10/15 Stereotype Development- ADD READINGS Flashcards
How do stereotypes develop?
6 ways
- Cultural Transmission
- Illusory Correlation - attribute pairings in minority groups
- Observation of group exemplars and generalization to the group - TASK FACILITATION PARADIGM
- Justification for role assignment - Hoffman’s thing with O’s and A’s
- Justification for prejudice (affect) - Crandall et al. 2011 - justify prejudice not role assignment
- Person-to-Person transmission via linear diffusion chains
Stereotypes and memory
what comes to mind as characteristic of groups depends on what we access from memory
```
~~~
Definition of Stereotype
Set of characteristics that we contribute to a group
Group-characteristic associations
Illustory Correlation
Hamilton & Gifford 1976
What 2 BIG Things?
- Distinctive Group: attribute pairings more salient, strong influence on forming group impressions
- Distinctive by virtue of infrequency: minority group is by definition infrequent, negative behaviors are infrequent
When you see information that involves distinct events, what does that mean?
Their cooccurance is more memorable
Categorical representations by virtue of those pairings
Why do we notice negative behaviors in minority group more often?
Both are infrequent and distinct, so they stand out and we pair them more easily.
Fewer minorities, fewer negative behavior, distinct and notiecable.
If we were to pair the minority group with a few positive attributes, then they’d be viewed as more positive.
Sherman 1966: showed that info about nvoel group members is stored as what?
Exemplers: features make prototype from exemplers we know. Shows info about novel groups. Those go into our memory. Then we get stereotype.
As more info acquired, abstract group stereotype develops
Sherman 1996 Exempler experiments
What is paradigm name?
TASK FACILITATION PARADIGM
You have 2 tasks, A and B, and the info you need for B is in A all along, so task B is easier, you just saw that info.
The critical task is recall task.
Info about people at club. Recall behavior of someone in group. When was someone kind?
Preceeded by:
1. Does kind describe the group? OR
2. Define “kind”
Learning phase: 2 kind, 2 intelligent, 2 irrelevant, 4 demographic
IV: 1 or 4 blocks of info. 1 block = 10 exemplers.
Critical: latency during recall task.
4 blocks: it’s about the same, no matter the question BUT
1 block: takes more time. define takes the longest, and differnce between describes, which is faster. recall info and you do it so much more quickly.
Why is effect wiped out in 4 blocks? Already have association because you saw it so often.
Hoffman and Hurst 1990
Gender stereotype research: why and how do gender stereotypes acquire specific contexts? What is the theory?
Generally Assume: real differences that are exaggerated
BUT! Eagly 1987 argued Role assignment is why. Roles give personality traits.
Hoffman and Hurst ask how division of labor = stereotypes.
The theory is that kind gentle = female because they are homemakers and homemakers have those traits
we observe then overgeneralize
How do stereotypes develop via observations?
What questions are unanswered?
Observations of individuals that get generalized to abstract group level. But generalized observation isn’t everything.
Perception. Can we notice covariation? If group differnce is remarkably small, it can still become steretype
Why do we generalize broadly? All lawyers are bad.
Why are some correlated attirbutes emphasized and others not? College students. Healthy wasn’t listed, but it applies.BUT! not part of stereotype.
What was Hoffman and Hurst’s counter to the “observe than overgeneralize” theory?
- Can we detect gender differnces? Some, large (height) (d =2.6, cohen’s d, bigger), influencability is much smaller (d = .3).
- Sex difference and stereotype content. Ex: verbal fluency and restlessly, which have reasonably large effect sizes (.7). Yet, not part of the gender stereotype.
- Why do we generalize beyond occupations? Newborns pink/blue. Yet don’t invariably generalize.
So if we don’t invariably generalize, what do Hoffman and Hurst say we do instead? RATIONALIZE need to justify division of labor which gives rise to stereotypes.
Theory: direct response to role assignment even in absence of objective sex differences
Explain Hoffman and Hurst 1990’s second experiment
What did they change about the orinthians and Ackmians?
They are now distinct biological species. Instead of gender stereotypes, now new category: business and research/academia.
Now name, category, 3 traits (extrovert, introverted, neutral)
12 O’s free enterprise, 3 research
3 A’s free enterprise, 12 research
**Results: **
Extraverted - introversion.
Role Unspecified Results:
If O mostly free enterprise, more extroverted than A in research category.
O more extraverted in general
Role specified results:
O free enterprise, more extroverted than A who ALSO work free enterprise
Conclusion: Stereotypes seem to be ways we rationalize world around us. justifications for role assignment.
Covariations between category and role with no accompanying correlations with personality.
Stereotypes can be created in lab.
Explain Hoffman and Hurts 1990 Orinthians and Ackminas Experiment
2 fictional aliens
1/2 told separate species
1/2 told distinct subcultures
Both in groups, some child raiser, some city workers, no sexes, anyone can mate with anyone.
Read descriptions of A’s and O’s.
O in city is resourceful, individualistic, and soft-spoken.
A raises children: outspoken, compassionate, reliable.
CRITICAL: what covariations do or do not exist in stimulus set.
No correlation between personality and eith role, BUT only convariation: 12 O city 3 child raisers + 3 A’s city 12 A’s child rasiers
The correlation is between species and subculture and role. Stimulus sets are constructed.
Each given 3 traits: communal, agenic, and neutral.
P’s asked to indicate % each category were city workers and child raisers. 1/2 asked to explain role distribution.
All complete stereotyping mesaures.
- Role unspeicified: “O in general” “A in general”
- Role specified: “O child raisers” “O cityworkers” and same for A.
There should be no explanation besides O and A and prevalency rates.
The O and A status should make no difference because roles are the same.
Results:
When asked to rate one species’ roles IN GENERAL
High scores = agenic (agentic = communal)
Childraisers always more communal, but a lot if told biological species and asked to give explanation. Explanation had the biggest effect, but told biologically different species had effect too.
Role specific measure results when O mostly city and A child raisers mostly:
O (mostly city workers) more agenic that A city workers
A child raisers more communal than O child raisers
Why? justify variation we see in roles.
Describe Crandall, Bahns, Warner, and Shcaller 2011
“Justification for Prejudice (affect)”
What is the name of task they used modeled after 2001 Fazio? What is the name of the paradigm?
NOTE: This one was unclear from his explanation in class
Create affective associations (separate from content) to novel countries.
Used Vigilance task. Surveillance paradigm
View non-rhythmic stream of visual stimuli. Words and images presented in varying locations on screen sometimes singly and sometimes in pairs.
Pairings: Conditioned and Unconditioned stimuli. Novel pokemon and + or -
Task: Detect occurrence of target
CS-US pairings presented within visual stream
Conditioned: pokemon
US: + and - words, none repeated, 20 pairs, one CS + and one CS -
5 blocks each time with different pokemon
Results:
CS-pos rated as more positive than CS-neg
Now: Use two fake countries (Eritrea and Mauritania)
DV: Evaluate them by feeling, general impression of each group.
If negative affect, more competent than warm, but overall positive group was higher on both warmeth and competence.
“Feelings” were justifiied by ascribing trists to different groups to justify the stereotypes.
What is person-to-person transmission of stereotypes?
Linear diffusion chains.
Person A tells B tells C
Leads to categories and stereotypes
This is the cultural cogntive mechanism. Maybe this goes at the beginning? Idk. He’s confusing.
