Who was the first person to study prejudice? Research reported the British Psychological Society suggests that most people agree that it was the seminal work of Gordon Allport 'The Nature of Prejudice' published in 1954, but according to Russell Webster and colleagues the first scholar to propose a working definition of prejudice was actually the English humanist and literary critic William Hazlitt, writing way back in 1830.
It was a visit to France where Hazlitt discovered the French were not as 'butterfly, airy, thoughtless, fluttering' as conventional stereotypes of the time predicted and was inspired to research prejudice itself. Hazlitt proposed that 'prejudice ... is prejudging any question without having sufficiently examined it, and adhering to our opinion upon it through ignorance, malice, or perversity, in spite of every evidence to the contrary'. This is not that different from the definition created by Allport more than a hundred years later.
For someone who was researching prejudice Hazlitt was not adverse to being prejudice himself, and revealed his gender based prejudices when he wrote that women are 'naturally physiognomists, judging by sensation or feeling and men are phrenologists', judging by rules.
It is perhaps shocking by todays standards but the first psychologist to really define prejudice was motivated by his experiences as a job hunter. Josiah Morse (born Moses), a student of G Stanley Hall's at Clark University. Morse, changed his Jewish sounding name after struggling, even though he had a letter of ecommendation from Hall to gain postgraduate employment. He was not along in adopting this strategy Harry Harlow, another psychologist also changed his name to boost his employment prospects).
Perhaps Morses job hunting difficulties were not eased by a recommendatioon that the British Psychological reports describe him as having 'none of the objectional Jewish traits ... and has no Jewish features'.
In 1907 Morse wrote a paper in which he drew attention to the ubiquity of prejudice and, with echoes of Hazlitt, defined it as 'when one fails to adjust or correct one's prejudgement in favour of contrary evidence.'
In 1890 G T W Patrick another student of G Stanley Hall defined prejudice as 'individual deviation from the normal beliefs of mankind, taking as standard the universal, the general, or the mean'.
But he failed to recognise the key aspect of prejudice, which Hazlitt and Morse had identified, as being the inability or unwillingness to change your mind in the face of new evidence.
Even with knowledge of prejudice Patrick just like Hazlitt demonstrated his own prejudices about women when he described the female mind as being less adapted than the male.
The British Psychological Society describe the writings of Hazlitt, Patrick and Morse as remarkable for their prescience. 'For example, they recognised the influence of both explicit and non-conscious, implicit beliefs, and they realised that prejudice has some adaptive value in helping strengthen in-group bonds.'
William Thomas the last scholar referenced by Webster and colleagues wrote in 1904 anticipating Allport's Contact Hypothesis - that prejudice between groups can be reduced if the members of the different groups socialise with each other.
These early pioneers deserve what the British Psychological Society describe as 'explicit credit for recognising prejudice as a phenomenon and one in dire need of psychological study,' Webster and colleagues conclude. 'Contemporary psychologists and sociologists who study stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination will hopefully have a renewed appreciation for these individuals who planted the roots of prejudice research in psychology and sociology.'
