Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination02:55

Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination

92.5K
Humans are very diverse and although we share many similarities, we also have many differences. The social groups we belong to help form our identities (Tajfel, 1974). These differences may be difficult for some people to reconcile, which may lead to prejudice toward people who are different. Prejudice is a negative attitude and feeling toward an individual based solely on one’s membership in a particular social group (Allport, 1954; Brown, 2010). Prejudice is common against people who...
92.5K
Stereotype Content Model02:16

Stereotype Content Model

14.9K
The Stereotype Content Model (SCM) was first proposed by Susan Fiske and her colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & Xu, 2002; see also Fiske, 2012 and Fiske, 2017). The SCM specifies that when someone encounters a new group, they will stereotype them based on two metrics: warmth—or that group’s perceived intent, and how likely they are to provide help or inflict harm—and competence—or their ability to carry out that objective. Depending on the warmth-competence...
14.9K
Stereotype Threat and Self-fulfilling Prophecies02:09

Stereotype Threat and Self-fulfilling Prophecies

40.0K
When we hold a stereotype about a person, we have expectations that he or she will fulfill that stereotype. A self-fulfilling prophecy is an expectation held by a person that alters his or her behavior in a way that tends to make it true. When we hold stereotypes about a person, we tend to treat the person according to our expectations. This treatment can influence the person to act according to our stereotypic expectations, thus confirming our stereotypic beliefs. Research by Rosenthal and...
40.0K
Confirmation Biases01:31

Confirmation Biases

7.4K
The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
7.4K
Halo Effect01:27

Halo Effect

65
The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...
65
Motivational Bias01:25

Motivational Bias

144
Cognitive bias results from limitations in thinking and information processing, leading to systematic errors in judgment. Conversely, motivational bias stems from personal desires or emotions, causing distortions in perception to align with self-interest. Motivational bias influences how individuals perceive and attribute causes to events, often shaped by personal needs, goals, and self-esteem preservation. This bias can distort judgment, leading to inaccurate assessments of success, failure,...
144

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Inequality in People's Minds: An Integrative Psychological Framework of Perceptions of Economic Inequality.

Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc·2025
Same author

Scale dichotomization reduces customer racial discrimination and income inequality.

Nature·2025
Same author

Evidence for a Curvilinear Effect of Psychological Discomfort on Dominant Group Members' Engagement in Allyship.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2025
Same author

The missing middle: Asian employees' experience of workplace discrimination and pro-black allyship.

The Journal of applied psychology·2022
Same author

Chronic frames of social inequality: How mainstream media frame race, gender, and wealth inequality.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2022
Same author

The "Equal-Opportunity Jerk" Defense: Rudeness Can Obfuscate Gender Bias.

Psychological science·2022

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 20, 2025

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

859

Why benefiting from discrimination is less recognized as discrimination.

L Taylor Phillips1, Sora Jun2

  • 1Stern School of Business.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
|September 13, 2021
PubMed
Summary

Favoring discrimination is less likely to be recognized as unfair compared to disfavoring discrimination. This perception stems from assumed positive intentions, impacting reporting and legal support for inequity.

More Related Videos

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects
08:13

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects

Published on: May 10, 2019

6.5K
Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

17.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 20, 2025

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

859
Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects
08:13

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects

Published on: May 10, 2019

6.5K
Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

17.6K

Area of Science:

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology
  • Legal Studies

Background:

  • Societal discrimination creates significant group inequities.
  • Existing research focuses on prejudice, overlooking the role of privilege and inequity frames.
  • The framing of discriminatory decisions influences their recognition as unfair.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how framing discriminatory decisions as favoring versus disfavoring impacts their recognition.
  • To explore the role of perceived intentions in this phenomenon.
  • To examine the consequences of framing on reporting behaviors, legal support, and job pursuit.

Main Methods:

  • Eight studies employing qualitative and experimental approaches.
  • Diverse discrimination contexts including race, sex, nationality, and age.
  • Analysis of language from U.S. Supreme Court cases and human resource employee perceptions.

Main Results:

  • Discriminatory decisions framed as favoring are less likely to be recognized as discrimination compared to disfavoring frames.
  • This effect is driven by perceptions of positive intentions, not perceived harm.
  • Human resource employees were less likely to identify favoring discrimination, impacting reporting; legal support and job pursuit behaviors were also affected.

Conclusions:

  • Inequity frames significantly shape perceptions of discrimination.
  • Favoring mechanisms, less likely to be recognized as discriminatory, may perpetuate group inequity.
  • Understanding framing effects is crucial for addressing systemic discrimination.