Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-6bnxx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T01:35:06.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fighting over who dictates the nature of prejudice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2022

Gordon Hodson Open the ORCID record for Gordon Hodson [Opens in a new window]
Gordon Hodson*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, L2S 3A1, Canada. ghodson@brocku.ca; www.hodsonlab.com; https://brocku.ca/social-sciences/psychology/people/gordon-hodson/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A growing trend, reflected in the target article, effectively shifts control of prejudice operationalization to align with right-leaning priorities (and away from disadvantaged groups' voices and social justice). The article would only be compelling if experiments misaligned with real-world findings, if experimenters ignored nuances and moderators, and if the call to consider the social context included the macro-level societal context.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e77
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ba, B. A., Knox, D., Mummolo, J., & Rivera, R. (2021). The role of officer race and gender in police-civilian interactions in Chicago. Science, 371(6530), 696–702. doi:10.1126/science.abd8694CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandt, M. J., & Crawford, J. T. (2020). Worldview conflict and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 61, 1–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2019.09.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupree, C. H., & Kraus, M. W. (in press). Psychological science is not race neutral. Perspectives in Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/1745691620979820Google Scholar
Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research, 20(1), 98–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hangartner, D., Kopp, D., & Siegentaler, M. (2021). Monitoring hiring discrimination through online recruitment platforms. Nature Human Behaviour, 589, 572–576. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-03136-0.Google ScholarPubMed
Haslam, N. (2016). Concept creep: Psychology's expanding concepts of harm and pathology. Psychological Inquiry, 27, 1–17. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2016.1082418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodson, G. (2021). Pushing back against the microaggression pushback in academic psychology: Reflections on a concept creep paradox. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(5) 932–955. DOI: 10.1177/1745691621991863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LeCount, R. J. (2017). More black than blue? Comparing the racial attitudes of police to citizens. Sociological Forum, 32 (S1), 1051–1072. doi:10.1111/socf.12367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, B. K., & Correll, J. (2020). Race, weapons, and the perception of threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.04.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quillian, L., Lee, J. J., & Oliver, M. (2020). Evidence from field experiments in hiring shows substantial additional racial discrimination after the callback. Social Forces, 99(2), 732–759. doi:10.1093/sf/soaa026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quillian, L., Pager, D., Hexel, O., & Midtøen, A. H. (2017). Meta-analysis of field experiments shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(41), 10870–10875. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1706255114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, S. O., Bereket-Shavit, C., Dollins, F. A., Goldie, P. D., & Mortenson, E. (2020). Racial inequality in psychological research: Trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15, 1295–1309. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916209277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed