China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Discrimination and health
Published in Bernadette N. Kumar, Esperanza Diaz, Migrant Health, 2019
Social psychology scholars have conceptualized prejudicial attitudes or bias as implicit and explicit (18). Explicit attitudes are thoughts and feelings that people deliberately think about and can make conscious reports about. On the other hand, implicit attitudes often exist outside of conscious awareness, and thus are difficult to consciously acknowledge and control. These attitudes are often automatically activated and can influence human behaviour without conscious volition. Such notions are applied most often when people are busy, distracted, tired, and under pressure.
People and places
Published in Jenny Gavriel, The Self-Directed Learner in Medical Education, 2005
The educator’s attitude towards potential - whether explicit or implicit - will inevitably impact upon the learner’s achievements and the educator’s judgements. It has been found that while explicit attitudes are likely to be positive, implicit attitudes are more likely to be negative.20 So having previously ducked the issue of intelligence, this section is the closest that I will get with a look at attitudes towards intelligence. There are two opposing approaches to education:21 those that believe intelligence is fixed and those that believe it is growable, and it is worth taking time to reflect on your own standpoint. Do you believe that intelligence is fixed, that it is a predetermined personality parameter that cannot be altered? Or do you believe that intelligence is something that can grow and increase with the right learning opportunities and the right environment? We know now that the brain can continue adapting and making new connections throughout adulthood, but how far do you believe this translates into an unlimited intelligence?
Social Psychology
Published in Mohamed Ahmed Abd El-Hay, Understanding Psychology for Medicine and Nursing, 2019
Attitude is a learned tendency to evaluate some object, person, event, or issue in a particular way (Krosnick, Judd, & Wittenbrink, 2005; Olson & Zanna, 1993). Such evaluations may be positive or negative, but they can be ambivalent, e.g., one might have mixed feelings and thoughts about a particular person or issue (Ajzen, 2001). Attitudes can be explicit or implicit. Explicit attitudes are those that people are consciously aware of and that clearly influence their behaviors and beliefs. Implicit attitudes are unconscious, but still have an effect on people’s beliefs and behaviors. Attitudes are suggested to have cognitive, affective, and behavioral components (Banaji & Heiphetz, 2010):Cognitive component: this is the set of thoughts and beliefs about a person, group or object.Affective component: feelings toward the person, object, issue or object.Behavioral component: how the attitude influences behavior. Contrary to the intuition that attitudes tend to guide behavior, social psychologists have consistently found that people do not always act in accordance with their attitudes, e.g., a student who disapproves of cheating, may glance at a classmate’s exam paper when the opportunity presents itself. Attitudes are likely to influence behavior when:One anticipates a favorable outcome or response from others for behaving that way.The attitudes are extreme or are frequently expressed (Ajzen, 2001).The attitudes were formed through personal experience (Fazio, 1990).Being an expert in the subject and having extensive working knowledge (Wood, Rhodes, & Bick, 1995).People act in a consistent way on important issues of high hedonic relevance (Lehman & Crano, 2002). Factors other than attitudes that may influence behavior include: personality traits, personal abilities, motivation, habits, needs, and social pressure.
Are Medical Students More Prejudiced? Comparison of University Students’ Attitudes Towards Sexual Minorities by Faculties and Cultural background: A Study From Hungary
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2023
Zsófia Török, Csilla Csekő, Márton Rakovics, Zsuzsanna Szél
The prejudice of the health-care personnel toward minorities may influence the health professional—patient relationship (Moskowitz et al., 2011) and the quality of the provided medical care (Freeman & Payne, 2000), therefore can negatively affect the quality of the received health care. There is existing evidence that physicians’ unconscious biases toward minorities influence their behavior toward and care of patients. Implicit bias had a negative influence on black patients’ experiences with lower ratings of trust and confidence in the clinician in Copper’s study (Cooper et al., 2012), while Green (Green et al., 2007) found that implicit bias was negatively correlated with recommending therapeutic interventions for black patients. Other studies also found that health-care professionals’ implicit attitudes influence patient–provider interactions, treatment decisions, and patient health outcomes (Hall et al., 2015). In addition to the doctors’ attitudes, the lack of skills and knowledge of specific needs of LGBT+ patients may result in worse health outcomes of LGBT+ people (Bonvicini & Perlin, 2003; Shetty et al., 2016).
Subverting Heteronormativity: An Intervention to Foster Positive Attitudes Toward Homosexuality Among Indian College Students
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2019
Kanika K. Ahuja, Megha Dhillon, Anisha Juneja, Siksha Deepak, Garima Srivastava
Further research must be carried out with samples from different settings and from different parts of the country. Interventions must be geared to the populace they are meant for. We tailored our intervention to college students belonging to urban pockets of the country. Such interventions can be more useful for a population that holds more negative attitudes toward gays and lesbians than the current sample, namely urban college students. Slightly different approaches may be needed for other subgroups of the Indian population. Future interventions can explore alternative methods of contact such as those involving closer one-to-one interaction between participants and resource persons—for example, working together on tasks. Contact with the family or friends of gay and lesbian persons would provide a new perspective as well. The alien nation exercise proved to be an effective technique in the present study, and its use needs to be explored further. Lastly, it would be beneficial to study changes in implicit attitudes as a result of such interventions.
Digging Deeper: The Relationship between School Segregation and Unconscious Racism
Published in Smith College Studies in Social Work, 2019
Despite a significant amount of research supporting the validity of the IAT for measuring implicit attitudes and for the predictive validity of implicit bias on discriminatory behavior, some have critiqued the instrument. In a review of studies assessing factors that can influence automatic attitudes and biases, Blair (2002) contends that social desirability and self-preservation, as well as specific strategies for countering stereotypes and perceiver’s attention, have all been found to impact implicit attitudes. She suggests that these attitudes are not in fact unconscious and although different than explicit attitudes, they are malleable to specific influences. Other researchers have also suggested that contextual factors can influence indirect measures of bias, such as the IAT. Fazio and Olson (2003) contend that differences between explicit and implicit measures of bias may be more reflective of the participants difficulty admitting to biased attitudes and this difficulty may be more pronounced in those who report lower levels of explicit bias. In addition, they also suggest that the correlation between implicit bias and discriminatory behavior may be influenced by other moderating factors. While these studies suggest more information is needed about the nature of implicit attitudes as well as the predictive validity of measures like the IAT, the research generally supports that the IAT measures bias (Dovidio et al., 2002; Fazio & Olson, 2003; Gawronski, Hofmann, & Wilbur, 2006; Greenwald et al., 2009; Stanley et al., 2008).