Prejudice follows correlated status cues, not racial markers themselves

Evidence

Consistent with Allport’s views, Krech and Crutchfield (1948) argued that “The grouping of people in perception does not, in itself make for racial prejudice - it merely makes such beliefs and attitudes possible” (p. 506, emphasis in original). They noted that social grouping can just as easily lead to favorable attitudes toward a group and argued that it is the “nature of the cue that supports the grouping” that is critical to whether or not racial prejudice follows. It is not the cue “black skin” that leads to prejudice, but rather, Krech and Crutchfield argued, the supporting or correlated cues of poverty, lack of education, and low social status. What is important then is to eliminate these correlated cues: The significance of this formulation lies in the suggestion that in our attempt to control racial prejudice through changing the percepts involved, we are not necessarily forced to adopt a program that will eliminate all racial differences. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 836

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the vault’s contact-theory and prejudice-cognition claims; Krech and Crutchfield’s cue argument parallels Allport’s categorization account and informs how contact interventions should be targeted.
• corroborated: 4 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 836