Interventions to reduce prejudice and enhance inclusion and respect for ethnic differences in early childhood: A systematic review

A systematic review was conducted of studies evaluating the effects of interventions aimed at reducing ethnic prejudice and discrimination in young children. Articles published between 1980 and 2010 and including children of 8 years and under were identified, harvested, and assessed for quality, both for the exposure/program as well as for the evaluation. In total, 32 studies (14 contact and 18 media or instruction) yielded 62 effects on attitudes and 59 effects on peer relations. An overall count of the positive (40%), non-significant (50%), and negative effects (10%) indicate a mixed picture. Overall, more attitude effects (55%) than peer relations effects (25%) were positive, and media/instruction (47%) was more successful than contact (36%). Most of the effects were observed with children from a majority ethnicity: 67% of the attitude effects were positive, and media/instruction and contact were equally effective at delivering these. Few differences were found as a function of the quality of the exposure and evaluation, but differences were found depending on the context of exposure (naturally occurring or experimental manipulation) and research design (random assignment or self-selection). In conclusion, the findings were more mixed than expected, though sufficiently strong studies exist to provide lessons for future research.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They’re not racist…’ Prejudice denial, mitigation and suppression in dialogue

Social scientific work on the suppression, mitigation or denial of prejudiced attitudes has tended to focus on the strategic self-presentation and self-monitoring undertaken by individual social actors on their own behalf. In this paper, we argue that existing perspectives might usefully be extended to incorporate three additional considerations. First, that social actors may, on some occasions, act to defend not only themselves, but also others from charges of prejudice. Second, that over the course of any social encounter, interactants may take joint responsibility for policing conversation and for correcting and suppressing the articulation of prejudiced talk. Third, that a focus on the dialogic character of conversation affords an appreciation of the ways in which the status of any particular utterance, action or event as 'racist' or 'prejudiced' may constitute a social accomplishment. Finally, we note the logical corollary of these observations - that in everyday life, the occurrence of 'racist discourse' is likely to represent a collaborative accomplishment, the responsibility for which is shared jointly between the person of the speaker and those other co-present individuals who occasion, reinforce or simply fail to suppress it.

When stereotype meets prejudice: Antiziganism in European Societies

Antiziganism is a widespread phenomenon in all European societies. Poor or rich, ‘postcommunist’ or ‘traditional’, North or South, with ‘lean’ or ‘thick’ welfare systems-all European societies demonstrate antiziganist prejudice.
All across Europe Romanis are among the poorest, most destitute, and most excluded communities. Widespread prejudice and stereotypical representations of Romani individuals limit their chances for participation in democratic decision making processes and their access to services. Unable to counteract majority stereotypes systematically, more often than not they remain on the fringes of society. This edited volume asks where these stereotypes and prejudices come from, why they are ubiquitous to all societies, and how pertinent their impact on antiziganist attitudes found in European societies really is.

EU Non-Discrimination Law and Intersectionality:investigating the triangle of racial, gender and disability discrimination

This book contributes to a critical reflection of current legislative and jurisprudential developments in Non-Discrimination Law, focusing on the European Union. The book is focused on intersectionality between gender, race and disability and the question of whether, and to what extent, this intersection can be adequately addressed in (EU) law. The discussion rests on two basic assumptions. First, the multiplication of 'discrimination grounds' in EU law and other legal regimes should not result in a dilution of the demands of equality law. Accordingly, the book focuses on the three key grounds - race, gender and disability. These constitute nodes around which other discrimination grounds can be grouped. Second, any multi-ground non-discrimination law framework needs to engage with the question of discrimination on several grounds. This book provides a critical evaluation of some of the problems presented by such intersectionality and an opportunity to explore the issues in depth. This collection offers some new proposals relating to the regrouping of identity categories and to the general approach to socio-legal research in the field. It also contains a comparative section, which expands on practical experiences with intersectionality and law, and a section dedicated to juridical responses to intersectionality.

The book will be a valuable resource for researchers, academics and those working in the area of EU non-discrimination law and policy.