Textbook Notes (368,794)
Canada (162,165)
Psychology (1,418)
PSYC 473 (17)
Chapter 12

PSYC 473 - Chapter 12.docx

5 Pages
Unlock Document

PSYC 473
Mark Baldwin

Social Cognition Chapter 12 Notes Control of Stereotypes and Expectancies Memory Bias Revisited: Stereotype Strength  Stangor and Ruble (1989)  argued that stereotype strength determines the stereotype’s impact on memory  strong stereotypes  stereotype-inconsistent information is not really remembered  young stereotypes  stereotype-inconsistent information is said to be remembered because of how hard it is to fit this information with the stereotype already held  Experiment by Stangor and Ruble  had two groups, one with behaviors predominantly extraverted, the other predominantly introverted, found that people who had formed expectancies beforehand recalled more extraverted or introverted traits, depending on expectancy (introversion or extroversion) that was primed  BUT not all research works point to the fact that stereotype strength determines stereotype’s impact on memory Memory Bias Revisited: Behavior that is Diagnostic of Nonstereotypic Concepts  Contact Hypothesis: several ingredients need to be in place to promote positive effects due to contact   1. People in contact must have interactions with each other  2. Must have equal status in these contact situations  3. Should pursue common goals  4. Situation they are in should promote a norm of equality between groups (i.e. there should be social support that sanctions all groups as equals)  5. The behavior observed in the course of the contact must provide the data-the counterstereotypic behavioral evidence- that will allow the stereotype to be dispelled  people see illusory correlations because they see a negative correlation between counterstereotypic behaviors and stereotyped groups  Hamilton and Rose (1980)  portrayed accountant and salesperson as quiet (salesperson not usually stereotyped to be quiet), found participants noticed the salesperson quiet more than accountant therefore participants did not show a stereotype-confirming bias in memory Entitativitiy  Entitativity: extent to which group is perceived as a coherent social entity, thought, can influence whether stereotype-inconsistent behavior can be recalled  Yzerbyt and colleagues (1998): found that research participants were less sensitive to situational information and more prone to committing the fundamental attribution error when a group was high in entitativity Memory Bias Revisited: Attributions  The reason stereotype-inconsistent information is less likely to be used in forming impressions, but is more likely to be recalled, is that the effort spent to preserve an attribution to the stereotypic disposition of the member of the stereotypic group (effort to explain away inconsistencies) makes the inconsistent behavior more memorable Confirmatory Judgment Revisited: Inconsistent Behavior Can Lead to Nonstereotypic Judgment Factors that determine if people detect, attend to, and elaborate on stereotype-inconsistent behavior 1. making situational attributions for inconsistent behavior 2. observing inconsistent behavior from highly entitative groups 3. having weak stereotypes regarding the group in question 4. observed behavior being relatively distinct and unique 1  but in these instances, effortful processing used to elaborate on inconsistent information but also prevents this information from having an impact on judgment How to resolve inconsistencies in stereotypes seen in others (Asch and Zukier) 1. Segregate inconsistent traits: an inconsistent trait was assigned to a “separate sphere” of the person 2. Depth Dimension: a person might exhibit a trait on the outside, but the perceivers might conclude that it did not reflect the true, inner person 3. “Means-End Thinking”: inconsistent behavior was seen as a means by which some other goal was achieved 4. Interpolation: added some new information that could link the inconsistent info to the rest of the structure (ex: stereotype of Jews that they are intelligent and ambitious, if see Jew who is intelligent but not ambitious, would say oh used to be ambitious but then something happened etc) Minority Influence: Being Consistently Inconsistent  Validation process that leads to influence: what happens when minority sticks to belief over time and in face of pressure, this should undermine perceivers’ confidence in their attitudes and cognitions, making them more susceptible to thinking elaborately about the minority group and reexamining the issues  Highly diagnostic: means that the behavior clearly implies an interpretation incongruent with an existing stereotype/heuristic prescribing the behavior of the minority  Strategy at heart of minority is triggering a switch in the mind of the majority perceiver from heuristic to systematic processing (Moskowitz and Chaiken, 2001)  Systematic processing: actively evaluating arguments and issues raised in the monologue Ignoring Base Rates  Locksley and colleagues suggest that when good, stereotype-disconfirming evidence is provided, the bias for stereotypes disappears  Two Potential Reasons for this   1. Base Rate Fallacy: when people throw out actual known prior probabilities of things in favor of recently encountered examples and information  2. “hitting people over the head”  if people are continually shown salient information about people disconfirming an obvious stereotype, they will ignore the stereotype (Except for in Locksley and colleagues 1982 experiment on assertiveness where found did not even need really salient disconfirming stereotype evidence for people to ignore the stereotype, suggests more research need be done) A Dissociation Model of Stereotype Activation and Stereotype Use  Dissociation Model: awareness of bias is triggered by perceivers’ detecting a discrepancy between their nonprejudiced belief/value system and the possibility that a stereotype is leading them to think and act in a biased way. Therefore they engage in a correction process to try to right the stereotype bias they may be feeling. Stereotype-Relevant Discrepancies Produce Compunction  Self-Discrepancy Theory: states that detecting a discrepancy within the self leads to specific types of emotional reactions. Higgins proposes experience different selves: 1. Ought self: self you ought to be or believe you should be 2. Actual Self: who you are and what you actually do in reality  Discrepancy between who you actually are and who you feel you should be will lead to feelings of guilt  Devine and Colleagues: measured guilt of low and high prejudice people in prejudiced situations, low prejudice people felt more guilt for having prejudicial thoughts Compunction Motivates Conscious Control  Self-Regulation Model of Prejudice: noting that one has acted in a manner discrepant with one’s egalitarian ideal triggers an affective response, which then initiates control attempts aimed at reducing the discrepancy and alleviating the negative affect/guilt 2  Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS): system believed to be triggered when pick up on cues that serve as a warning that a discrepant response may follow, which allows for control over the unwanted response Outcome Dependency and Accountability Promote Dissociation via Accuracy Goals  Neuberg and Fiske  found that when people were motivated to be accurate (due to outcome dependency), they were less likely to form impressions of a schizophrenic person that reflected the stereotype of such persons and were more likely to spend time evaluating information describing the individual qualities of the specific schizophrenic person  Neuberg  found stereotype-confirming processes in job interviews were attenuated when the interviewers had accuracy goals Thought-Suppression: The Ironic Increased and Hyperaccessibility of Stereotypes  Thought Suppression: trying to suppress or not thinking about a specific thought  Thought suppression leads to a greater incidence of that thought in consciousness than if the thought had not been suppressed  Attempts at mental control do not always meet with success, and may have the ironic or paradoxical effect of producing an even greater incidence of unwanted thoughts  Ironic Processes of Mental Control (Wegner): any attempts to suppress a thought (or engage in
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 473

Log In


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.