People alternate between egalitarian and prejudiced stances depending on what a situation makes salient

Evidence

Explaining away inconsistent evidence can be challenging and requires a vigilance that may be taxing to social perceivers. An alternative strategy is to accept negative beliefs about outgroup members as valid while simultaneously viewing oneself as egalitarian and fair-minded. Because these views are likely to collide, Allport suggested that people who use this type of strategy would need to alternate between their conflicting views of outgroup members. Indeed, Allport suggested that this was likely the most common strategy used to address the threat of inner conflict because it allowed people to maintain a fair and just self-concept yet still respond in prejudiced ways. Using this strategy, people vacillate between their egalitarian values and their prejudiced beliefs based on situational factors that make one or the other salient. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2096 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim
• XREF: connects to: Personal and political framing both shrink problems but operate in opposite directions. — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 1266; Egalitarian statements can transmit prejudice between group members — Drew S. Jacoby-Senghor and Michael Rosenblum and N. Derek Brown, Not all egalitarianism is created…, 63; People and situations mutually influence each other rather than situations acting one-way on people — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 354 (+11 more)

Broader Connections

• People alternately vacillate between egalitarian values and prejudiced beliefs #expands (0.95) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2096