Prejudice Theory: Scapegoat Theory

Scapegoating is the process through which frustration and aggression are directed at a group that is not the causal agent of the frustration. Scapegoat theory emerged during the 1940s as a way for social psychologists to explain why prejudice and racism occur. Though many scholars today choose to study racism from a social cognitive or institutional perspective, some continue to use scapegoat theory to study responses to affirmative action and immigration policies.

Keywords Affirmative Action; Immigration; Prejudice; Racism; Scapegoating; Social Psychology; Stereotypes

Race & Ethnicity > Prejudice Theory: Scapegoat Theory

Overview

For over a century, social psychology has concerned itself with the intersection of the individual with society. One of the field's preeminent theorists, Gordon Allport, explained in 1954 that "social psychologists regard their discipline as an attempt to understand and explain how the thought, feeling and behavior of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined or implied presence of other human beings" (quoted in Lubek, 2000, p. 320). Racism and its social effects have been significant areas of study for social psychologists. Scholars in the field have put forth a number of theories about racism, but this article will concentrate on scapegoat theory.

According to Echebarria (1997) scapegoat theory emerged during the 1940s as social psychologists began their first attempts to conceptualize racial prejudice. During this time, prejudice was largely seen as being rooted in psychology, not society; it was "the result of defense mechanisms through which internal conflicts were resolved" (Echebarria, 1997, p. 1). The scapegoat theory was introduced during this time as a means of explaining why frustration and aggression are deflected toward other, less powerful groups in the form of prejudice, even if those groups are not the source of the frustration. For example, an economic downturn may cause a group to become aggressive towards immigrants, whom it blames for taking its jobs, since it is unable to express its anger toward the cause of its frustration. Thus, anger, and even violence, is deflected away from the true source of the frustration — which Echebarria defined as the "interruption or impossibility to obtain certain desired goals" (p. 2)—because it is either impossible or too difficult to address the source of this frustration (Echebarria, 1997, McMannus, 2008).Thus, scapegoat theory introduced societal aspects into the period's purely psychological approach to prejudice.

Allport

Gordon Allport further advanced the theory during the 1950s with his work on ingroups and outgroups in The Nature of Prejudice (1954). He drew on William Graham Sumner's work in Folkways (1906) to outline a theory of prejudice that is based upon ingroup and outgroup conflict. According to Allport, the need for defined ingroups and outgroups grew out of our evolutionary development as an obligatorily interdependent species. Because humans rely on one another for the information and resources they need to survive, we must be willing to trust and cooperate with one another. But indiscriminate trust isn't a good survival strategy, since it is necessary to have some degree of certainty that the obligation is mutual. Therefore, ingroups are formed in which members are obligated to reciprocate any aid given to them in a system of "contingent altruism" (Brewer, 1999, p. 433). At the most basic level, members expect the ingroup to treat them with kindness and fairness so long as they cooperate with other group members. As groups become larger, signs and symbols are created to differentiate ingroup members from outgroup members so that outgroup members will not accidentally receive the benefits given to ingroup members. At the same time, the group's institutions and rules gain a degree of moral authority within the group. And as that authority becomes more absolute, the ingroup members' tolerance for the institutions and rules of the outgroup declines, leading to disapproval of or outright hostility toward the outgroup (Brewer, 1999).

Scapegoating can occur when an ingroup perceives itself to be interdependent with an outgroup. When the two groups are forced to work together to achieve a common goal or face a common threat, the lack of mutual trust between the groups becomes particularly noticeable. Since neither group can trust the other to not exploit the relationship, the relationship becomes one of distrust. This distrust can lead to scapegoating as one group blames the other for the difficulties or failures it encounters while working to achieve the groups' mutual goal or ward off a mutual threat (Brewer, 1999).

One of Allport's unique insights was that aggression directed against an outgroup does not serve a cathartic function. Instead, he believed that aggression feeds on itself, resulting in ever worse relationships between the two groups (Pettigrew, 1999).

Girard

The French anthropologist and philosopher, Rene Girard, revived scapegoat theory during the 1980s (Wagner, 1986). Drawing on sources ranging from Greek mythology to the Biblical Passion, he claimed that:

….human communities maintain their order—language, status, possession and so forth—through a system of differences. These differences are threatened by violence within the group. Sacrifice is a momentary reversion to the chaos of violence in order to maintain the system of differences (Williams, 1989, p. 452)

and

The scapegoat allows the social group to achieve unanimity by imputing its sin (=violence) to the sacrificial victim. Violence is thus both checked and maintained through a ritual act that itself is a form of violence (Williams, 1989, p. 451).

Girard used his most controversial writings—Violence and the Sacred (1977) The Scapegoat (1986) and Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World (1987)—to show how sacrificial scapegoats function in areas as wide ranging as law, literature, politics, and religion. He focused on sacrificial foundational myths, embedding them with critical importance:

These myths operate [by turning] certain targeted 'others' into 'aliens'. Holding these aliens responsible for the ills and divisions of society, the scapegoaters proceed to isolate or eliminate them. This sacrificial strategy furnishes many communities with their sense of collective identity—that is, with the basic sense of who is included (us) and who is excluded (aliens). But the price to be paid is often the demonising of an innocent outsider: the immolation of the 'other' on the altar of the 'alien' (Kearney, 1999, p. 251-252).

Thus scapegoats unite divided groups against a perceived "other," and the violence directed at the "other" allows the community to forget its internal divisions. And while examples of the "immolation of the 'other'" are abundant in Greek or Roman mythology, Girard also argued that the same dynamic is in play today, too, albeit in less obvious ways. Indeed, Girard argued that all modern societies take part in scapegoating at some level. Whether the scapegoating is carried out via a witch hunt or in the name of national security, the tendency to persecute the "…fantasy of the evil adversary" (Kearney, 1999) is a part of an ancient tradition.

Applications

Affirmative Action

Just as scholars were beginning to formally study prejudice and racism, America was entering into the civil rights era. In 1955, Brown v. The Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294 ended de jure segregation in schools, and nine years later the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned segregation in public places, the government, and workplaces.

In the years after the civil rights era, some activists and legal scholars sought to realize further changes by expanding the scope of affirmative action, often through legal means. These programs are designed to increase the representation of groups who have historically been excluded from participation in certain employment sectors, companies, or educational institutions. Affirmative action programs can take many forms, ranging from programs that encourage employers and admissions committees to report on the racial and gender breakdown of those who apply and those who are accepted to strict quota programs requiring that a specific number or percentage of those accepted come from underrepresented backgrounds.

While many affirmative action programs remain legal, strict quota programs were ruled unconstitutional in the landmark affirmative action case was Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 912 (1978). Allan Bakke, a white man, had applied to the University of California, Davis Medical School in 1973 and 1974 through its general admissions program and was rejected both times. He sued, claiming that the university's special admissions program, which each year admitted sixteen applicants with lower test scores and grade point averages than applicants to the general program, operated as a racial and ethnic quota system and had discriminated against him because of his race. While the Court found that it is a positive good for colleges and graduate schools to work to achieve diversity in the student body, it ruled that colleges and universities cannot have rigid "quota" systems, unless "the facts established there was a specific constitutional reason to do so" (Jones, 2002, p. 15).

Legal scholar and critical race theorist Derrick Bell has suggested that the Supreme Court's largely formalist approach toward affirmative action is a modern version of scapegoating.

…when conservative white elite privilege is protected, it deflects anger onto unprivileged people of color and prevents white class warfare….Because white racial privilege promises poorer whites the possibility of upward mobility, they gain a stake in the system. For that reason, they are fooled into seeing people of color as the enemy. In cases like Bakke blacks are scapegoated, becoming the enemy, shifting the focus away from the children of elites who benefit far more from a legacy admission policy (Jones, 2002).

According to critical race theorist scholars, the formalist’s preference for completely race neutral policies understands affirmative action as nothing more than a "…system of spoils for people of color to gain unfair advantages over others" (Jones, 2002, p. 12).

However, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Clarence Thomas has defended the court's formalist rulings, saying that the constitution is " color blind" and should not be used "simply as an efficiently functioning instrument that parcels out goods to different competing interest groups," (quoted in Jones, 2002, p. 19). Instead, he argued, "justice and conformity to the Constitution, not 'sensitivity,' should be the object in race relations" (quoted in Jones, 2002, p. 19-20).

Still, critical race theorists like Bell have countered that it is impossible for the law to be race neutral. Because racial discrimination has been a part of society for so long, they say, its effects are still with us today, even after the civil rights movement. Jurisprudence that does not take into account racism and its effects, then, is in fact no more than covert discrimination (Jones, 2002). They see the current state of civil rights laws as "a vast array of race-neutral rules intended to advantage whites while excluding or greatly limiting access to blacks" (Bell, 1998, quoted in Jones, 2002, p. 17).

Echebarria (1997) has suggested that racism and scapegoating serve a social purpose, that they are used to justify and maintain dominant groups' position of power and privilege. Bell seconded this notion, writing that

even when non-racist practices might bring a benefit, whites may rely on discrimination against blacks as a unifying factor and a safety valve for frustration during economic hard times…..Whites, rather than acknowledge the similarity of their disadvantage, particularly when compared with that of better-off whites, are easily detoured into protecting their sense of entitlement vis-á-vis blacks for all things of value (Bell, 1998, quoted in Jones, 2002, p. 53).

Immigration

In the late twentieth century and early twenty-first century, immigration has become as controversial subject as affirmative action within the United States. While critics like Samuel P. Huntington (2004) charge illegal aliens with being a drain on the nation's economy and public services and failing to assimilate to US culture, others say that illegal aliens are being made into scapegoats for societal ills on which they have little bearing. Mexican American journalist Ruben Navarrette (2005) has been a supporter of strong borders, but he sees racism at the root of much of the debate over illegal immigration. Illegal immigrants, he has said, "are being unfairly attacked and blamed for everything from traffic jams, to overcrowded schools, to the spread of infectious diseases" (2005, p. 80).

Judis (2006) has observed that immigrants' failure or refusal to assimilate into US culture may be at the root of critics' concerns. Speaking of immigration in Arizona, journalist Dave Wagner commented

Mexicans and Mexican-Americans have their own culture and stores. It is possible if you are Spanish-speaking to disappear into that culture. That scares the hell out of some people…Arizona has changed dramatically in the last 20 years, and a lot of people are uncomfortable with that. (Judis, 2006, p. 18)

Pyong Gap Min (1996) has also studied prejudice among what he calls "middleman minorities," or minorities that occupy an intermediate position in racially stratified societies and offer goods and services made by dominant groups to low status groups. His work on Korean business owners in black neighborhoods as shown that racial conflict and scapegoating can occur not just within dominant groups, but also among minority groups.

Viewpoints

As Brewer has pointed out, Allport's work on ingroups and outgroups differs from Sumner's in one very important aspect: whereas Sumner had argued that the love of one's own group necessitated the hatred of others, Allport posited that identification with one's own group doesn't necessitate hostility toward members of other groups. In contrast to Sumner, who believed that one must be hostile towards an outgroup in order to identify with an ingroup, Allport claimed that while one's attachment to one's ingroup is "primary," it is not predicated upon negative beliefs about or attitudes toward outgroups. He believed while an ingroup must identify an outgroup in order to define itself, it does not have to hate or fear this outgroup. While Allport is considered one of the early and most important thinkers within scapegoat theory, this insight demonstrates that, unlike Girard, he did not see scapegoating as innate to the human condition (Brewer, 1999).

Certainly, not all theorists agree with Gerard that every myth and every modern society is founded upon a scapegoating relationship. Kearney (1999) has asked if there might be some myths that try to "express a genuinely creative impulse to imagine other possibilities of existence" rather than just a desire to dominate the world as it is (p. 253). Similarly, not all social psychologist accept scapegoat theory as a comprehensive theory for understanding interracial relationships. Zawadzki (1948) asked four questions that challenge the foundations of the theory:

  • Why is one minority chosen as a scapegoat when there are many to choose from?
  • Why is there sometimes a significant difference in the level of animosity directed at minorities?
  • Why are some minorities respected or liked while others are found objectionable or even despised?
  • Why do minorities have prejudices against majorities?

Zawadzki (1948) claimed that scapegoat theory is an incomplete theory, for it is entirely focused on the drives which cause a person to become prejudiced, ignoring the characteristics unique to the group against which he or she becomes prejudiced. He argued that any theory of prejudice which does not account for both the factors peculiar to the prejudiced individual and those peculiar to the minority against which he or she is prejudiced is too narrowly focused and cannot fully explain violence or aggression.

Today, scapegoat theory is no longer a predominant theory among social psychologists; rather, since the 1980s, most scholars have subscribed to social cognition theories. They believe that racism is a natural and normal part of human thought processes, and seek to overcome it by disproving stereotypes through psychosocial interventions like intergroup contact (Echebarria, 1997). In addition, racism and prejudice have become a topic of interests to a broader range of sociologists who have studied it from a more institutional perspective. Racism, in other words, is no longer seen only in terms of the prejudice that may develop inside individuals' minds, but also as a product of social and institutional relationships that advantage some groups and disadvantage others.

Terms & Concepts

Affirmative Action: Policies designed to improve access to education and employment opportunities among groups that have historically been targets of discrimination, such as women and racial minorities. These policies can take a variety of forms from targeted recruiting to explicit preferential treatment.

Critical Race Theory: A legal theory that focuses on racial discrimination within the legal system. Among other tenets, it holds that "race neutral" legal decision making in fact provides a way for the legal system to maintain White privilege.

De Jure Segregation: Racial segregation that is enforced by the law.

De Facto Segregation: Racial segregation that is not enforced by the law, but that occurs anyway through social custom, business practices, or economic conditions.

Formalism: A legal theory which holds that judges should limit themselves to interpreting what the law says about a particular case rather than seek to determine what the law should say about a particular case. Formalists argue that this limitation serves to uphold the separation between the judiciary and legislative branches of government; they do not consider the social or political history behind a law when making judgments.

Ingroup: A group in which an individual has membership and toward which the individual feels loyalty and respect. Strong ingroup feelings generally lead to a bias towards the ingroup. Ingroups are often formed on the basis of social relationships such as family, religion, or ethnic and racial identities. However, social psychologists have found that ingroup bias can develop even on the basis of traits we normally do not consider to have social meaning, such as eye color. Ingroup loyalty can thus explain behavior such as that of sports fans or people who follow certain fashion trends.

Outgroup: A social group in which one does not have membership and does not seek to have membership. Outgroups are the opposite of ingroups, and ingroup members tend to feel contempt, opposition, and other negative emotions towards outgroup members.

Prejudice: An opinion or attitude about a particular group or object that is founded upon incorrect stereotypes, incomplete knowledge, or irrational emotions.

Racism: The term racism can be used in two different contexts. In individual terms, racism refers to the notion that people of different races necessarily possess certain qualities or abilities which make them superior or inferior to other races. Institutional or structural racism, on the other hand, refers to racial inequality that is built into social institutions and which continues to produce racially disparate effects even in the absence of any racist feelings or actions on the part of individuals.

Scapegoating: A term describing the process through which frustration and aggression are directed at a group that is not the causal agent of the frustration.

Stereotype: A set of oversimplified beliefs about a group or person.

Bibliography

Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York: Basic Books.

Bell, D. (1998). The Burger Court's place on the bell curve of racial jurisprudence. In B. Schwartz (Ed.), The Burger court: Counter-revolution or confirmation? (pp. 57-65) Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brewer, M. (1999, Fall). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429-429. Retrieved May 9, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=2627447&site=ehost-live

Caple James, E. (2012). Witchcraft, bureaucraft, and the social life of (US)AID in Haiti. Cultural Anthropology, 27, 50-75. Retrieved October 29, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=70950884

Echebarria, A. E. (1997) Socio-psychological approaches to racism: A critical review. Papers on Social Representations, 6. Retrieved May 6, 2008, from http://www.psr.jku.at/PSR1997/6%5f1997Echeb.pdf

Huntington, S. P. (2004, March/April). The Hispanic challenge. Foreign Policy. Retrieved May 9, 2008, from http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story%5fid=2495&popup%5fdelay yed=1

Jones, A., & Ewing, D. (2005). The ghost of Wards Cove: The Supreme Court, the Bush administration, and the ideology undermining title VII. Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal, 21, 163-184. Retrieved May 13, 2008 EBSCO Online Database from Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=17796600&site=ehost-live

Jones, B. D. (2002). Critical Race Theory: New Strategies for Civil Rights in the New Millennium? Harvard BlackLetter Law Journal,18, 1-90. Retrieved May 6, 2008, from www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/blj/vol18/jones.pdf

Judis, J. (2006, January 16). Border war. New Republic, 234, 15-19. Retrieved May 25, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=19413811&site=ehost-live

Kearney, R. (1999). Aliens and others: Between Girard and Derrida. Cultural Values, 3, 251-262. Retrieved June 3, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=3252034&site=ehost-live

Lubek, I. (2008). Understanding and using the history of social psychology. Journal of the Behavioral Sciences, 36, 319–328. Retrieved May 11, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=11788663&site=ehost-live

Min, P. G. (1996). Caught in the middle: Korean communities in New York and Los Angeles. Berkley: University of California Press.

Murakawa, N. (2012). Phantom racism and the myth of crime and punishment. Studies In Law, Politics & Society, 59, 99-122. Retrieved October 29, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=83112136

Navarrette Jr., R. (2005, October). A healthy division. Hispanic, 18, 80-80. Retrieved May 25, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18515002&site=ehost-live

Pettigrew, T. (1999). Gordon Willard Allport: A tribute. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 415-415. Retrieved May 9, 2008,from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=2627446&site=ehost-live

Rothschild, Z. K., Landau, M. J., Sullivan, D., & Keefer, L. A. (2012). A dual-motive model of scapegoating: Displacing blame to reduce guilt or increase control. Journal Of Personality & Social Psychology, 102, 1148-1163. Retrieved October 29, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=76433784

Wagner, M., & Fletcher, J. (1986, November 1). [Review of the book The Scapegoat]. Library Journal, 111, 102. Retrieved May 9, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=7414013&site=ehost-live

Williams, J. (1989). The Scapegoat. SA: Sociological Analysis, 49, 451-453. Retrieved May 9, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=27704492&site=ehost-live

Zawadzki, B. (1948). Limitations of the scapegoat theory of prejudice. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 43, 127-41.

Suggested Reading

Cameron, Jessica & Trope, Yaacov. (2004) Stereotype-biased search and processing of information about group members. Social Cognition, 22, 650 - 672. Retrieved May 13, 2008, from http://www.psych.nyu.edu/trope/Cameron%20&%20Trope%20(2004)%20Stereo otype-biased%20search%20and%20process.pdf.

Deo, M. (2006). Ebbs & flows: The courts in racial context. Conference Papers — American Sociological Association; 2006 Annual Meeting, Montreal. Retrieved May 24, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=26642131&site=ehost-live

Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2007). Critical race theory and criminal justice. Humanity & Society, 31(2/3), 133-145. Retrieved May 27, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=28748769&site=ehost-live

Didech, K. (2004). The extension of disparate impact theory to White men: What the Civil Rights Act of 1991 plainly does not mean. Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights, 10, 55-81. Retrieved May 13, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=16501307&site=ehost-live

Illegal immigrants add to states' economies. (2008, April 4). USA Today.

Janowitz, N. (2011). Inventing the scapegoat: Theories of sacrifice and ritual. Journal Of Ritual Studies, 25, 15-24. Retrieved October 29, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=60494103

Kanat, K. (2012). “War on Terror” as a diversionary strategy: Personifying minorities as terrorists in the People's Republic of China. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 32, 507-527. Retrieved October 29, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=84222428

Kosterlitz, J., & Caruso, L. (2008, March 29). We love you, now leave. National Journal, 40, 19-19. Retrieved May 15, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=31721327&site=ehost-live

McManus, J. (2008, March 4). The battle against illegal immigration. New American, 24, 10-13. Retrieved May 15, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=31136753&site=ehost-live

Renfro, C., Duran, A., Stephan, W., & Clason, D. (2006). The role of threat in attitudes toward affirmative action and its beneficiaries. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 41-74. Retrieved May 24, 2008, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=20042834&site=ehost-live

Ruggiero, K. (1999). The personal/group discrimination discrepancy: Extending Allport's analysis of targets. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 519-519. Retrieved May 9, 2008 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=2627452&site=ehost-live

Essay by Cheryl Bourassa; Essay Reviewed by Mikaila Mariel Lemonik Arthur, Ph.D.

Cheryl Bourassa earned a MA in early American History in 1991 from the University of New Hampshire. She worked as a certified social studies teacher in the Concord, NH public schools for twenty years, before leaving to pursue a writing and research career. She is involved in refugee and political activities in her home town of Concord, NH.

Mikaila Mariel Lemonik Arthur is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Rhode Island College, where she teaches courses in research methods, law and society, and race and ethnicity. She has also taught courses in the sociology of education, social movements, and the sociology of the Holocaust at New York University, Hamilton College, and Queens College. She earned her undergraduate degree at Mount Holyoke College and her doctoral degree at New York University, and she has published articles in Sociology Compass as well as numerous sociological encyclopedia articles and book reviews.