Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The nature of prejudice and practices that can lead to its reduction are among the most discussed questions in the field of social psychology. The article by Dixon, Levine, Reicher, and Durrheim (2012) attempts at providing an exhaustive discussion of the effectiveness of prejudice reduction interventions. Apart from questioning the positive impact of such interventions, the researchers examine the advantages and disadvantages of the collective action model. When speaking about the deficiencies of the prejudice reduction model, the researchers pay attention to the real sources of prejudice, the distribution of power, and the reduced collective consciousness.
First, the authors do not support one of the underlying assumptions of the model, according to which prejudice is caused by negative attitude. Among their arguments are the existence of “good” or benevolent sexism and the patronizing attitude of some plantation owners towards their slaves. Another point raised by Dixon et al. (2012) is that prejudice reduction interventions do not affect unjust power distribution since privileged groups remain in higher position.
In their opinion, the possibility of social change depends upon the degree of group consciousness. The researchers support this point by discussing studies, proving that increased intergroup contacts reduce the minorities’ willingness to contribute to social change.
As for my opinion on the topic, I believe that the arguments presented by Dixon et al. (2012) in their article are valid because the focus on intergroup communication in some way destroys cultural identity in vulnerable groups. Using only prejudice reduction interventions, it is impossible to improve the position of unprivileged social groups in general. This approach to social change can help to eliminate certain negative stereotypes about groups that lack power.
Due to that, some members of such groups get an opportunity to succeed given that they are enough talented and influential people support them. Nevertheless, it does not involve significant improvements to the life of minority groups to which they belong.
I absolutely agree with the researchers when they prove that the representatives of racial minorities who cultivate close links with white Americans become less likely to endorse group efforts aimed at achieving racial equality. In his critical commentary, Alicke (2012) states that, following the logic of the authors, only violent resistance of underprivileged groups can reduce discrimination. To me, increasing group cohesion can lead to bloody protests only in societies where inequality is extreme. In more developed countries, increased group consciousness is likely to help underprivileged groups to acknowledge inequity and clearly identify the claims to be met by those possessing social privilege.
The use of the collective action model, which enables the members of disadvantaged groups to act as the agents of change, can be more effective in encouraging positive social change. According to Dixon et al. (2012), intergroup contacts can present a barrier to inequality in certain cases. This point is also illustrated by Maoz (2012) who proves that the coexistence model aimed at improving the relationships between Arabs and Jews living in Israel does not work. Instead, by emphasizing similarities and universal human needs, it supports the existing asymmetry in the relationships between these two nations.
Finally, as it is clear from the article and the commentaries, the decision to rely on the prejudice reduction model can be ineffective in eliminating discrimination and unequal distribution of power. The model emphasizes the necessity to create a more positive image of the representatives of vulnerable groups. This strategy often involves attracting more attention to similarities between groups; as a result, the boundaries between unequal groups are dissolved and special needs that oppressed groups have remain unnoticed.
References
Alicke, M. (2012). You say you want a revolution? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(6), 426-427.
Dixon, J., Levine, M., Reicher, S., & Durrheim, K. (2012). Beyond prejudice: Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting us to like one another more the solution? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(6), 411-425.
Maoz, I. (2012). The dangers of prejudice reduction interventions: Empirical evidence from encounters between Jews and Arabs in Israel. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(6), 441-442.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.