Group entitativity and group perception: Associations between physical features and psychological judgment.

Two experiments tested whether the perceived entitativity of groups (i.e., cohesiveness) influences judgments about those groups, in terms of both their observable physical properties and underlying psychological traits. Entitativity was manipulated with groups whose members were similar or dissimilar in skin color. Experiment 1 demonstrated that beliefs about entitativity elicited more accurate judgments of skin color for entitative than nonentitative social groups, although memory for individual members of entitative groups was relatively impoverished. Experiment 2 revealed that entitative groups were viewed as not only physically similar but also psychologically homogeneous and elicited strong negative trait and behavioral judgments. Together, these findings suggest that physical properties (e.g., similarity) can create perceptions of psychological "groupness" that have important consequences for group perception. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Culture and group perception: Dispositional and stereotypic inferences about novel and national groups.

In 3 studies, the authors tested the hypothesis that Chinese participants would view social groups as more entitative than would Americans and, as a result, would be more likely to infer personality traits on the basis of group membership--that is, to stereotype. In Study 1, Chinese participants made stronger stereotypic trait inferences than Americans did on the basis of a target's membership in a fictitious group. Studies 2 and 3 showed that Chinese participants perceived diverse groups as more entitative and attributed more internally consistent dispositions to groups and their members. Guided by culturally based lay theories about the entitative nature of groups, Chinese participants may stereotype more readily than do Americans when group membership is available as a source of dispositional inference. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Source entitativity and the elaboration of persuasive messages: The roles of perceived efficacy and message discrepancy.

Compared with nonentitative groups, entitative targets are considered to elicit more elaborative processing because of the singularity or unity they represent. However, when groups serve as sources of persuasive messages, other dynamics may operate. The current research suggests that entitativity is intrinsically linked to perceptions of a group’s efficacy related to the advocacy, and this efficacy combines with the position of the appeal to determine message elaboration. When messages are counterattitudinal, entitative (efficacious) sources should elicit greater processing than nonentitative groups because of concern that the entitative sources may be more likely to bring about the negative outcomes proposed. However, when appeals are proattitudinal, sources low in entitativity (nonefficacious) should initiate more elaboration due to concern that they may be unlikely to facilitate the positive outcomes proposed. These hypotheses were supported in a series of studies. Preliminary studies established the entitativity–efficacy relation (Studies 1A and 1B). Primary persuasion studies showed that manipulations of source entitativity (Studies 2 and 3) and source efficacy (Studies 4A and 4B) have opposite effects on processing as a function of message discrepancy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"The Impact of Stereotype-Incongruent Information on Perceived Group Variability and Stereotype Change." Correction to Garcia-Marques and Mackie (1999).

Reports an error in "The impact of stereotype-incongruent information on perceived group variability and stereotype change" by Leonel Garcia-Marques and Diane M. Mackie (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999[Nov], Vol 77[5], 979-990). In this article, Table 3 (p. 987) contained an error. The row "Number of subgroups" was inadvertently omitted. The corrected table appears in this erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1999-01257-006.) Three experiments showed increases in the perceived variability of social groups after perceivers received stereotype-incongruent information about group members. In Experiment 1, participants generated flatter distributions after exposure to incongruent information, compared with equally deviant congruent information, in the form of typical verbal materials. Experiment 2 indicated similar changes in dispersion after the presentation of numeric information about a single group member. In Experiment 3, the authors manipulated cognitive load at encoding or at the time group judgments were requested. Under conditions of cognitive constraint, stereotype-incongruent information ceased to promote more dispersed group representations. These results are consistent with the idea that incongruent information triggers more deliberative and comprehensive retrieval and generation of exemplars. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for stereotype change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Target entitativity: Implications for information processing about individual and group targets.

It is hypothesized that perceptions of entitativity (i.e., seeing social targets as possessing unity and coherence) have important implications for how one organizes information about, and forms impressions of, individual and group targets. When perceivers expect entitativity, they should form an integrated impression of the target, resulting in on-line judgments. However, when perceivers expect little entitativity, they should not process target-relevant information in an integrative fashion, resulting in memory-based judgments. Although many factors affect perceptions of entitativity, the current study focused on expectations of similarity and behavioral consistency. It was predicted that in general, perceivers expect greater entitativity for individual than group targets. However, when explicitly provided with similar expectancies of entitativity, information processing would be similar for both individual and group targets. Two experiments supported these predictions, using recall, memory-judgment correlation, and illusory correlation measures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The prejudiced personality revisited: Personal need for structure and formation of erroneous group stereotypes.

Two studies explored the relation between personal need for structure (PNS) and a reasoning process through which stereotypes may form. Participants viewed information about the performance of group members on intelligence-related tasks and then indicated their inference strategies and impressions of the groups. Results indicated that high-PNS participants were more likely than low-PNS participants to form erroneous group stereotypes. Individual differences in attributional complexity and need for cognition also predicted stereotype formation under some conditions. The effects of PNS and other cognitive personality variables were weakened under conditions in which participants believed that they would have to justify their impressions publicly. Discussion focuses on processes underlying the relation between PNS and stereotype formation and on relations among personality, social context, and social inference. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Development and mental representation of stereotypes.

A mixed model of stereotype representation was tested. Experiment 1 examined the development of stereotypes about novel groups. Results showed that, at low levels of experience, stereotypic group knowledge is derived from information about particular group exemplars. However, as experience increases, an abstract group stereotype is formed that is stored and retrieved independently of the exemplars on which it was based. Results of Experiment 2 suggest that preexisting stereotypes about well-known groups are represented as abstract structures in memory. These results indicate that stereotypical knowledge is most likely to be exemplar-based in the absence of abstract stereotypes. The implications of these findings for other aspects of stereotyping and social perception are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity.

Three studies examined perceptions of the entitativity of groups. In Study 1 (U.S.) and Study 2 (Poland), participants rated a sample of 40 groups on 8 properties of groups (e.g., size, duration, group member similarity) and perceived entitativity. Participants also completed a sorting task in which they sorted the groups according to their subjective perceptions of group similarity. Correlational and regression analyses were used to determine the group properties most strongly related to entitativity. Clustering and multidimensional scaling analyses in both studies identified 4 general types of groups (intimacy groups, task groups, social categories, and loose associations). In Study 3, participants rated the properties of groups to which they personally belonged. Study 3 replicated the results of Studies 1 and 2 and demonstrated that participants most strongly valued membership in groups that were perceived as high in entitativity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Illusory correlation and the maintenance of stereotypic beliefs.

Investigated the role of cognitive processes in the maintenance of social stereotypes in 3 experiments with 73 male and 77 female high school and undergraduate students and adults. Ss read sets of sentences in which the members of different occupational groups were described by pairs of trait adjectives. In 2 experiments, the trait adjectives were either consistent (CT) with stereotypic beliefs about one of the occupational groups or unrelated to the group's stereotype; in the 3rd study, traits were either inconsistent (ICT) with or unrelated to a group's stereotype. Different correlational relationships between the traits and occupational groups were built into the sets of sentences, but, in each case, the CT or ICT traits described the members of each occupational group as often as matched traits unrelated to the groups' stereotypes. Ss estimated how frequently each of the trait adjectives had described members of each of the occupational groups. Each study revealed systematic biases in the Ss' judgments so that the perceived correlation between traits and occupations was more congruent with existing stereotypic beliefs than the actual correlation. Findings indicate a cognitive bias in the processing of new information about social groups that is mediated by existing stereotypes and that provides a basis for explaining the persistence of stereotypes in the absence of confirming evidence. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Person memory in intergroup contexts: Categorization versus individuation.

Three experiments were conducted to assess the effects of perceiver group identity and expectancies on whether social information is organized at the level of the individual or the social category. In all 3 experiments, participants viewed a videotaped discussion among 6 people whose category identity was signified by sweatshirt color. In Experiment 1, performance on an identification test was affected by meaningfulness of the category distinction. Results of Experiment 2 indicated that intracategory confusions were higher under conditions of competitive interdependence between groups than under mere categorization or category salience conditions alone. Experiment 3 demonstrated that members of minority categories are individuated less than members of majority categories, except by members of the minority in-group. Results of the 3 experiments are discussed in relation to the concept of perceived "entitativity" of social categories. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects.

Examined the process leading to the confirmation of a perceiver's expectancies about another when the social label that created the expectancy provides poor or tentative evidence about another's true dispositions or capabilities. Ss were 67 undergraduates. One group was led to believe that a child came from a high SES background; the other group, that the child came from a low SES background. Nothing in the SES data conveyed information directly relevant to the child's ability level, and when asked, both groups reluctantly rated the child's ability level to be approximately at grade level. Two other groups received the SES information and then witnessed a videotape of the child taking an academic test. Although the videotaped series was identical for all Ss, those who had information that the child came from a high SES rated her abilities well above grade level, whereas those for whom the child was identified as coming from a lower-class background rated her abilities as below grade level. Both groups cited evidence from the ability test to support their conclusions. Findings are interpreted as suggesting that some "stereotype" information creates not certainties but hypotheses about the stereotyped individual. However, these hypotheses are often tested in a biased fashion that leads to their false confirmation. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stereotype threat and working memory: Mechanisms, alleviation, and spillover.

Stereotype threat (ST) occurs when the awareness of a negative stereotype about a social group in a particular domain produces suboptimal performance by members of that group. Although ST has been repeatedly demonstrated, far less is known about how its effects are realized. Using mathematical problem solving as a test bed, the authors demonstrate in 5 experiments that ST harms math problems that rely heavily on working memory resources--especially phonological aspects of this system. Moreover, by capitalizing on an understanding of the cognitive mechanisms by which ST exerts its impact, the authors show (a) how ST can be alleviated (e.g., by heavily practicing once-susceptible math problems such that they are retrieved directly from long-term memory rather than computed via a working-memory-intensive algorithm) and (b) when it will spill over onto subsequent tasks unrelated to the stereotype in question but dependent on the same cognitive resources that stereotype threat also uses. The current work extends the knowledge of the causal mechanisms of stereotype threat and demonstrates how its effects can be attenuated and propagated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Team reflexivity, development of shared task representations, and the use of distributed information in group decision making.

Decision-making groups often exchange and integrate distributed information to a lesser extent than is desirable for high-quality decisions. One important reason for this lies in group members’ understanding of the decision task—their task representations—specifically the extent to which they understand the importance of exchange and integration of information. The authors hypothesized that a group’s development of a (shared) understanding of the information elaboration requirements of their task is influenced by collective reflection on the task. When not all group members initially realize the importance of information elaboration, team reflexivity increases the degree to which the group understands the importance of information elaboration. In an experiment, the authors showed that team reflection fostered the development of task representations emphasizing information elaboration and subsequent information elaboration and decision quality. When all members initially already held representations emphasizing information elaboration, team reflection promoted elaboration and performance to a lesser degree. (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 impact of stereotype-incongruent information on perceived group variability and stereotype change.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 78(4) of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (see record 2007-17406-001). In this article, Table 3 (p. 987) contained an error. The row "Number of subgroups" was inadvertently omitted. The corrected table appears in this erratum.] Three experiments showed increases in the perceived variability of social groups after perceivers received stereotype-incongruent information about group members. In Experiment 1, participants generated flatter distributions after exposure to incongruent information, compared with equally deviant congruent information, in the form of typical verbal materials. Experiment 2 indicated similar changes in dispersion after the presentation of numeric information about a single group member. In Experiment 3, the authors manipulated cognitive load at encoding or at the time group judgments were requested. Under conditions of cognitive constraint, stereotype-incongruent information ceased to promote more dispersed group representations. These results are consistent with the idea that incongruent information triggers more deliberative and comprehensive retrieval and generation of exemplars. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for stereotype change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Knowing others' preferences degrades the quality of group decisions.

Results from 4 experiments demonstrate that learning the other group members' preferences at the beginning of a discussion impedes the solution of hidden profiles. In Experiments 1–3, participants who were not informed about their fellow group members' preferences were more likely to solve a hidden profile than those who received bogus information about the others' preferences. The negative effect of learning the others' preferences on decision quality was mediated by participants paying less attention to the information exchanged when they had been made aware of the others' preferences. Experiments 1 and 2 further ruled out that the effect of learning the others' preferences is due to participants bolstering their position or due to an increase in informational load. Experiment 3 showed that learning the other group members' preferences impedes the solution of hidden profiles even if one of the other members favors the correct alternative. Finally, Experiment 4 replicated these results in face-to-face interacting 3-person groups. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-stereotyping and social context: The effects of relative in-group size and in-group status.

In 2 laboratory experiments, the tendency to stereotype oneself in terms of one's group membership as a function of the social context was examined. Exp 1 examined the effects of relative ingroup size on self-stereotyping. The results confirmed the prediction that minority members are more likely than majority members to stereotype themselves. Exp 2 examined the interactive impact of relative in-group size and in-group status. As predicted, a high (relative to a low) status of the in-group increased self-stereotyping primarily for minority members, but not for majority members. Moreover, analyses of the differences in perceived in-group and out-group homogeneity suggest that the in-group homogeneity effect should also be interpreted in terms of self-stereotyping processes. Finally, the interplay between cognitive and motivational determinants of self-stereotyping is discussed as well as a possible distinction between self-stereotyping effects on individual level vs group level self-representations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)