Blog 2: The Contact Hypothesis

The contact hypothesis states that intergroup contact can reduce prejudice under certain conditions. The contact hypothesis has been heavily investigated since its development over 50 years ago and is considered to be one of the most effective strategies for improving intergroup relations. Whilst the significance of the contact hypothesis is widely recognized it has been subject to considerable criticism. A number of social psychologists have argued that that the contact hypothesis is overly optimistic and suggest that contact may not be effective in reducing prejudice and stereotypes even under ideal circumstances. The research that supports the contact hypothesis has also been criticized for its limited scope and focus on ideal over mundane settings. Contact theorists and researchers have also been criticized for assuming a causal relationship between contact and a reduction in prejudice when there are alternate conclusions that can be drawn from the research findings.

What is the contact hypothesis?

Gordon Allport (1954, as cited in Baumeister & Bushman, 2008) proposed the contact hypothesis which states that regular interaction between members of different groups reduces prejudice. The contact hypothesis is based on the notion that prejudice arises out of ignorance, which is the result of limited contact with outgroup members. Limited contact with and lack of knowledge about members of different groups encourages the development of unfavorable, stereotypical views (Ellison & Powers, 1994). According to the contact hypothesis, frequent contact with other group members promotes positive and tolerant attitudes towards the group as a whole as it allows ingroup members to gain information about the lifestyles, behaviours and experiences of other groups. It is believed that the information acquired through contact is generalized to the whole group and negative stereotypical views are consequently disproved (Ellison & Powers, 1994).

Allport recognized that not all contact is effective in reducing prejudice and proposed four conditions for successful intergroup contact. The first condition states that the contact must be between group members who are equal in status. When participants are of unequal status intergroup contact is likely to increase prejudice and confirm stereotypes (Robinson & Preston, 1976). The second condition states that the contact should be pleasant. If the contact is not a pleasurable experience for members of both groups future contact may be avoided. The third condition specifies that it is necessary for the groups to cooperate in achieving a common goal. Introducing any conflicts of interest whether actual or perceived may increase tension between the groups. Finally the contact should occur in situations where intergroup interaction is encouraged by authority figures. If these conditions are not met there is no guarantee that positive attitude change will occur and there is the possibility of an increase in intergroup conflict and prejudice (Bratt, 2002).

There is a plethora of empirical evidence that supports the contact hypothesis. For example, Bratt (2002) found that school aged students had more favorable attitudes towards outgroup members that they encountered at school compared to outgroup members they had little interaction with. Ellison and Powers (1994) found that African Americans who had close white friends held more positive views of white people than African Americans without such friendships.

Argument that contact is not a successful method for reducing prejudice.

Social psychologists have argued that the optimal conditions required for prejudice reduction make the contact hypothesis inapplicable to the real world (Dixon, Durrheim & Tredoux, 2005). The conditions for optimal contact are not characteristic of most casual encounters between groups and because of this it has been suggested that casual contact is not sufficient in reducing prejudice (Ellison & Powers, 1994; Robinson & Preston, 1976). Some social psychologists have argued that even contact under ideal conditions might not result in the ingroup making positive generalizations towards the outgroup. Ingroup members might view those they come into contact with as atypical and subcategorize those individuals as exceptions of their particular social group. Research has found that contact with people who are exceptions to a stereotype has no effect in changing how the whole group is perceived (Hamburger, 1994). It might seem that the solution to this problem is to ensure that contact occurs between those who are highly representative of a group however, attitude change only results from positive contact and contact with highly stereotypical individuals is likely to be viewed as negative. It has been suggested that contact might have the effect of individuals recognizing that not all members of a group are the same whilst maintaining their prejudicial views (Hamburger, 1994).

Limitations of the research examining the contact hypothesis.

Studies that support the contact hypothesis probably outweigh those that challenge it however the research on the contact hypothesis has been criticized for having been conducted under ideal or laboratory conditions instead of everyday settings (Hanssen, 2001). Contact has mainly been examined in laboratory settings or the armed services, mixed race residential areas and in educational and occupational institutions all of which are designed to create intergroup contact (Ellison & Powers, 1994). This makes generalizing the findings of such research to the general population difficult, as most interracial contact does not occur under such monitored conditions. The implication of this is that whether contact reduces prejudice in the general population is yet to be conclusively determined. A study conducted by Hanssen (2001), which investigated the effect of contact in a natural setting failed to support the contact hypothesis. Hanssen expected white American baseball players to be less prejudiced towards African Americans than baseball fans due to regular contact and believed that this would be evident in the votes for baseball’s annual All-Star game however no significant difference was found.

The benefit of examining the ideal situations in which contact is effective is that it demonstrates social order and can promote social change. However, it is necessary to investigate contact in everyday situations in order to better understand the implications of intergroup contact (Dixon et al., 2005).

Furthermore, the research into the contact hypothesis has been criticized for its heavy focus on white Americans (Ellison & Powers, 1994). The result of such limited scope is that the meaning of intergroup contact for members of other races is not entirely understood. This notion is supported by a study conducted by Robinson and Preston (1976) in which the prejudices of white American and African American teachers were examined. African Americans were initially less prejudiced towards whites and after contact their prejudices reduced less than white Americans. This implies that contact may have different meanings for African Americans and white Americans. The limited research that has involved other races (e.g. Jews, Hispanics and Asians) has also indicated that the contact hypothesis needs to be refined to more accurately depict how intergroup contact affects races other than white Americans (Dixon et al., 2005).

Causal assumptions of the research into the contact hypothesis.

Researchers who have investigated the contact hypothesis have been criticized for concluding that intergroup contact causes a reduction in prejudice and promotes tolerance. Whether attitude change is the result is of interracial contact is questionable as the behaviour change might be better explained by the possibility that those who are least prejudiced and most tolerant are likely to seek out contact with individuals of other groups whilst the most prejudiced people are likely to avoid such contact (Hanssen, 2001). This is a serious issue because contact is most likely to be favorable when participants come together voluntarily (Robinson & Preston, 1976). This belief suggests that forcing highly prejudiced individuals into contact situations in an effort to reduce their prejudices is likely to produce unfavorable results. This criticism again questions the relevance of the contact hypothesis to the general population and implies that the research that has been conducted over the past four to five decades has been misguided (Hanssen, 2001).

Whilst the contribution of the contact hypothesis to social psychology and its effectiveness in improving intergroup relations is largely acknowledged and recognized amongst psychologists it has been subject to considerable criticism since its development over 50 years ago. According to the contact hypothesis, frequent interaction between members of different social groups has the effect of reducing intergroup prejudice and eliminating stereotypes under certain conditions. The first criticism is that the conditions necessary for positive attitude change make the hypothesis inapplicable to the real world. It has also been suggested that contact does not result in positive generalizations being made to the whole group but rather people recognize that not all individuals are representative of their group. The research investigating the contact hypothesis has been criticized for its focus settings where intergroup contact is promoted and monitored instead of everyday situations. The research has also been criticized for focusing largely on white Americans. The researchers who have examined the contact hypothesis have been criticized for assuming that contact causes a reduction in prejudice when the least prejudiced individuals seeking out contact with members of other groups might better explain this result. Overall, the criticisms of the contact hypotheses question its efficacy in reducing prejudice and application outside of laboratory situations.

References

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature (1st ed.).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Bratt, C. (2002). Contact and attitudes between ethnic groups: A survey-based study of
adolescents in Norway. Acta Sociologica, 45 (2), 107-125.

Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2005). Beyond the optimal contact strategy: A reality
A reality check for the contact hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60 (7), 697-711.

Ellison, C. G., & Powers, D. A. (1994). The contact hypothesis and racial attitudes among Black
Americans. Social Science Quarterly, 75 (2), 385-400.

Hamburger, Y (1994). The contact hypothesis reconsidered: Effects of the atypical outgroup
member on the outgroup stereotype. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15 (3),
339-358.

Hanssen, A. F. (2001). A test of the racial contact hypothesis from a natural experiment:
Baseball's all star voting as a case. Social Science Quarterly, 82 (1), 51-66.

Robinson, J., & Preston, J. D. (1976). Equal-status contact and modification of racial prejudice:
A reexamination of the contact hypothesis. Social Forces, 54 (4), 911-924.

Self Assessment
Theory: The theory I discussed was the contact hypothesis itself. I had originally planned to critique the contact hypothesis from the viewpoint of a different theory however found no relevant theory to use for this purpose in conducting my research. I feel that I was able to adequately critique the hypothesis without doing so however, and believe would not have been able to do so sufficiently anyway due to the limited word count.
Research: I read a considerable number of studies when researching for my essay a number of which I refer to in the essay. The majority of the research I used was recent however I used some older research which I would normally avoid however as the contact hypothesis has been around for over 50 years I believe it was relevant to include some of the earlier research findings and views on the contact hypothesis.
Written Expression: I am quite confident that my essay conforms to APS standards. The readability level is 15.5 (despite a number of editing attempts to reduce this to 12) however I believe my essay is easy to read and understand
On-line Engagement: My online engagement improved since writing the first blog having finished the majority of assessment items. I posted 4 original posts (compared to one at the beginning of the semester) and made a number of comments on other peoples blog postings. My postings were thoughtful and I made thoughtful and relevant comments on other peoples blogs. I enjoyed the online engagement more since posting blog 1 as I was more involved in it.

Essay plan!

Hi guys,

Hope everyone is going well with exam preparation and the final blog! Below is a detailed plan for my essay, if anyone wants to make any comments or anything they would be greatly appreciated!

Contact Hypothesis- What is it? Describe and critique with reference to theory & research.

Introduction

Paragraph 1: What is the contact hypothesis?

- Proposed by Gordon Allport (1954)

- States that regular interaction between members of different groups reduces prejudice.

- Contact results in positive attitude changes and reduces stereotypes.

- Assumes that prejudice and stereotypical views arise out of ignorance, limited contact and lack of understanding about outgroup members.

- Interracial contact provides information about values, lifestyles, behaviours and experiences of other groups.

- Four conditions for successful intergroup contact including, interaction between individual of equal status, under cooperative conditions, sharing a common goal and with the encouragement of authority figures.

Paragraph 2: Argument that contact does not reduce prejudice or stereotypes.

- Conditions that cause positive change are unlikely in real life.

- If contact is with individuals who are considered to be atypical or not representative of their group, members of the ingroup will class them in a separate category and prejudice will not be reduced.

- Research has found that encounters with people who are exceptions to stereotypes do not lead to any change in how the group as a whole is evaluated.

- Positive views formed during contact might not be generalized to the whole group.

- Trying to arrange contact with individuals who are most representative of their group is likely to be problematic as contact with a very typical person is more likely to be viewed as a negative occurrence and attitude change only results from positive contact.

- The effect of contact might be that people keep the stereotype but become more aware that it is not representative of all group members.

- Contact may lead to increased intergroup conflict.

Paragraph 3: Limitations of the research into the Contact Hypothesis.

- Studies that support the Contact Hypothesis probably outweigh those that contradict it however research on the contact hypothesis has been criticized for being conducted in limited or laboratory settings.

- Most research has been conducted in settings designed to create interracial contact (including in the army, educational or organizational settings or in laboratory settings) not in natural or casual settings.

- Findings of some natural experiments do not support the Contact Hypothesis, in a natural experiment which investigated whether white baseball players were less prejudiced towards black players than fans found no difference in prejudiced attitudes and provides no support for the contact hypothesis under natural conditions (Hanssen, 2001)

- This makes generalizing the findings of the studies to the general population difficult, as most interracial contact does not occur in such monitored conditions.

- Questions whether the contact hypotheses can be applied to the general population.

- Research has focused largely on whether contact reduces prejudice in white Americans with generally supportive results.

- The limited research that has been conducted with members of different races (e.g. Jews, Hispanics, Asians etc.) has suggested that contact might have different affects on prejudice in individuals of other races.

- For example, Robinson & Preston (1976) found that African Americans prejudice towards white Americans reduced less than white people after contact, suggests contact might have a different meaning for African Americans.

- Implies that it may be necessary to revise the original contact hypothesis in order to more accurately depict how contact among different groups leads to attitude change.

- Suggests the need for further research.

Paragraph 4: Causal assumptions of the Contact Hypothesis.

- The contact hypothesis has been criticized for assuming that contact causes a reduction in prejudice, however it might be that less prejudiced and more tolerant people seek out contact with outgroup members.

- If this is the case the research that has been conducted over the past four years may have been misguided and consequently the results may not be generalizable to the general population.

Conclusion

Good luck!

My experience with the bystander effect...

After reading the story about Kitty Genovese I was reminded of an experience I had some time ago that I have never understood until now.

About 2 years ago I was sleeping at my boyfriends house when at 4am I was woken by a girl screaming "help he's trying to rape me!". My boyfriend lives across the road from a small shopping center with a lot of open spaces and the voice was so loud I thought the girl must have been quite close so I woke up my boyfriend and told him to go help her. He got up and woke his dad and they both ran towards the voice. Meanwhile my boyfriends mum and I got up to phone the police whilst the girl continued to cry out for help. My boyfriend and his dad shortly returned and said they were unable to help the girl because she was in one of the apartments in a large block of apartments that is at least 500 meters from the house.

Interestingly, the police said that we were the first people to call! This amazes me because the girl was in a large apartment building and if she was loud enough to wake me up when I was so far away surely her neighbors were woken up to but none of them called the police! Also there was a group of guys waiting to start work outside the shops and none of them did anything either!

Until studying social psych I could never understand how so many people could ignore a girl screaming that she was in danger and needed help. I now understand that people are less likely to help when there are others around that could help than when they are alone. It seems to me that the people in the apartment building experienced a diffusion of responsibility where they did not feel responsible for providing assistance because of the presence of other people.

It's an interesting but ugly part of human nature. It would be nice to know that you could rely on other people if you desperately needed help no matter what the situation was or how many people were around...

The role of friendship in reducing prejudice...

In researching for my final blog which is on the contact hypothesis (frequent contact with other groups results in a reduction of intergroup prejudice under certain conditions) I have found a lot of information which suggests that close intergroup friendships can result in considerable reduction in prejudice towards the whole group... This research has personal meaning to me because my best friend is Asian (I'm Australian with an English background) and I wonder if my best friend was not Asian would I be more prejudiced towards Asian people... I like to think not but who knows???

Researchers have suggested that friendships promote equality between the friends, intimacy and a positive interaction with an outgroup member (which are some of the optimal contact conditions) and allow individuals to gain information about the outgroups experiences, lifestyles etc which causes the ingroup member to reject any existing stereotypical views towards the group and make positive generalizations about the entire group. research has found that individuals with one close friend from a different group are less prejudiced towards that group than individuals without such a relationship (forgive I don't have the reference but ask me of your interested and I'll find it).

But I was just wondering... Is this only applicable in countries that are highly multicultural and promote intergroup relationships? And what about in places where there is a long negative history of prejudice and ongoing conflict like Israel and Palestine? Because of the history and conflict in such places it is unlikely that individuals will form a friendships with members of the other group. We also learned that people seek out relationships with people who are similar to them in race, religion, SES etc which in theory makes intergroup friendships rare and unlikely...

I'd be really interested to hear people's opinions on this matter..

Blog 2

After much consideration I've decided to change my topic for the second blog... I was going to do the one on psychiatric stigma but after failing to find any significant information I've decided to write my essay on the contact hypothesis...

According to the contact hypothesis regular interaction between members of different groups reduces prejudices if the contact occurs under favorable conditions. This hypothesis was devised by Gordon Allport over 50 years ago and whilst it seems to make sense has been subjected to considerable criticism about the circumstances under which the contact must occur and conflicting research findings that suggest contact increases prejudice between groups.

If anyone has any comments, suggestions or recommendations I would love to hear them!
I think this topic will be quite interesting and I look forward to sharing more, happy blogging ;)

Blog 1: Aboriginal Stereotypes

A stereotype is a generalized belief about members of a certain social group that is held by the vast majority of the community. These beliefs reflect what are thought to be characteristic behaviours and traits of a particular group (Kenrick, Newberg & Cialdini, 2005). A number of stereotypes exist in Australia as it is a largely multicultural society. The Aboriginal people in Australia are subject to a particularly negative stereotype which represents them as uneducated, lazy, problem drinkers who are unemployed and receive special treatment from the Government. Such a stereotype can have a negative impact on the Aboriginal community who are prejudiced against as a result. Stereotypes exist for cognitive reasons allowing people to simplify and make sense of their environment and are formed through socialization and an innate tendency to view members of different groups negatively and as all being the same. In Australia, the mass media assisted in the development of the stereotype of Aboriginal people and helps maintain the stereotype through the images it depicts and the stories it chooses to report. People’s tendency to attend to information that supports their beliefs rather than disconfirms it and desire to blame other people for problems also contributes to the maintenance of stereotypes. Stereotypes, negative stereotypes in particular, are difficult to change. Changing stereotypes involves education about and exposure to minority groups as well as individuals attempting to avoid judging people based on stereotypical beliefs.

In Australia, Aboriginal people or Indigenous Australians are victims of a particularly negative stereotype. Aboriginal people are frequently viewed as uneducated alcoholics who are lazy, have no desire to work and receive too much assistance from the Australian government (Walker, 1993). Like most stereotypes, this stereotypical view has some basis in truth, but is in general, terribly inaccurate, overgeneralised and is damaging to the social, psychological and economical well being of Indigenous Australians at an individual and community level (Kenrick et al., 2005). Contrary to popular belief, most Aboriginal people do not abuse alcohol. Approximately 70% of Aboriginal people do not drink alcohol at all; however many of those who do are considered problem drinkers (OMATSIA,1997 ). And whilst there is a high rate of unemployment amongst Indigenous Australians it is not necessarily because Aboriginal people do not wish to work but rather that there is a lack of employment opportunities in areas populated by Aboriginal people and that employers tend to be prejudiced against Aboriginal workers as a result of stereotypical attitudes (OMATSIA,1997). It is commonly believed that Aboriginal people receive special treatment from the Australian Government however Aboriginal people are subject to the same legislation as the general population. The Government does provide additional assistance to Indigenous Australians living in remote and underprivileged regions but Aboriginal people are eligible for the same welfare benefits and Government housing as all Australians (OMATSIA, 1997). And finally, it is true that a large proportion of Aboriginal students do not complete high school and only a small percentage of Aboriginal people receive a tertiary education. The likely explanation for this is that the curriculums of mainstream schools are not compatible with the needs of Aboriginal students and that there are limited tertiary institutions in areas where Aboriginal people live (OMATSIA, 1997).

It seems that people have an innate tendency to categorize people into groups and form stereotypes (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Stereotypes serve a cognitive purpose and act as heuristics allowing people to quickly recognize and categorize members of a certain group in order to simplify their social environment (Spears, Oakes, Ellemers & Haslam, 1997). The content of stereotypes is learned through socialization from members of one’s own group and is consequently likely to present members of different groups in an unfavorable manner according to in-group favoritism which suggests that people tend to have a more positive perception of and favor members of their own group in comparison to that of members of different groups. Another factor that contributes to the formation of stereotypes is the false assumption people make that members of different groups are all similar in behaviors and characteristics, which is known as the out-group homogeneity bias (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). For example, if a person has a negative experience with one Aboriginal person they are likely to make the generalization that all Aboriginal people are the same as the person they encountered (Worchel, Cooper, Goethals & Olson, 2000).

Many factors contribute to the maintenance of stereotypes. The mass media has played a significant role in developing and maintaining the stereotype of Aboriginal people. The Australian media has been criticized for its portrayal of Aboriginal people, as for many years the media has focused largely on stories that depict the Aboriginal people as violent, drunk and uncivilized. Such images in the media confirm people’s beliefs about Aboriginal people (Meadows, 2001). According to the confirmation bias people have a tendency to focus on information that supports their beliefs rather than information that challenges them (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). So if people believe that all Aboriginal people are unemployed alcoholics and they meet an unemployed alcoholic Aboriginal person this belief is confirmed and the stereotype is supported and maintained. People also tend to subtype meaning that if the encounter an individual member of a stereotyped group who does not conform with the stereotype they see this person as an exception rather than a representation of the entire group and does not amend their stereotypical view (Worchel et al., 2000).

Stereotypes are also maintained by people’s desire to have someone to blame. According to the scapegoat theory people tend to blame their problems on members of other groups (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). In Australia, Aboriginal people have been blamed for a number of social problems including youth violence and drug and alcohol abuse. Unfortunately, once stereotypes are established they are particularly difficult to change.

Whilst it is recognized that it is very difficult to change stereotypes it is thought to be possible through education and exposure. At an individual level stereotypes can be reduced through consciously overriding automatic judgments that are made based on stereotypes. Judging an individual based on a stereotype occurs automatically however people can make a conscious effort not to perceive people based on preconceived beliefs but to form a judgment based their experience and knowledge of the person without taking stereotypical beliefs into account (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

At a national level, stereotypes can be overcome or at least reduced through education and exposure programs. One of the reasons stereotypes are formed is because people have limited contact and knowledge about certain groups (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). It may be useful to implement education programs that are designed to dispel any myths that exist about certain groups and present people with facts in order to reduce the uncertainty that people have about different groups. It has been found that stereotypes can be more successfully changed in children compared to adults (Worchel et al., 2000). Based on this knowledge education programs should be strongly targeted at children in primary school. Children who are educated about members of minority groups are less likely to develop negative stereotypes and pass them on to their own children. The mass media played a considerable role in constructing the stereotype of Aboriginal people and could play a role in changing it. It could achieve this by reporting more positive stories concerning Aboriginal people and also through educational advertisements which aim to eliminate myths and educate people about Aboriginal people (Meadows, 2001).

Stereotypes are formed as a result of limited exposure to members of certain groups (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). According to the contact hypothesis intergroup contact can result in more positive intergroup attitudes (Worchel et al.,2000). However there are specific conditions under which intergroup contact is effective in reducing contacts. These conditions are that the contact must be positive and the groups must be of equal status (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). An exposure program designed to expose children to Aboriginal people, practices and culture may be useful in eliminating the negative stereotype that exists in Australia concerning Aboriginal people. Such a program would also make Aboriginal people and their culture more familiar which may result in more favorable attitudes according to the exposure effect (Worchel et al., 2000).

Aboriginal people are viewed very negatively by the majority of Australian people. The stereotype concerning Aboriginal people was formed because people use stereotypes to understand and simplify their environment, and tend to believe that people from groups other than their own all share the same unfavorable characteristics. The media has played a role in the formation and maintenance of this stereotype and the confirmation bias and scapegoat theory help to explain how stereotypes are maintained. Negative stereotypes are very difficult to change and changing them involves education, exposure and individual effort to avoid stereotyping.

References

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature (1^st

ed.) Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Kenrick, D.T, Neuberg, S. L., & Cialdini, R. B. (2005). Social Psychology: Unraveling

The Mystery. Boston : Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

Meadows, M. (2001). Voices in the wilderness : images of Aboriginal people in the

Australian media. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.

Office of the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs,(OMATSIA,1997)

Rebutting the myths: some facts about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

Affairs. Canberra : Office of the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

Affairs.

Spears, R., Oakes, P. J., Ellemers, N. & Hoslam, S. A. (1997). The Social Psychology of

Stereotyping and Group Life. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Walker, Y (1993). Aboriginal Family Issues. Family Matters 35, pp. 51-53.

Worchel, S., Cooper, J., Goethals, G. R., & Olson, J. M. (2000). Prejudice and

stereotypes. In S. Worchel, J. Cooper, G. R. Goethals & J. M. S. Olson (2000).

Social psychology (Ch 7, pp. 192 - 223). Wadsworth: Belmont, CA.

Appendix A

Self evaluation

1.Theory/ Research

I have used a number of theories and social psychology terms that are relevant to stereotyping in my essay. Each theory and terms has been defined and expanded on with examples where possible to aid in understanding. My concept map is well intertwined with my essay and depicts the information contained in the essay and my understanding of the topic.
In conducting research I found seven sources that I believed were relevant. Unfortunately I was unable to locate many journal articles that contained relevant information so I focused heavily on text books. It was particularly difficult to locate Australian texts. However I am satisfied that I have provided a clear and succinct essay with a strong argument.

2. Written Expression

Readability analysis showed a Flesch Reading Ease scale of 51.5. An ideal score is between 60 and 70. I am aware that I tend to use very long sentences and this probably contributed to a less than ideal result. The Flesch Kincaird Grade was 8.1 which is slightly above the ideal score of 8.

I aimed to write in perfect APA style however being inexperienced using blogs resulted in some conventions not being met (Indenting reference list). However I am reasonably confident my essay is mostly in APA format having used a writing in APA style text book

3. Online Engagement

Unfortunately I was not able to engage with others online as much as I would have liked. This is the result of having a large number of assessment items due early in the semester. I did read a lot of blogs others had written but was unable to comment due to limited free time. I would have liked to offer more information on my chosen topic through giving links to articles and references

Blog 1

Hi guys,
For my first blog I've decided to focus on the stereotype that exists about Aboriginal people. Unfortunately the stereotypical view of Aboriginal people is that they are violent, lazy, alcoholics who do not want to work and receive special treatment from the Australian Government. Whilst this stereotype may fit some Aboriginal people as it would fit some of any other group of people it is certainly not true of all Aboriginal people (please read article). The effect of such a negative stereotype is that Aboriginal people are judged before they are even given a chance and can have an impact on how the Aboriginal people view themselves.

In my essay/report I am going to discuss how this stereotype developed, why it continues to exist and how it can be changed. In my opinion and from what research I've done the mass media has played a strong role in the formulation and maintenance of this stereotype and can help to change it. Changing stereotypes is a long and difficult task as they are so widespread and have existed for so long but it can be done!

Feel free to comment, ask questions, argue or lead me to any useful resources!

Jaimee's Blog

I did it!