On the nature of prejudice : fifty years after Allport

455 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Developmental Science Approach to Reducing Prejudice and Social Exclusion: Intergroup Processes, Social‐Cognitive Development, and Moral Reasoning (2015, background): “A significant body of research now exists which has investigated the contact hypothesis among children by seeing whether contact between different social groups under certain conditions reduces childhood prejudice (see Aboud, 2005; Cameron & Rutland, 2008).”
Can Descriptive Representation Change Beliefs about a Stigmatized Group? Evidence from Rural India (2014, background): “…consensus has suggested that, while engaging in social behaviors, individuals often rely more on perceived social norms than on their own personal beliefs (Allport, 1954; Asch, 1958; Cialdini, Kallgren, and Reno 1991; Crandall and Stangor 2005; Kuran, 1995; Stangor, Sechrist, and Jost, 2001).”
With malice toward none and charity for some: ingroup favoritism enables discrimination. (2014, unknown): “If negative outgroup attitudes are expressed primarily in hostile form, we can expect that negative emotions should be more readily expressed toward outgroups than ingroups—a phenomenon that is indeed observed (cf. Smith, 1993; Smith & Mackie, 2005).”
Alief in Action (and Reaction) (2008, background): “But for those seeking a compact overview, three helpful starting points are Stangor, 2000; Dovidio et al. , 2005 ; and Devine, 2001 .”