Classification of Generalized Prejudice against Minorities in Türkiye: A Stereotype Content Model Approach in Two Samples

Date

2025-06-27

Author

Karagenç, Kardelen
Özakay, Özgün
Cingöz Ulu, Banu

Metadata

Show full item record

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Item Usage Stats

128
views

0
downloads

Cite This

Previous research demonstrated that a context-specific (i.e., Türkiye) measure of generalized prejudice toward social minorities exhibits a factor structure consistent with the Dual Process Motivational Model of ideology (DPM). Building on this, the present study explored how the groups identified in this measure are classified within the framework of Stereotype Content Model (SCM). A student sample (N=291) and a general community sample (N=287) evaluated 29 target groups of prejudice in Turkey on warmth and competence dimensions according to the view of society. For each sample, we conducted an agglomerative hierarchical cluster analysis with Ward’s linkage method to determine the optimal number of clusters, followed by a k-means cluster analysis to view which groups are classified together. For the student sample, the final clusters mostly overlapped with the DPM structure with a few exceptions. Post-hoc tests indicated the three-cluster groups were significantly different from each other on both dimensions, supporting the prevalence of mixed combinations of stereotypes hypothesis put forward by the SCM (i.e., low on warmth, high on competence, and vice versa). On the other hand, hierarchical cluster analysis for the general community sample suggested a two-cluster solution as a better fit. Even though the clustering of groups differed compared to the student sample, warmth and competence rates indicated differences within and between clusters again where both clusters embodied ambivalent stereotypes. Paired t-tests further supported the ambivalent stereotypes hypothesis, showing that 29 groups in the student sample and 25 groups in the general community sample exhibited ambivalence at the group level. Differences in religiosity, conservatism, and political orientation between samples were discussed as potential explanations for the variation in cluster solutions. The results raise a methodological question suggesting that responses to the SCM’s traditional question about society’s view of groups may vary depending on the sample.

URI

https://hdl.handle.net/11511/115831

Collections

Graduate School of Social Sciences, Conference / Seminar