Influential Factors on Korean Teens' Double Standard for
Foreigners
Jong Youl, Yu
Kongju National University(South Korea)
Ⅰ. The Purpose and Contents of the Study
South Korea has a task of overcoming blind adherence to pure blood as racial
homogeneity and discrimination against other races or nations. Koreans even apply
their double standard to foreigners. Koreans tend to be unconditionally attracted by
people from developed countries(Europe, White), while they despise ones from
underdeveloped countries(Africa, Black).
This discriminatory attitude might evolve into racial and cultural conflicts as
shown in other countries.
This study will search for the answer to the question, "'Why' do South Korean
teens have the double standard for foreigners?" And it will also explore the
direction and the composition of contents essential to multicultural education of
Korean teens, by extracting influential factors on their double standard, which
consist of demographic-socio, awareness level, and likability factors.
The category of foreigners includes other races and ethnic groups. Korean people
have had a belief that their country is homogeneous since its origin. This belief
leads Koreans to consider foreigners 'others' except for 'themselves', or both other
races and ethnic groups. That is why the study categorizes chinese, japanese, and
north Koreans, along with White Europeans and Black Africans, into foreigner
groups. The study closely examines Korean students' double standard for foreigners
through investigating their attitudes toward foreigners including other races and
ethnic group.
Meanwhile, the research views 'attitudes' toward foreigners as 'prejudices.' This
is because attitudes toward 'others' reflect evaluative 'belief,' which largely relates
to prejudices such as 'stereotypes,' 'emotions,' and 'sense of social distance.'
The study will research three sub-topics as follows: firstly, the study will extract
psychological, socio-economic, and demographic factors expected to affect Korean
teens' double standard for foreigners, and will discuss how these factors are related
to their double standard; secondly, the study will conduct an empirical survey to
extract influential factors on Korean teens' double standard for foreigners; thirdly,
the
study
will
explore
the
direction
and
contents
composition
multi-cultural education, based on the findings from the empirical survey.
- 1 -
of
future
The expectations are as follows: firstly, the study will reveal the actual condition
of Korean teens' double standard for foreigners; secondly, the study, based on the
first finding, will provide specific alternatives to the direction and
contents
selection for future multi-cultural education, by extracting influential factors on
Korean teens' double standard for foreigners and investigating relative significances
of
socio-economic
and
demographic
factors;
thrirdly,
these
analyses
and
alternatives will serve as the basis for the development of educational programs,
which will address national and racial conflicts caused by a deep-rooted prejudice
against foreigners within Korean society.
Ⅱ. Theoretical Discussion
Conflicts arise between members of a society due mainly to each group's
prejudice against the others. Prejudice refers to unconscious obstinate opinions on a
thing or a phenomenon, and negative emotions and evaluative attitudes accompanied
by stereotypes for an outgroup. Prejudice, which is built on unreasonable bases,
usually tends to be illogical and problematic. This nature of prejudice consistently
encourages researches to identify influential factors on biased views toward
foreigners. Precedent researches have revealed some main factors of distorted
views towards foreigners, which are stereotypes, learning, lack of contact and a
sense of social stagnation, and individual values and motives.
1. Constituents of Prejudices against Foreigners
As mentioned previously, the research interprets 'attitudes' toward foreigners as
'prejudices.'
This is because attitudes toward 'others' reflect evaluative belief,
which usually relates to prejudices such as 'stereotypes,' 'preferred emotions,' and
'sense of social distance.' These prejudices also contribute to the formation of
double standard for foreigners(others) and the resulting conflicts.
Prejudice compels people to rate a person negatively, based only on the fact that
the person belongs to any specific groups. If an individual has prejudices against
any
social
groups
or
categories,
the
person
evaluates
someone
distinctively - usually negatively - merely because he/she belongs to those groups.
Individual characteristics or behaviors do not play their part in this situation. The
only fact that a person is in a specific group incites hatred against the object(Lee,
1995). This implies prejudice encompasses three elements of attitude: cognitive,
affective, and behavioral aspects.
Cognitive aspect refers to stereotype, which indicates general and abstract
knowledges about a group of people's characteristics. Affective aspect refers to
negative or hostile emotions against a group of people. Behavioral aspect(sense of
social distance) refers to actions to give disadvantages based on a specific group
- 2 -
name in voting, employing, or socializing(Kim&Oh, 1999). Those cognitive, affective,
and behavioral aspects are interrelated with each other and likely to transfer among
themselves.
Kim(1999) argued an individual's judgement is more affected by emotions than by
stereotype on the local people. Conversely, cognitive perception works more than
emotions in case there are no likes and dislikes, or history of conflicts(eg. new
acquaintances).
If a group's prejudice stems from emotions toward other groups, changes of the
emotions will help reduce the prejudice. Similarly, If the prejudice derives from
cognitive perception toward other groups, changes of the stereotype will be
effective in reducing the prejudice(Kim, 2002).
2. Influential Factors on Prejudice against Foreigners
Furnham & Barrie(1991) listed four elements as influential factors on attitude
and prejudice toward foreigners(other races and ethnic groups). Direct instruction
from school, mass media, and parents comes first. The personality of parents
follows. In other words, the personality of parents influences the way of bringing
up children and then reinforces their offsprings' attitude and belief toward other
cultures. Thirdly, overcategorization entails a misbelief that any members in the
same category share the same characteristics. Lastly, cognitive nature forces a
human
to
believe
that
visual
difference
manifests
an
object's
essential
difference(Furnham & Barrie, 1991:141～142).
Contact theory is widely used across socio-psychological researches on attitudes
toward other races and cultures. Contact theory explains the effects of prejudices
on students' racial attitude.
Park(2007) argued contact experiences with other cultures relate to prejudices.
She provided an empirical evidence that encountering experiences with a foreign
community had a positive impact on the change in perception of other cultures of
prospective elementary teachers.
Condon(1987) insisted he noticed the same pattern in the process of contacts and
responses with other cultures. Suppose two cultures, geographically remote or
politically and ethnically different, perceive any subtle 'difference' between the two
culture. They experience culture shock in the course of actually contacting between
two cultures.
This culture shock leads people to be attracted to the other culture
and judge their own culture objectively(Condon, 1987:4). Those findings verify that
the process of response and adaptation through contact with other cultures
develops gradually from early stereotypical response to empathetic response toward
other cultures.
Ironically, the contact does not necessarily contribute to the reduction of negative
- 3 -
biases and the formation of friendly behaviors and attitudes. In other words, the
contact with other races and ethnic groups does not always reduce the prejudice
between themselves. There is a difference according to ways of contacting other
cultures.
According
to
contact
theory,
contact
between
groups
promotes
mutual
understanding and goodwill, thereby reducing potential prejudice and tension. This
theory is supported by the awareness that the more people contact with others, the
more they have in common and the better feeling they have toward each other.
The assumption, however, requires the following conditions(Bennett, 2007: 43).
Individuals, most of all, need to be equal in their relations or believe they stand on
an equality with each other. If they sense any inequality in their relationship, they
would have difficulty communicating and reducing negative biases.
Secondly, the
contact should accompany cooperation and interdependence between individuals.
When individuals or groups try to achieve their common goals through cooperation
and interdependence, they could be able to reduce negative prejudices. Thirdly, the
contact should be close and informal so that it can break down walls of prejudice.
Fourthly, individuals or groups need to contact in the way of fostering positive
attitudes toward each other. Lastly, institutional strategies have to step into the
above conditions.
In short, the prerequisites above, first of all,
need to be met and the
environment to promote positive contact should be fostered for the positive effects
of contact with other races and ethnic groups on education. Therefore, the
decrease in prejudice against other races and ethnic group requires strategic
approaches, which satisfy the above prerequisites, rather than just random contacts.
Ⅲ. The Method of the Study
1. The Subjects of the Study
The researcher will study the first graders of high schools in Gyeonggi provinc
e1). Korean high schools consist largely of general, vocational, foreign language,
and international ones. General high schools aim at entering college, accounting for
around 70%. Vocational high schools train technical professionals, most students
getting a job after graduation. Foreign language and international high schools help
students, most of whom show high academic achievement, develop language
proficiency and acquire a cosmopolitan outlook. The research sampled general,
foreign language, and international high schools, excluding vocation schools.
1) Gyeonggi is the biggest province in Korea.
- 4 -
2. Measurement Tools: Attitudes toward Foreigners
The study will measure the cognitive, affective, and behavioral attitudes toward
White, Black, Japanese, Chinese, and North Koreans, who become mainly the
objects of the double standard.
The cognitive aspect will include the questions that reflect stereotypes for
foreigners. For these questions, the researcher will modify and compliment the
scales used in the previous literatures of Corrigan & Schmidt(1983)2), Lim(2003),
Lee(2007), and Yang(2009). The study will use a total of 11 questions consisting of
attractiveness, expertness, rationality, gentleness, sincerity3). The answer will range
from 'strongly no(1)' to 'strongly yes(5),' using five-point scale, to each question of
'humble', 'kind', 'cleanly', 'smart', 'rational', 'emotional', 'peaceful' etc.
As for the emotional aspect, the study will also accept Kim & Oh(1999)',
Yang(2009)'s questions as they are. The questions will consist of a total of 12
questions, which are divided into three fields4); four questions for positive emotions,
five for dislike․displeasure, and three for anxiety․discomfort . The answer will range
from 'strongly no(1)' to 'strongly yes(5),' using five-point scale, to each question of
'pleasant', 'likable', 'respectable', 'good', 'anxious', etc.
The behavioral aspect will be based on Kim & Oh(1999)'s, Bogardus(1925)'s
concept of social distance. The behavioral aspect will include five questions such as
'I would even know them.' 'I'll greeting them.,' 'I can play with them.,' 'I can invite
them to my house,' and 'I can accept him as family.' The answer will range from
'strongly no(1)' to 'strongly yes(5),' using five-point scale, to each question.
The reliability of the research tool is as follows: cronbach's alpha of the
questions for the cognitive aspect ranges from White .647 to Black .738, Chinese
.763, Japanese .849, and North Koreans .765; cronbach's alpha of th affectional
aspect ranges from White .823 to Black .738, Chinese .801, Japanese .640, North
Koreans .669; cronbach's alpha of the behavioral aspect ranges from White .774 to
Black .820, Chinese .895, Japanese .903, North Koreans .877, Generally speaking,
if cronbach's alpha is .60 and over, the measured item is considered reliable. This
means the research tool is reliable.
2) Corrigan & Schmidt has developed Counselor Ration Form(CRF). The CRF was used to assess
perception of expertness, thrustworthiness, and attractiveness. The instrument include 12 bipolar
items reflecting three demensions of credibility.
3) The prior researches(Lim, 2003; Lee, 2007)did not include 'sincerity' factor, but the study added it
and classifies into 5 factors.
4) The prior researches identified 4 factors of ‘positive emotions,’ ‘negative,’ ‘sympathetic,’ and
‘discomfort,’ but the study reclassified them into 3 factors: ‘positive emotions’, ‘dislike․displeasure’,
and ‘anxiety․discomfort.’
- 5 -
3. Method of Analysis
The research tested frequence, cross-tab, t-test, multiple regression analysis,
etc. to find out the prejudice against other races and ethnic groups, using SPSSWIN
14.0. Statistical significance levels are p < .05.
Ⅳ. Result of Analysis and Interpretation
1. General Characteristics of Respondents
The researcher distributed 320 questionnaires to the first graders of high schools
in Gyeonggi province, collecting 301. 293 was the subject of analysis as 8 was not
proper for the analysis. The measurement was conducted from May 10th, 2013 to
May 30th. Table 1 below describes general characteristics of the respondents. Boys
are 36.9%, while girls are 63.1% as there are more girls enlisted at international
high schools. As for the type of schools, international is 30.4% and general is
69.6%. As for the religion of students, Buddhism is 8.2%, Christianity 24.3%,
Catholicism 7.9%, no religion 59.6%. Those who had visited any foreign countries
accounted for 62.1%; White countries 85, Black countries 2, Chinese 77, Japanese
67,
and
North
Koreans
6.
As
for
the
standard
of
living,
upper
middle-upper 28.9%, middle 55.0%, middle-under 6.5%, and low 1.7%.
<Table 1> General Characteristics of Respondents
section
sex
type of school
religion
experiences of visiting
foreign countries
standard of living
class
male
female
total
international
general
Buddhism
Protestant
Catholicism
no
yes
no
upper
middle-upper
middle
middle-under
low
number
108
185
293
89
204
24
71
23
174
182
107
23
84
160
19
5
- 6 -
component ratio(%)
36.9
63.1
100
30.4
69.6
8.2
24.3
7.9
59.6
62.1
36.5
7.9
28.9
55.0
6.5
1.7
is
7.9%,
2. Cognitive Bias(Stereotype) against Other Races and Ethnic Groups
Table 2 presents prejudices against each group(stereotype for the rest) in terms
of cognitive aspect. The highest and lowest scores by group are as follows:
White-reasonable(average 3.35), humble(average 2.76); Black-kind(average 3.32),
peaceful(average 2.63); Chinese-competent(average 3.02), cleanly(average 2,23);
Japanese-cleanly(average 3.49), flexible(average 2.25); North Koreans-hardworking
(average 3.59), resonable(average 2.49).
<Table 2> Cognitive Bias(Stereotype) against Other Groups
humble
kind
cleanly
competent
smart
hard-working
rational
reasonable
flexible
mild
peaceful
average
factor 1-attractiveness
factor 2-excellent
factor 3-rationality
factor 4-gentleness
factor 5-sincerity
White
Black
Chinese
Japanese
2.76(.82)
3.33(.72)
3.26(.77)
3.28(.58)
3.15(.67)
2.92(.74)
3.28(.73)
3.35(.75)
2.72(.91)
2.82(.71)
2.88(.81)
3.07(.74)
3.04(.67)
3.22(.55)
3.32(.64)
2.81(.56)
3.09(.59)
3.14(.82)
3.32(.82)
2.94(.80)
3.23(.73)
3.08(.71)
3.32(.81)
2.98(.67)
3.04(.60)
2.71(.87)
2.98(.80)
2.63(.87)
3.03(.77)
3.23(.73)
3.15(.64)
3.01(.56)
2.77(.62)
3.13(.64)
2.45(.82)
2.66(.85)
2.23(.90)
3.02(.80)
3.03(.81)
2.69(.91)
2.76(.70)
2.78(.75)
2.29(.83)
2.64(.72)
2.60(.83)
2.65(.81)
2.55(.77)
3.03(.74)
2.77(.65)
2.51(.59)
2.46(.73)
2.97(1.16)
3.32(1.07)
3.49(.96)
3.21(.90)
3.24(.95)
3.29(.92)
2.92(.98)
2.89(1.07)
2.25(1.07)
2.78(.97)
2.66(.99)
3.00(1.0)
3.15(1.03)
3.23(.88)
2.91(.93)
2.56(.80)
3.39(.84)
North
Koreans
3.01(.88)
2.96(.89)
2.78(.84)
2.69(.82)
2.73(.85)
3.56(.91)
2.56(.79)
2.49(.83)
2.61(.96)
2.90(.91)
2.50(.96)
2.80(.88)
2.96(.82)
2.71(.77)
2.52(.74)
2.67(.73)
3.17(.70)
* Numbers in bold indicate the most remarkable qualities within a race or ethnic group, and shaded
boxes mark a race or ethnic group showing the highest score in each item.
* Numbers in parentheses indicate standard deviation.
Compared to other groups, the relative highests are as follows: White people
were scored highest in terms of 'kind, competent, rational, reasonable, flexible, and
peaceful'; Black ‘humble and mild'; Japanese ‘cleanly and smart’; North Koreans
‘hard-working’; none for Chinese.
White people, with 3.04, were ranked in terms of the total average, followed by
Black, Japanese, North Koreans, and Chinese. As higher score indicates more
positive stereotype, the subjects have the most positive prejudice for White, while
the most negative against Chinese5).
The research categorized 11 factors above into 5 through factor analyzing
method': ‘humble' and 'kind’ into 'attractiveness'; ‘competent' and 'smart’ into
5) The result falls into line with that of Lee(2007)'s prior research for preliminary teachers.
- 7 -
'excellent'; ‘rational' and 'reasonable’ into 'rationality'; ‘flexible,' 'peaceful' and 'mild'
into 'gentleness'; ‘hard-working' and 'cleanly’ into 'sincerity' ‘attractiveness’ factor
ranked highest in Black(3.23), while lowest in Chinese(2.55). ‘Excellent’ ranked
highest in Japanese(3.23), while lowest in North Koreans(2.71). ‘Rationality’ is
highest in White(3.32), while lowest in North Koreans(2.52). ‘Gentleness’ is highest
in
White(2.81),
while
lowest
in
Chinese(2.51).
‘hard-working’
is
highest
Japanese(3.39), while lowest in Chinese(2.47). According to the analysis,
in
Whites
are believed to be reasonable and gentle, Blacks attractive, Japanese excellent and
rationality, Chinese unattractive, stubborn and lazy, and North Koreans inferior and
unreasonable.
Factors above average, or 3 points, were as follows: White ‘kind, cleanly,
competent, smart, rational, and reasonable'; Black 'humble, kind, competent, smart,
hard-working, and reasonable'; Chinese 'competent and smart'; Japanese 'kind,
cleanly,
competent,
smart,
and
hard-working';
North
Koreans
'humble
and
hard-working.'
Prejudices in terms of cognitive aspect did not make a big difference between
White and Black(White 3.07, Black 3.03). The prejudices, on the contrary, made a
relative big difference among surrounding countries. Respondents had a strong
negative
stereotype
against Chinese, whereas there were
wide
variations of
stereotypes for Japanese(cleanly 3.49, flexible 2.25). This deviation reveals Korean
teens' double standard for Japanese.
3. Affective Bias against Other Races and Ethnic Groups
Table 3 presents prejudices against each group(affection for the rest) in terms of
affective aspect. As for White, 'respectable' was high, whereas 'disliking, unpleasant,
uncomfortable, and anxious' were low. As for Black, 'pleasant, likable, and good'
factors were high, while 'angry, disliking, and unpleasant' were very low. This
implies low negative bias against Black, which is quite different from the result of
the prior researches. As for Chinese, compared to other groups, there were no
factors specially high or low, which is quite different from the result of cognitive
aspect. The subjects expressed the highest negative stereotype against Chinese, but
they responded differently in terms of affection. The subjects, interestingly, as for
Japanese, revealed quite different prejudices. They displayed positive bias such as
‘excellent’ and ‘hard-working' in terms of cognitive aspect,
whereas negative bias
such as ‘angry,’ ‘uncomfortable,’ ‘disliking,’ and 'unpleasant‘ in terms of affective
aspect. Students had negative emotions against Japanese irrespective of their
positive cognitive perception. This reveals Korean students have mixed emotions
about Japanese in terms of cognitive and affective aspect6).
6) The result might be attributed to the survey timing, when there was growing conflict between two
countries about Dokdo issue and distortion of history and textbook. Koreans, however, seem to
- 8 -
<Table 3> Affective Bias against Other Groups
pleasant
likable
respectable
good
anxious
angry
uncomfortable
afraid
pitiful
sad
disliking
unpleasant
factor 1 positive emotions
factor 2dislike∙displeasure
factor 3anxiety∙discomfort
North
White
Black
Chinese
Japanese
3.13(.74)
2.91(.81)
3.01(.79)
3.32(.71)
2.35(.85)
2.03(.82)
2.60(1.06)
2.29(.93)
1.80(.88)
1.83(.84)
1.85(.84)
1.88(.86)
3.26(.98)
3.19(1.00)
2.98(.84)
3.28(.88)
2.60(.99)
1.85(.86)
2.81(1.11)
2.66(1.03)
2.53(1.10)
2.22(1.05)
1.86(.90)
1.88(0.89)
2.56(.80)
2.53(.87)
2.44(.79)
2.48(.83)
2.57(1.09)
2.58(1.08)
2.84(1.13)
2.42(1.07)
2.47(1.07)
2.21(.96)
2.37(1.10)
2.52(1.12)
2.28(.93)
2.18(1.0)
2.23(.99)
2.26(.99)
2.47(1.15)
3.43(1.32)
3.08(1.25)
2.23(1.14)
2.29(1.27)
2.11(1.13)
2.86(1.39)
3.03(1.37)
Koreans
2.55(.88)
3.16(1.12)
2.34(.91)
2.77(.95)
3.04(1.17)
2.54(1.14)
2.90(1.15)
2.72(1.15)
3.69(1.21)
3.25(1.21)
2.08(1.11)
2.17(1.13)
3.09(.60)
3.18(.79)
2.50(.73)
2.26(.88)
2.70(.82)
1.88(.74)
2.07(.77)
2.43(.89)
2.74(1.03)
2.75(.84)
2.42(.81)
2.69(.89)
2.61(.95)
2.59(.92)
2.89(1.0)
* Numbers in bold indicate the most remarkable qualities within a race or ethnic group, and shaded
boxes mark a race or ethnic group showing the highest score in each item.
* Numbers in parentheses indicate standard deviation.
The highest scores by group are as follows: ‘pleasant and likable’ is for Black;
‘respectable’ White; ‘angry, uncomfortable, disliking, and unpleasant' Japanese;
'uncomfortable, afraid, and sad' North Koreans.
The research categorized 12 factors above into 3 through factor analyzing
method': ‘pleasant, good, likable, and respectable' into 'positive emotions'; ‘disliking,
sad, unpleasant, unpleasant, pitiful, and angry' into dislike∙displeasure; ‘uncomfortble,
anxious, and
afraid' into anxiety∙discomfort. As for the
average of 'positive
emotions' factor, Black(3.18) stood highest, while Chinese(2.50) lowest. As for
‘dislike∙displeasure,’ White(3.23) scored the lowest, while North Koreans(2.75) the
highest. As for ‘anxiety∙discomfort,’ White(2.42) scored the lowest, while North
Koreans(2.89) the highest. In general, the subjects revealed low ‘dislike∙displeasure’
and ‘anxiety∙discomfort’ for White, whereas the highest ‘dislike∙displeasure’ and
‘anxiety∙discomfort’ for North Koreans. They relatively had a positive emotions
about Black.
The students expressed more 'positive emotions' about North Koreans compared
to Chinese and Japanese, but, interestingly, ‘anxiety∙discomfort’ factor was also
higher. This reveals Koreans have mixed emotions between anxiety∙fear and
internalize fixed negative emotions about Japanese to some extent as the prior researches show
similar results.
- 9 -
brotherhood about North Koreans as brother country7).
4. Behavioral Aspect(Social Distance) against Other Races and Ethnic Groups
Table
4
presents
prejudices
against
each
group
in
terms
of
behavioral
aspect(social distance for the rest). The students demonstrated the most friendliest
attitudes toward White across all behavioral factors, whereas the least toward
Japanese.
White(3.70) won the highest average, followed by North Koreans, Black, Chinese,
and Japanese. As higher score implies more positive social distance, the subjects
have the most positive prejudice for White, while the most negative against
Japanese.
<Table 4> Behavioral Aspect(Social Distance) against Other Groups
North
White
Black
Chinese
Japanese
3.88(.97)
3.87(.97)
3.43(1.19)
3.21(1.29)
3.77(1.13)
I could greet them
3.91(.89)
3.86(.91)
3.44(1.11)
3.27(1.23)
3.71(1.08)
I could play with them.
4.00(.84)
3.80(.95)
3.32(1.12)
3.15(1.21)
3.65(1.09)
I could invite them to
my place.
I could accept them
into family.
3.73(.99)
3.43(1.14)
3.02(1.19)
2.98(1.29)
3.47(1.20)
2.97(1.10)
2.55(1.01)
2.34(1.07)
2.27(1.17)
2.97(1.23)
3.70(.70)
3.50(.77)
3.11(.93)
2.97(1.05)
3.51(.96)
I would pretend
know them.
total average
to
Koreans
* Shaded boxes mark a race or ethnic group showing the highest score in each item.
* Numbers in parentheses indicate standard deviation.
In relation with social distance, the students displayed the second highest
friendliness toward North Koreans, which was so different result from congnitive
and affective aspects. As for ‘I could accept them into family,’ they showed similar
high level of positiveness, which was higher than any other groups. Consequently,
Korean students have positive prejudices toward White, but they still consider
bloodline an important condition in accepting a person into their family.
7) The result might be attributed to the survey timing, when there was growing tension on Korean
Peninsular due to missile threat and closure of Gaeseong Industrial Complex. Those provocations
from North Korea, however, do not bother South Koreans as serious as it used to be in the past, as
they are accustomed to those incidents. For this reason, the tension at the time had few impacts on
the research.
- 10 -
5. Awareness Level and Likability of Other Races and Ethnic Groups
This part describes of awareness level and likability of other races and ethnic
groups.
Awareness level of other groups is related to “How much do you know about
other
groups?"
It
refers
to
'the
extent
of
knowledge,'
which
reflects
each
respondent's subjective opinion.
Likability toward other groups is related to “To what extent do you like other
groups?" This is also subjective emotions of respondents toward each race.
Awareness level and likability were measured on a scale of one to five. Higher
scores indicate higher 'awareness level' and 'likability.'
Table 5 presents the result of questionnaires about awareness level and likability
about other races and ethnic groups.
‘Awareness level’ ranked in order of Japanese(3.30), Chinese(3.05), White(3.00),
North Koreans(2.59), and Black(2.62). The students perceive they are well aware of
Japanese and Chinese, but not of Black and North Koreans. This corresponds to the
frequency of their visiting foreign countries. It deserves attention that awareness
level of North Koreans ranked lower than that of Japanese and Chinese.
<Table 5> Awareness Level and Likability of Other Groups
White
Black
Chinese
Japanese
North
Koreans
awareness level
3.00(.84)
2.62(.83)
3.05(.89)
3.30(.92)
2.59(1.04)
likability
3.53(.66)
3.43(.74)
2.68(.84)
2.30(1.01)
3.05(.94)
* Numbers in parentheses indicate standard deviation.
As for likability, White(3.53) won the first place, followed by Black(3.43), North
Koreans(3.05),
Chinese(2.68),
and
Japanese(2.30).
This
is
so
different
from
awareness level in that North Koreans were ranked lower in awareness level than
Japanese and Chinese, but higher in likability. This demonstrated awareness level
and likability are perceived as being different and that high awareness level does
not necessarily signify higher likability. Based on the average score of 3.0, the
students had positive likability toward White, Black, and North Koreans, but
negative toward Japanese and Chinese.
The case assumes a similar aspect with the prejudices toward Japanese and
Chinese mentioned above.
6. Influential Factors on Prejudices toward Foreigners
What are the influential factors on prejudices toward other groups? As social
factors have ultimate effects on specific behaviors, investigation into the factors
- 11 -
related to behavioral aspect(social distance) is statistically significant. For this
purpose, the study tested multiple regression analysis, using socio-demographic
factor(gender, academic course, religion, standard of living, and experience of
visiting the foreign countries) and awareness level and likability as independent
variables, along with social distance as dependent variable. The study also used
'the extent of knowledge' for awareness level, and 'the extent of liking' for
likability. Table 6 presents the independent and dependent variables used in the
analysis.
<Table 6> Classification of Analysis Items
conditions
contents
demographic
& socio-economic
independent variables
awareness level,
likability
dependent variable
behavioral aspect
∘sex
∘type of school
∘religion
∘standard of living
∘visiting the countries involved
∘awareness level for other groups
∘likability for other groups
∘social distance for other groups
Table 7 presents the effects that each independent variable has on social
distance. Gender8) and likability had significant effects on White, Black, and
Japanese, while likability alone on Chinese and North Koreans. Therefore, likability
has a powerful impact on social distance. The affective factor of 'the extent of
liking'
triggers
knowledge.'
specific
behaviors
rather
than
the
objective
'the
In conclusion, higher ‘likability’ indicates less social distance.
8) difference by gender in social distance toward other groups. t-test
Race/Ethic
White
Black
Chinese
Japanese
North
Korean
Sex
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
N
107
185
107
185
107
185
107
185
107
185
M
3.2280
3.4141
3.0318
3.2249
2.7664
3.0335
2.7196
2.9924
3.0617
3.2897
- 12 -
SD
.55317
.48858
.60260
.52505
.64923
.61852
.74776
.65254
.70866
.63516
P
.003　.004　.000　.001　.005　extent
of
<Table 7> Influential Factors on Behavioral Aspect(Social Distance)
Object
Independent variables
R2
F
B
constant
gender
academic course
White
religion
standard of living
visiting White countries
awareness level of White
likability for White
constant
gender
academic course
Black
religion
standard of living
visiting Black countries
awareness level of Black
likability for Black
constant
gender
academic course
Chinese religion
standard of living
visiting China
awareness level of Chinese
likability for Chinese
constant
gender
academic course
Japanese religion
standard of living
visiting Japan
awareness level of Japanese
likability for Japanese
constant
gender
academic course
religion
North
Koreans
*
.116
.220
.269
.395
.343
standard of living
visiting North Korea
awareness level of North Koreans
likability for North Korean
p < .05,
**
p< .01,
***
p < .001
- 13 -
***
8.046
***
11.360
***
14.799
***
26.319
***
21.00
t
2.416
8.568
***
.121
2.029
*
-.005
-.696
-.002
-.112
.025
.675
-.138
-2.095
.040
1.090
.230
4.958
1.215
1.604
.166
2.681
-.002
-.294
-.014
-.709
.013
.329
.260
.724
.036
.950
.316
7.454
***
1.335
4.358
***
.130
1.873
.000
.037
-.007
-.346
.045
1.083
*
***
**
.062
.787
.058
1.511
.365
8.808
***
1.437
4.418
***
.179
2.631
**
-.011
-1.439
.005
.234
.085
2.047
-.048
-.587
.035
.958
.401
12.183
***
2.177
4.051
***
.051
.729
-.001
-.118
-.006
-.279
.065
1.547
-.287
-1.235
.046
1.460
.396
11.165
*
***
Ⅴ. Conclusion and Suggestion
The study identified Korean students' (aged 16) prejudices toward other races
and ethnic groups and the influential factors on their prejudices.
Firstly, Korean students assumed similar but a little different prejudices from the
prior researches in terms of cognitive aspect(stereotype). They had a positive
stereotype for White as shown in the prior studies, but this was not the case for
the surrounding countries. Lim's study(2003), which looked at elementary, middle,
and high school students, displayed North Koreans scored high, but the research
found out North Koreans was ranked lower than Japanese, as mentioned at Lee's
study(2007)
for
preliminary
stereotypes
against
North
teachers.
Koreans
The
than
students
toward
had
Japanese.
stronger
In
negative
addition,
Lee's
study(2007) displayed negative stereotypes against Black, but the study identified
relatively positive stereotypes for Black.
Secondly, the students showed affective prejudices toward other groups as
follows: as for White, ‘respectable’ factor was high, ‘dislike∙displeasure' and 'anxiety∙
discomfort’ were very low; as for Black, ‘pleasant,’ ‘likable,’ and ‘good’ factors
were high, but ‘angry,’ ‘disliking,’ and ‘unpleasant’ were very low; as for Japanese,
they evaluated high in cognitive aspect but low in affective aspect. They, in
cognitive aspect for Japanese, had positive stereotypes such as 'excellent' and
'hard-working,' while negative biases such as 'angry' and 'uncomfortable,' 'disliking,'
and 'unpleasant' in affective aspect.
Prejudices in behavioral aspect(social distance) toward foreigners are as follows:
White(3.70) won the highest score, followed in order of North Koreans, Black,
Chinese, and Japanese. The students had the most positive prejudices for White,
whereas they had the most negative bias against Japanese. Prejudices against North
Koreans deserves attention in terms of social distance. The subjects expressed
quite friendly prejudices for North Koreans, which White alone preceeded. For
instance, ‘I would accept them into family.’ won the highest positive answer. This
demonstrates Korean students still have a lingering love for pure blood when it
comes to issues like whether they accept a person into their family.
Moreover, 'likability' played the most important role in forming attitudes toward
foreigners. In other words, the extent to which they like other groups has a great
influence on prejudices in behavioral aspect(social distance).
This findings suggest that education needs to boost up favorable emotions,
reducing unfriendly ones to diminish prejudices toward foreigners. In other words,
much information alone on other races or ethnic groups does not result in decrease
in prejudices toward foreigners.
Additionally, ‘gender’ has a significant effect on prejudices toward foreigners.
This
necessitates
development
of
specialized
consideration to gender.
- 14 -
educational
programs
with
Next, authorities should pay special attention to the following issues when they
develop educational programs to visit foreign countries or expand opportunities to
contact foreigners.
Most of all, if students visit foreign countries or contact foreigners with no
planning, it can have severely damaging effects on students' prejudice towards
other groups. Therefore, premeditated and deliberate planning should precede
contact with other races and ethnic groups requires. The contact needs to be
meaningful on both sides, not just simple seeing each other. To this end, firstly,
individuals in contack should have belief that they stand on an equality with each
other. Secondly, the contact should be cooperative and interdependent among all
concerned. Thirdly, individuals need to interact privately and informally. Lastly, the
contact have to promote positive attitudes toward each other.
Only when programs for multi-culture education reflect these requirements stated
above, students will make decent world citizens by reducing their prejudices rooted
in wrong information and belief .
References
Banks, J. A.(2008). An Introduction to Multicultural Education, 4/E.
Allyn &
Bacon, Inc.
Banks, J. A.(2003). Series foreword. In W. Parker, Teaching democracy: Unity and
diversity in public life. New York: Teachers College Press.
Banks, J. A.(1981). Multiethnic education: Theory and Practice, Boston: Allyn &
Bacon
Bennett,
C.
I.(2007).
Multicultural
Education
Theory
and
Practice.
Hakjisa
Publisher.
Bogardus, E. S.(1925). Measuring social distances. Journal of Applied Sociology.
Vol 9. 299-308.
Brewer,
M.
B.(1979).
Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A
cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin. Vol 86. 307-324.
Brown, R.(1998). Group processes: Dynamic within
and between group. New
York: Ball Black.
Cohen, C. E.(1981). Person categories and social perception: Testing some
boundaries of the processing effects of the prior knowledge. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. Vol 40. 441-452.
Corrigan, J.. D. & Schumidt, L. D.(1983). Development and validation of revision
in the counselor ration form. Journal of Counseling Psychology. Vol 30 (1).
64-75.
Devine, P. G.(1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled
- 15 -
components. Journal of Personalty and Social Psychology. Vol 56. 5-18.
Fiske, S. T.(1993). Social cognition and social perception. In M. R. Rosenzweig &
L. W. Porter(Eds.), Annual review of psychology(Vol. 44. 155-194). Palo
Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
Fisk, S.(1998). Stereotyping prejudice, and discrimination. In D. Gilben, S. Fiske,
& G. Lindzet(Eds), The handbook of social psychology(4th ed, pp. 357-411).
NY: McGrawHill.
Ford, M. L. & Harris, J. J Ⅲ.(1999). The development of an instrument for
assessing levels of ethnicity in public school teacher. Doctoral dissertation.
University of Houston.
Furnham. A & Barrie. S. (1991). Young people's understanding of society. New
York: Routledge.
Kim, H. S.(2002). Stereotypes, prejudice and the interpersonal relationship. Ewha
Journal of Social Sciences. No. 9. 83-100.
Kim, H. S. & Oh, S. S.(1999). The stereotype, affects and attitudes of college
students and citizens toward North Koreans: A comparison with theory
toward other foreigner. Journal of Psychological Science. Vol 8(1). 1-22.
Lee, J. W.(2007). Prospective teacher' steretype toward ethnic group: Implication
for preservice social studies teacher education. Theory and Research in
Citizenship Education. Vol 39(1). 153-178.
Lee, H. G.(1995). Social Phycology, Seoul: Bobmunsa Co. Ltd.
Lew, S. M. &. Lee, T. J.(2006). Measures of Social Recognition in Korea and the
Korean's Double-face Attitudes to Foreigners. Discourse. Vol. 9(2). 275-311.
Lim, S. T.(2003). The analysis of korean students' stereotypical attitudes toward
other ethnic group. Korea Journal of Educatinal Reseach. Vol 41(3). 275-301.
Park, Y. K(2007).
The educational meaning of the preservice teachers` changes
in multicultural contact experiences: centered on the cultural diversity.
Theory and Research in Citizenship Education. Vol 39(3). 147-183.
Schwartz, S. H.(1992). Universals in the content and structure of value :
Theoretical advances and empirical test in 20 countries. Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology. Vol 25. 1-65.
Yang, K. M.(2009a). The Influence Korean Ethnic Identity upon the Multicultural
Receptiveness of Adolescents. Studies on Korean Youth, Vol. 20(4). 387-421.
Yang, K, M.(2009b). The Factors Influencing the Korean Adolesents' Attitude to
Minority Group. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology. Vol.
23(2). 59-79.
Yoon, I. J. & Song, Y, H.(2011). South Koreans' Perceptions of National Identity
and Acceptance of Multiculturalism. The Korean Journal of Unification Affairs,
Vol. 55. 143-192.
- 16 -