Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Monteith, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Walters, G. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Monteith, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Walters, G. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 24, No. 2, 186-199 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167298242007
© 1998 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Egalitarianism, Moral Obligation, and Prejudice-Related Personal Standards

Margo J. Monteith

University of Kentucky, mjmontl1pop.uky.edu.

Gina L. Walters

Texas Tech University

Many high-prejudice individuals' personal standards suggest that they should be less prejudiced toward Blacks than they actually are. The present research revealed that these standards are derived from a sense of personal moral obligation to temper prejudice rather than from pressure from others to moderate prejudice. The authors also investigated the influence of egalitarian values on feelings of moral obligation and, ultimately, on personal standards. Although participants viewed themselves as highly egalitarian, they differed in how they conceptualized the meaning of egalitarianism. Path analysis results were consistent with the notion that high-prejudice individuals who defined egalitarian in terms of equality of opportunity feel morally obligated to temper their prejudice, which, in turn, is associated with establishing relatively low-prejudice personal standards for responding to Blacks.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
S. D. Livingston and L. Sinclair
Taking the Watchdog Off Its Leash: Personal Prejudices and Situational Motivations Jointly Predict Derogation of a Stigmatized Source
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, February 1, 2008; 34(2): 210 - 223.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
J. J. Ratcliff, G. D. Lassiter, K. D. Markman, and C. J. Snyder
Gender differences in attitudes toward gay men and lesbians: the role of motivation to respond without prejudice.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, October 1, 2006; 32(10): 1325 - 1338.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
S. R. Levy, T. L. West, L. Ramirez, and D. M. Karafantis
The Protestant Work Ethic: A Lay Theory with Dual Intergroup Implications
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2006; 9(1): 95 - 115.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
C. I. Voils, L. Ashburn-Nardo, and M. J. Monteith
Evidence of Prejudice-Related Conflict and Associated Affect Beyond the College Setting
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2002; 5(1): 19 - 33.
[Abstract] [PDF]