As human existences, we socially categorise people as members of societal groups instead than as persons. The ground why we do so is because it ‘provides utile information that can non instantly be perceived and it allows us to disregard unneeded information ‘ ( Bruner 1957 cited in Smith and Mackie: 145 ) .
The danger of this societal classification is that it ‘ makes a group seem more similar to each other than they would be if they were non categorised ‘ . ( McGarty et al cited in Smith E and Mackie D: 165 )
The procedure of seeing one ‘s ego as a member of a group or self classification can hold positive effects for persons within a group. Tajfel ( 1972 ) argues that ‘people seek to deduce positive self-pride from their group ranks ‘ . ( Smith E and Mackie D: 189 )
As societal attention practicians, we work with assorted societal groups such as people with disablements, the going community, immature wrongdoers, kids in attention, the aged and many others societal groups. These groups have been socially categorised and can frequently be considered as ‘outgroups ‘ by society. They are frequently considered by society to be vulnerable groups and are frequently ‘ pushed to the borders of society and excluded from the mainstream ‘ . ( Thompson: 2003 )
The definition of societal attention is the ‘provision of attention, protection, support, public assistance and protagonism for vulnerable or dependent clients, separately or in groups ‘ ( Joint Committee on Social Care Professionals cited in Share P and Lalor L: 5 )
Each person who is in demand of societal attention can socially place themselves as portion of a group. Tajfel ‘s Social Identity theory suggests that members of a group addition a self-concept and self-esteem as a consequence of their group rank. ‘Seeing oneself as a group member means that the group ‘s typical features become norms and criterions for one ‘s ain behavior ‘ . ( Turner et al cited in Smith and Mackie: 195 ) . This, hence consequences in members of the group moving in group typical ways.
This theory can assist us to understand the behavior of assorted groups we are working with as societal attention practicians. For illustration, a group of immature grownups who are prosecuting in condemnable activity may be making so as this behavior is a norm within their group.
It besides enables us to see why these groups are considered as outgroups in society and can assist us to understand why these groups are seen as ‘oppressed ‘ by mainstream society.
Tajfel ‘s theory besides tells us that frequently the persons who make up the group are seen as ‘uniform ‘ and their diverseness is underestimated.
This is surely common with people who have rational disablements. The ‘ingroup ‘ , which in this instance is the group who does non hold rational disablements, frequently views the ‘outgroup ‘ , or the people with disablements as all ‘being the same ‘ . The persons who have disablements are categorised because of their disablement instead than their individualistic features and are hence stereotypic due to their disablement.
Stereotypes can be described as ‘over generalised sets of beliefs about members of a peculiar societal group. ‘ ( Schultz and Oskamp: 63 ) They are the positions we form approximately groups as a consequence of societal classification and ‘reduce the complexness of the universe into a few simple guidelines that suggest how members of certain groups should be treated ‘ ( Schultz: 63 )
They act as ‘generalisations about a group of people in which indistinguishable features are assigned to virtually all members of the group, irrespective of existent fluctuation among members ‘ . ( Aronson et Al: 2004:466 )
These stereotypes can take to both positive and negative ratings being made about the members of the group. They can besides take to the mark group moving in stereotyped ways, for illustration, one of the grounds why a group of immature wrongdoers may be prosecuting in condemnable activity could be a consequence of stereotype menace. This refers to ‘being at hazard of moving in a mode consistent with a negative stereotype about 1s group ‘ . ( Schultz: 69 ) The group of wrongdoers are seen as an out-group and ‘may experience their piquing behavior is justified because they have been oppressed, but their intervention must be disproportionately terrible ‘ ( Harrower J, 2001:4 )
Biass, ‘hostile or negative attitudes towards a distinguishable group of people, based entirely on the rank in that group. ‘ ( Aronson et Al: 2004:467 ) can hold highly inauspicious effects on the persons within these categorised societal groups.
‘Any group that portions a socially meaningful common feature can be a mark for bias ‘ ( Smith and Mackie: 143 )
Biass against people in marginalised and vulnerable groups are prevailing in the society in which we live. ‘By virtuousness of their function and the societal groups they engage with, societal attention practicians witness the impact of inequality on the mundane lived experience of people affected ‘ ( Share and Lalor: 110 )
Cultural groups such as the traveling community are invariably subjected to biass. Much research has been carried out in recent old ages in relation to this. One study found that 42 per centum of the population held negative attitudes towards the going community ( Behaviour and Attitudes in Ireland 2000 ) and another revealed that 72 per centum of the settled community did non desire the going community to populate amongst them. ( Lansdowne Market research 2001 ) .
Peoples with disablements are another group in society which are capable to biass. Often society has the ‘assumption that disablement is a signifier of unwellness ‘ ( Oliver: 1990 cited in Thompson: 128 )
Peoples with disablements have besides been viewed as ‘not to the full human, or even subhuman ‘ ( Brandon: 4 ) . Despite the fact that society ‘s attitude towards people with disablements has improved over clip as a consequence of traveling off from the medical theoretical account to the societal theoretical account of disablement which involves the integrating of people with disablements into our communities, people with disablements are still non regarded as ‘complete human existences of an equal position to the balance of society ‘ . ( Share and Lalor: 334 )
Research suggests that bias is learned from the groups in which we belong. ‘Racial and cultural individuality is a major focal point for prejudiced attitudes ‘ . ( Aronson: 457 )
Discrimination can be defined as ‘unequal or unjust behaviour toward an person based on his or her rank in a peculiar group ‘ ( Schultz: 63 ) and is normally seen in the country of Social Care at many degrees.
Thompson ( 2003 ) outlines many procedures closely linked with favoritism. He refers to Invisibilzation, a type of favoritism whereby ‘ dominant groups are invariably presented to us, for illustration through the media, and are strongly associated with power, position, prestigiousness and influence, while other groups are seldom, if of all time seen in this visible radiation ‘ ( Thompson ‘ : 2003.13 ) This is true of many societal groups in societal attention. Peoples with disablements are seldom seen in the media.
Infantilisation, which Thompson refers to as ‘ascribing a child-like province to an grownup ‘ ( Share and Lalor: 2009:278 ) is besides common in societal attention. Society tends to see people who are aged or who have a disablement as ‘child-like and dependent, unable to interact in their ain right ‘ . ( Thompson: 88 )
Thompson besides argues that favoritism occurs in other signifiers such as marginalization, welfarism, medicalization, dehumanisation and trivialization.
The Experience of favoritism in Ireland ( 2004 ) , a piece of research carried out by the Equality Authority, found that people with disablements reported one of the highest rates high rates of incidents of favoritism both while accessing services and at work.
Assorted theories in the country of societal psychological science focal point on the ways to understate bias and favoritism within society.
Allport ‘s theory known as the Contact Hypothesis, suggests that ‘intergroup contact ‘ can take to cut downing bias but merely under a figure of suited conditions. These conditions are that ( a ) the groups in the state of affairs have equal position, ( B ) are non competitory and ( degree Celsius ) have support from the relevant governments for the contact and ( vitamin D ) have common ends.
As societal attention practicians, we can advance Allport ‘s theory through the work we do with the assorted vulnerable groups we are involved with. This can be done by advancing societal inclusion within the community.
Although attitudes towards groups such as people with disablements have changed over recent old ages, there is much work needed in order to guarantee that this group has equal position within our society. The same can be said for the other vulnerable groups we work with as societal attention practicians.
The topic of bias and favoritism is extremely relevant to the country of societal attention and with the aid of research carried out in this peculiar country of societal psychological science, we can hold a clearer apprehension of the grounds why, as human-beings, we develop and utilise these actions and behaviors. By holding this understanding, we can develop accomplishments and mechanisms to assist cut down bias and favoritism, and combat the detrimental effects that they can hold on vulnerable groups in society.