Investigating stereotype structure with empirical network models

In this work we present empirical network models as a new approach in the investigation of stereotype structure. We will argue that empirical network models can provide more insight into stereotype structure because they do not suffer from the inherent constraints of factor analysis and multidimensional scaling (e.g., group features interpreted homogeneously only on the basis of their shared variance, impossibility to adequately represent cognitive schemas, difficulties to make inferences on the basis of dimensions potentially overlapping). In the present research we show how empirical network models can represent stereotypes as dynamic cognitive structures clustered in different substructures. These structures will be based on both the stereotype content and the co-occurrence of features in each group target. Additionally, this research shows how using empirical networks can contribute to broadening the interpretation of stereotypes representing them in the framework of prejudice or intergroup attitudes.     

The Attitudinal Entropy (AE) Framework as a General Theory of Individual Attitudes

Abstract

This article introduces the Attitudinal Entropy (AE) framework, which builds on the Causal Attitude Network model that conceptualizes attitudes as Ising networks. The AE framework rests on three propositions. First, attitude inconsistency and instability are two related indications of attitudinal entropy, a measure of randomness derived from thermodynamics. Second, energy of attitude configurations serves as a local processing strategy to reduce the global entropy of attitude networks. Third, directing attention to and thinking about attitude objects reduces attitudinal entropy. We first discuss several determinants of attitudinal entropy reduction and show that several findings in the attitude literature, such as the mere thought effect on attitude polarization and the effects of heuristic versus systematic processing of arguments, follow from the AE framework. Second, we discuss the AE framework’s implications for ambivalence and cognitive dissonance.     

Evaluating Eve: visceral states influence the evaluation of impulsive behavior

Impulsive behavior is a common source of stigma. The authors argue that people often stigmatize impulsive behavior because they fail to appreciate the influence visceral impulses have on behavior. Because people tend to underestimate the motivational force of cravings for sex, drugs, food, and so forth, they are prone to stigmatize those who act on these impulses. In line with this reasoning, in 4 studies, the authors found that participants who were in a cold state (e.g., not hungry) made less favorable evaluations of a related impulsive behavior (impulsive eating) than did participants who were in a hot state (e.g., hungry). This empathy gap effect was tested with 3 different visceral states--fatigue, hunger, and sexual arousal--and was found both when participants evaluated others' impulsive behavior (Studies 1 & 2) and when participants evaluated their own impulsive behavior (Study 3). Study 3 also demonstrated that the empathy gap effect is due to different perceptions of the strength of the visceral state itself. Finally, Study 4 revealed that this effect is state specific: Hungry people, for example, evaluated only hunger-driven impulses, and not other forms of impulse, more favorably.     

Visceral drives in retrospect: explanations about the inaccessible past

The present research demonstrates that the extent to which people appreciate the influence past visceral states have had on behavior (e.g., the influence hunger has had on food choice) depends largely on their current visceral state. Specifically, we found that when people were in a hot state (e.g., fatigued), they attributed behavior primarily to visceral influences, whereas when people were in a cold state (e.g., nonfatigued), they underestimated the influence of visceral drives and instead attributed behavior primarily to other, nonvisceral factors. This hot-cold empathy gap was observed when people made attributions about the past behavior of another person or themselves, and proved difficult to overcome, as participants could not correct for the biasing influence of their current visceral state when instructed to do so. These different attribution patterns also had consequences for people's satisfaction with their performance. Those who attributed their poor performance to visceral factors were more satisfied than those who made dispositional attributions.     

Attitudes as stable and transparent constructions

In three studies we examined the assumption that attitudes can be based on a stable structure of individually important attributes. In the first study we examined if people are able to adequately determine what the attributes are that underlie their attitude by relating meta-attitudinal measures to more operative measures of attribute importance. The results of the operative measures corroborate the subjective ratings of importance. In the second study we examined the associative strength between the individually important attributes and the attitude object. Results indicate that priming participants with individually important attributes leads to facilitation of the overall attitudinal response, as opposed to priming them with less important attributes. This suggests a bottom-up process underlying attitude judgment. The third study shows that attitude strength can play a moderating role in this respect. Implications for research on attitude structure are discussed.     

The effects of time pressure on chess skill: an investigation into fast and slow processes underlying expert performance

The ability to play chess is generally assumed to depend on two types of processes: slow processes such as search, and fast processes such as pattern recognition. It has been argued that an increase in time pressure during a game selectively hinders the ability to engage in slow processes. Here we study the effect of time pressure on expert chess performance in order to test the hypothesis that compared to weak players, strong players depend relatively heavily on fast processes. In the first study we examine the performance of players of various strengths at an online chess server, for games played under different time controls. In a second study we examine the effect of time controls on performance in world championship matches. Both studies consistently show that skill differences between players become less predictive of the game outcome as the time controls are tightened. This result indicates that slow processes are at least as important for strong players as they are for weak players. Our findings pose a challenge for current theorizing in the field of expertise and chess.