Another look at sex stereotypes and social judgments: an analysis of the social perceiver's use of subjective probabilities

Locksley, Borgida, Brekke, and Hepburn (1980) assert that subjects fall prey to the base-rate fallacy when they make stereotype-related trait judgments. They found that subjects ignored their stereotypes when trait judgments were made in the presence of trait-related behavioral information. The present article reexamines those findings with respect to two issues: (a) the use of a normative criterion in comparison with subjects' judgments and (b) the level of analysis (group vs. individual) of subjects' judgments. We conducted a replication of the Locksley et al. (1980) Study 2, and the results were examined with respect to these two issues. We found no support for the base-rate fallacy. When a Bayesian normative criterion was constructed for each subject based on the subject's own stereotype judgments and was compared with assertiveness judgments made in the presence of individuating information, there was no evidence that subjects ignored or underused their stereotypes as the base-rate fallacy predicts.     

The moderating influence of variability on belief revision

The variability of the information on which a belief was initially based should moderate the degree to which the belief is revised when new disconfirming information is received. Reasoning from everyday intuitions, psychological theories of concept representation, and a rational mathematical analysis, we inferred that as variability increased, resistance to disconfirming information would also increase. Participants’ judgments of the central tendencies of distributions of numerical information confirmed this prediction.     

Rudd's Apology to the Stolen Generations: Challenging Self‐Sufficient Arguments in “Race” Discourse

While the public debate on whether to apologise to the Stolen Generations ended on 13 February, 2008, public opinion was still divided, reflected particularly in the arguments against apologising that were common in political and public discourse. We examine the ways in which differing arguments can be flexibly deployed and combined within a political context to not just resist, but also to support, an act of reparation for historical injustice. In particular, we consider how Rudd makes use of specific rhetorically self‐sufficient arguments to justify offering the apology; precisely the same arguments that had previously been used by political leaders and members of the public to oppose the apology. It is the use of such arguments in combination with each other and additional common tropes drawn from egalitarian and liberal discourse that allow for the building of a rhetorically powerful case for offering the apology. Rather than the traditional focus of such research on the ways in which racism is accomplished in talk, we suggest that Rudd's apology to the Stolen Generations can be seen as a practical tool‐kit for building an “anti‐racist” rhetoric in the context of Indigenous and non‐Indigenous relations in Australia.     

Cold hearts and bleeding hearts: disciplinary differences in university students' sociopolitical orientations

Many people believe that a university education leads to the liberalization of students' worldviews. The author aimed to investigate whether such differences occur across disciplines and whether they are due to self-selection or socialization within disciplines. The author conducted 3 correlational studies of university students (N = 223, N = 531) and alumni (N = 143). The results clearly supported the self-selection hypothesis and suggested that students from all disciplines generally endorse liberal or left-wing attitudes. These findings have theoretical implications for the study of belief system development (primarily the impressionable years hypothesis), and they contribute to a greater understanding of how a university education affects the sociopolitical orientations of students.     

Content Effects on Decision Making

How does the domain or subject matter of a decision problem affect the outcome of the decision? Although decision-making research typically dismisses content as merely a cover story, the present research shows that it plays a fundamental role in the decision process by influencing the information processing that underlies it. An experiment is reported in which the same basic decision problem was presented in several content domains (legal traffic tickets, academic course grades, stock investments, and casino gambling). The changes in content led to changes in both strategies and mental representations, which in turn led to changes in decision outcomes, even though measures of the subjective utilities of the options remained unchanged.     

Decision and experience: why don't we choose what makes us happy?

Recent years have witnessed a growing interest among psychologists and other social scientists in subjective well-being and happiness. Here we review selected contributions to this development from the literature on behavioral-decision theory. In particular, we examine many, somewhat surprising, findings that show people systematically fail to predict or choose what maximizes their happiness, and we look at reasons why they fail to do so. These findings challenge a fundamental assumption that underlies popular support for consumer sovereignty and other forms of autonomy in decision-making (e.g. marriage choice), namely, the assumption that people are able to make choices in their own best interests.     

The robust beauty of majority rules in group decisions

How should groups make decisions? The authors provide an original evaluation of 9 group decision rules based on their adaptive success in a simulated test bed environment. When the adaptive success standard is applied, the majority and plurality rules fare quite well, performing at levels comparable to much more resource-demanding rules such as an individual judgment averaging rule. The plurality rule matches the computationally demanding Condorcet majority winner that is standard in evaluations of preferential choice. The authors also test the results from their theoretical analysis in a behavioral study of nominal human group decisions, and the essential findings are confirmed empirically. The conclusions of the present analysis support the popularity of majority and plurality rules in truth-seeking group decisions.     

Does Evidence Presentation Format Affect Judgment? An Experimental Evaluation of Displays of Data for Judgments

Information relevant to a prediction was presented in one of eight formats: a table of numbers, a brief text, a longer biographical story, and five different types of bar graphs. Experimental participants made judgments of marathon finishing times based on information about the runners' ages, prior performance, training, and motivation. A regression analysis was used to assess the individual judges' relative weighting of the various types of information relevant to their predictions. The different formats for displaying information yielded different levels of accuracy and patterns of information utilization. In accordance with an explanation-based decision model, the text and story displays induced the heaviest reliance on information about the runners' motivation and prior performance and produced the most accurate judgments of marathon finishing times.