Intergroup norms and intergroup discrimination: Distinctive self-categorization and social identity effects.

Manipulation of in-group and out-group norms of discrimination and fairness allowed for the operation of competing social identity principles concerning in-group bias, conformity, and group distinctiveness. The combined effects of these principles on in-group bias were first examined in a modified minimal-group setting (Study 1). Results demonstrated that participants' allocation strategies were in accord with the in-group norm. Furthermore, dissimilar norms resulted in greater use of positive differentiation allocation strategies. However, in natural groups (Study 2), more in-group bias was found when both group norms were similar and discriminatory. The results confirm the importance of in-group norms and demonstrate differences between experimental and natural groups in the applicability of competing social identity and self-categorization principles. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Traits and social stereotypes: Efficiency differences in social information processing.

Research on the associative structure of social stereotypes and trait-defined categories has shown that stereotypes are associatively richer, more visual, and more distinctive (S. M. Andersen and R. L. Klatzky; see record 1987-34370-001). We hypothesized that stereotypes might also operate more efficiently than trait-defined categories in social information processing. Participants were presented with sentences pairing either a stereotype or a trait label with an overt act or an internal state. Participants judged whether or not the designated target person would be likely to do or to experience what was described in the sentence. As predicted, participants judged the stereotype sentences more quickly than the trait sentences. An incidental recall test of memory for the target terms, cued by the acts and states, showed that participants were also better able to remember the stereotypes than the traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes.

In the present research, consisting of 2 correlational studies (N = 616) including a representative U.S. sample and 2 experiments (N = 350), the authors investigated how stereotypes and emotions shape behavioral tendencies toward groups, offering convergent support for the behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map framework. Warmth stereotypes determine active behavioral tendencies, attenuating active harm (harassing) and eliciting active facilitation (helping). Competence stereotypes determine passive behavioral tendencies, attenuating passive harm (neglecting) and eliciting passive facilitation (associating). Admired groups (warm, competent) elicit both facilitation tendencies; hated groups (cold, incompetent) elicit both harm tendencies. Envied groups (competent, cold) elicit passive facilitation but active harm; pitied groups (warm, incompetent) elicit active facilitation but passive harm. Emotions predict behavioral tendencies more strongly than stereotypes do and usually mediate stereotype-to-behavioral-tendency links. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison.

Two studies tested the prediction that the outcome of social comparison will differ depending on whether interpersonal or intergroup comparison processes have been engaged. Results of an experiment in which college students were assigned to membership in a minority or majority social category confirmed the predicted 3-way interaction effect of in-group salience, target group membership, and upward–downward comparison on self-assessments of academic ability. Majority group members exhibited contrast effects in their self-ratings following exposure to a videotape of an in-group member displaying either very high or very low academic competence. Self-evaluations of minority group members revealed assimilation effects in response to in-group comparisons and contrast effects in response to out-group comparisons. In a 2nd follow-up experiment, this in-group assimilation effect was found to be dependent on intergroup contrast. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Possible explanations for social class differences in cancer patient survival

Social class differences in cancer patient survival have been reported for most cancer types and for a number of countries. The etiology of these differences has been studied less thoroughly and less systematically than social class differences in cancer occurrence. Stage of disease at diagnosis appears to be the most important factor contributing to the social class differences in cancer patient survival. This has been observed most clearly for gastrointestinal and gynaecological cancers. Social class differences in survival are generally wider for patients diagnosed with cancer at local stages than for those diagnosed with cancer at advanced stages. The reasons why cancers are more frequently diagnosed at a local stage in high than in low social classes in not properly understood at the moment. Of other potential contributing factors, the role of treatment and psychosocial factors has scarcely been studied. Biological indicators of tumour aggressiveness have failed to explain the social class differences.     

Sex stereotypes and social judgment.

Tested the assumption that sexual stereotypic beliefs affect the judgments of individuals in an experiment with 98 male and 97 female undergraduates. No evidence was found for effects of stereotypes on Ss' judgments about a target individual. Instead, Ss judgments were strongly influenced by behavioral information about the target. To explain these results, it is noted that the predicted effects of social stereotypes on judgments conform to Bayes' theorem for the normative use of prior probabilities in judgment tasks, inasmuch as stereotypic beliefs may be regarded as intuitive estimates for the probabilities of traits in social groups. Research in the psychology of prediction has demonstrated that people often neglect prior probabilities when making predictions about people, especially when they have individuating information about the person that is subjectively diagnostic of the criterion. An implication of this research is that a minimal amount of subjectively diagnostic target case information should be sufficient to eradicate effects of stereotypes on judgments. Results of a 2nd experiment with 75 female and 55 male undergraduates support this argument. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The communication of social stereotypes: The effects of group discussion and information distribution on stereotypic appraisals.

Stereotypes are fundamentally social constructs, formulated and modified through discussion and interaction with others. The present studies examined the impact of group discussion on stereotypes. In both studies, groups of participants discussed their impressions about a hypothetical target group after having read behaviors performed by target group members. These behaviors included both stereotypic and counterstereotypic examples, and the distribution of these behaviors varied across discussion group members. In some groups only 1 member knew of the counterstereotypic behaviors; in other groups this information was distributed across all group members. In general, discussion led to a polarization of the target group stereotypes, but this effect was lessened when the counterstereotypic behaviors were concentrated in 1 group member. In this case, these counterstereotypic behaviors were discussed more and retained better. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The actor as context for social judgments: effects of prior impressions and stereotypes

Three experiments identified conditions under which trait judgments made about a behavior were more likely to influence later judgments of the behavior. In Experiment 1, participants made trait judgments about numerous behaviors presented with photos of actors. Some behaviors were repeated, paired with the same or a different actor. All repeated behaviors were judged faster than new behaviors. Facilitation was greatest when repeated behaviors were paired with the same actor, suggesting greater influence of prior judgments in this condition. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this effect, and the pattern of response times (RTs) suggested a stronger association between the actor and behavior when a prior impression of the actor had been formed (Experiment 2) and when the behavior was stereotypic of the actor's group (Experiment 3). Level of prejudice moderated RT patterns in Experiment 3. Implications for context effects, the nature of trait inferences, and stereotype change are discussed.     

The effects of stereotypes and suggestions on preschoolers' reports.

Children's (N?=?176) reported memories of a strange man's visit were studied. Three- to 6-year-olds were interviewed repeatedly after the event in one of the following conditions: (a) control, in which no interviews contained suggestive questions; (b) stereotype, in which children were given previsit expectations about the stranger; (c) suggestion, in which interviews contained erroneous suggestions about misdeeds committed by the stranger; and (d) stereotype plus suggestion, in which children were given both pre- and postvisit manipulations. Results from open-ended interviews after 10 weeks indicated that control participants provided accurate reports, stereotypes resulted in a modest number of false reports, and suggestions resulted in a substantial number of false reports. Children in the stereotype-plus-suggestion group made high levels of false reports. All experimental conditions showed dramatic developmental trends favoring older children. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Impression valence constrains social explanations: The case of discounting versus conjunction effects.

Discounting refers to a reduction in explanation plausibility in light of another explanation, whereas conjunction effects refer to an increase in plausibility of explanations judged in combination rather than in isolation. Explanation compatibility moderates these effects, such that discounting is greater for incompatible explanations and conjunction effects are greater for compatible explanations. Three experiments examined whether this effect reflects perceptions regarding (a) the prior statistical association of causal factors, (b) the sharing of common causal mechanisms, or (c) coherence with regard to global impressions. Results indicated that impression valence predicts and also directly influences discounting and conjunction effects independent of covariation and mechanism, underscoring the pervasive impact of impressions on attributions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intragroup social influence and intergroup competition.

Three experiments examined the role of intragroup social influence in intergroup competition. In the context of a mutual fate control situation, participants in Exp 1 demonstrated more intergroup competition in the presence than in the absence of social support for shared self-interest. Exp 2 revealed that, in the context of a Prisoner's Dilemma Game, this social support effect was stronger when noncorrespondence of outcomes between the interacting groups was low than when it was high. Results from Exp 3 were consistent with the possibility that the effect of social support is attenuated when noncorrespondence of outcomes is high because under these circumstances intergroup competition is prescribed by a norm of group interest. The implications of these findings for understanding the antecedents of interindividual-intergroup discontinuity are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The social norms of alcohol-related negative consequences.

Social norms for alcohol use are important influences on individual college student drinking. The present study extends social norms research by examining alcohol-related consequences and, in particular, whether similar misperceptions exist regarding the frequency and evaluation of these consequences over time. College student drinkers (N = 624) participating in a longitudinal study completed Web-based surveys assessing alcohol use and related consequences, as well as their beliefs about frequency and evaluation of consequences for the typical college student. Findings suggest that students overestimated how often typical college students experience negative consequences and underestimated how negatively other students evaluated those consequences. Finally, results support a bidirectional model for alcohol-related consequences, possibly indicating a reciprocal, mutually influential feed-forward loop of norms and consequences that promotes maintenance of college student drinking and consequences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Inferred sex differences in status as a determinant of gender stereotypes about social influence.

In 3 experiments, 470 male and 425 female university students read a scenario describing a communicator's attempt to influence a recipient and then judged how much influence would occur. The scenarios in Exp I described a man trying to influence a woman or a woman trying to influence a man. For scenarios in which job titles were omitted, Ss believed that women held lower status jobs than men and that women were more likely to comply behaviorally with men than men were with women. For scenarios in which job titles were included, Ss' beliefs about compliance were based on job status rather than the sex of the stimulus persons. In Exp II, scenarios in which job titles were omitted described an influence attempt between same- or opposite-sex persons. Both the communicator's and the recipient's sex were found to contribute to the greater perceived compliance of women to men (vs men to women). In Exp III, this perceived sex difference in compliance occurred only when the communicator and recipient were employed by the same organization. (31 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in social behavior: Are the social role and evolutionary explanations compatible?

Examines the competing claims of 2 explanations of sex differences in social behavior: social role theory, and evolutionary psychology. The origin and scope of research on sex differences in social behavior are outlined, and the application of social role theory is discussed. Research that is based on modern sexual selection theory is described, and whether its findings can be explained by social role theory is considered. Findings associated with social role theory are weighted against evolutionary explanations. It is concluded that evolutionary theory accounts much better for the overall pattern of sex differences and for their origins. A coevolutionary approach is proposed to explain cross-cultural consistency in socialization patterns. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Groupdrink: The effects of alcohol on intergroup competitiveness.

Alcohol is often consumed in group settings. The present article examines the effect of alcohol on intergroup competitiveness through the use of a prisoner's dilemma game. One hundred fifty-eight college students participated in the study, either individually or as a member of a 4-person experimental single-sex group. Participants consumed either alcohol (1.13 g ethanol/kg body weight) or a placebo. Results show no effect of alcohol on cooperative choice within individuals. However, groups were significantly less cooperative after consuming alcohol than they were after consuming a placebo. In addition, after consuming alcohol, groups were less cooperative than were individuals. Results are discussed in terms of the way alcohol may affect focus of attention on group-level cues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in the intimacy of social interaction: Further examination of potential explanations.

Two studies, with 58 female and 49 male undergraduates, evaluated potential explanations of the finding that males' same-sex interaction is less intimate than that of females. These explanations concerned differing criteria for intimacy, labeling differences, selectivity in the occasions or partners for intimacy, the question of capability vs preference, and gender-cued stereotypic judgments. In a replication of the essential datum, diarylike reports of naturalistic interaction indicated that males' same-sex interaction was substantially less intimate than that of females. Subsequently, Ss were asked to judge standard stimuli and to have an intimate conversation in a laboratory setting. Analyses revealed that the sex difference could not be attributed to differing criteria, labeling, selectivity, or gender-cued judgments. Further analyses indicated that preference played more of a role in the sex difference than did capability, because situational manipulations eliminated the sex difference. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Definition and assessment of accuracy in social stereotypes.

A perennial issue in the study of social stereotypes concerns their accuracy. Yet, there is no clear concept of the various ways in which stereotypes may be accurate or inaccurate and how one would assess their accuracy. This article is designed to rectify this situation. Three forms of stereotype inaccuracy are identified: stereotypic inaccuracy, valence inaccuracy, and dispersion inaccuracy. The implications of each form are discussed, along with how each can be assessed using a full-accuracy design. Past research that has attempted to examine stereotype accuracy is reviewed, and new data on the issue are presented. Although of perennial interest, the theoretical and methodological difficulties of assessing stereotype accuracy are substantial. The goal in this article is to alert the researcher to these difficulties and point toward their solution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of person and job stereotypes on two personnel decisions.

Two studies investigated whether the effects of incumbent age on personnel decisions are different in a stereotypically older job than in a stereotypically younger job. In Exp I, 19 26–52 yr old managers were asked to make awards recommendations and overall evaluations for 18 hypothetical employees in 3 jobs that varied in age stereotype. Hypothetical employees varied in age and exhibited either a stereotypically older performance pattern or a stereotypically younger pattern of performance. Significant Job?×?Performance Pattern and Target Age?×?Pattern interactions were found in the awards exercises. In Exp II, 19 26–62 yr old managers were asked to make promotion decisions for 18 hypothetical employees in 3 jobs. Again, the Job?×?Pattern interaction was significant. Overall results suggest that when the pattern of performance is inconsistent with the age stereotype of the job, employees receive lower ratings than when behavior is consistent with the job stereotype. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of purpose of appraisal and individual differences in stereotypes of women on sex differences in performance ratings: A laboratory and field study.

We investigated the effects of purpose of appraisal and individual differences in stereotypes of women on the evaluations of male and female ratees in two studies. In Study 1, 52 female and 51 male undergraduate students with traditional or nontraditional stereotypes of women evaluated written vignettes of either male or female ratees. Raters were informed that their evaluations would be used for scale development (experimental purposes) or for merit pay and promotion decisions (administrative decisions). Analyses revealed that female ratees were evaluated less accurately by raters with traditional stereotypes of women than by raters with nontraditional stereotypes of women. Such differences occurred, however, only when appraisals were made for administrative decisions. In Study 2, 810 raters with traditional or nontraditional stereotypes of women evaluated the teaching effectiveness of eight male and six female professors. Analyses indicated that women were evaluated more favorably by raters with nontraditional stereotypes of women than by raters with traditional stereotypes of women. Implications of the findings for sex differences in appraisal, future research, and organizational effectiveness are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)