each category, how many would have to be present before you would feel uncomfortable?"
The categories included all sorts of races, nationalities, religions and ethnic groups. However, within these categories were three "Nonesuch" groups — Danerian, Wallerian and another that I cannot remember.
They found that the level of acceptance of the Nonesuch groups corresponded closely to the level of low acceptance of various outgroups for that person. This is just one attempt to measure prejudice. This led the researchers to conclude that the prejudices were — to a great extent — a function of the perceiver's suspicions of unknown groups in contrast to actual characteristics of the outgroups.
Other studies have shown that, as one gets to know outgroup members on an individual basis, usually prejudiced attitudes against that group tend to be reduced.
This is just one attempt to measure prejudice. I searched Google under the key words "prejudice measure" to get these possible sources:
http://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/Users/BHippel/Articles/1997.vHSV.JESP.pdf
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:cxtWKq1uijkJ:www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dcarney/DRCarney.with.ident.info.pdf+prejudice+measure&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=safari
http://www.sparknotes.com/psychology/psych101/socialpsychology/section2.rhtml
http://www.diversityweb.org/Digest/Sp.Sm00/tolerance.html
There are many more sources, if you want to continue the search.
Since prejudice is influenced by so many factors, it is very difficult to measure on a reliable basis. Even so, some basic trends can be indicated.
In the future, you can find the information you desire more quickly, if you use appropriate key words to do your own search. Also see http://hanlib.sou.edu/searchtools/.
I hope this helps a little more. Thanks for asking.
Assuming that the IAT is a paper and pencil test, many people feel uncomfortable in admitting their prejudices, leading to less valid results.
There used to be a "Nonesuch" test, which asked something like, "Out of 100 people in each category, how many would have to be present before you would feel uncomfortable?"
The categories included all sorts of races, nationalities, religions and ethnic groups. However, within these categories were three "Nonesuch" groups — Danerian, Wallerian and another that I cannot remember.
They found that the level of acceptance of the Nonesuch groups corresponded closely to the level of low acceptance of various outgroups for that person. This is just one attempt to measure prejudice. This led the researchers to conclude that the prejudices were — to a great extent — a function of the perceiver's suspicions of unknown groups in contrast to actual characteristics of the outgroups.
Other studies have shown that, as one gets to know outgroup members on an individual basis, usually prejudiced attitudes against that group tend to be reduced.
This is just one attempt to measure prejudice. I searched Google under the key words "prejudice measure" to get these possible sources:
http://www.psy.unsw.edu.au/Users/BHippel/Articles/1997.vHSV.JESP.pdf
http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:cxtWKq1uijkJ:www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dcarney/DRCarney.with.ident.info.pdf+prejudice+measure&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=safari
http://www.sparknotes.com/psychology/psych101/socialpsychology/section2.rhtml
http://www.diversityweb.org/Digest/Sp.Sm00/tolerance.html
There are many more sources, if you want to continue the search.
Since prejudice is influenced by so many factors, it is very difficult to measure on a reliable basis. Even so, some basic trends can be indicated.
In the future, you can find the information you desire more quickly, if you use appropriate key words to do your own search. Also see http://hanlib.sou.edu/searchtools/.
I hope this helps a little more. Thanks for asking.
2 answers