Stereotype Control and Change Flashcards
What are stereotypes for the target and perceiver?
Using them is costly for the target but avoiding them is costly for the perceiver - effort and efficiency
When might people be willing to avoid stereotypes?
When accuracy matters - when accuracy matters, it is a high motivation to work hard
What are cognitive misers?
Cognitive misers - always taking the easiest option
What are motivated tacticians?
A fully engaged thinker who has multiple cognitive strategies available and chooses among them based on goals, motives and needs
Sometimes the motivated tactician chooses widely, in the interests of accuracy and sometimes defensively, in the interests of speed
How can we overcome our stereotypes?
If we have lots of personal information about the person we have the cognitive ability/attentional capacity to do it
we have the motivation – we want to form new impression
What is the distinction between?
Cognitive misers - just using stereotypes because they are easy
Motivated tacticians - making an effort
How can we create motivated tacticians?
Fiske and Neuberg - we can create attribute-based (individual) processing through:
outcome dependency - success depends on working well with others
accuracy - important to be accurate
accountability - have to explain the outcome
these are externally induced motivations
What was Devine interested in?
Can we self-motivate ourselves to inhibit stereotypes
What did Devine believe?
There is a difference between: knowing what a stereotype is and enforcing it to be accurate. We all grow up in societies which hold stereotypes, can’t escape it. When it encounters groups there is automatic activation for every one but conscious inhibition for people who are motivated
Devine - study 1
Ps asked to list the cultural stereotype of Blacks
Completed Modern Racism Scale
Results:
no difference in stereotype knowledge for high and low prejudice Ps.
(i.e. they were all equally aware of the stereotype)
Divine - study 2
Subliminal priming of words
80% were stereotypical vs. 20% stereotypic of African Americans
Donald paragraph - engaging in aggressive/assertive behaviours
Results:
80% prime made more aggressive/hostile interpretations
Activation of Black stereotype = activation of concept of hostility
Equally true of high & low prejudice people - ideas about aggression more accessible in memory
NB: control conditions - flashed up random words to see if they what words they would give - no idea
Devine - study 3
Asked hi and lo prej people to list all their thoughts in response to the social group Black Americans
Results:
low prej P’s thoughts were significantly more positive, and included beliefs about equality
high Prej included more negative and pejorative terms
What were Devine’s conclusions?
Stereotypes are automatically activated by the stimulus person
BUT people who are low in prejudice can inhibit the negative parts of their stereotype
But need intention, attention and time!
Prejudice with compunction. We should recognise and feel guilty about the conflicts between lingering stereotypic thoughts and feelings and non-prejudiced values
Stereotypes as bad habits we should break
How did Devine believe we could get rid of stereotypes?
With intention, attention and time - recognise them, feel bad and realise we need to change them - bad habits which need to be broken
How do we have prejudice with compunction (guilt)?
This means we have guilt to stop us doing something
We can do this by:
being aware of our implicit biases
be concerned about them
learn to replace prejudice responses with non prejudice responses
How can you intervene with prejudices?
Encourage concern and guilt - internal motivations
Provide training in prejudice reduction techniques - thinking of other stereotype examples, encouraging intergroup contact
What was the just say no study? Kawakami et al
Did a training program to see if it was possible to break down stereotypes
participants in a lab: showed the pic of social group and stereotypical word, everytime you see a word associated with that person say no, if inconsistent word say yes - breaking down automatic associations
Judgement task - shown word and then black or white faces, does this apply to them - quick if stereotypes are active
Before training: classify white following white prime and black following black prime
After: slower to identify the stereotype, shows it has broken down
Still worked 1 week after
What are the costs of stereotype suppression?
Wegner - rebound effects
What are rebound effects?
When you suppress a thought
1. an intentional process drives the thought from consciousness
2. an automatic process monitors thoughts to check for the appearance of the unwanted thought
Monitoring has the effect of activating the thought (at a very low level)
Once the intentional process of suppression is stopped the thought rebounds strongly - even more stereotypical
What is the white bear study? Wegner et al
Session 1:
Students left in a room for 5 mins with tape recorder
Half told to think about white bears, half told to try NOT to
Asked to say everything that came into mind (into tape recorder) BUT also to ring a bell every time they thought about a white bear, even if they had not mentioned it aloud
Although suppressing students didn’t talk about bears, they rang the bell almost as many times - rang a little less than ones who had to think about them, shows that they had little suppression
Session 2:
Switch over so thinkers then suppressed and suppressers then thought.
If firstly suppressing then thinking, ringing it so much more, because they are allowed to do it so get this rebound effect
If thought about bears previously, couldn’t suppress well, rang bell
What is the skinhead study? Macrea, Bodenhausen et al
Write a passage about a skinhead
Half told to avoid using stereotypes, half given no instructions
Then write a passage about 2nd skinhead - no instructions regarding stereotypes
Study 2:
choose which seat near alleged - went in room, skin head jacket was on chair. DV - how far they would sit
skinhead
Results:
After first passage, suppression used them significantly less - suppressing it
After second study with no instructions, suppressed group used so many more than the control group that never suppressed
Study 2: the ones who suppressed the stereotype would sit further away - influencing behaviour
Is rebound inevitable?
Monteith - no
it depends on the type of group used - e.g., if it is a social group ppl don’t mind having stereotypes about, people will use their stereotypes
it also depends on personal attitudes - if you are happy to use them
When is rebound less likely according to Monteith?
When people are motivated to reject the stereotype (e.g. coz low in prejudice) - don’t want to use them, want to be fair
Social norms indicate that stereotypes aren’t acceptable - so people still suppress them
Monteith et al: experiment 2
Ps pretested high or low in prejudice toward gays
Write paragraph about a day in life of gay couple
Told to avoid using stereotypes vs. given no instructions
Supposedly unrelated memory test – lists of words including some associated with gay stereotype
Results:
Hi prej Ps in suppression condition remembered more stereotypic words than high prej in control condition = rebound because high these prejudices, helps memory
No evidence of rebound effects for low prej Ps, don’t suffer from rebound effects
Is the fact that rebound effects aren’t inevitable optimistic?
There is a difference between self-motivated vs instructed suppression - if instructed, the stereotypes come back
What can help reduce rebound effects?
Practise - if we regularly suppress a certain stereotype, it might diminish and might mean they don’t get activated in the first place
People who are motivated to do so can avoid stereotypes, without suffering rebound effects
How can you make stereotypes more accurate?
By changing the content of them - stereotype disconfirming, getting past these biases
What are the 3 models of stereotype change?
Weber and Crocker
Bookkeeping:
modification of stereotype in response to disconfirming information - gradually change stereotype when people give disconfirming info
Conversion:
radical change in response to dramatic disconfirmation - abandon and start again (least supported)
Subtyping:
create subgroups in response to disconfirming
information - creation of groups within groups
Which stereotype change model applies?
Weber and Crocker - it depends on whether the disconfirming examples are concentrated or dispersed
Concentrated (a few drastically disconfirming) = subtyping
Dispersed (loads disconfirming the stereotype in different ways) = book keeping
Are subtypes good?
Lots of subtypes = the overall stereotype will eventually disintegrate? (Pettigrew)
Or at least you perceive outgroup as more variable? (Brewer & Miller) - helpful
More thoughtful processing of inconsistent info? (Fiske & Neuberg) - makes you think more
Are subtypes bad?
Almost any disconfirming behaviour can be explained away – subtyping allows more exceptions (Taylor) - don't integrate it into stereotype, just use the subtypes Insulation or even strengthening of stereotype? - allows exceptions without change Limits generalisation (Hewstone) - won't be generalised as everyone has different ones
