Quantcast
Welcome Guest  —  No members and 103 guests online
WELCOME TO THE SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN COMMUNITY
Please join the conversation!

Feel free to explore the site and create an account (click on "Log In" on the upper right hand side).

Uncover cool stories and news and participate in lively discussion that will force you to think.

Be inspired, launch a blog, and stake your place in the realm of the new, new media.
Mind Matters
How Harvard students perceive rednecks: The neural basis for prejudice



Stephen L. Macknik

Laboratory of Behavioral Neurophysiology
Barrow Neurological Institute
Phoenix, Arizona


The source of many of the world's woes might be tracked to a specific brain area responsible for identifying people that are not of our ilk. If so, a study on the neural bases of prejudice and its modulation (read abstract or download the pdf), by Jason Mitchell and Mahzarin R. Banaji, of Harvard University, and C Neil Macrae, at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, published in Neuron in May 2006, could be as important to the burgeoning field of social cognitive neuroscience as Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech was to the American civil rights movement.

Like-minded

How does the brain differentiate those who are similar to us from those who are different? Does it analyze differences in skin color, language, religion, height, eye color, foot size? Does it discriminate cat versus dog lovers, Pepsi versus Coke drinkers, Shiite versus Sunni, Crips versus Bloods?

In a way, the brain does all this and more by simply distinguishing those who don't meet various definitions of who we are. Specifically, a forebrain area called the dorsal medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) appears to predict the behavior of members of outgroups by employing prejudices about their presumed background -- assumptions we make, in other words, based on what groups their various traits and contexts seem to put them in or out of. In this sense, outsiders, or those in outgroups, include humans of dissimilar cultural or ethnic identities or any other perceived stereotyped dissimilarity from your own self-identified groups, as well as non-human agents such as cartoons and animals and even inanimate moving objects. We distinguish otherness by all sorts of indicators, from the seemingly obviously, like sex or race, to the more obviously cultural, such as whether a person is wearing, say, a Yankees cap, a Dodgers cap, or a tee-shirt that says Baseball Sucks.

The focus of the paper under review here focuses less on the cues than on the brain areas that respond to them. The authors detailed the function of a particularly important brain area while studying the neural correlates of "mentalizing." Mentalizing is the ability to predict how other people will behave in a given situation. It combines the powers of theory of mind (our ideas about what other people know and do not know) with the presumptions that we hold about people with dissimilar backgrounds. Some researchers believe that mentalizing is a function of the brain's mirror neuron system, allowing us to predict the behavior of others by simulating how other people may feel in a given situation.

You might be a redneck if… you activate a Harvard student's dorsal mPFC

The experimenters used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to scan the brains of Harvard and other Boston-area students while showing them pictures of other college-age people whom the researchers randomly described as either liberal northeastern students or conservative Midwest fundamentalist Christian students. The categories were a ruse. The pictures were actually downloaded from an online dating website and randomly assigned to the two groups (which were an invention of the researchers), with each group holding similar racial and gender mixes. The experimental participants, however, thought each person pictured really was from one group or the other because the experimenters contrived demographic information about each photo; this information was randomly reassigned to different pictures with each new experimental subject. The participants, then, were confronted with pictures of people who had randomly generated but coherent cultural and political identities already attached to them.

The participants themselves, meanwhile, had answered a questionnaire about their social and political attitudes, which the scientists used to classify them as liberal or conservative. How would these self-described liberals or conservatives react to the pictures of the (supposedly) liberal and conservative strangers?

Prior research had suggested that the medial prefrontal cortex, or mPFC, an area stretching up and forward from roughly beneath the temple, was known to be involved in mentalizing. The researchers hoped to distinguish whether two important parts of the medial PFC, the ventral mPFC (toward the front of the mPFC) and the dorsal mPFC (further toward the top of the head), might be reacting differently. The brain imaging results indeed indeed showed a dissociation between these two regions. Heightened activity in the ventral mPFC was associated with mentalization of self-similar people, whereas dorsal mPFC activity was associated with mentalization of self-dissimilar people. But when the participant pondered the subject in situations where an outsider was believed to behave in the same way as the participant would, activity in dorsal and ventral mPFC was equivalent. For instance, virtually all college students enjoy going home for Thanksgiving, irrespective of background, so a conservative student would recognize that even a liberal probably loves Thanksgiving, and his brain would set aside their differences when it came to that situation.

Mentalizing as Moralizing

The study adds valuable perspective to our understanding brain dynamics associated with stereotyping and prejudice. It shows, for instance, that the recognition of a common interest or trait in an "outsider" has the potential, at a brain-based level, to make that outsider seem less foreign and threatening. Prejudice may in part arise (and be easily aggravated) when people assume that members of an outgroup do not have corresponding mental states, due to their different backgrounds. Without a self-referential basis to mentalize individuals from an outgroup in a specific circumstance -- without the opportunity, in other words, to recognize the things they have in common -- perceivers may rely heavily on stereotypes to predict the mental states of outgroup members.

The experimenters certainly saw it that way. They concluded that "that a critical strategy for reducing prejudice may be to breach arbitrary boundaries based on social group membership by focusing instead on the shared similarity between oneself and outgroup members." This is not new advice. Yet it is heartening to see that it is firmly grounded in distinct patterns of neural activity. There may be a brain basis for reacting with prejudices for those that seem different. But there's also a brain basis for overriding those differences and seeing outsiders as more like us.

Stephen L. Macknik is director of the Laboratory of Behavioral Neurophysiology at the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, where he studies how vision and and other basic mechanisms of awareness affect consciousness and behavior. Along with fellow Mind Matters and Scientific American Mind contributor Susana Martinez-Conde (with home he co-authored a recent Scientific American cover story on eye movements -- pdf download), he also has a strong interest in the neuroscience of magic and illusions.
14 Comments
This has always been fascinating to me. Dr. Banarji was my directed research adviser in college and at the time was working a lot with bias tests, although I'm not sure if she was looking at it on the neurological level. This Washington Post article describes the test and highlights some of the more interesting conclusions: See No Bias, WASHINGTON POST, 23 Jan 2005.
Presumably, the "Midwest conservative fundamentalist Christian " students are the "rednecks" and the "liberal Northeastern" students are not. Maybe the authors had, themselves, a case of dorsal mPFC activation when designing this study.
Fascinating information. It meens we can see others just as being fellow humans. It also means that xenopobia is innated. But xenophobia doesn't have to lead to racism at all.

I have the impression that once again religion, language and ethnicity are key elements able to unite people or divide them.

We have to power to search for simularities or to search for differences. We will just get what we're searching for.

Civil attitudes are enormously important, because they create a bound and acknowlegde people to be humans.
Great post.

Another proof that our minds' primary function is not perceiving reality but dealing with it. And that most of our decisions about dealing with reality happen before we construct consciousness. We think to rationalize what we already "know".
Perhaps it was deliberate that Dr. Macknik mentioned Thanksgiving as a unifying trait among American college students. The original event may have been an anecdotal example of the proposed theory in practice - "that the recognition of a common interest or trait in an 'outsider' has the potential, at a brain-based level, to make that outsider seem less foreign and threatening." In that case, the interest to remain comfortably fed through a harsh season.

It would be interesting to see if this might work if used more deliberately in foreign policy; perhaps we should begin summit meetings with some roast turkey and cranberry sauce, and see where it goes from there.

Disclosure: Dr. Stephen L. Macknik is this commenter's brother.
Fascinating. I saw in a documentary that by the end of filming the original 'Planet of the Apes', all the actors costumed as gorillas were exclusively eating lunch with the other costumed gorillas, the chimps with the chimps, etc. despite who was friends with whom offset.
A Harvard Scholarly Abstraction Verses a Rednecks Agression

Dear Sir: if one wants to define "redneck" perception (perceiver or perceived?) is it adequate to define prejudice, i.e. especially this paricular prejudice as a typical "alien-response" phenomenen, or are there an entire ontology of components and finer defintiion that assemble to cause a different percepion and description from a different ordering of the "brushmarks" that compose the picture. That harvard students aren't notonly afraid of rednecks they also are in possession of a great deal of power (impying force) themselves. I think at the basis of he phenomenon discussed is a common component of both sets (harvard students and rednecks)-a near ubiquitous fact of men that in te absence of a conceptial oneness with nature they perceive a falsely constured and incoherent in meaning overlap-a false common element that they seek to evict. If philosophically all human endeavors canbe described as the pursuit of space/volume, this particular eviction action, as the overlap of areas between the groups/sets is a perceptual artifact-mirrage- it is self defeating-self denigrating. The enormous amount of power-potential energy- in the incoherent abstractions of the harvard scholar far exceeds the rough physical poential and atidude of a redneck. The conflict is highly violitle the "predestined" outcome is resultng argument, conflictual analysis that occupies the time as a potential topic for the application of (abstraction originating) force. A viscous cycle that leads one to think that his life is predestined in advance of his actions or even awarness of his problems. All things are different and alien from one another as a prerequisite for existence and there is no logical way that this fact could entail a narrower and narrower fate. Fated death, eventual death and fated paths of conflict perception and resolution are different phenomenon. A search for the phenomenon in neurological pathways( a Harvard soution that is phenomenologically no different from the redneck's behavior) I do not think will yied any results as the brain,any part or subdivision, simply does not know/does not possess an answer. The endeavor returns/circles to it's philosphical origin involving perspective and observation and the fearful thought that my seeing/knowing causes change and "I am damned and fated in advance" without, really, a free will. It is not only a local phenomenon at Harvard that the "brushstrokes" of a valid conceptual picture of the world is falsely assembed in the route from motions of experience/perception to notion fueled motions of the mind.
It is thus, if we exist a all we have a free will, that a natural ethic that is unfound -violated -via (an implication verses an if and only if entailment of) human prejudices and the prejudicial leverage of power to nature that is actually fueling denigration and doom, as one obviously could expect a doom to be fueled by amoral activity.

--
Edited by mkirsh at 02/09/2008 11:05 AM
This is not fair. Stephen L. Macknik knows very well that he can write a very provokative article such as this and not expect Scientific American to get threatened and be forced to fire Stephen or withdraw the article or apologize for it. I just had to delete part of this post because I used slurs for people other than rednecks. Thanks SA for proving my point!!!!

I am very tired of the double standards in society and I think it would be nice if we could say publicly in respected journals what we think of folks like Macknik.

If someone were to do so please don't call those folks bigots, they are merely responding to a portion of their brains that tell them Macknik is different.

These things don't matter in the United States because we are all trained that rednecks are inferior, diversity rules and political correctness keeps the lid on.

While we deal with diversity and poltical correctness we get to bankrupt ourselves and spill our Christian children's blood securing an ethnic state for the Jews. What do Harvard students make of that. Does that mean that Jews have larger dorsal medial prefrontal cortexes than the rest of us. Inquriging minds want to know.
My previous post had to be edited because as SA explained, racist slurs violate their standards. I guess there are not standard when it comes to rednecks.

Lets see if this gets past the censors.

REDNECK
Yep. SA and Stephen whats his name are not against bigotry, you just have to be bigoted against the right people.

There is a name for that but I'm afriad it would not get past the censors and their standards.
I have reported the article by Stephen Macknik as abuse. I have done so because I believe that everyone should be treated the same and we should all have to abide by the same standards and rules.

If I am not allowed to call people names then I don't think they should be allowed to call me names.

I attempted to use different ethnic slurs and other than the word "redneck" the slurs would not post and I received a message that SA has "standards". Terriffic. Treat me the with the same respect that you treat others or remove your so-called "standards" and allow me to exercise my right to free speech as freely as Stephen is allowed to.
"You have to be taught, carefully taught....to hate all the people your relatives hate...." to quote a R&H song. Seems to me: Prejudice in, prejudice out. Not buying the "its in your brain structure" theory.
:-x
Me'thinks we are at the beginning of a "New Enlightenment." For the first time in human history we are acquiring sufficient knowledge about how our brain actually works to begin understanding our consistently irrational behavior.

The discovery of the left-brain interpreter function by Dr. Michael S. Gazzaniga et al. provided the key to understanding how we could be tribal territorial animal whose behavior is influenced by instincts, but be totally blind to the instincts.

Now the flood of fMRI studies are providing crude but telling evidence of the unconscious processing going on behind the scenes before we consciously react.

The emerging truth suggests we may still be doomed to repeat the past, even if we remember it, unless we become aware of the underlying programming that drives our behavior.

We won't like some of the findings -- we don't like having beliefs overturned -- but the new knowledge will provide the means of eventually overcoming our propensity to war and strife.
Interesting posts. As a Mississippi born "redneck", I believe the posts from those who got sidetracked by the label and went on the attack have proved Dr. Macknik's point. Do "rednecks" see Harvard students (and other Boston college students) as a LIBERAL ELITE outsider group? Perhaps so from the reaction and I believe the reaction proves the point of the study.

I think a replication of the study perhaps using students at Iowa State or Ole Miss would likely produce the same results. Perhaps you should "attack" Dr. Macknik using scientific methods -- replicate his study and prove him right or wrong.
 

ADVERTISEMENT