Imagine Me and You,I Do: Effects of imagined intergroup contact on anti‐fat bias in the context of job interviews

Imagined intergroup contact (IIC) has been demonstrated to alleviate prejudice toward social groups as a whole, but the extent to which it prevents biases in ratings of individual job candidates has not yet been examined. This study uses a simulated employment interview where a female candidate either higher or lower in body fat is rated by participants who have undergone an IIC or a control manipulation. IIC successfully alleviated discrimination in ratings of interviewee competence but had no significant effect on ratings of warmth. Competence ratings fully mediated the effect of the two‐way interaction of IIC and interviewee body fat on a dichotomous hiring recommendation provided 1 week later. IIC may be an effective and inexpensive intervention for reducing bias in job interview contexts.     

How Self‐Image and Compassionate Goals Shape Intrapsychic Experiences

Self‐image goals focus on constructing, maintaining, and defending desired public and private images of the self, whereas compassionate goals focus on being supportive and not harming others. We suggest that these goals shape construals of others in relation to the self, which in turn, shape affective experiences. We review research showing that when people have self‐image goals, they construe others as competitors, which leads to feeling uneasy with others (i.e., conflicted, confused, and fearful), and that when they have compassionate goals, they construe others as collaborators and have more constructive approaches to interpersonal problems, which leads to feeling at ease with others (i.e., peaceful, clear, and loving) and less upset with them. Thus, interpersonal goals shape construals of others, which in turn shape intrapsychic experiences of the world and of the self.     

Comparing Data Sets: Implicit Summaries of the Statistical Properties of Number Sets

Comparing datasets, that is, sets of numbers in context, is a critical skill in higher order cognition. Although much is known about how people compare single numbers, little is known about how number sets are represented and compared. We investigated how subjects compared datasets that varied in their statistical properties, including ratio of means, coefficient of variation, and number of observations, by measuring eye fixations, accuracy, and confidence when assessing differences between number sets. Results indicated that participants implicitly create and compare approximate summary values that include information about mean and variance, with no evidence of explicit calculation. Accuracy and confidence increased, while the number of fixations decreased as sets became more distinct (i.e., as mean ratios increase and variance decreases), demonstrating that the statistical properties of datasets were highly related to comparisons. The discussion includes a model proposing how reasoners summarize and compare datasets within the architecture for approximate number representation.     

Looking Philosophical: Stuff,Stereotypes, and Self‐Presentation

Self‐presentation is a complex phenomenon through which individuals present themselves in performance of social roles. The success of such performances rests not just on how well a performer fulfills expectations regarding the role she would play, but on whether observers find her convincing. I focus on how self‐presentation entails making use of material environment and objects: One may “dress for the part” and employ props that suit a desired role. However, regardless of dress or props, one can nonetheless fail to “look the part” owing to expectations informed by biases patterned along commonplace social stereotypes. Using the social role of philosopher as my example, I analyze how the stereotype attached to this role carries implications for how demographically under‐represented philosophers may self‐present, specifically with regard to dress and decoration. I look, in particular, to the alienation from one's material environment that may follow on the frustration of self‐presentation through bias. One pernicious effect of bias, I argue, is the power it has to deform and distort its target's relation to her physical setting and objects. Where comfort and ease in one's material environment can be a significant ethico‐aesthetic good, bias can inhibit access to, and enjoyment of, this good.     

Can we fight stigma with science? The effect of aetiological framing on attitudes towards anorexia nervosa and the impact on volitional stigma

The present study experimentally investigated the way in which exposure to various aetiological explanations of anorexia nervosa (AN) differentially affected stigmatisation and behavioural intention outcomes. University students (N = 161) were randomly assigned to read one of four aetiological vignettes presenting the causes of AN as biological/genetic, socio‐cultural, environmental, or multifactorial. Results indicate that those who received a socio‐cultural explanation made stronger socio‐cultural causal attributions, fewer biological/genetic causal attributions, and were significantly less willing to sign a health insurance petition for AN. Unexpectedly, the multifactorial group considered individuals with AN as more responsible and blameworthy for their condition. Overall, findings were comparative with previous research and partially support the propositions of attribution theory. Results also suggest that by conceptualising the aetiology of AN as biological or genetic, or at least increasing one's knowledge of these contributing factors, it may be possible to decrease the level of blame‐based stigma associated with AN.