Quantitative data analysis. "Images of others" - analysis of the range and diversity of ethnic images of selected national groups in contemporary Polish society (interpretation of survey data).

elective courses

Formal

prerquisites

Expected level of knowledge of statistics and research methodology corresponding to at least completed courses "Statistical sociological toolbox" and "Methodological Requirements" (or courses with at least a similar scope completed during undergraduate studies).

Remote learning

The aim of the proposed workshop is to analyze survey data on the ethnic images of the following national groups: Englishman, Arab, Chinese, Indian, Black, German, Ukrainian and Roma. The material comes from the survey "Poles and others thirty years later", devoted to Poles' attitudes towards other nations and races, which was conducted in June 2018. It refers to almost identical surveys from 1988 and 1998, which were prepared and implemented according to the same methodological and technical rules. As part of the workshop, we focus on analyzing these ethnic images in contemporary Polish society. Their striking feature is the richness and diversity of wording. The interpretation of this complexity is a major part of our considerations. Individual elements of the image are treated as the result of inter-ethnic direct and indirect contact resulting from migration phenomena, as well as progress in the field of technical possibilities of interpersonal contacts. On the one hand, this is due to the increasing mobility and more personal contacts, but also to widely available media coverage and the use of effective forms of communication on a massive scale (Skype and Whatsapp connections, development of cellular technologies and the Internet). On the other hand, he comes from his own personal contacts. In the course of our work, we want to question the legitimacy of using the classic concept of 'stereotype', and we will try to prove that the conceptual category of stereotype should be replaced by a more complex concept of 'ethnic image'.

As part of the workshop, we focus on analyzing these ethnic images in contemporary Polish society. Their striking feature is the richness and diversity of wording. The interpretation of this complexity is a major part of our considerations. Individual elements of the image are treated as the result of inter-ethnic direct and indirect contact resulting from migration phenomena, as well as progress in the field of technical possibilities of interpersonal contacts. On the one hand, this is due to the increasing mobility and more personal contacts, but also to widely available media coverage and the use of effective forms of communication on a massive scale (Skype and Whatsapp connections, development of cellular technologies and the Internet). On the other hand, he comes from his own personal contacts. In the course of our work, we want to question the legitimacy of using the classic concept of 'stereotype', and we will try to prove that the conceptual category of stereotype should be replaced by a more complex concept of 'ethnic image'.

Interpreting the responses of respondents to individual questions of the questionnaire, we will refer to concepts that have been used for years in analyzing the phenomena of migration and cultural contacts. One of them is the term "social distance" which goes back to the famous article by Emora S. Bogardus (1925), used in various forms and varieties to date (cf. Ethington 1997; Wark, Galliher 2007). We also refer to the classic, theoretical assumptions arising from the concept of "alien", which originates from the famous sketch of Georg Simmel "Alien" (1908). We also use concepts that have been shaped in recent years in migration research. One of them is the concept of "social remittances" and the other is the concept of "encounter". Both have been functioning successfully in the literature for a decade (Garapich, Grabowska 2016; Valentine, 2008; Valentine, Sadgrove 2012; Wessendorf 2013; Gawlewicz 2015a; Amin 2002).

Particularly interesting for us are the research of Anna Gawlewicz in connection with the question whether and to what extent direct contact with ethnically and racially different people is affected by their attitudes of openness or closedness (Gawlewicz 2015a; Gawlewicz 2015b). Particularly interesting for us are the research of Anna Gawlewicz in connection with the question whether and to what extent direct contact with ethnically and racially different people is influenced by their attitudes of openness or closedness (Gawlewicz 2015a; Gawlewicz 2015b). This situation occurs in the case of economic and scientific migrants returning to Poland from the UK, such as educational, scientific, business, etc. Her respondents talked about how close, direct contact influenced the perception of people who were different in ethnic and religious terms. These changes were both positive and negative, but they always came about, emerging from our study, image complexity and different attitudes. In her research looking for an "encounter" response to openness or closedness of attitudes, aspects of the actual experiences of migrants and the cognitive process of their inclusion in the image of the group with which they come into contact were not distinguished. She emphasized that frustration and a lower social position in exile (especially in people with a higher level of education) led in a psychologically understandable way to reactions that were reluctant to contact.

Amin A. (2002), Ethnicity and the Multicultural City: Living with Diversity, “Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space” 6 (34), s.959–980.

Baran M., Boski P. (2016), Czy „Inny” zawsze musi być obcy? Wpływ dystansu kulturowego na postawy etnicznych Polaków wobec osób czarnoskórych i ich kategoryzację „Psychologia Społeczna” 2 (37), s. 136-159.

Bielewska A. (2013), Kupowanie polskości – tożsamość narodowa jako towar wśród polskiej migracji poakcesyjnej w Wielkiej Brytanii, w: Praszałowicz D., Łużniak-Piecha Ł., Kulipńska J. (red.), Młoda polska emigracja w UE jako przedmiot badań psychologicznych, socjologicznych i kulturowych, http://www.euroemigranci.pl/dokumenty/pokonferencyjna/Bielewska.pdf. [data dostępu: 23.09.2019].

Bogardus E. S. (1925), Measuring social distance, “Journal of Applied Sociology” 9, s. 299-308.

Bokszański Zbigniew (2001), Stereotypy i kultura, „Monografie Fundacji na Rzecz Nauki Polskiej. Seria Humanistyczna”, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Funna.

Bukowski M., Winiewski M. (2011), Emocje międzygrupowe i zagrożenia społeczne: co jest przyczyną, a co skutkiem uprzedzeń, w: Kofta M., Bilewicz M. (red.), Wobec obcych. Zagrożenia psychologiczne a stosunki międzygrupowe, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, s. 40-59.

Gawlewicz A. (2015a), Production and Transnational Transfer of the Language of Difference: The Effects of Polish Migrants’ Encounters with Superdiversity, “Central and Eastern European Migration Review” 2 (4), s. 25–42.

Gawlewicz A. (2015b), Beyond “us” and “them”: migrant encounters with differences and redefining the national, “Fennia” 2 (193), s. 198-211.

Gawlewicz A. (2016), Beyond openness and prejudice: the consequences of migrant encounters with difference, “Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space” 2 (48), s. 256-272

Grabowska I., Garapich M. P. (2016), Social remittances and intra-EU mobility, „Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies” 13 (42), s. 2146-2162.

Grzymała-Moszczyńska H., Nowicka E. (1998), Goście i gospodarze. Problemy adaptacji kulturowej w obozach dla uchodźców oraz otaczających je społecznościach lokalnych, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Nomos.

Jasińska-Kania A. (1989), Postawy Polaków wobec różnych narodów: sympatie i niechęci, „Kultura i Społeczeństwo” 4 (32), s. 147-161.

Niekrewicz A. A., Stereotypy etniczne i narodowe w memach, „Język. Religia. Tożsamość” 2019, nr 1.

Skrodzka M., Stefaniak A., Postawy wobec muzułmanów a przywiązanie do grupy własnej w Polsce, Centrum Badań nad Uprzedzeniami UW, Warszawa 2017.

Valentine G., Sadgrove J. (2012), Lived difference: a narrative account of spatiotemporal processes of social differentiation. “Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space” 9 (44), s. 2049 – 2063.

Wark C., Galliher J. F. (2007), Emory Bogardus and the Origins of the Social Distance Scale, “The American Sociologist” 4 (38), s. 383-395.

Wessendorf S. (2013), Commonplace diversity and the “ethos of mixing”: perceptions of difference in a London neighbourhood, “Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power” 4 (20), s. 407-422.

K_W07 Has in-depth knowledge of selected methods and techniques of social research, their limitations, specificity and areas of application

K_W08 Is aware of the importance of a reflective and critical approach to the results of social research, analyses and research procedures

K_W09 Knows how to plan and carry out complex qualitative and quantitative empirical research; is aware of the consequences of methodological choices

K_U04 Can use theoretical categories and research methods in the description and analysis of social and cultural changes in modern societies, as well as their consequences

K_U05Can plan and carry out a social study using advanced quantitative and qualitative methods and techniques of social research

K_U06 Can use a selected computer program for data analysis, including its advanced functions

K_U10 Can prepare a presentation of a selected problem or study in Polish and in a foreign language

K_K03 Can gather, find, synthesize and critically assess information about social sciences

K_K04 Can argue a thesis using scientific evidence

K_K10 Takes responsibility for planned and performed tasks

Participants are required to conduct their own research report, from the moment of conceptualization and operationalization to sample selection and data collection, to data preparation and analysis culminating in a report, which is the main element of the final grade