Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Can we stop ourselves from stereotyping other people? (Intro (A) serve…
Can we stop ourselves from stereotyping other people?
Intro
Knowledge: learned from & shared with others & personal experiences
Expectancies: anticipation of certain attributes and actions in others
Beliefs: Generalise from grp ->indiv
Schema about grp, stored in LT memory
triggered by physical features
automated - effortless
influence social cognition from precocious stages
A) Why? Multiple purposes that reflect a variety of cognitive & motivational processes
A) definition
A) not necessarily negative in nature
A) assumptions about representation (in the head) underlie the current understanding of stereotyping and stereotype change
A) come form 2 sources (both are mental representations)
real differences between groups
independent of real group differences
A) serve difference functions in different contexts
sometimes simplify processing demand
enrich perception
justify a particular conclusion/behaviour
multi mediated
B predict reactions/behaviour
A ) formed and maintained through a variety of processes becomes hard to imagine interventions that successfully block all routes to stereotypical thinking.
A) nonconsicous components
A) cognitive routes
consequences
A) can lead to unfair, negative consequences when applied to members of the ST-ed group
racism
A aversion racism, modern racism and symbolic racism. ambivalent racism
sexual objectification
AH: unconscious bias?
Control of stereotyping.
ST results from 2 processes Kunda & Spencer 2003
ST application - decide if to use, can control if intend to
reactive control
continuum model of impression formation (Fiske & Neuberg 1990)
initial categorisation, confirmatory categorisation, recategorisation, piecemeal integration.
B) assumed that stereotypes would always be activated, now clear that can vary from one situation to the next
B) differ in assumptionsptions about how gaols influence stereotyping
dissociation model (Devine 1989)
seek to dissociate stereotypes influence. conditions: (*what is reference for this) - i.e. overturn the output of the automatic process, effortful and occurs later
awareness,
motivation to correct,
compunction Guilt motivates conscious attempt to correct/compensate fir use of stereotypes
Devine et al 1991.
Monteith 1993
accurate theories of bias,
cognitive capacity
Pendry & Macrae (1994)
accuracy goals (Moskowitz (2005))
accountability
outcome dependency (Neuberg & Fiske (1987))
fear of invalidity
desire to be accurate
Punishment for inaccuracy
desire to avoid dullness and predicability (Mayseless & Kruglanski (1987))
self-assessment motive (Dijksterhuis, Bargh & Miedema (2000))
suppression: trying to prevent activated ST from impacting on ones's judgment
can lead to increased stereotyping: operating process & monitoring process. unwanted thought becomes hyper-accessible (Wenger (1994) and Macrae, Bodenhausen, Milne & Jetten (1994))
A alternative: explanations as a way to inhibit stereotypic reactions
A) issue of personal standards may be a critical factor in determining when suppression will fail or succeed.
Macrae et al 1994
Monteith 1993
causing people to become personally involved with the targets or accountable for the consequences ->rely less on stereotypes in their judgement Schaller et al 1995 Tetlock 1992
perspective taking. Correlated with social competence & self-esteem
:
Galinsky & Moskowitz (2000)
Peck et al (2013)
Magister et al (2013)
Inzlicht et al (2012)
A Not all strategies for thought control are equally likely to be doomed to failure.
B) extent to which one uses a ST to judge a member of the ST group
ST activation - retrieved from memory due to asssoc with category
B extent to which stereotype is accessible in one's mind
B now clear spontaneous activation is not inevitable or universal
B) examines what determines the activation and application of ST and how the two processes relate to one another.
Depend on 3 goals
Goals:
motivation to avoid prejudice (may stem from...)
internally driven to maintain egalitarian identity
externally driven desire to comply with egalitarian social norms
self-enhancement goals (ego defensive functions)
comprehension goals (simplification)
when ST application can help satisfy the goals Sts are activated for that purpose. When ST application can disrupt goal satisfaction activation is inhibited to prevent such application.
individual differences in strength of goals
one goal can inhibit and one can increase, the stronger will win.
few studies have directly pitted opposing motives against each other
goals intensified by situational factors
controlled rule based thinking
automatic associative processes
both can be automatic or controlled
inhibition of stereotype activation can also be automatic or controlled
intentional: Wegner 1994
without awareness Moskowitz 1999
B people with chronic egalitarian goals can inhibit activation....how do you get chronic egalitarian goals?
B heightened self focus: increase salience of anti prejudice norms and boost motivation to adhere to them Macrae et al 1998 (and application)
self enhancement foals have been shown to override dampening effect of cog resources on stereotype activation
application
intentionally to explain behaviours
not aware of: Wilson et al 2000
B look at it via 3 goals
motivation to avoid prejudice
B goal: avoid prejudice, could be mediated by cog resources
once activated, inhibiting may require considerable effort (Devine 1989) so only successful if have the necessary resources. busy, fatigued, time pressure
influenced by mood
why: ability to cleanse judgment (inhibitory ability) or using individuating info more effortful
1 more item...
few studies have pitted motives against factors that effect cognitive resources
do goals affect each others strengths?
Situation - does this have an impact (eg topic sensitive to partner)
Can be reducing automatic assimilation
or more deliberate if necessary cog resources
some limitations in the studies
contextual factors and individual differences
Perceivers' concerns that they might be or appear prejudiced can prevent them from applying activated stereotypes that they would most likely apply if these concerns were assuaged [AH but this doesn't seem conscious, but awareness might help]
Confident in their egalitarian credentials, these participants relaxed their efforts to avoid prejudice, and expressed negativity that they would have otherwise curtailed
self focus (also inhibits activation) only for those that disapprove of stereotyping. How do we increase self focus
Norm salience - who we surround ourselves with
self enhancement goals
receive criticism -> salvage self worth
intensity can be decreased by experiences that affirm self worth. eg discuss most important value, reminded of secure attachment
may be because less like to activate ST they are prevented from applying them
boost self enhancement goals: apply. weaken: stop application
chronic need for structure->motivated to form unambiguous impressions of others, seek rapid comprehension
might be ongoing concern
triggered by situational factors eg time pressure
AH: how do you measure high/low need?
individuating information
awareness - seek this out
B need to look at RELATIVE strength of the goals (in many situations the motivation to avoid prejudice prevails)
enduring factors also acknowledged
important to distinguish the two because they can diverge
Study limitations
REPORTED impressions. activations - mostly implicit, application - explicit: colour blind? intention deception? awareness and corrections - > construct a non ST impression that they endorse and report honestly
might not have had ST in mind when evaluating but may be subsequently activated by that evaluation
may have implicit stereotypic beliefs that unaware of (central to other theories) ie reporting honestly
application
automaticity. Deinve (1989). important as both a process model of activation and applications and implications for use under various circumstances
against: Gilbert & Hixson
A) 1 representation
A) different models lead to different predictions re how , inter alia, STs changed
abstraction based
instance based
assumptions about representations are implicit in all research on STs
A) 2 Formation: various routes
non conscious detection of covariation
self-fulfilling prophecies
Illusory Correlation
outgroup homogeneity
A) 3 Maintenance
priming
assimilation effects
attributional processes
memory processes