« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Why attitudes to discrimination matter
1.1 There have been some major developments in recent years in the ways in which policy makers develop strategies and approaches to try to reduce discrimination and promote equality. For example, three 'public sector equality duties' have been introduced in respect of race, disability and gender. Although the detail of these three duties varies, all three have, at their heart, a requirement that public bodies should take steps to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote equality of opportunity. Furthermore, in October 2007 a new commission, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (the 'commission') was established. This body is responsible for the work designed to eliminate discrimination on the grounds of race, gender and disability that was previously undertaken by the Commission for Racial Equality ( CRE), the Equal Opportunities Commission ( EOC), and the Disability Rights Commission ( DRC). In addition, the commission will promote equality and work towards the elimination of discrimination in relation to three additional areas, sexual orientation, religion or belief, and age.
1.2 While these developments have primarily been concerned with reducing discriminatory behaviour rather than influencing attitudes, it is important that those organisations with a key responsibility for developing work to reduce discrimination and promote equality (such as the Scottish Government and the new commission) should have an informed understanding of public attitudes towards discrimination. In part, this is simply because discrimination itself is more likely to occur if people hold views that imply it is acceptable to discriminate against particular groups in certain circumstances. But an informed understanding of public attitudes also helps bodies such as the Scottish Government and the commission to develop and undertake initiatives to promote equal opportunities and challenge discrimination, for example by undertaking public information and education campaigns, such as 'One Scotland, Many Cultures'.
Previous research
1.3 In 2002 the Scottish Social Attitudes survey carried a module of questions on attitudes to discrimination in Scotland (Bromley and Curtice, 2003). Undertaken in collaboration with the support of the then three existing commissions, Stonewall Scotland and the Scottish Government, it covered four areas of potential discrimination - race/ethnicity, gender, physical disability and sexual orientation. In so doing it aimed to answer three questions:
1. How much discrimination do people think exists in Scotland?
2. What is the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes in Scotland?
3. Why do people hold discriminatory attitudes?
1.4 One of the principal objectives of the research in addressing these questions was to establish how far the answers were the same or different in respect of the four areas of potential discrimination - the first time that such comparative research had been conducted in Scotland. An understanding of the similarities and differences in the nature of discriminatory attitudes towards different groups seems central to the work of any integrated equalities commission such as the Equality and Human Rights commission. For example, if discriminatory attitudes are more prevalent towards some social groups than towards others, this may indicate that educational work should prioritise some groups more than others. Meanwhile, if the character of discriminatory attitudes towards different social groups varies, then it may be advisable to use different educational strategies in respect of different groups.
1.5 The 2002 research suggested that while avowedly discriminatory attitudes were usually the preserve of a minority, such attitudes were indeed more common in respect of some groups (gay men and lesbians together with ethnic minorities) than others (women and those with disabilities). However, even when a discriminatory attitude towards a particular group was usually only rarely expressed, it could still be relatively common in certain situations. One such example was whether a wheelchair user would be a suitable person to be a primary school teacher. For the most part avowedly discriminatory attitudes were more likely to be expressed by older people and those with lower levels of educational attainment, and most commonly appeared to be stimulated when people felt psychologically different or distant from a group.
Possible Changes
1.6 Since that research was conducted there have been a number of important developments that could have affected the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes in Scotland. Following on from the attack on the World Trade Centre on September 11th 2001, subsequent developments such as the London bombings on July 7th 2005 have resulted in extensive debate and controversy about the role of Muslims in British society and appear to have stimulated discriminatory attitudes towards them (Hussain and Miller, 2006). Together with continued debate about asylum seekers and increased immigration to the UK - including most recently from those Central and East European countries that joined the European Union in 2004 - they may also have resulted in greater hostility towards minority ethnic groups (McClaren and Johnson, 2004). Certainly according to MORI's regular monthly surveys, race relations and immigration are now widely regarded as one of the most important issues facing the country. On the other hand, the introduction in 2005 of civil partnerships for same sex couples, together with reforms to family law that pave the way for such couples to apply to adopt children jointly, might have been expected to promote more favourable attitudes towards sexual orientation. These developments suggest there is a need to update the earlier research, which in any event did not cover two of the areas that now fall within the remit of the commission, religion/belief and age.
This project
1.7 Thus in anticipation of the creation of the Equality and Human Rights Commission and bearing in mind its remit, it was decided in 2006 to conduct a further round of survey work, again using the Scottish Social Attitudes survey as a platform. The research was developed in collaboration with representatives from the three predecessor commissions and other groups with interests that fall within the remit of the commission, together with the Scottish Government. The work was funded by the Scottish Government and the former Department for Trade and Industry (the UK Government department then responsible for the establishment of the commission). This report presents the main findings from this second round of research.
1.8 The Scottish Social Attitudes ( SSA) survey is an annual high quality social survey that aims both to facilitate the academic study of public opinion and support the development and evaluation of public policy in Scotland. It is conducted by the Scottish Centre for Social Research (ScotCen) located in Edinburgh. ScotCen is part of the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen), the UK's largest independent social research organisation. SSA has a modular structure, and so the questions included on the survey for this research on attitudes towards discrimination were carried alongside those for other research projects.
1.9 Fieldwork for the 2006 survey was conducted between August 2006 and January 2007 (with over three quarters being completed by the end of October). A total of 1,594 adults aged 18 and over were interviewed face to face using computer assisted interviewing, representing a response rate of around 57%. In addition 90% of those who completed this interview also completed a self-completion paper and pencil questionnaire, on which some of the questions included for this research were administered. The resulting data are weighted to correct for known inequalities in the probability of a respondent being selected for interview, and to ensure that the sample reflects the known age and sex composition of the adult population in Scotland. Full technical details about the survey are included in Annex C.
1.10 The main aim of the new research was to address once again two of the three questions that were the focus of the previous research. These questions were:
1. What is the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes in Scotland?
2. Why do people hold discriminatory attitudes?
1.11 However, on this occasion we wished to answer these questions with respect to all six of the grounds for which anti-discrimination legislation exists in Great Britain, not just the four considered in the 2002 research. At the same time in revisiting these questions we also wanted to make it possible to chart whether the incidence of discriminatory attitudes has changed in recent years (in either direction), and if so what lessons might be drawn from the changes.
1.12 Meanwhile, although our previous research identified the kinds of individuals who are more likely to hold discriminatory attitudes, it did not consider whether the kind of place in which someone lives makes a difference too. Yet we might anticipate, for example, that those living in less 'cosmopolitan', more 'homogenous' neighbourhoods, where many people have similar social backgrounds and perhaps have limited experience of living in different kinds of place or with different kinds of people, may be more likely to express discriminatory attitudes (Kitchen et al, 2006). Equally, it could be that those living in areas of high social deprivation are more likely to be hostile towards groups such as 'immigrants' whom they think might pose unwanted competition for a job or social spending by government. Thus one way in which we wanted to extend our previous analysis was to ascertain whether the character of the area in which someone lives makes a difference to their attitudes after taking into account their individual social circumstances.
1.13 In addition we wished to extend our previous analysis of why people hold discriminatory attitudes in two ways. The 2002 work indicated that both those who think that people in other groups are similar to themselves and those who would prefer to live in diverse communities were less likely to exhibit discriminatory attitudes. This appeared to leave open the question of whether the prevalence of discriminatory attitudes would be more likely to be lower if fewer people thought they were different from those belonging to other groups (Saggar and Drean, 2001; Valentine and McDonald, 2004) or whether, instead, their prevalence could fall if more people were persuaded of the merits of living in what they acknowledged to be a diverse community. By adding new material to the survey, we hoped to establish the degree to which acceptance of minority groups is dependent on the perception that they are culturally 'integrated' into the 'mainstream' of Scottish society, or whether in fact such acceptance can be founded on a willingness to 'celebrate diversity'.
Defining a discriminatory attitude
1.14 Of course if we are to ask the questions, "what is the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes" and, "why do people hold such views", we need to have a clear understanding of what we mean by a 'discriminatory attitude'. In the case of this project we have used the same definition as in our earlier research. It reads as follows:
'a discriminatory attitude is one that directly or indirectly suggests that some social groups may not be entitled to engage in the full panoply of social, economic and political activities that are thought to be the norm for most citizens. In short, it is an attitude that openly or tacitly legitimates some form of social exclusion'.
1.15 Two important features of this definition should be noted. First, it is strictly about attitudes, not behaviour. Our project studied discriminatory attitudes not discrimination itself. While it might be felt that discrimination is more likely to occur when individuals hold discriminatory attitudes, it is perfectly possible for it to happen in the absence of such attitudes, perhaps for example as a consequence of institutional procedures and practices. In any event where it is suggested in this report that discriminatory attitudes are uncommon, it should not be presumed that we necessarily imply that discrimination itself is uncommon too. Second, our definition is not embedded in current legal definitions of what constitutes discrimination. In our case a discriminatory attitude exists whenever someone is willing to deny someone who belongs to a particular social group the ability to engage in an activity that they would not deny to (most) other people, irrespective of whether such denial is currently outlawed or not.
Measurement
1.16 Such a wide definition of what constitutes a discriminatory attitude has meant of course that in practice we have had to focus our research on certain topics. But at the same time we wanted to try and produce a rounded picture of the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes in Scotland. The incidence of discriminatory attitudes may well vary from one context to another. In particular, we anticipated that the more personal and intimate an activity, the more likely it is that discriminatory attitudes will be expressed. This is because the sense of psychological 'threat' that often appears to underlie such attitudes is greater in these circumstances (Stephan and Renfro, 2002; Abrams and Houston, 2006). Equally while we might feel that people should not encounter discrimination in the economic market place, such as in employment or the provision of goods and services, we might also feel we should be free to decide for ourselves with whom we share a friendship, let alone any more intimate relationship. Thus we decided to focus much of the survey work on three scenarios that we anticipated would be distinguished from each other by the degree of intimacy that they implied.
1.17 The most intimate relationships in our society are usually to be found within the family. So the most intimate scenario that was posed to respondents was how they would feel if a close relative of theirs wanted to marry or form a close relationship with someone from a particular social group. Our least intimate scenario, in contrast, was to ask how suitable someone from a particular background would be as a primary school teacher. Employment is primarily an economic contract, not a personal relationship, though we might note that as primary school teachers have responsibility for relatively young children, they are engaged in a form of employment that involves a particularly high degree of social and personal interaction together with responsibility for young people. Meanwhile our third scenario was to ask whether a person running a bed and breakfast business in their own home should be allowed to refuse to take a booking from someone from a particular social group. This scenario we anticipated would clearly combine elements of both the personal and the economic. On the one hand what is at stake is purely an economic transaction; on the other hand it involves inviting someone into the intimacy of one's own home.
1.18 For each scenario we asked people exactly the same question in respect of a variety of different groups. For example, in the case of how happy someone would feel about a close relative marrying someone, respondents were asked the question in respect of ten different kinds of people - such as a person of the Hindu faith, someone who was black or Asian, someone who has a learning disability. This means for each scenario we can directly compare the incidence of avowedly discriminatory attitudes towards different groups.
1.19 Our questions about the three key scenarios were supplemented by a small collection of additional questions designed to tap particular discriminatory attitudes in respect of our three foci of intimate relationships, employment and the provision of goods and services. Many of these questions had previously been included in our 2002 survey (or in a separate module of questions on attitudes to Muslims that had been included on the 2003 SSA). Although some of our scenario questions had also been posed in earlier research, these additional questions significantly extend our ability to chart changes in attitudes over time.
1.20 In addition we also asked some questions about people's perceptions of the attempts that had been made so far to increase equal opportunities in respect of various groups and the degree of discrimination that certain groups experience nowadays. Moreover we also asked a few questions about people's attitudes towards possible measures of 'positive action' that might be taken to improve the employment opportunities of minority groups. Our rationale here was twofold. First, it might be the case that people are reluctant to espouse a discriminatory viewpoint (and perhaps especially so in the presence of an interviewer), and as a result there is a danger that our research might underestimate the incidence of discriminatory attitudes in Scotland (Raja and Stokes, 1998; Steffens, 2005). However, they may not feel the same reluctance when asked to talk about government policy or the current extent of discrimination (Sears, 1988). Second, the questions potentially provide some guidance to both the Scottish Government and the commission as to the likely degree of public support for further measures to reduce discrimination and promote equality.
The structure of this report
1.21 This report falls into two main halves. In the first part ( Chapters Two to Eight) we primarily address our first question about the extent and character of discriminatory attitudes in Scotland. We examine in turn attitudes in respect of families and relationships, employment, and the provision of goods and services. In each case the centrepiece of our analysis comprises the relevant scenario outlined earlier, that is our questions about a close relative marrying, primary school teaching, and the provision of bed and breakfast in one's own home respectively. We then consider what we can learn from comparing the answers we secured across the three scenarios, how far the incidence of discriminatory attitudes has changed over time and to what extent discriminatory attitudes are covert in their nature. In the second part ( Chapters Nine to Eleven) we primarily address our second question, that is to explain why people hold discriminatory attitudes, looking in particular at whether their incidence also depends on the kind of neighbourhood in which someone lives and how far they appear to be related to feelings about integration and diversity.
« Previous | Contents | Next »