Textbook Notes (362,835)
Canada (158,073)
Psychology (1,390)
PSYC 473 (17)
Chapter 11

PSYC473 - Chapter 11.doc

11 Pages
Unlock Document

McGill University
PSYC 473
Mark Baldwin

Chapter 11: Stereotypes and Expectancies ← ← Most of us believe that stereotyping and prejudice are the problems of others, and not ourselves, and our own minor lapses hardly pose a threat to the social order. E.E. Jones asserted that stereotypes are just expectancies that we hold about a category. According to Jones, we have expectancies about every person with whom we interact, making stereotyping a far more common component of everyday thought than many of us would like to believe. ← We all have beliefs about the groups of individuals with whom we interact, which are derived from prior experience. Expectancies about groups can be defined as our beliefs about the probability that particular traits, features, characteristics, opinions and behaviors will be observed in those people at some point during our future interactions with them. Stereotypes serve a function of simplifying thought and perception to deliver meaning. ← Characteristics represented in a stereotype range from being 100% true to being 100% false. Inaccurate frequently used stereotypes are what most people find troubling. ← Stages of cateogrization and inference proceed outside of awareness, and present to our conscious mind a world that is recognizable, coherent, and coherent. Therefore, even if we are not explicitly attempting to cateogize a person, each person we meet is quickly and quietly placed into some primitive and broad boxes. Then there is the inescapable part of heightened accessibility of all the information in that box, including that which we have learned but rejected. ← Another function of categorization is it allows us to make predictions about what to expect when interacting with the person. Then we can plan our behaviour. ← Stereotyping often proceeds without our awareness, biasing us in ways we would never expect (implicit stereotyping). ← Self presentation concerns can affect the expression of stereotypic beliefs in two opposing ways. First, people may publicly express a belief in a stereotype so that they are sen as agreeing with their group. People foten perceive that their groupis more extreme than they themselves actually are. The second way is that people may believe the stereotype privately, but be unwilling to express it publicly. ← There are two broad reasons why people conceal private beliefs even from themselves. The first is that they do not want to face their own biases, and the second is that they don’t know the truth and they have unconscious biases that lead them ti idstort what they express without realizing it. ← An implicit measure is one that taps a psychological event in a manner that conceals the true nature of what is being measured from the persons being tested. Some examples are asking people to form judgments about a person named Donald, a second is reaction times/ ← Distinct from the knowledge we possess about a category/group are our feelings about the category/group. The affect associated with a group is what is known as prejudice. ← In one study. Participants had to respond whether an adjective was “good” or “bad” with a prime of either the picture of a white or black man. It was shown that white participants were faster at making the evaluations of posoitive adjectives following White primes and engative adjectives following Black primes. ← Another study found the same effect, and an even stronger effect twhen the words were relevant to stereotypes of Blacks that were negative in nature. ← The Implicit Association test has the participant make two decisions at the same time, e.g. pressing a button indicating whether a word is positive or negative and one indicating whether a face is black or white. When the participant’s affective responses are the same (e.g. they feel positively toward white people and a positive word is presented) the response is referred to as compatible, and when the affective responses are different the response is referred to as incompatible. Implicit association should be revealed by a facilitation in response times when compatible responses are being mapped together. ← In one study with Japanese American and Korean American students, the first task was pressing one button when a Japanese surname appeared and one when a Korean surname appeared, the second was whether or not a word was pleasant or unpleasant. Koreans had faster respnse times for a Korean surname and a pleasant word, and the opposite was shown for Japanese participants. The same results were found with white participants and their reaction to White or Black names. ← Some critics think that the IAT measures the associations that are present in a cultural environment as opposed to an individual’s values, or that it might reflect the lack of familiarity with one of the groups in question. However research shows that familiarity does not seem to be the root of the IAT effect: in a study with Christians and Jewish surnames, the same results were found with names that had been selected that were equally familiar to the participants. Other critics argue that their should be two separate scales examined when using the IAT, their positive attitudes and their negative attitudes. Further research continues on the IAT’s validity. ← Overtly negative beliefs about groups are less common in modern day society, as well as people do tend to have less prejudiced beliefs in general. Aversive racism is a modern type of intergroup bias, in which people who truly uphold the beliefs that oppose the old stereotypes are also latently holding negative feelings toward the group. Their bias may not be visible to themselves or others. This unconscious bias comes out 1) when behavior and attitude in domains not clearly related to race are examined and 2) in situations where there are no clear norms about how to behave. ← Many aversive racists use to their defense “some of my best friends are Black (Jewish etc.), however this does not mean that their attitude toward the group as a general is unbiased. ← In one study, either or white or black confederate’s car had broken down and accidentally called the White participant, who was either conservative or liberal. Implicit stereotyping could be detected by a greater tendency to hang up early on Black callers than on White callers. Results showed that when the motorist had time to explain his dilemma, liberals helped a Black person more than conservatives, however liberals also hung up early on Black people more than white people (and more than conservatives did) which shows that implicit stereotypes existed when the situation’s norms are unclear. 2 ← Regardless of whether we have egalitarian values, anti-stereotypic personal beliefs, and a dedication to fairness, a stereotype can still be triggered simply because we know the stereotype. Therefore we can be biased by stereotypes just because they are more accessible. ← STUDY: participants see pairings of words like “white-ambitious” and “black-ambitious” and are asked to respond yes if the second word could be conceived as possessed by a member of the group. People responded faster to pairings that were stereotypic, revealing an implicit activation of the stereotype. Some theorists follow a spreading activation model which holds that all information associated with a stereotyped feature is triggered in the lexicon and becomes perceptually ready upon attending to that feature. Others propse a parallel-constraint-satisfaction model which asserts that not all information that is stored in the lexicon associated with a particular category is triggered by encountering a person exhibiting behaviour that fits that category, instead expectancies and context bolster the activation of some information and inhibit the activation of other information. ← We begin to learn about stereotypes as soon as we are able to understand speech. Devine asserts that the activation of the association network relating to a stereotype. STUDY: more stereotyped words than neutral words were subliminally shown to one condition, and more neutral words than stereotyped words were subliminally shown to another condition. Then they were asked to form impressions of a person “Donald” who was acting in an ambiguous manner. Donald was rated as more hostile by participants who had been primed with stereotyped words. Both Low and high prejudice people were equally likely to have their stereotypes triggered. ← Devine’s findings do not suggest that peoeple are doomed to use stereotypes once activated, it simply suggests that stereotypes are inevitably activated. ← Confirmatory bias: information is processed in manner that confirms the existing stereotype. Research finds that the use of stereotypes is something that people can control if they become aware of the stereotype’s influence. ← Study: asked participants to make judgments about a group of lines. One group was told that lines in group A were short and lines in group B were long. The other half of the participants saw the same lines in the same order, but membership did not ocincide with line length. The participants were asked to judge the difference in length between two consecutive lines. People with a stereotype that group A lines were shorter than group B lines saw a greater difference in length between the two lines than they actually were. ← Minimal group studies: the simple act of being in a group creates a bias where people behave in ways that differentiate their group from others. E.g. rather give money to their own group (even when the group was chosen arbitrarily). ← STUYD: research participants listen to a discussion between 6 people, three of whom were white and three of whom were black. They then calculated the number of errors people made when remembering who said what. People were more likely to confuse what a white person said with another white person, and what a black person with another black person ( there were a greater number of intracategory errors rather than intercategory errors) 3 ← Study: participants asked to play admission board member and evaluate applications to law school. Application was either strong or weak and either by a White or Black applicant. They found that when White participants made judgments of two identical applications, they made more extreme evaluations for Black vs. White applicants ( a strong application was seen as stronger, a weak application was seen as weaker). This is because when people think about people from a different group, less features are incorporated into their thinking, and less complex judgments, more extreme judgments are made than when thinking about their own group. ← Outgroup homogeneity: the perception of highly differentiated ingroup contrasted with a simple and undifferentiated outgroup ← Study: white participants were asked to sort cards with traits printed on them so that traits that went together were grouped together. When they thought they were representing the characteristics of white people, they formed more piles they when they thought they were representing the characteristics of black people. ← Ingroup homogeneity is likely to be seen when evaluations are being made on traits that are highly relevant to the ingroup. ← Traits can have multiple meanings, but when the trait is linked to a member of a group, the stereotype can dictate the meaning of the trait. (e.g. aggressive is interpreted differently for an aggressive lawyer vs. an aggressive construction worker) ← Even when groups are made using the minimal-group procedure, people are more likely to spontaneously infer positive traits about an ingroup than an outgroup member. ← Study: participants were told a sentence about a person (either garbage collector or professor), and the behavior the person performed was either consistent or inconsistent with their stereotype . They were then asked of certain probe words were in the sentence e.g. smart. Participants found that responses to words implied in the behavior descriptions were faster when the actor in the sentence belonged to a group whose stereotypic traits were inconsistent with the behavior. This suggests that participants did not make the inference implied by the behavior. In a follow up experiment, participants were subliminally primed to activate the actor’s group membership. Participants were slower to indicate that the trait probe was not part of the sentence when the subliminally flashed group labels were consistent with the behavior in the sentence rather than inconsistent. This shows that categorizing people according to stereotypes facilitating making spontaneous trait inferences that are compatible with the stereotype, but inhibits the likelihood of making inferences when the behavior being observed implies a trait that is inconsistent with the stereotype. ← Study: research participants make judgments of women and men. Participants saw a picture of a man or a woman and need to make a judgment- how tall was this person? When making judgments in feet and inches, the participants saw men as significantly taller than women. When they were instructed to make judgments by evaluating each person’s height relative to a typical person, the difference noted on the objective measure was reduced by 80% (e.g. using different standard when amking the judgment for women or for men). Therefore people use stereotypes even when judgments seemilngy suggest that stereotypes are not being used. 4 Study: Hindu research participants were asked toe valuate Muslims perform eith erpositive or negative behavior in different contexts. They had to choose form alist of why the participant behaved that way. Findings indicated a patter of biased attributions that confirmed existing stereotypes. Internal attributions were more likely to be used to explain the behavior of a muslim when it was negative as opposed to positive. Study: how white Americans judged an ambiguous act performed by either a White or a Black person. Participants were told that two other individuals in the next room were on videotape, and asked to judge their behavior. One participant shoved the other; could be interpreted as friendly or hostility. Some participants showed an interaction between two white people, between two black people, a black person shoving a white person, or a white person shoving a black person. The results showed that when a black person shoved a white person, the participants labeled th
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 473

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.