Scapegoating’s extreme forms require social-historical analysis rather than lab experiments

Evidence

To study the most extreme manifestations of scapegoating, such as genocide, requires a social-historical analysis of stereotypes and mass political movements. Allport himself suggested that “[i]t is chiefly the historical method that helps us to understand [scapegoating]” (1954/1979, p. 246). A rigorous social-scientific approach could, however, be applied to archival data. For example, content analysis of the propaganda directed at scapegoated groups, either historically (e.g., Mein Kampf and Der Stürmer) or currently (e.g., conspiracy theories on the internet) could test whether scapegoats are stereotyped in the manner the model predicts. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1613

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Allport’s original argument that scapegoating demands historical method — relevant to my reading on genocide and mass ideology. — connects to: Social psychologists explain genocidal behavior through situational pressure plus unexamined psychological processes — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 352; the MOC “The False Compass: How Racial Categories Reorder Bodies, Minds, and the Self”
• SEED: An article comparing historical scapegoat propaganda (Mein Kampf) with modern internet conspiracy theories as a content-analysis study.