External social norms may be the strongest cues suppressing prejudiced expression

Evidence

Another matter ripe for future research concerns an issue Allport largely overlooked. That is, although the bulk of Allport’s chapter focused on the personal or internal reasons for renouncing prejudice and deploying mechanisms to address the attendant inner conflict, in a number of instances, Allport also alluded to the effect others’ views may have in discouraging expressions of prejudice. Though Allport clearly recognized the power of both inner (personal) and outer (normative) forces discouraging the expression of prejudice as alternative types of cues for “putting the brakes on prejudice,” he did not consider outer forces in any depth. Time, however, has revealed that the presence of others who discourage prejudice may be among the strongest cues for engaging controlled processes to prevent expressions of prejudice (see Crandall & Stangor, ch. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2120

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the shame/community-reputation work in the Milgrom law-merchant and Social Control of Impersonal Trust chapters — external normative enforcement as a behavioral brake. — connects to: Persuasion that stimulates some behaviors while suppressing others constitutes conditioning — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1019; Social norms exercise overwhelming force over even trained observers of behavior — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1507; Dog whistles activate latent racial prejudice while evading egalitarian norms — Rachel Wetts and Robb Willer, Who Is Called by the Dog Whistle?…, 5 (+1 more)
• QUESTION: Which is the stronger regulator of out-group hostility — internalized values or visible social disapproval?