Nazar Akrami

National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement

About 70% of more than half a million Implicit Association Tests completed by citizens of 34 countries revealed expected implicit stereotypes associating science with males more than with females. We discovered that nation-level implicit stereotypes predicted nation-level sex differences in 8th-grade science and mathematics achievement. Self-reported stereotypes did not provide additional predictive validity of the achievement gap. We suggest that implicit stereotypes and sex differences in science participation and performance are mutually reinforcing, contributing to the persistent gender gap in science engagement.

What matters most to prejudice: Big Five personality, social dominance orientation or right-wing authoritarianism?

Whereas previous research has studied the relation of either (i) personality with prejudice, (ii) personality with social dominance orientation (SDO) and right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), or (iii) SDO and RWA with prejudice, the present research integrates all approaches within the same model. In our study (N = 183), various causal models of the relationships among the Big Five, SDO, RWA, and Generalized Prejudice are proposed and tested. Generalized Prejudice scores were obtained from a factor analysis of the scores on various prejudice instruments (racism, sexism, prejudice toward homosexuals, and mentally disabled people), which yielded a one‐factor solution. The best‐fitting causal model, which was our suggested hypothetical model, showed that Big Five personality had no direct effect on Generalized Prejudice but an indirect effect transmitted through RWA and SDO, where RWA seems to capture personality aspects to a greater extent than SDO. Specifically, Generalized Prejudice was affected indirectly by Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness through RWA, and by Agreeableness through SDO, whereas Neuroticism had no effect at all. The results are discussed against the background of previous research and the personality and social psychology approaches to the study of prejudice. Copyright

Classical and modern racial prejudice: a study of attitudes toward immigrants in Sweden

In two studies we develop and validate a Classical-overt or direct-and a Modern-covert or subtle-Racial Prejudice Scale, concerning attitudes toward immigrants, for a Swedish (Scandinavian) context. Further, we examine whether these two forms of prejudice

The relation between personality and prejudice: a variable- and a person-centred approach

The relationship between Big Five personality (measured by the NEO‐PI) and prejudice was examined using a variable‐ and a person‐centred approach. Big Five scores were related to a generalized prejudice factor based on seven different prejudice scales (racial prejudice, sexism, etc). A correlation analysis disclosed that Openness to Experience and Agreeableness were significantly related to prejudice, and a multiple regression analysis showed that a variable‐centred approach displayed a substantial cross‐validated relationship between the five personality factors and prejudice. A cluster analysis of the Big Five profiles yielded, in line with previous research, three personality types, but this person‐centred approach showed a low cross‐validated relationship between personality and prejudice, where the overcontrolled type showed the highest prejudice and the undercontrolled the lowest, with the resilient falling in between. A head‐to‐head comparison sustained the conclusion that, based on peoples Big Five personalities, their generalized prejudice could be predicted more accurately by the variable‐ than the person‐centred approach. Copyright

Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Their Roots in Big-Five Personality Factors and Facets

Extending previous research on the relation of Big-Five personality with right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, we examined the relationships of Big Five facet scores rather than factor scores. The results (N = 332) of stepwise regression analyses showed that Openness to Experience was the only significant predictor of RWA on factor level, whereas Values and Ideas were significant predictors on facet level. A similar analysis of SDO showed that Agreeableness and Openness to Experience contributed significantly to the prediction on factor level, whereas Tender-Mindedness and Values were the best significant predictors on facet level. The prediction based on facet scores showed to be more accurate that the prediction based on factor scores. A random split of the sample confirmed the robustness of the findings. The results are discussed against the background of the personality and the social psychology approaches to explaining individual differences in prejudice.

Gender differences in implicit prejudice

Abstract In three experiments ( n =131), we examined gender differences in implicit (and explicit) racial prejudice employing priming of immigrant and Swedish facial photographs without attention or without awareness. Implicit prejudice was defined as the degree of negativity expressed toward a person described in a subsequent ambiguous story in an impression formation task. We found, contrary to our hypothesis, that women displayed systematically higher implicit prejudice than men in all three experiments, although men scored higher on explicit prejudice than women. The results are discussed against the background of related prejudice research, the dissociation of implicit and explicit prejudice, and gender differences in cognitive functioning, especially in the processing of pictorial stimuli.

Generalized Prejudice: Common and Specific Components

This research examined the personality-prejudice relationship and whether personality and social psychological factors predict different aspects of prejudice. We proposed a distinction between a co ...

Development and validation of Swedish classical and modern sexism scales

In two studies we develop and validate a Classical--overt or direct--and a Modern--covert or subtle--Sexism Scale concerning attitudes toward women, for a Swedish (Scandinavian) context. Further, we examine whether these two forms of prejudice are distinguishable. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that, although highly correlated, classical and modern sexism are distinguishable. The construct validations showed that men had higher means on modern and classical sexism scores than women, and that our scales were related to other constructs as expected. In a third study, we analyzed the knowledge and the content of cultural stereotypes about women. There were no differences in the knowledge of cultural stereotypes between men and women or between high- and low-sexist individuals. The findings are discussed in relation to previous international studies that examine peoples modern and/or classical sexism.

Reducing Prejudice Through Priming of Control-Related Words

We investigated the effect of incidentally presented constructs that imply self-control on activated stereotypes associated with immigrants. To activate immigrant stereotypes, participants responded to a scale that measures peoples prejudice toward immigrants. They were then primed, using scrambled sentences, with words that were related to self-control (e.g., control, restrain, self-regulate) or with neutral words. After the priming task, participants evaluated an ambiguous behavior of a target person. On the basis of three experiments, the results showed that participants primed with the control-related words rated the target behavior more positively than those primed with neutral words. The results are discussed in relation to previous research on self-control, automatic influence of activated constructs, and prejudice reduction.

Is group membership necessary for understanding generalized prejudice? A re-evaluation of why prejudices are interrelated.

Many scholars have proposed that people who reject one outgroup tend to reject other outgroups. Studies examining a latent factor behind different prejudices (e.g., toward ethnic and sexual minorities) have referred to this as generalized prejudice. Such research has also documented robust relations between latent prejudice factors and basic personality traits. However, targets of generalized prejudice tend to be lower in power and status and thus it remains an open question as to whether generalized prejudice, as traditionally studied, is about devaluing outgroups or devaluing marginalized groups. We present 7 studies, including experiments and national probability samples (N = 9,907 and 4,037) assessing the importance of outgroup devaluation, versus status- or power based devaluations, for understanding the nature of generalized prejudice, and its links to personality. Results show that (a) personality variables do not predict ingroup/outgroup biases in settings where power and status differences are absent, (b) women and overweight people who score high on generalized prejudice devalue their own groups, and (c) personality variables are far more predictive of prejudice toward low-compared with high-status targets. Together, these findings suggest that the personality explanation of prejudice including the generalized prejudice concept is not about ingroups versus outgroups per se, but rather about devaluing marginalized groups. (PsycINFO Database Record