To be published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (in press)

© Cambridge University Press 2011

 

Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Call for Commentary Proposals

 

Beyond prejudice: Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting us to like one another more the solution?

John Dixon, Mark Levine, Steve Reicher, and Kevin Durrheim

Deadline for Commentary Proposals: February 13, 2012

 

If this target article interests you as a possible subject for commentary, please download the full pre-print to see if you would like to propose a commentary. If you are interested please follow the instructions below the target article information. Please keep in mind that we are not asking you to submit a commentary -- but rather, a short proposal in order to be considered as an invited author after the proposal deadline. The instructions below are also in the Call letter you may have received.

 

Abstract: For most of the history of prejudice research, negativity has been treated as its emotional and cognitive signature, a conception that continues to dominate work on the topic.  By this definition, prejudice occurs when we dislike or derogate members of other groups. Recent research, however, has highlighted the need for a more nuanced and ‘inclusive’ (Eagly 2004) perspective on the role of intergroup emotions and beliefs in sustaining discrimination. On the one hand, several independent lines of research have shown that unequal intergroup relations are often marked by attitudinal complexity, with positive responses such as affection and admiration mingling with negative responses such as contempt and resentment.  Simple antipathy is the exception rather than the rule. On the other hand, there is mounting evidence that nurturing bonds of affection between the advantaged and the disadvantaged sometimes entrenches rather than disrupts wider patterns of discrimination. Notably, prejudice reduction interventions may have ironic effects on the political attitudes of the historically disadvantaged, decreasing their perceptions of injustice and willingness to engage in collective action to transform social inequalities. These developments raise a number of important questions. Has the time come to challenge the assumption that negative evaluations are inevitably the cognitive and affective hallmarks of discrimination?  Is the orthodox concept of prejudice in danger of side-tracking, if not obstructing, progress towards social justice in a fuller sense?  What are the prospects for reconciling a prejudice reduction model of change, designed to get people to like one another more, with a collective action model of change, designed to ignite struggles to achieve intergroup equality?

 

Keywords: Prejudice; intergroup relations; social change

Download Target Article Preprint:  http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Call/Dixon_preprint

 

About Commentary Proposals: When a target article or recent book has been accepted for BBS Commentary, the editorial office sends out the Call for Commentary Proposals to thousands of people. Commentary Proposals help the BBS Editors craft a well-balanced commentary invitation list.

 

New Commentary Proposal Submission Instructions

 

In order to nominate yourself for commentary invitation, follow the instructions below and submit a Commentary Proposal via the BBS Editorial Manager site: http://www.editorialmanager.com/bbs. 

 

You may also find these instructions available in PDF form at http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Inst/Call.

 

If you have received the Call for Commentary Proposals, your username and password should have been included inside the email.  At the Editorial Manager (EM) site you can register a new user account, update your existing information, or retrieve your username and password.

 

Information on recently accepted target articles or books that are currently open for Commentary Proposal submission are available at http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal.

 

 

COMMENTARY PROPOSALS MUST INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:

 

1. What aspect of the target article or book you would anticipate commenting on.

 

2. The relevant expertise you would bring to bear on the target article or book.+

 

+Including your relevant expertise saves the Editors valuable time when evaluating proposals. If one of these requirements is missing, your proposal will be returned for resubmission.

 

Please include names and affiliations of your potential co-authors if applicable.

 

 

Suggesting Commentators and Nominating BBS Associates:

 

Commentators must be BBS Associates, or suggested by a BBS Associate. If you are not a BBS Associate, please see http://journals.cambridge.org/BBSJournal/Inst/Assoc.

 

To suggest others as possible Commentators, or to nominate others for BBS Associateship status, please email bbsjournal@cambridge.org.

 

 

HOW TO SUBMIT A COMMENTARY PROPOSAL

 

1. Log-in as Author

 

Log-in to your BBS Editorial Manager account as an author: http://www.editorialmanager.com/bbs.

 

If you do not have an account, please visit the site and register.  You can also submit a request for missing username and password information if you have an existing account.

 

2. Submit New Manuscript

 

Within your author main menu please select Submit New Manuscript.

 

3. Select Article Type

 

Choose the article type of your manuscript from the pull-down menu.  Commentary Proposal article types are temporarily created for each accepted target article or book.  Only select the Commentary Proposal article type that you wish to submit a proposal on.  For example: "Commentary Proposal (Dixon)"

4. Enter Title

 

Please title your proposal submission by indicating the relevant first author name of the target article or book.  For example: "Commentary Proposal on Dixon"

 

5. Co-Authors

 

Commentary Proposal submissions are limited to a single author.  However, if you are proposing to write a commentary with co-authors -- please list their names, affiliations and email addresses in the body of your Commentary Proposal document.

 

6. Attach File

 

The only required submission Item is your Commentary Proposal in MSWord or RTF format.  In the Description field please add the first author name of the target article or book.  For example: "Commentary Proposal on Dixon"

 

7. Approve Your Submission

 

Editorial Manager will process your Commentary Proposal submission and will create a PDF for your approval.   On the Submissions Waiting for Author's Approval page, you can view your PDF, edit, approve, or remove the submission.  Once you have Approved the Submission, the PDF will be sent to the editorial office. Please note: It may take several minutes for the blue Action Menu to appear, allowing you to Approve the Submission.

 

8. Editorial Office Decision

 

At the conclusion of the Commentary Proposal period, the editors will review all the submitted Commentary Proposals.  An undetermined number of Commentary Proposals will be approved and those author names will be added to the final commentary invitation list.  At that time you will be notified of the decision.  If you are formally invited to submit a commentary, you will be asked to confirm your intention to submit by the commentary deadline.

 

Note: Before the commentary invitations are sent, the copy-edited and revised target article will be posted for invitees.  In the case of Multiple Book Review, invitees will be sent a copy of the book to be commented upon if requested.  With Multiple Book Reviews, it is the book, not the Précis article that is the target of commentary.

 

Please do not write a commentary unless you have received an official invitation!

 

If you have any questions or problems, please email bbsjournal@cambridge.org.