Stereotypes III: Controlling Stereotypes Flashcards
PREVENTING IMPLICIT STEREOTYPE ACTIVATION
- 2 factors play prominent implicit activation regulation role:
MACRAE ET AL (1997)
1. perceiver’s temporary processing goals
MOSKOWITZ ET AL (1999)
2. general attitudes (ie. prejudice level)
MACRAE ET AL (1997)
- relationship between activation/perceiver interest
- 3 (processing set = feature detection/semantic judgement/exposure) x 2 (trait type = stereotypic/counter-stereotypic) mixed design w/repeated second factor measures
- faces of females/household object
- feature detection (white dot)/exposure (hit key)/semantic (animate object)
- lexical decision task (LDT) = woman construct activation
MACRAE ET AL (1997): RESULTS
- implicit stereotype activation is NOT always spontaneous by-product of triggering stimulus
- activation = ONLY when pps processed target via semantic manner
- stereotype activation MAY be governed via pragmatic concerns aka. processing goals
MOSKOWITZ ET AL (1999)
- chronic VS non-chronic egalitarians
- Jack VS Joe = both low prejudice BUT…
- react dif when realising inadvertently prejudiced action (ie. laughed at sexist joke)
- Jack = chronic egalitarian (self-disappointment/rectifying mistake need)
- Joe = non-chronic egalitarian (doesn’t mind much/doesn’t want remedial action)
MOSKOWITZ ET AL (1999): METHOD/RESULTS
- men/women photos + attribute (consistent (ie. sensitive)/irrelevant (ie. flexible))
- pps to say “ASAP”
- activation = faster consistent prime responses post stereotype relevant primes (woman)
- ONLY non-chronic egalitations = activation
- striving for egalitarianism -> ^ implicit stereotype activation prevention
FISKE & NEUBERG (1990)
CONTINUUM MODEL STAGES
- initial categorisation = initial glance (ie. looks like elderly woman)
- confirmatory categorisation = will it suffice? (ie. grey hair/wrinkles/untypical dress)
! MORE EFFORT REQUIRED FROM HERE !
- recategorisation = refining subtypes (ie. funky old lady)
- piecemeal integration = (ie. “they don’t fit purely category-based/recategorised impression”)
FACTORS INCREASING ATTENTION
PENDRY & MACRAE (1994)
- outcome dependency
PENDRY (1998)
- perceiver accountability
KRUGLANSKI & FREUND (1983)
- accuracy-set instructions
PENDRY & MACRAE (1994): STUDY 1
- outcome dependency focus
- individuated (less stereotypic) impressions = ^ likely when pps = motivated for attention (outcome dependent)
- motivational goals -> pps pay more attention (?)
- can attention be measured/linked to motivated pps?
PENDRY & MACRAE (1994): STUDY 2
- looked more closely at attention role
- Probe Reaction Task (PRT) to measure residual attentional capacity
- pps outcome dependent/independent/control
- prediction = ^ involving goals -> slower PRT reaction
MACRAE ET AL (1994): STUDY 1
- Wegner’s Ironic Processes of Mental Control Model suggests suppression can backfire
- skinhead case
- 2 (task instruction = stereotype suppression/control) x 2 (construction = passage 1/2) mixed design w/2nd factor repeated measures
MACRAE ET AL (1994): STUDY 1 PREDICTIONS
- pps instructed to suppress stereotypes in 1st phase = ^ stereotyping levels aka. rebound in 2nd phase (against non-suppressing pps)
MACRAE ET AL (1994): STUDY 1 RESULTS
- 3rd party ratings of passage stereotypically showed suppressing pps = ^ stereotypic in 2nd passage > controls (7.83 > 7.08)
- BUT… what about IRL beh? demand charas?
MACRAE ET AL (1994): STUDY 2
- similar design BUT w/o passage 2; focus on seating position
- predicted = suppress pps -> rebound effect evidence via sitting further from stereo target
- rationale = if still preoccupied w/unwanted stereo thoughts -> ^ social distance maintenance
- stereo suppressors occupied further seat > control (5.25 > 4.41; p < .04)
MACRAE ET AL (1994): STUDY 2 CRITIQUE
- suppression task still prone to demand charas as TOLD to suppress
- skinhead target VS other groups (ie. ones we may care more for)
MACRAE ET AL (1998)
- suppression factors = self-focus/self-regulation/viewing the self (ie. video/mirror/hearing own name)
- mirror/video/name presence = ^ stereo suppression
- factors ^ belief salience of stereotype = undesirable
- can work in reverse
OVERALL: self-regulation = enhance regulatory procedure efficacy
