Communication and Language Biases

Question 1

In-group favouritism

Answer 1

• Individuals tend to favour their own group over the out-group
• In-group favouritism is based on the “us vs. them” distinction and is guided by the positive distinctiveness process (see Tajfel)
• Motivated by the need of having a positive self-concept meaning that the ingroup is also perceived as positive and favoured compared to an outgroup.

Question 2

Communication accommodation theory

Answer 2

• Giles et al., 1979
• “When people interact they adjust their speech, their vocal patterns and their gestures, to accommodate to others.” (Turner & West, 2010)
• 3 key elements to consider in communication: identity, language and context
• 3 ways to adapt in intergroup communication:
  
  • Convergence - Assimilation/adaptation to the interlocutor (e.g., accent, behaviour, communication style, slang, etc.)
  • Over-accommodation - extreme form of convergence that is negatively perceived
  • Divergence: highlighting linguistic differences e.g. hate speech

Question 3

Prejudiced language

Answer 3

• Ruscher, 2017
• Hate speech → increase of online hate speech where people can remain anonymous
• Metaphors e.g. Nazis describing Jews as rats
• Disparging humour: More acceptable form of language to emphasis difference between in-group/out-group

Question 4

Linguistic bias

Answer 4

“A linguistic bias is defined as a systematic asymmetry in word choice that reflects the social-category cognitions that are applied to the described group or individual(s). Types of biases are distinguished in the literature that reveal, and thereby maintain, social-category cognitions and stereotypes.” (Beukeboom & Burgers, 2017)

Question 5

Types of linguistic biases

Answer 5

• Bias that affects social cognition → perception of groups
  
  • Labelling
• Type of information we communicate
  
  • Stereotype consistency bias
  • Stereotypic explanatory bias
• How we formulate information
  
  • Linguistic category bias
  • Linguistic inter-group bias
  • Negation bias
  • Irony bias
  • Gender language bias

Question 6

Labelling

Answer 6

• Foroni and Rothbart, 2011: Experimental example
  
  • Participants asked to evaluate similarity of different female silhouettes in 3 conditions: no labelling, weak labelling and strong labelling
  • Findings: Labelling increases similarities between targets of the same group, especially when the labels were “strong”

Question 7

Strereotype consistency bias

Answer 7

• Kashima et al., 2007
• In communication individuals are more likely to communicate stereotype consistent information
• Stereotypes represent shared knowledge (Lyon and Kashima, 2001)
• Helps people to connect (Clark and Kashima, 2007)
• Makes conversations smooth and comfortable (Clark et al., 1983)

Question 8

Serial reproduction chain

Answer 8

• Kashima, 2000: experimental example of stereotype consistency bias
• Chinese whispers experiment with 2 different stories: one consistent with gender stereotypes and one inconsistent
• Findings: first participant remembers less of the story in the stereotype consistent scenario - could be because it’s more unusual therefore more salient in their memory. But over time, stereotype consistent information was better communicated and recalled than stereotype inconsistent information.

Question 9

Stereotypic explanatory bias (SEB)

Answer 9

• Hastie, 1984
• People tend to produce more explanation for stereotype inconsistent behaviours to make sense of that unexpected behaviours and to maintain shared knowledge (stereotypes) e.g. if Marc got a low score on the intelligence test, and then received an A+ on the exam, I will explain that it was because it was an easy exam to maintain the stereotype that Marc is dumb
• Sekaquaptewa et al., 2003: study of the consequences of SEB in interactions. Showed that people ask more stereotypical questions in interviews when a Black female candidate is presented → our questions are affected by our expectations and our stereotypes

Question 10

Gelman and Heyman (1999)

Answer 10

Names confer more essentiality and stability than do verbs e.g. Jane is a carrot eater vs Jane eats carrots whenever she can

Question 11

Carnaghi et al. (2008)

Answer 11

Names confer more essentiality and stereotypes than do adjectives e.g. Mark is a Jew vs Mark is Jewish

Question 12

Linguistic category model

Answer 12

• Semin and Fielder, 1992
• Interpersonal terms (verbs and adjectives) vary a on continuum of concrete to abstract forms
• Actions are more punctual and delimited, psychological states are longer lasting whereas attributes are seen as permanent.
• Basis for linguistic intergroup bias

Question 13

Linguistic intergroup bias

Answer 13

• Maass et al., 1989
• Study of linguistic categories in the context of in-group/out-group:
  
  • In a negative situation: I will use concrete language to describe my ingroup to convey a single episode vs abstract language to convey a negative permanent characteristic of my out-group in order to maintain a positive image of my group and a negative image of the out-group e.g. ingroup: A is beating B, outgroup: A is violent
  • In a positive situation: I will do the opposite e.g. out-group: A is helping B, in-group: A is altruistic
• Experimental example: Maas et al., 1995 - study of northern vs southern Italians
• Aim is to promote in-group favouritism (Mass, 1999) but it also has to do with expectations (Rubini and Semin, 1994). When I expect a certain behaviour, I’m more likely to use abstract language and when I don’t expect a behaviour, I’m more likely to use concrete language.
• Consequence: Linguistic Intergroup Bias is associated to perception of target groups as threatening and to other forms of bias (stereotyping, attitudes, etc.; Von Hippel et al., 1997)

Question 14

Negation bias

Answer 14

• Beukeboom et al, 2010
• Use of negative markers to reinforce stereotypes e.g. Mark solved a math problem. If Mark is a professor, I will say ‘Mark is smart’ because his behaviour is consistent with my stereotype. But if Mark is a football player, I will say ‘Mark is not stupid’ because his behaviour is inconsistent with my stereotype that footballers are stupid.
• Consequence: this has an impact on likeability of the target (Beukeboom et al., 2010)

Question 15

Irony bias

Answer 15

• Burgers and Beukeboom, 2016
• Irony is more appropriate, and use more often, to communicate stereotype inconsistent than stereotype consistent information
• Experimental example: grandmas stereotypically seen as good bakers. In the case where she baked the perfect cake, participants thought it was more appropriate to use literal description to explain the situation, but in the case where she burnt the cake, irony was seen as being more appropriate to describe the situation.

Question 16

Gender language bias

Answer 16

• To refer to a group of males and females, we usually use the masculine generic form. But this actually leads to a male bias.
• Hodel et al., 2017 cross-cultural study showed that in more egalitarian countries like Switzerland and Austria, job advertisements made use of more gender fair language than less egalitarian countries such as Czech Republic and Poland. This is important because it shows that women are more likely to want to apply to a job if it uses more gender fair language as the male generic makes them feel less represented.
• Little girls are less likely to think they can be firewomen if they are not presented with the male and female version of the word, as they don’t think they can do it → language use affects the belief of women in their suitability to the job (Horvath and Szesny, 2015)
• Gender fair language: neutralisation (policeman → police officer), feminisation (German: elektriker → elektrikerin), double form (Italian: studenti & studentesse)
• However, women with feminine job titles are judged less favourable than when they had a masculine job title (Formanowicz et al., 2013)