Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Reference Chapter 2

 

2
Ethnocentrism:Seeing the World From Where We Stand

Kenneth D. Keith

There is an old Asian proverb about the frog that lives in the well. The frog, it seems, is quite happy because, after all, the well is a perfectly good place, and the patch of sky he can see from the bottom of his well is a perfectly nice bit of sky. The frog has no need for, nor any interest in, any place but his own. Like the frog in the well, we are all prone to elevate our own place or our own culture as the standard against which we judge others, and to see our own as superior to others. This tendency is known as ethnocentrism (Berry, Poortinga, Segall, & Dasen, 2002). In this chapter, we discuss the concept of ethnocentrism: Who is ethnocentric, how do we become ethnocentric, and how can we reduce ethnocentrism?  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Permalink: 

Ethnocentrism is likely universal among humans (LeVine & Campbell, 1972) and first appeared in the literature more than a century ago in the writings of W. G. Sumner (1906), although it was even earlier that Charles Darwin (1874) noted that tribes tended to be more sympathetic to their own groups. Ethnocentrism often serves to create perceptions of cross-cultural difference, with resulting intercultural conflict and negative stereotypes (Triandis, 1994); it is thus important to successful intergroup relationships, and our efforts to improve them, that we develop an understanding of ethnocentrism: its characteristics, causes, and amelioration. Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

What are the Characteristics of Ethnocentrism?

The classic perspective

Ethnocentrism has its roots in words implying feelings and judgments that are centered (“centrism”) in an individual’s own cultural or ethnic (“ethno”) context (Brislin, 2000), and frequently involves: (a) perceiving outsiders with suspicion (Price & Crapo, 2002) and (b) individual tendencies toward group self-centeredness (Bizumic & Duckitt, 2007). Further, we seem to want to be near others who are like us, and we feel different from, and sometimes fearful of, those who are not like us (Strickland, 2000).  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

The result, Sumner (1906) suggested, is a division between in-groups and out-groups, in which in-group members consider their own practices the standard against which they measure out-groups. Members of the in-group are likely to see themselves as superior to (Hooghe, 2008), and more possessed of virtue than (Hammond & Axelrod, 2006), out-group members. The traditional Sumnerian view includes not only elevation of one’s own group, but also negative attitudes toward the “other,” the out-group. The potential for negative assessment increases with greater differences between the groups (Berry et al., 2002). And, as Raden (2003) noted, Sumner concerned himself primarily with unitary, homogeneous groups with clearly external out-groups. This was likely due, at least in part, to the fact that Sumner studied groups that found it necessary to unite against other groups in the interest of survival—an idea consistent with the finding of Pratto and Glasford (2008) that individuals value the lives of their in-group members more than those of an out-group when the groups are in competition. Sumner (1906) pointed out, for example, that Jews divided people between themselves (ingroup) and Gentiles (out-group), and that the Greeks and Romans (in-groups) saw all others as barbarians (out-groups).  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

A contemporary view

Research today, particularly in cultures as diverse as the U.S., often involves studies in which one racial or ethnic subgroup is the in-group, and other groups, although internal to the country, are out-groups (Raden, 2003); and studies have generally continued to support the notion that positive feelings for the in-group and negative feelings for out-groups bear a reciprocal relationship to each other (Brewer, 1999). However, as Brewer (1999; 2007) reported, data from many groups have shown that, although individuals tend to be differentially positive toward their in-group, these attitudes may be independent of their attitudes toward out-groups. In other words, we can have positive feelings toward members of our in-groups without corresponding attitudes of disdain or hostility toward out-groups—a perspective supported by the work of Khan and Liu (2008), who found, in a study of Indians and Pakistanis, more support for favoring the in-group than for disfavoring the out-group.

Bizumic and Duckitt (2007), in a study of three varieties of group self-centeredness (ethnocentrism, fundamentalism, and anthropocentrism) among Australian university students, found that individuals who strongly favor their own human groups over others also tend to favor humans over other species. Thus, prejudice against animals was related to self-centeredness in relation to human out-groups. However, ethnocentrism, like the other forms of self-centeredness, correlated with negative feelings toward specific relevant out-groups, but not toward out-groups in general. Further, although Raden (2003) found classic (Sumnerian) ethnocentrism (i.e., positive attitudes toward the in-group, hostility toward the out-group) among some subgroups of a large probability sample of white Americans, in-group bias (without the implication of unfavorable views of out-groups) was more prevalent in his sample. This finding led Raden to point up the methodological importance of the distinction between the classic form of ethnocentrism and the more common in-group bias, suggesting that the latter may be a midpoint between the extremes of classic ethnocentrism and the absence of ethnocentrism. Such current work indicates that the occurrence of ethnocentrism, in its contemporary incarnation, is more complex and more nuanced than the Sumnerian perspective might suggest.   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Who is ethnocentric?

Many writers have discussed the universal tendency of humans to be ethnocentric (e.g., LeVine & Campbell, 1972; Neuliep, Hintz, & McCroskey, 2005; Shuya, 2007). Researchers have studied ethnocentrism in relation to ethnic minorities within the United States (Gittler, 1972; Hraba, 1972; Mutisya & Ross, 2005; Prothro, 1952; Raden, 2003), across nationalities (Beswick, 1972; Cashdan, 2001; Khan & Liu, 2008; Li & Liu, 1975), in the tendencies of consumers to buy domestic products (Chryssochoidis, Krystallis, & Perreas, 2007; Hsu & Nien, 2008; Nguyen, Nguyen, & Barrett, 2008; Vida, 2008), and toward people with disabilities (Chesler, 1965). Ethnocentrism has also been manifest in perceptions of intercultural attractiveness and competence of individuals from other cultures (Neuliep et al., 2005).

Sumner (1906) recounted a long list of cultural groups (including Lapps, Kiowa, Caribs, Greenlanders, Jews, Seri, and others) that developed terms denoting their respective groups as uniquely “men,” “people,” “chosen,” or otherwise superior.   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

And of course researchers, being human themselves, are also subject to ethnocentrism (Hofstede, 2007). Thus, ethnocentric bias exists not only at the levels of the individual and intergroup relations, but also at the level of the scientists who study psychological phenomena across cultures (e.g., Berry et al., 2002; Hofstede, 2007). Campbell (1970), among others, has proposed research methodologies designed to ameliorate the contaminating influence of ethnocentrism in social science investigations.

Everyone, it seems, is ethnocentric or at least potentially susceptible to ethnocentrism. It seems clear, as Matsumoto and Juang (2004) suggested, that culture serves much like a lens, or filter, “distorting, rotating, and coloring” (p. 65) our view of the world, leading us inevitably to see it from the only vantage point we know—our own.   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

How Does Ethnocentrism Develop?

Biological perspectives

Ethnocentrism may seem to be “automatic” (LeBaron, 2003), as a part of the enculturation of children within a society; a process in which some see the child learning its culture and its attitudes as a kind of tabula rasa (LeVine, 1982). On the other hand, some writers have argued for an evolutionary basis for ethnocentrism. Wilson (1978), for example, raised the possibility that biological advantage might accrue to ethnocentric tribal groups, not only from aggression but also from other associated behaviors. Wilson argued that particular behaviors (e.g., specific forms of aggression) are not genetically transmitted, but that cultural structures supporting them may have been. Thus, successful groups were those that successfully divided the world between “us” and “them.” Similarly, Thayer (2004) set forth the proposition that evolution has equipped humans with an affinity for those who are biologically related; thus, this view would suggest, people should be expected to support first their immediate family, then other relatives, then their ethnic group, and finally others. This perspective, Thayer said, does not mean ethnocentrism is not subject to environmental influence (e.g., culture, religion, political beliefs), but it does recognize the natural tendency to favor those who are biologically related, and there is some evidence to suggest that an ethnically homogeneous culture (in which people might be assumed to be more biologically similar) may manifest higher levels of ethnocentrism than a more diverse one (Neuliep, Chaudoir, & McCroskey, 2001).   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Perceived vulnerability to disease may give rise to negative attitudes toward out-group members (Faulkner, Schaller, Park, & Duncan, 2004). Navarrette, Fessler, and Eng (2007), in a study testing this disease-threat model for intergroup attitudes, found that pregnant women were most ethnocentric during the first trimester of their pregnancy—a finding consistent with the model and supportive of the role of biological factors as an influence on ethnocentrism. In another investigation, Navarrette and Fessler (2006) gathered data indicating an increase in ethnocentrism in individuals who perceived an increased vulnerability to disease— supporting the notion that, because in-group members may present less risk of disease than out-group contacts, individuals may have mental approach and avoidance mechanisms that predispose them to ethnocentric behaviors (e.g., Faulkner et al., 2004). And, although such cognitive processes might be assumed to be involved in ethnocentrism, there is some evidence simply for an individual predisposition to favor in-groups (Hammond & Axelrod, 2006).  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

On the other hand, Roberts (1997) did not find a significant correlation between ethnocentrism and reproductive success in a study of two distinct ethnic groups in India—perhaps casting doubt on the presumption of evolutionary advantage of ethnocentrism (although such an advantage may well have once existed for such groups). Ross (1991), in suggesting the incompleteness of a sociobiological explanation for ethnocentrism, argued instead for the possibility of a cultural evolutionary process. Simon (1980), in discussing the relationship between genetics and human nature, enumerated several cultural universals and suggested that there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that they are or are not genetically based. Ethnocentrism may well be one such universal and, as we will see in chapter 7, it is likely that biological and psychological influences bear a reciprocal relationship to each other in the evolution of culture and psychological processes.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Psychological variables

Scientists have studied a number of psychosocial variables that appear to be related to the behaviors we call ethnocentrism. Some of these are narcissism, religious fundamentalism, major personality traits, intolerance for ambiguity, and authoritarianism. Numerous studies have shown that ethnocentrism may decrease over time, as group members develop experience with both the in-group and out-groups, and views of out-groups may become more positive with experience (Ryan & Bogart, 1997). Perhaps more interesting is the fact that researchers have found ethnocentrism related in various ways to characteristics that we might place on a continuum of “open-mindedness.” For example, Bizumic and Duckitt (2008), in a sample of university students in New Zealand, found a positive relationship between narcissism (self-centeredness) and intergroup ethnocentrism, leading the researchers to suggest that narcissism may predispose individuals to hold ethnocentric attitudes. Similarly, Altemeyer (2003), studying Canadian students, found significant correlations between religious fundamentalism, Manitoba ethnocentrism (Altemeyer, 1996), and religious ethnocentrism; in other words, those scoring high on religious fundamentalism also tended to be ethnocentric—toward other religions and other sociocultural groups. Altemeyer’s (2003) religious fundamentalist participants reported coming from homes in which religion was a focus of emphasis from an early age, and, he said, have a “very small ‘us’ and quite a large ‘them’ when it comes to faith” (p. 27). The connection between religion and ethnocentrism is not limited to Canadians. For example, working in India with Hindu and Muslim adolescents, and comparing them to nonreligious individuals, Hasnain (2007) found religious persons in both groups to be significantly more prejudiced and ethnocentric than the nonreligious participants.   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

In a study investigating the attitudes of American university students toward foreign-born and domestic instructors, de Oliveira, Braun, Carlson, and de Oliveira (2009) measured Big Five personality traits of the students (McCrae & Costa, 1999) as well as attitudes toward the instructors. Among their findings, these researchers found an ethnocentric bias against the foreign-born instructors (whom students apparently saw as out-group members), and the student traits of agreeableness and conscientiousness were positively correlated with positive attitudes toward the foreign-born teachers. de Oliveira et al. also reported an inverse relationship between attitudes toward the two instructor conditions (i.e., students who liked one instructor group more tended to like the other instructor group less)—a finding that would seem consistent with the classical version of ethnocentrism.

There is a long history of research investigating the relationship of other personal traits to ethnocentrism. Noting the similarity in descriptions of intolerance for ambiguity and for ethnocentrism, Block and Block (1951) designed research to study the relationship between these characteristics. Using a laboratory task and a sample of American university students, these investigators reported that participants considered intolerant of ambiguity were more ethnocentric than those considered tolerant of ambiguity. Taft (1956) employed a variation on the methods used by Block and Block (1951) to study ethnocentrism and intolerance of ambiguity in an Australian group, with similar conclusions: Those intolerant of ambiguity also scored significantly higher on a measure of ethnocentrism. O’Connor (1952), studying a sample of American students, also found similar results: She reported a significant correlation between intolerance for ambiguity and ethnocentrism; she also noted a significant difference between people assessed as high in ethnocentrism and those low in ethnocentrism on a measure of intolerance of ambiguity (Those high in ethnocentrism scored higher on intolerance of ambiguity.)  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Parents, of course, play a role in the development of ethnocentrism in their children, and researchers have studied parental characteristics and parenting styles in this context. Thomas (1975) assessed parents for authoritarianism (the tendency to favor absolute obedience to authority) in seven Pacific Island cultures, finding authoritarian parenting characteristics in three of the groups (Tahiti, Cook Islands, and Samoa). In each of these three cultures, authoritarianism was positively correlated with ethnocentrism. A number of studies have shown a relationship between parental characteristics and behavior and ethnocentrism in their children. Epstein and Komorita (1966), for example, found that childhood ethnocentrism was related to the interaction between parental ethnocentrism and punitiveness. In particular, parents who used moderately punitive disciplinary approaches were more likely to have children who shared their parents’ ethnocentric attitudes. Mosher and Scodel (1960), in a study of Midwestern American schoolchildren and their mothers, found that the children’s ethnocentrism was correlated with that of their mothers, but not with the mothers’ authoritarianism.

Finally, in two Dutch samples, Van IJzendoorn (2001) found significant correlations between ethnocentrism and authoritarianism in both high school and university students. This study also revealed negative correlations, for both groups, between moral judgment and both ethnocentrism and authoritarianism. Likewise, in an investigation measuring ethnocentrism and authoritarianism of adolescents and parents in two Hungarian cities, both groups showed a significant relationship between these two variables (Todosijevic´ & Enyedi, 2002).  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Summary

In summary, we can say that scientists of various points of view have proposed numerous explanations for ethnocentrism. It seems likely that ethnocentrism has evolutionary underpinnings, but it is equally evident that it is linked to a variety of environmental/cultural and personal influences, including parental characteristics and individual traits. Bias favoring the in-group may help individuals to organize their experience and reduce uncertainty (Druckman, 2006)—perhaps contributing to efforts to explain the relationship of highly structured views, in the form of authoritarianism and fundamentalism, to ethnocentrism.

Although ethnocentrism may contribute, via evolutionary mechanisms, to the survival and integrity of groups, there is nevertheless abundant evidence of the challenges and obstacles posed by ethnocentrism at the interpersonal and intercultural levels. This state of affairs of course presents concerns for intergroup understanding and relations (Brewer & Brown, 1998). We might, therefore, logically ask whether there are ways to overcome the effects of this universal phenomenon.   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Can We Reduce Our Ethnocentrism?

Cross-cultural psychology has made efforts not only to understand the ethnocentric limits of our cultural/scientific knowledge (Berry et al., 2002), but also to find ways to decrease ethnocentrism among individuals. Brislin (2000) has pointed out that interaction with people of other cultures is likely to challenge our ethnocentric perspectives, and numerous writers have suggested that such contact will reduce ethnocentrism. This is not always the case, however (Brewer & Brown, 1998). In this section, we review the potential effects of education and related variables on the ethnocentrism of individual people.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Role of education

Higher education

Hooghe (2008) reported that high levels of education may reduce ethnocentrism. This assertion was borne out by two studies conducted by Plant (1958a, 1958b) more than a half century ago. In one of these studies, Plant (1958b) administered the ethnocentrism scale from The authoritarian personality (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950) to a sample of American college students, 755 of whom were still available for testing two years later. Of the 755, 505 had completed two years of college, and showed significantly reduced ethnocentrism at follow-up. The remaining 250 participants did not continue in college or withdrew before the two-year follow-up; this group showed no significant changes in measured ethnocentrism. In this study, Plant also found a significant sex difference, with men showing higher levels of ethnocentrism than women—a finding consistent with other (Hooghe, 2008) discussions of ethnocentrism.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

In the second study, Plant (1958a) used a modified version of the Total Ethnocentrism Scale: Public Opinion Questionnaire E, again from the work of Adorno et al. (1950). Of 1,030 students completing the measure as entering college students, Plant invited 315 to be retested at the end of their four-year college career. Of the 315 eligible students, 271 (86%) completed the retest. Both male and female students produced significantly lower ethnocentrism scores following their four years of college. Scores for men were higher than those for women at the time of both the initial testing and the retesting, and Plant’s analysis of the difference in shift scores indicated that female students’ scores were reduced significantly more than those of males. We should note that in this study, Plant did not report scores for a non-student control group. Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Specific courses

In another study, designed to more specifically examine the effects of studying cross-cultural psychology on ethnocentrism, Pettijohn and Naples (2009) conducted a comparative investigation across two undergraduate courses: cross-cultural psychology and introductory psychology. Fifty-nine students in these two courses completed the U.S. Ethnocentrism Scale (Neuliep & McCroskey, 1997) and the revised Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale (Neuliep, 2002) at the beginning and completion of their respective courses. These researchers found a significantly greater decrease in ethnocentrism, on both measures, for the cross-cultural students (who decreased their scores on both tests) than for the introductory psychology students (whose scores did not decrease significantly on either measure). This study had numerous flaws, including a number of preexisting differences between the groups; nevertheless, it suggests that exposure to the content material of cross-cultural psychology may have the capacity to aid in overcoming ethnocentrism.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Borden (2007) reported another educational effort aimed toward reduction of ethnocentrism. She studied university students in two sections of an intercultural communication course, evaluating effects on ethnocentrism of their experience in service learning projects conducted in community settings serving ethnic minorities and international students. Borden used the Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale (Neuliep, 2002) as a pretest and posttest, administering it to students at the beginning of the course and again at the end. This report was essentially an effort to test the so-called “contact hypothesis”—the notion that contact between groups may reduce tension between them (Allport, 1954). The results indicated a significant reduction in ethnocentrism in students completing the service learning experience, suggesting a possible role for such exposure as a means to reduce ethnocentrism. However, the absence of a comparison group and other standard control measures makes it necessary to interpret this project with caution.

Further, as Brewer and Brown (1998) pointed out, the contact hypothesis has often been contradicted by experience. Specifically, as Brewer and Brown explained, the contact hypothesis, or simple exposure to other groups, is likely to succeed only if certain additional factors (social and institutional support, potential for meaningful relationships, equal status between groups, and intergroup cooperation) are in place.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Predictive variables

Finally, Dong, Day, and Collaço (2008) investigated the possible role of intercultural communication sensitivity and multiculturalism as predictors of ethnocentrism. They administered the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (Chen & Starosta, 2000), a multicultural ideology scale (Berry & Kalin, 1995), and the Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale (Neuliep, 2002) to 419 American undergraduate students, most of them Caucasians and Asian Americans.

Dong et al. reported significant correlations between both the intercultural sensitivity and multicultural ideology measures and the Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale, and suggested the possibility that increasing intercultural sensitivity and multicultural appreciation (e.g., through educational advocacy, neighborhood and community education, and one-to-one intercultural experience) might reduce ethnocentrism. However, this correlational study, while perhaps identifying promising variables for future research, did not demonstrate a causal connection among these measures. It may simply be the case that individuals who are more ethnocentric are naturally less interculturally sensitive and less multiculturally ideologic, and that all these traits are the product of some other cause. Dong et al. were correct, however, in observing that few empirical studies have investigated specific variables that could decrease levels of ethnocentrism.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Summary

Despite the universality of ethnocentrism, we have some evidence that culture and experience may influence its occurrence. Thus, students in different cultures show differing levels of ethnocentrism. Specifically, Japanese students have shown higher levels of ethnocentrism than Americans (Neuliep et al., 2001), as have Chinese students (Li & Liu, 1975; Shuya, 2007). Thus, although the evidence suggests the universality of ethnocentrism, levels seem to vary from culture to culture. And some research findings have indicated tentative relationships between education as a mitigating factor and ethnocentrism, and between ethnocentrism and experience in specific courses. However, although exposure to cultural subgroups may hold promise in the effort to overcome ethnocentrism, we know we must be skeptical of claims that exposure alone will achieve this end. Nevertheless, exposure to people and their diversity is likely to play a contributing role in reducing ethnocentrism.   Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Conclusion

Ethnocentrism has appeared in the sociocultural literature for more than a century, and we believe it to be a universal human phenomenon. We have seen that ethnocentrism may take different forms—specifically with or without hostility toward out-groups—but always involving the tendency to elevate one’s own group (in-group). Although ethnocentrism may have evolutionary roots, researchers have identified a number of psychological traits and conditions associated with it. Studies investigating these psychological variables have generally been correlational in nature, or have lacked sufficient experimental  controls to allow causal inferences; research has nevertheless suggested a connection between ethnocentrism and authoritarianism and between ethnocentrism and fundamentalism.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Although ethnocentrism has sometimes diminished with educational experience and intergroup exposure, the studies demonstrating this have lacked the scientific rigor necessary to show causal connections. Further, intergroup exposure seems to require additional supports and relationships to reliably influence out-group prejudice. The base of empirical research directed toward reducing ethnocentrism is sparse; more work will be needed if we are to fully understand this important cultural phenomenon. Only then perhaps, unlike the proverbial frog, will we get beyond our isolated well and our own little patch of sky.

References

Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D., & Sanford, N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Altemeyer, B. (2003). Why do religious fundamentalists tend to be prejudiced? International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 13, 17–28.

Berry, J. W., & Kalin, R. (1995). Multicultural and ethnic attitudes in Canada: An overview of the 1991 national survey. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 27, 301–320.

Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Beswick, D. G. (1972). A survey of ethnocentrism in Australia. Australian Journal of Psychology, 24, 153–163.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Bizumic, B., & Duckitt, J. (2007). Varieties of group self-centeredness and dislike of the specific other. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29, 195–202.

Bizumic, B., & Duckitt, J. (2008). “My group is not worthy of me”: Narcissism and ethnocentrism. Political Psychology, 29, 437–453.

Block, J., & Block, J. (1951). An investigation of the relationship between intolerance of ambiguity and ethnocentrism. Journal of Personality, 19, 303–311.

Borden, A. W. (2007). The impact of service-learning on ethnocentrism in an intercultural communication course. Journal of Experiential Education, 30, 171–183.

Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper

Brewer, M. B. (2007). The importance of being we : Human nature and intergroup relations. American Psychologist, 62, 728–738.

Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. (1998). Intergroup relations. In D.  Characteristics of Ethnocentrism Assignment Paper