Mechanisms of Prejudice: A Critique of the CIIM
Document Type
Event
Faculty Mentor
Elizabeth Parks-Stamm
Abstract
The Common In-group Identity Model (CIIM) is the widely used framework for examining the dynamics of distinct social groups. As a prejudice reduction technique, the CIIM asserts that intergroup bias decreases when members of separate groups are encouraged to recategorize themselves within a shared superordinate identity, shifting perceptions of an “us-them” dichotomy, toward a collective “we.” This recategorization is proposed to reduce prejudice via the mechanism of reducing situationally salient bias. Building upon The Nature of Prejudice by Gordon Allport, Samuel L. Gaertner & John F. Dovidio constructed the theoretical basis for Aversive Racism. Aversive Racism posits that contemporary racism is often covert and unintentional, and is distinct from “old-fashioned” racism which was overt and intentional. Over time, the work of Aversive Racism would develop into the theoretical scaffolding of the CIIM. Despite its prominence the CIIM has been subject to comparatively sparse critical evaluation. This thesis serves to argue that the CIIM is theoretically limited and in effect may not achieve its stated goals. Through thematic analysis, the core mechanisms of the CIIM were identified and recategorized. The core mechanisms of the CIIM are as follows: Intergroup Interdependence, Group Differentiation, Linguistic Differentiation, Environmental Context, Precontact Experience, Cognitive Effects, Affective Consequences, and Behavioral Effects. Applying an intersectional feminist perspective three overarching themes emerged from this analysis: Harmony, Homogeneity, and Hegemony. Together, these themes serve to articulate how the Common In-group Identity Model centers the experiences of dominant groups, fails to adequately reduce out-of-lab prejudice, and encourages outgroup exceptionalism in the tradition of the model minority myth.
Mechanisms of Prejudice: A Critique of the CIIM
The Common In-group Identity Model (CIIM) is the widely used framework for examining the dynamics of distinct social groups. As a prejudice reduction technique, the CIIM asserts that intergroup bias decreases when members of separate groups are encouraged to recategorize themselves within a shared superordinate identity, shifting perceptions of an “us-them” dichotomy, toward a collective “we.” This recategorization is proposed to reduce prejudice via the mechanism of reducing situationally salient bias. Building upon The Nature of Prejudice by Gordon Allport, Samuel L. Gaertner & John F. Dovidio constructed the theoretical basis for Aversive Racism. Aversive Racism posits that contemporary racism is often covert and unintentional, and is distinct from “old-fashioned” racism which was overt and intentional. Over time, the work of Aversive Racism would develop into the theoretical scaffolding of the CIIM. Despite its prominence the CIIM has been subject to comparatively sparse critical evaluation. This thesis serves to argue that the CIIM is theoretically limited and in effect may not achieve its stated goals. Through thematic analysis, the core mechanisms of the CIIM were identified and recategorized. The core mechanisms of the CIIM are as follows: Intergroup Interdependence, Group Differentiation, Linguistic Differentiation, Environmental Context, Precontact Experience, Cognitive Effects, Affective Consequences, and Behavioral Effects. Applying an intersectional feminist perspective three overarching themes emerged from this analysis: Harmony, Homogeneity, and Hegemony. Together, these themes serve to articulate how the Common In-group Identity Model centers the experiences of dominant groups, fails to adequately reduce out-of-lab prejudice, and encourages outgroup exceptionalism in the tradition of the model minority myth.
