The influence of aetiology and blame on prejudice towards survivors of brain injury.

The purpose of the present work was to investigate if a hierarchy of aetiology exists which would influence attitudes towards survivors of brain injury. An independent groups design utilised four independent variables; aetiology (measured at five levels: ‘Road Traffic Accident’ (RTA), ‘Alcohol’, ‘Drug Use’, ‘Aneurism’ and ‘Recreation’), blame (blame and no-blame), group (psychology students and members of the public) and gender to explore attitudes towards survivors of brain injury. The dependent variables were measured using the Prejudicial Evaluation Scale (PES) and Social Interaction Scale (SIS). Three hundred and twenty-five participants (173 students and 152 members of the public) were randomly allocated to one of ten possible conditions. Among individuals who contributed to receiving their injury greater prejudice was displayed towards those in the ‘Drugs’ condition followed by ‘Recreation’, ‘RTA’, ‘Alcohol’ and ‘Aneurism’. Findings suggest that a hierarchy of aetiology exists, which results in prejudicial attitudes, and is influenced by issues of blame. Key words: prejudice, blame, brain injury

Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups

This research rests on the assumption that individual differences approaches to prejudice benefit from all integration of intergroup factors. Following Duckitt (2001), we assumed that two prominent individual differences variables, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), would differentially predict majority members' levels of ethnic prejudice depending on specific factors of the intergroup context: RWA as all index of motivational concerns about social cohesion, stability and security should drive prejudice against outgroups perceived as socially threatening, and SDO as an index of concerns about ingroup superiority and dominance should predict prejudice against outgroups perceived as potential competitors for power-status. Across two studies (Ns = 82, 176), using between-participants and within-participants experimental designs, the effects of RWA on prejudice were particularly powerful when the outgroup was manipulated to be socially threatening, but the effects of SDO on prejudice appeared not to increase when the outgroup was manipulated to be competitive. In Study 2, presenting the outgroup as having low status also increased the effect of RWA, but not the effect of SDO. These results support the differential prediction assumption for RWA, but not for SDO. Implications for the conceptualisation of RWA and SDO are discussed. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authoritarianism, threat, and prejudice: An analysis of mediation and moderation

Right-wing authoritarianism is a central construct in individual differences approaches to prejudice. Its power to predict prejudice is often attributed to perceived threat. However, the exact moderating and mediating processes involved are little understood. In two studies (Ns=53, 84), exposure to threatening versus nonthreatening information about an ethnic out-group had reliable indirect effects on prejudice in authoritarians, but not in nonauthoritarians, largely because authoritarians were more likely to perceive actual threat when they interpreted the information received to represent a threatening argument. Additionally, in Study 2, authoritarians reacted more strongly with negative emotions when they perceived actual threat.

Healthcare professionals’ attitudes towards traumatic brain injury (TBI): The influence of profession, experience, aetiology and blame on prejudice towards survivors of brain injury

Primary objective: To investigate the attitudes of healthcare professionals towards individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and their relationship to intended healthcare behaviour.

Research design: An independent groups design utilized four independent variables; aetiology, group, blame and gender to explore attitudes towards survivors of brain injury. The dependent variables were measured using the Prejudicial Evaluation and Social Interaction Scale (PESIS) and Helping Behaviour Scale (HBS).

Methods and procedures: A hypothetical vignette based methodology was used. Four hundred and sixty participants (131 trainee nurses, 94 qualified nurses, 174 trainee doctors, 61 qualified doctors) were randomly allocated to one of six possible conditions.

Main outcomes and results: Regardless of aetiology, if an individual is to blame for their injury, qualified healthcare professionals have more prejudicial attitudes than those entering the profession. There is a significant negative relationship between prejudice and helping behaviour for qualified healthcare professionals.

Conclusions: Increased prejudicial attitudes of qualified staff are related to a decrease in intended helping behaviour, which has the potential to impact negatively on an individual's recovery post-injury.

Cultural politics and the racial cartographics of human origins

Discussions about human origins, both scientific and pre-scientific, have frequently been freighted with the cultural politics of race relations and questions about human equality. In one way or another, maps have played a critical role in these enterprises by presenting in visual form narratives of human genesis and patterns of human ancestral lineages. In this paper I discuss how a sequence of cartographic representations of human beginnings have transacted racial power from the middle ages to the present day.