The communication of social stereotypes: the effects of group discussion and information distribution on stereotypic appraisals

Stereotypes are fundamentally social constructs, formulated and modified through discussion and interaction with others. The present studies examined the impact of group discussion on stereotypes. In both studies, groups of participants discussed their impressions about a hypothetical target group after having read behaviors performed by target group members. These behaviors included both stereotypic and counterstereotypic examples, and the distribution of these behaviors varied across discussion group members. In some groups only 1 member knew of the counterstereotypic behaviors; in other groups this information was distributed across all group members. In general, discussion led to a polarization of the target group stereotypes, but this effect was lessened when the counterstereotypic behaviors were concentrated in 1 group member. In this case, these counterstereotypic behaviors were discussed more and retained better.     

Disinhibition of stereotyping: context,prejudice, and target characteristics

The present research examined the moderating influences of individual differences in sexism on the application of gender stereotypes to stereotypic versus nonstereotypic targets as a function of contexts that induced sex stereotypic or counterstereotypic responses. Specifically, participants first received an attribution task in which they were induced to explain a variety of gender relevant situations in gender stereotypic or nonstereotypic ways. Participants were then presented with an ostensibly unrelated person judgment task in which they were asked to judge two women who acted either ambiguously stereotypically or nonstereotypically. The initial opportunity to express stereotypes without censure accentuated stereotype application, but only for highly prejudiced participants rating a woman who acted in an ambiguously stereotypical (i.e. unassertive) manner. We consider the implications of these findings for processes of stereotype disinhibition, and the moderating influences of individual differences in prejudice, target characteristics, and local norms. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Multiple and Counterstereotypic Categorization of Immigrants: The Moderating Role of Political Orientation on Interventions to Reduce Prejudice

Multiple and counterstereotypic categorization of outgroup members reduces prejudice towards them. The present research addresses, for the first time, the role of political orientation in moderating the impact of these strategies on prejudice reduction. Given that right‐wingers have very likely a higher need for cognitive closure compared to left‐wingers and thus may be less tolerant to social diversity, for them, increasing the complexity of outgroup members through counterstereotypic versus stereotypic or multiple versus simple categorizations should be a less effective strategy of prejudice reduction than it is for left‐wingers and moderate individuals. Results using Romanians and immigrants as outgroup targets for Italian participants supported our prediction. Further, we found that the effect of prejudice reduction was explained by the sequential mediation of increased individuation of immigrants and reduced sense of threat from them. Implications of the interplay between multiple categorization and political orientation are discussed.     

Young children's responses to media representations of intergroup threat and ethnicity

Two studies are reported in which ethnic majority children's reactions to media representations of ethnic minorities are examined. In Study 1, 20 white Scottish 6‐year‐olds viewed short television stories in which white or ethnic minority children were depicted as hostile to the participants’ in‐group (threat present) or not (threat absent). A strong effect of threat on liking was obtained but no effect of ethnicity of target and no interaction. In Study 2, 4‐ and 6‐year‐old white Scottish children viewed PowerPoint displays in which Scottish people were shown only as white (traditional version) or as ethnically diverse (multicultural version). Intergroup threat was manipulated. Again, a strong effect of threat was obtained. However, when threat was absent, participants exposed to the traditional condition liked the white out‐group more than the multi‐ethnic out‐group, while participants exposed to the multicultural condition liked the multi‐ethnic out‐group more than the white out‐group. The results are interpreted as consistent with the predictions of Social Identity Development Theory.     

"Memories" of Anomalous and Traumatic Autobiographical Experiences: Validation and Consolidation of Fantasy Through Hypnosis

What is diversity science and who needs it? This response addresses these and other themes and challenges raised by 11 excellent commentaries. Others include: What are the assumptions of diversity science regarding difference? Is diversity science constrained to the study of multiculturalism and colorblindness? Are race and ethnicity the only dimensions of difference worth studying? At which level of analysis should diversity scientists work and with which types of variables? Should diversity science address the experiences of both majority and minority groups? Should diversity science reside solely on U.S. soil? Is diversity science already in motion (i.e., has the train already left the station)? and Is social psychology a particularly useful site for diversity science?     

Assimilation,multiculturalism, and colorblindness: Mediated and moderated relationships between social dominance orientation and prejudice

Using correlational and experimental data, we examined the degree to which personal and perceived normative support for the acculturation ideologies of assimilation, multiculturalism, and colorblindness mediated and moderated the relationship between social dominance orientation (SDO) and prejudice among 299 White students at three American colleges. Correlational results indicated that personal support for the acculturation ideologies mediated the SDO–prejudice relationship. Personal support for assimilation (a hierarchy-enhancing ideology) positively related to SDO; multiculturalism and colorblindness (hierarchy-attenuating ideologies) negatively related to SDO. An experimental manipulation varied whether assimilation, multiculturalism, or colorblindness was considered normative in the United States. In addition to a control, a fifth condition primed the Obama presidency. SDO related most strongly to prejudice toward American immigrants and ethnic minorities when assimilation norms and the Obama presidency were primed. Efforts to reduce the associations between SDO and prejudice are discussed in terms of highlighting hierarchy-attenuating national norms of multiculturalism and colorblindness.     

Imagining stereotypes away: the moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery.

Research on implicit stereotypes has raised important questions about an individual's ability to moderate and control stereotypic responses. With few strategies shown to be effective in moderating implicit effects, the present research investigates a new strategy based on focused mental imagery. Across 5 experiments, participants who engaged in counterstereotypic mental imagery produced substantially weaker implicit stereotypes compared with participants who engaged in neutral, stereotypic, or no mental imagery. This reduction was demonstrated with a variety of measures, eliminating explanations based on response suppression or shifts in response criterion. Instead, the results suggest that implicit stereotypes are malleable, and that controlled processes, such as mental imagery, may influence the stereotyping process at its early as well as later stages.     

How self-evaluations relate to being liked by others: integrating sociometer and attachment perspectives

What is the relation between self-evaluation and being liked by others? Does being liked by others lead to more positive self-evaluations (as in sociometer theory), or do positive self-evaluations lead to being liked more (self-broadcasting)? Furthermore, what might affect the extent to which self-evaluations are influenced by likability (and vice versa)? The purpose of the present study was twofold. First, it used a naturalistic design to test the direction of the effect between social self-evaluations and others' judgments of likability in real relationships. Second, it examined how individual differences in attachment avoidance and anxiety relate to self-evaluations and likability and whether attachment differences moderate the relation between the two. Social self-evaluations, actual interpersonal liking, and attachment were assessed in participants taking part in a longitudinal group study. The findings supported the sociometer theory: Being liked by others led to more positive self-evaluations. Both anxious and avoidant attachment predicted lower self-evaluations, and anxious attachment predicted stronger reactions to others' liking (i.e., potentiated the sociometer). These findings have several implications for research on self-evaluation, adult attachment theory, and the importance of integrating interpersonal processes and individual differences.     

Diversity ideologies and intergroup relations: An examination of colorblindness and multiculturalism

In this review, we highlight the importance of understanding diversity ideologies, or people's beliefs and practices regarding diversity, for social psychological research on intergroup relations. This review focuses on two diversity ideologies, colorblindness and multiculturalism, and their impact on core issues related to intergroup conflict, such as stereotypes, prejudice, attitudes toward inequality, interracial interactions, and disparate outcomes between minority and majority group members. We close by highlighting some of the areas in which future research has the potential to be especially illuminating. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Liking-Similarity Effect: Perceptions of Similarity as a Function of Liking

In these two studies, we examined whether the inferences people make about likable and dislikable targets align with the predictions of balance theory. We hypothesized that people exhibit a liking-similarity effect by perceiving greater similarity with a likable person than a dislikable person. To test this hypothesis, we manipulated the likability of a target person and then assessed participants’ perceptions of similarity to that target person. In both studies, people rated likable others as more similar to themselves than dislikable others across a variety of domains (e.g., attitudes, personality characteristics, behaviors). In Study 2, individual differences in self-concept clarity, self-esteem, and preference for consistency moderated the liking-similarity effect.     

Individualism-Collectivism as a Boundary Condition for Effectiveness of Minority Influence in Decision Making

Results of this experiment demonstrate that individualists and collectivists react differently to minority influence. Based on the distinction between objectivity and preference norms in the minority influence literature, we hypothesize that individualism and collectivism influence (A) responses to minority influence (focusing on the target of influence) and (B) effectiveness of minority influence (focusing on the influence agent). Our results replicate past research and demonstrate improved decision quality for individuals exposed to a minority perspective. Moreover, minority influence targets with high horizontal individualism and low horizontal collectivism made higher quality decisions. Influence targets with high vertical collectivism demonstrated higher quality decisions when the influence agent held a high status position in the group. Results also demonstrate that influence agents with high vertical individualism experienced less role stress than those with low vertical individualism. Finally, influence agents with low role stress were more effective in influencing the decision making of others. We discuss our findings in terms of boundary conditions to the minority influence process.     

The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot

Using a videogame to simulate encounters with potentially hostile targets, three studies tested a model in which racial bias in shoot/don't-shoot decisions reflects accessibility of the stereotype linking Blacks to danger. Study 1 experimentally manipulated the race-danger association by asking participants to read newspaper stories about Black (vs. White) criminals. As predicted, exposure to stories concerning Black criminals increased bias in the decision to shoot. Studies 2 and 3 manipulated the number of White and Black targets with and without guns in the context of the videogame itself. As predicted, frequent presentation of stereotypic (vs. counterstereotypic) targets exacerbated bias (Study 2) and—consistent with our process account—rendered stereotypes more accessible (Study 3). Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Anti-fat prejudice among children: The “mere proximity” effect in 5-10 year olds

Research has shown that average-weight individuals are derogated when viewed next to overweight background individuals, rather than next to average-weight background individuals (Hebl, M. R., & Mannix L. M. (2003). The weight of obesity in evaluating others: A mere proximity effect. Personalilty and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 28-38). The aim of the present investigation was to determine whether this mere proximity effect would be obtained among children, and to determine how participant gender, target character gender and size, and background character size affect this finding. Eighty-nine children between 5 and 10 years old indicated whether they would like to be friends with a target character, who was either male or female and average-weight or overweight. The target was presented with four other background characters of the same gender, all of whom were either average-weight or overweight. The results showed that overall, overweight targets were liked significantly less than average-weight targets, though this effect was moderated by target gender. Furthermore, participants liked average-weight female targets significantly less when they were presented with overweight background characters, and liked overweight female targets significantly less when they were presented with average-weight background characters. This was not the case for male targets. These findings support the mere proximity effect for female targets and demonstrate that this effect is present in children as young as five years of age. The implications are discussed with regards to obesity stigma.     

Face validity of test and acceptance of generalized personality interpretations.

After students in different groups took one of four "personality tests" that varied in face validity, they received a generalized personality interpretation. Even though the test lowest in face validity merely required the subject to circle digits, judged accuracy of the interpretation (a) was high for all tests (76-87% of the ratings in the various test groups were good or excellent) and (b) was independent of type of test upon which the interpretation was purportedly derived. From 46-60% of the subjects in the various groups "definitely liked" or "liked" the interpretation; likability was independent of face validity of the test. Judged accuracy and likability of the interpretation correlated positively and significantly. The willingness of individuals to accept generalized statements about themselves is a researchable problem area suggested by the present research.     

Colorblind or colorful? How diversity approaches affect cultural majority and minority employees

We examined how perceived organizational diversity approaches (colorblindness and multiculturalism) relate to affective and productive work outcomes for cultural majority and minority employees. Using structural equation modeling on data collected in a panel study among 152 native Dutch majority and 77 non‐Western minority employees, we found that perceptions of a colorblind approach were most strongly related to work satisfaction and perceived innovation for majority members, while perceptions of a multicultural approach “worked best” for minority members. Moreover, these effects were fully mediated by the extent to which employees felt socially included in the organization. Thus, while inclusion is an important factor for both groups to enhance work outcomes, it is facilitated by different diversity approaches for majority and minority members.     

Ethnic group identification and group evaluation among minority and majority groups: testing the multiculturalism hypothesis

Following social identity theory, the author hypothesized that members of minority groups are more likely than majority group members to endorse multiculturalism more strongly and assimilationist thinking less strongly. In addition, the multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that the more minority groups endorse the ideology of multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the more (or less) likely they will be to identify with their ethnic in-group and to show positive in-group evaluation. In contrast, the more majority group members endorse multiculturalism (or assimilationism), the less (or more) likely they are to identify with their ethnic group and to show negative out-group evaluation. Results from 4 studies (correlational and experimental) provide support for this hypothesis among Dutch and Turkish participants living in the Netherlands.     

The Effects of Counterstereotypic Gender Strategies on Candidate Evaluations

Voters do not associate female candidates with feminine stereotypes, but voters also do not associate female candidates with the qualities most valued in political leaders such as experience and knowledge. Current research offers conflicting conclusions on whether female candidates benefit from breaking with feminine norms or face a backlash for being too aggressive and not likable enough. Using a series of experiments, I show how counterstereotypic gender strategies, including women emphasizing masculine trait competencies, improve evaluations of female candidates along both masculine and feminine leadership dimensions. These results offer novel insights into how female candidates can overcome perceptual deficits among voters that they lack critical masculine leadership qualities. I also show that female candidates can overcome these biases without losing on traditional feminine strengths such as warmth and likability. However, counterstereotypic female candidates can face a “likability” backlash from out‐partisan voters. These findings suggest counterstereotypes may be more beneficial for female candidates in a primary election context when voters are copartisans rather than general elections where candidates often need cross‐partisan support.     

Perceptions of non‐target confronters in response to racist and heterosexist remarks

Research has established that targets who express disagreement with prejudicial comments directed toward their social group may be viewed negatively by those they confront or by members of social outgroups. Less research has examined how non‐target individuals who confront prejudicial remarks are perceived. The current studies were designed to examine how non‐targets who confronted racist (Study 1) and heterosexist (Study 2) comments would be perceived as a function of the level of offensiveness of the comment and the confrontation style used. The studies also examined whether confronting behavior would affect perceptions of the individual who made the prejudicial comment. Undergraduate participants read vignettes depicting a situation with a high or low offensive prejudicial comment in which a non‐target individual confronted assertively, unassertively, or not at all. Participants provided judgments of both individuals. Results indicated that non‐targets who confronted highly prejudicial comments either assertively or unassertively were liked and respected more than those who failed to confront. Additionally, commenters who were assertively confronted were respected less than commenters who were not. These findings suggest that non‐targets may be especially effective in confronting prejudicial comments, as they do not suffer the same negative consequences as targets who confront. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Etiology of Individual-Targeted Intolerance: Group Stereotypes and Judgments of Individual Group Members

Virtually all scientific writing on attitudes toward political unorthodoxy in the United States focuses on group-targeted tolerance, or the question of whether Americans are willing to extend constitutional rights and freedoms to groups outside the political mainstream. Less is known about the etiology of individual-targeted tolerance, or the question of whether Americans are willing to tolerate the exercise of constitutional rights and freedoms by individuals who belong to unpopular groups. This paper examines the sources of attitudes toward individuals belonging to disliked and stereotyped political groups—in particular, the extent to which political tolerance judgments about gay and racist targets are influenced by attributes of those targets that are either consistent or inconsistent with group stereotypes. In line with expectations, an empirical analysis showed that individuals exhibiting attributes inconsistent with their group's stereotype (whether neutral with respect to stereotypic beliefs or directly challenging them) are tolerated more than those with stereotype-consistent attributes. Because members of political outgroups can control the timing of disclosing their group membership, they have the power to determine whether and to what extent stereotypic beliefs associated with their group will influence the reactions they provoke. This analysis confirms that the impact of stereotypic beliefs on tolerance varies as a function of timing of group membership revelation, although the direction of this interaction depends on the intensity of dislike for the group of which the individual target is a member.