• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
For visually-impairedFor visually-impairedUser profile (HSE staff only)Search
Advanced search
Menu
HSE University
User profile (HSE staff only)Search
Advanced search

Course Syllabus

Master 2021/2022

Social Psychology of Prejudice

Category 'Best Course for Career Development'
Category 'Best Course for Broadening Horizons and Diversity of Knowledge and Skills'
Category 'Best Course for New Knowledge and Skills'
Type: Elective course (Applied Social Psychology)
Area of studies: Psychology
Delivered by: School of Psychology
Where: Faculty of Social Sciences
When: 1 year, 3, 4 module
Mode of studies: offline
Open to: students of one campus
Instructors: Marina Kotova
Master’s programme: Applied Social Psychology
Language: English
ECTS credits: 5
Contact hours: 48

Course Syllabus

Full Syllabus

Abstract

Course Description 1) Pre-requisites The course is designed for first year master students and is based on the previously learned courses (“Theory and Methodology of Modern Psychology”, “Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods in Psychology”, “Cross-cultural Psychology”). 2) Abstract The course is aimed to introduce to students basic findings and new directions in the area of prejudice research. Specific topics addressed are: 1) on the nature of prejudice: “old” prejudice and modern racism; 2) prejudice formation: easy to get in touch, hard to get rid of; 3) group identity, scapegoating, and stereotype threat “assistance” in prejudice formation and enhancing; 4) prejudice reducing techniques: strengths and weaknesses. Classroom activities follow several rules: • Combination of lecture sessions (which are aimed to provide theoretical and methodological basics) with discussions, analysis of video fragments, and group work (which develop students’ abilities to analyze and compare different approaches, justify their ideas, and participate in the scientific discussion) makes the course diverse and interesting for students. • Concentrated approach to course material and studying process. Each meeting is devoted to a specific topic and includes both a lecture and a seminar session. This type of classes’ organization leads to several consequences. Foremost, students come at lecture having a background knowledge that provides in turn a base for lecture information learning. Further, there is no a time gap between lecture and seminar, that reduces time for introduction part of seminar and allows to study more in depth. • Tasks that increase student’s responsibility for the education process. For instance, students chose a particular topic, form a working group, read additional literature about this topic, and are responsible for discussion at seminar devoted to this topic. • Tasks that are aimed to set a connection between course materials and students’ research projects. This gives students an opportunity to see an alternative to their research plan, compare and evaluate its strength and weaknesses. 3) Working language of the course is English (teaching and all communications). Duration of the course is 2 modules, from January till July, 190 academic hours (5 credits) in total, including: 48 hours in class and 142 hours for self-studying. Assessment method includes short quizzes, final test, article analysis (homework 1) and research project (homework 2, team task).
Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

  • The main objectives of the course are: • to acquaint students with basic theories and investigations in the area of prejudice and discrimination research; • to develop students’ abilities to analyze and compare different research approaches; to identify prejudice reducing techniques strengths and weaknesses; • to develop students' abilities to present their ideas, analyze research design and results, and to organize the scientific discussion.
Expected Learning Outcomes

Expected Learning Outcomes

  • Student is able to analyze scientific literature, argue his or her point of view, and participate in a scientific discussion, specifically, student is able to make a theoretical overview of a particular course topic and organize a part of seminar discussion.
  • Student is able to assess and verify information required for professional performance and synthesize new information if it is needed
  • Student is able to plan and conduct an independent research project according to international academic standards, specifically, student is able to propose the research plan based on course materials, conduct a study, and present research results correctly.
  • Student is able to present the results of scientific work in a written and verbal form in English, specifically, student is able to write a theoretical overview of a particular course topic in English and present this work using illustrations (e.g. Power Point slides).
  • Student is able to use modern IT technologies for information search and analysis, specifically, student is able to find appropriate literature in the electronic library database of HSE.
  • Student is familiar with the core theoretical and methodological backgrounds of humanitarian knowledge, specifically, student is familiar with the core theoretical and methodological backgrounds in the area of prejudice research.
  • Student is familiar with the research methods of social psychology and their application in the particular research field, specifically, student is familiar with the research methods application in the area of prejudice research.
Course Contents

Course Contents

  • Introduction: Overview of the course
  • Differences in prejudice definitions and research methodology
  • “Old” prejudice and modern racism
  • Prejudice formation and categorization: easy to get in touch, hard to get rid of
  • Group identity and prejudice formation and enhancing
  • Stereotyping, scapegoating and prejudice
  • Intergroup threat and its consequences for intergroup relations
  • Prejudice reducing techniques: strengths and weaknesses
  • Crossed-categorization, ‘re-‘ and ‘de-‘ categorization, dual identities and its effects
  • Particular prejudice reducing practice analysis
  • Research practice
Assessment Elements

Assessment Elements

  • non-blocking Class participatioin
  • non-blocking Quizzes
  • non-blocking Homework 1
  • non-blocking Homework 2
  • non-blocking Final test
Interim Assessment

Interim Assessment

  • 2021/2022 4th module
    0.25 * Homework 2 + 0.2 * Final test + 0.15 * Homework 1 + 0.25 * Class participatioin + 0.15 * Quizzes
Bibliography

Bibliography

Recommended Core Bibliography

  • Allbritten, D., Mainzer, R., & Ziegler, D. (2004). Will Students with Disabilities Be Scapegoats for School Failures? Educational Horizons, 82(2), 153–160. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ684754
  • Ashby, F. G., & Maddox, W. T. (2005). Human Category Learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 149–178. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070217
  • Cameron, J. A., Alvarez, J. M., Ruble, D. N., & Fuligni, A. J. (2001). Children’s Lay Theories About Ingroups and Outgroups: Reconceptualizing Research on Prejudice. Personality & Social Psychology Review (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 5(2), 118–128. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0502_3
  • Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M., & Zakrisson, I. (2004). What matters most to prejudice: Big Five personality, Social Dominance Orientation, or Right-Wing Authoritarianism? European Journal of Personality, 18(6), 463–482. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.526
  • Henry, P. J., & Sears, D. O. (2009). The Crystallization of Contemporary Racial Prejudice across the Lifespan. Political Psychology, 30(4), 569–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2009.00715.x
  • Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review Of Psychology, 53, 575–604. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=mdc&AN=11752497
  • Hummel, J. H., Whatley, M. A., Monetti, D. M., Briihl, D. S., & Adams, K. S. (2009). Using the Sixth Edition of the APA Manual: A Guide for Students. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.B42304CD
  • Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: a meta-analytic review. Personality And Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal Of The Society For Personality And Social Psychology, Inc, 10(4), 336–353. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=mdc&AN=17201592
  • Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. R. (2006). The social functions of ingroup bias: Creating, confirming, or changing social reality. European Review of Social Psychology, 17(1), 359–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280601088773
  • Thomas F. Pettigrew. (n.d.). INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.E5FCBB03
  • Vezzali, L., Stathi, S., Giovannini, D., Capozza, D., & Trifiletti, E. (2015). The greatest magic of Harry Potter: Reducing prejudice. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.1E0C0E8
  • Wenzel, M., Mummendey, A., & Waldzus, S. (2007). Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: the ingroup projection model. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.16D708AF

Recommended Additional Bibliography

  • Binder, J. ( 1 ), Brown, R. ( 1 ), Zagefka, H. ( 2 ), Funke, F. ( 3 ), Kessler, T. ( 3 ), Mummendey, A. ( 3 ), … Leyens, J.-P. ( 4 ). (n.d.). Does Contact Reduce Prejudice or Does Prejudice Reduce Contact? A Longitudinal Test of the Contact Hypothesis Among Majority and Minority Groups in Three European Countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 843–856. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013470
  • Brown, R. (2002). Henri Tajfel’s “Cognitive aspects of prejudice” and the psychology of bigotry. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(2), 195. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602760060183
  • Crisp, R., Ensari, N., Hewstone, M., & Miller, N. (2003). A dual-route model of crossed categorisation effects. European Review of Social Psychology, 13(1), 35–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280240000091
  • Durrheim, K., Quayle, M., & Dixon, J. (2016). The Struggle for the Nature of “Prejudice”: “Prejudice” Expression as Identity Performance. Political Psychology, 37(1), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12310
  • Elizabeth Levy Paluck. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field experiment in Rwanda. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.C833680
  • Guglielmi, R. S. (1999). Psychophysiological Assessment of Prejudice: Past Research, Current Status, and Future Directions. Personality & Social Psychology Review (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 3(2), 123. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0302_3
  • Gulker, J., Mark, A., & Monteith, M. (2013). Confronting prejudice: The who , what , and why of confrontation effectiveness. Social Influence, 8(4), 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2012.736879
  • Irene V. Blair, Pers Soc, & Psychol Rev. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.4D20DD3F
  • Lai, C., Marini, M., Lehr, S., Cerruti, C., Shin, J. E., Joy-Gaba, J., … Nosek, B. (2016). Reducing Implicit Racial Preferences: I. A Comparative Investigation of 17 Interventions. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.8EC51516
  • Lamb, L., Bigler, R., Liben, L., & Green, V. (2009). Teaching Children to Confront Peers’ Sexist Remarks: Implications for Theories of Gender Development and Educational Practice. Sex Roles, 61(5–6), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9634-4
  • Legault, L., & Green-Demers, I. (2012). The protective role of self-determined prejudice regulation in the relationship between intergroup threat and prejudice. Motivation & Emotion, 36(2), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-011-9242-9
  • Major, B., & O’Brien, L. T. (2005). The social psychology of stigma. Annual Review Of Psychology, 56, 393–421. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=mdc&AN=15709941
  • McFarland, S. (2010). Authoritarianism, Social Dominance, and Other Roots of Generalized Prejudice. Political Psychology, 31(3), 453–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00765.x
  • Mummendey, A., Klink, A., & Brown, R. (2001). Nationalism and patriotism: national identification and out-group rejection. The British Journal Of Social Psychology, 40(Pt 2), 159–172. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=mdc&AN=11446222
  • National identification and anti-immigrant prejudice: Individual and contextual effects of national definitions. (2009). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.121D340
  • Otten, S., & Mummendey, A. (1999). To Our Benefit or at Your Expense? Justice Considerations in Intergroup Allocations of Positive and Negative Resources. Social Justice Research, 12(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023274223181
  • P. J. Henry, & David Sears. (2000). The symbolic racism 2000 scale. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.A0268342
  • Patricia G. Devine, E. Ashby Plant, David M. Amodio, Eddie Harmon-jones, & Stephanie L. Vance. (2002). The regulation of explicit and implicit race bias: The role of motivations to respond without prejudice. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.579F5081
  • Prejudice towards Muslims in The Netherlands: Testing integrated threat theory. (2008). British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4). https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608x284443
  • Ramsay, J. E., & Pang, J. S. (2017). Anti-Immigrant Prejudice in Rising East Asia: A Stereotype Content and Integrated Threat Analysis. Political Psychology, 38(2), 227–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12312
  • Rebels with a cause: Group identification as a response to perceived discrimination from the mainstream. (2001). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(9), 1204–1213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201279012
  • Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social Identity Complexity. Personality & Social Psychology Review (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 6(2), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0602_01
  • Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2011). The role of need for closure in essentialist entitativity beliefs and prejudice: An epistemic needs approach to racial categorization. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 52–73. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466610X491567
  • Scroggins, W., Mackie, D., Allen, T., & Sherman, J. (2016). Reducing Prejudice With Labels: Shared Group Memberships Attenuate Implicit Bias and Expand Implicit Group Boundaries. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.BCCAE642
  • Shi, Y., Dang, J., Zheng, W., & Liu, L. (2017). Dual Identity and Prejudice: The Moderating Role of Group Boundary Permeability. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.54EAE7C9
  • Susan T. F Iske. (n.d.). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.BB8295A9
  • Susan T. Fiske, Amy J. C. Cuddy, Peter Glick, & Department Of Psychology. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.4E3159ED
  • West, K., & Greenland, K. (2016). Beware of ‘reducing prejudice’: Imagined contact may backfire if applied with a prevention focus. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.AFF86C38

Authors

  • KOTOVA MARINA VIKTOROVNA