A "change-of-standard" perspective on the relations among context, judgment, and memory

We conducted three studies that tested a "change-of-standard" perspective on the relations among context, judgment, and recall. Each study consisted of two or three sessions held a few days apart. All subjects read about the sentencing decisions of one or two target trial judges and of six nontarget trial judges who consistently gave either higher or lower sentences than the target judge(s). Each study varied both the standard that was available when subjects initially judged the sentencing decisions of a target judge and the standard available when subjects subsequently recalled those decisions. To accomplish this, we varied the context of judgment, the timing of judgment, and the overall category norm for trial judges' sentencing decisions that was available at recall. We found that although subjects had been exposed to the same target information and had initially judged it in the same way, their recall of the information was different depending on whether and how a change-of-standard had occurred between judgment and recall. Unique predictions of the change-of-standard perspective were confirmed that could not be accounted for in terms of other types of context effects on judgment and memory.     

When do the stigmatized make attributions to discrimination occurring to the self and others? The roles of self-presentation and need for control

Two experiments examined how the goals of self-presentation and maintenance of control over one's outcomes influence women's tendencies to make or to avoid making attributions to discrimination. Demonstrating the importance of self-presentational goals, Experiment 1 showed that targets of discrimination were just as likely as similar others to make attributions to discrimination under private reporting conditions, but they were significantly less likely to do so under public reporting conditions. This experiment also provided initial evidence that need for personal control increases discrimination attributions. Experiment 2 demonstrated that targets' minimization of discrimination, observed in public reporting conditions, was eliminated when the need to reassert personal control was induced. Both experiments also demonstrated that failing to view events as discrimination has negative psychological costs.     

The role of intent and harm in judgments of prejudice and discrimination

Four experiments examined how an actor's intent and the harm experienced by a target influence judgments of prejudice and discrimination. The presence of intent increased the likelihood that participants judged an actor as prejudiced and the actor's behavior as discriminatory. When intent was uncertain, harm influenced judgments of the behavior, which in turn influenced judgments of the actor, and participants were more cautious in their judgments about an actor than an actor's behavior. Harm also played a stronger role in targets' than observers' judgments. Understanding the role of intent and harm on perceptions of prejudice can help explain variations in targets' versus observers', and possibly targets' versus actors', judgments of discrimination and prejudice.     

Effect on Mood of Thinking About Extreme Emotional Terms

The hypothesis that being asked to think about extreme emotional terms influences mood in the direction of the polarity of the terms was tested in three experiments. Subjects answered items about their mood before and after being asked to think about nine extreme, positive emotional terms (e.g., ecstatic) or nine extreme, negative emotional terms (e.g., wretched). It was found that when subjects were asked to think about extreme, positive emotional terms, mood changed in a positive direction, and when they were asked to think about extreme negative emotional terms, mood changed in a negative direction. The effect on mood of being asked to think about extreme emotional terms did not depend on whether the subjects were asked just to think about the terms(Experiment 1), to think about the terms in relation to the self (Experiment 2), or to think about the meaning of the terms (Experiment 3).     

Understanding Subtle Sexism: Detection and Use of Sexist Language

In the present research we examined the association between Modern Sexist beliefs and identifying and engaging in subtle sexist behavior. In Study 1, we found that those who endorsed Modern Sexist beliefs were less likely to detect the occurrence of normative sexist behavior (i.e., the use of sexist language), and this oversight was a function of their failure to define such behavior as sexist. In Study 2, we found that those who endorsed Modern Sexist beliefs were more likely to use sexist language and less likely to use nonsexist language. Use of nonsexist language was a function of personal definitions of sexist language. Results are discussed in terms of motivations to self-correct discriminatory behavior and conceptualizations of current forms of sexism.     

The role of diagnosticity in stereotype formation: perceiving group means and variances.

Three experiments tested the hypotheses that while forming stereotypes of social groups, people abstract the central tendency and variability of different attribute dimensions to determine which ones best differentiate the groups and that more differentiating dimensions are more likely to become stereotypical in the sense of becoming strongly associated with the groups in memory. Supporting these hypotheses. Experiment 1 found that, after viewing behaviors performed by members of 2 groups, Ss characterized the groups more in terms of attribute dimensions indicating larger differences between the central tendencies of the groups, and Experiment 2 showed that this effect did not occur when Ss formed impressions of only 1 group. Experiment 3 found that Ss also characterized groups more in terms of attribute dimensions indicating lower within-group variability.     

Perceived consensus influences intergroup behavior and stereotype accessibility

Past research has demonstrated the powerful influence other people have on the thoughts and behaviors of individuals. However, the study of intergroup attitudes has focused primarily on the influence of direct exposure to out-group members as determinants of stereotypes and prejudice. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that learning that others share one's intergroup beliefs influences intergroup attitudes and behavior as well as stereotype representation. Experiment 1 demonstrated that learning that one's beliefs are shared or not shared with others influences attitudes, behavior, and the strength of the attitude-behavior relationship. Experiment 2 demonstrated a potential mechanism for such effects by showing that learning about whether others share one's stereotypes influences the accessibility of those stereotypes and related stereotypes.     

Ask,Answer, and Announce: Three stages in perceiving and responding to discrimination

Discrimination towards members of low-status groups takes a variety of forms, and results in a variety of negative consequences for its victims. Furthermore, discrimination may influence its targets either directly (for instance, when housing discrimination makes insurance, mortgage rates, or rents higher for African Americans than for whites) or indirectly, that is via perceptions on the part of the stigmatised. In the latter case the outcomes are caused or amplified by perceptions on the part of the victim that he or she is the target of discrimination. This chapter focuses on current research concerning factors that influence the perception of discrimination and its indirect influence on individuals. We review work from our own lab as well as from the field more broadly, focusing on research that attempts to explain contextual and individual variability in how events that are potentially due to discrimination are initially perceived, subsequently interpreted, and then publicly reported or withheld.     

Needs for cognitive economy and self‐enhancement as unique predictors of intergroup attitudes

This research tested the extent to which two motivations commonly assumed to predict prejudice—needs for cognitive economy and needs for self‐enhancement—were simultaneously able to predict two underlying components of prejudice—social categorization and ingroup favoritism. Across three studies, diverse measures of the two motivations showed them to be consistently differentiated. Furthermore, both motivations were found to be independently predictive of both ingroup favoritism and social categorization in each of the three studies. The research adds to existing knowledge about the personality correlates of prejudice by demonstrating the conceptual independence of these two underlying motivations as well as their relationships to components of intergroup attitudes. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Changes in the marital relationship during the transition to first time motherhood: effects of violated expectations concerning division of household labor

This research combined cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses to evaluate the hypothesis that violated expectations with respect to sharing child care and housekeeping responsibilities contribute to women's dissatisfactions with their marital relationships after the birth of their first child. The cross-sectional sample consisted of 670 women who completed questionnaires at one of six phases in relation to birth. The longitudinal sample consisted of 48 women who filled out questionnaires late in pregnancy and at three periods postpartum. The results showed, consistent with previous findings, that women reported less positive feelings about their husbands during the postpartum period than during pregnancy, and that women reported doing much more of the housework and child care than they had expected. Moreover, regression analyses indicated, as predicted, that violated expectations concerning division of labor were related to negative feelings postpartum concerning some aspects of the marital relationship. Additional findings suggested that the negative implications of the birth of a baby for the marital relationship may not be as great as has been emphasized in previous literature, and that expectancy violations affect some parts of the relationship but not necessarily the core affective feeling.