Explanations and Research into Prejudice

Social Identity Theory (SIT) believes that prejudice is the outcome of social categorisation and identification.
Developed by Tajfel and Turner, SIT implies that individual’s self-esteem is coupled with the status of the groups they’re part of.
People may show in-group favouritism to enhance their self-esteem that may lead to prejudice against out-groups.
Tajfel’s Minimal Group Studies support this, even arbitrary group allocation was enough to create prejudice.

Realistic Conflict Theory

Realistic Conflict Theory (RCT) suggests that prejudice arises from competition between groups over scarce resources.
It was initially developed by Sherif during the famous “Robber’s Cave” experiment where two groups of boys competed for resources, leading to prejudice.
The conflict and consequent prejudice can be reduced through superordinate goals that require cooperation between groups.

Prejudice can also be understood through Social Learning Theory, suggesting that prejudice is acquired through observational learning and reinforcement.
Bandura’s Bobo Doll experiment supports this, children imitated aggressive behaviour and if reinforced, it’s likely to continue.
This applies to prejudice because behaviour, attitudes, and stereotypes can be learnt by observing others.

Confirmation bias is a cognitive bias where individuals search for, interpret, and remember information in a way that confirms preexisting beliefs and stereotypes.
Stereotyping is a mental/ cognitive representation of a social group and its members, and it can lead to prejudice if the stereotypes are negative. This can be in respect to race, gender, age or other characteristics.

Authority figures have a significant role in shaping individual’s opinion. Their views and beliefs can be highly influential leading to development of prejudice.
The Obedience Studies by Milgram highlight how individuals may conform to the wishes of authority figures, even when it means harming others, which may indirectly foster prejudice.