Stereotypes Hilton & von Hippel Annual Review of Psychology 1996

Key Question: Is Prejudice … Inevitable by-product of miserly cognitive style vs. Product of deep-seated personality & motivational factors

Answer: Affect and motivation often increases reliance on cognitive stereotyping processes Also may inhibit or decrease stereotyping processes

Heuristics Humans can ’ t process all info available, in thoroughly scientific, unbiased manner Brain/Mind has evolved info-processing rules, algorithms, short-cuts Select a little info & evaluate it quickly  “ cognitive miser ”

Definitions “ Beliefs about the characteristics, attributes, and behaviors or members of certain groups. ”  Sometimes accurate representations of reality  Sometimes formed independent of real differences

Focus of Review Stereotypes arising from “ miserly ” cognitive style But: maintained when no evidence of corresponding group characteristics

Organization of Review How are stereotypes represented in mind/brain How formed? How maintained? How applied? How changed?

Representation of Stereotpyes Prototype: group ’ s typical features Exemplar: prototype is specific individual Associative network: linked attributes Schemas: general, abstract beliefs Base rates: average expectable behavior

Queston: What of the exaggerated caricatures of we saw in Ethnic Notions? –Flawed information processing? or –Evidence of emotion & motivation?

Formation Self-fulfilling prophecies (C. Word) Non-conscious detection of covariation (a few stereotype-congruent examples  self- perpetuating) Illusory correlation (more processing devoted to negative info about minorities; same correlation not noted or not remembered among in-group members)

Formation (con ’ t) Out-group homogenaiety heuristic of info-processing: see out- group members as similar H. Tajfel ’ s “ minimal group ” experiments

Maintenance Info-processing heuristics: Priming Assimilation Attribution processes Memory processes

Maintenance Priming effects – Making category or trait salient, so people perceive & think in terms of it –Usually outside of conscious awareness

Maintenance Assimilation – Individual automatically perceived as resembling group stereotype

Maintenance Attributional processes  Fundamental attribution error (overestimate others ’ personal dispositions)  Ultimate attribution error (dispositional attributions for positive in- group and negative out-group actions)

Maintenance Memory Processes: Better memory for stereotype- incongruent information  works against stereotyping But: incongruent info  dissonance  diss.-reducing defense of stereotype Also: high demand  better memory for stereotype-congruent info.

Application Automaticity: stereotype activation becomes automatic at young age –Suppression takes effort –Threats to self-esteem activate Ambiguity: ambiguous situations  greater reliance on stereotypes (Gaertner & Dovidio)

Prejudice as “ application of stereotypes ” Aversive racism: egalitarian values but negative affect “ Modern ” / “ symbolic ” / “ subtle ” racism: negative affect rationalized by non- racist issues Ambivalent racism: egalitarian & Protestant ethic values  quick to praise & to condemn

Prejudice Style of information processing that uses stereotypes for repre- senting out-groups

Stereotype Change Bookkeeping model: incremental updates Conversion model: dramatic change Subtyping model: inconsistent info given new sub-category Exemplar model: change prototype

Inhibition of Stereotypes Suppression likely to prime stereotypic perception and processing Personal commitment to not stereotype makes suppression more successful

Conclusions Know more about development of stereotypes than how to reduce their use Don ’ t understand non-conscious aspects of stereotyping

Questions What is the causal role played by cognitive heuristics – by “ natural ” biases in information-processing? How do we integrate cognitive factors with emotional, motivational, and societal to explain prejudice? Do cognitive heuristics doom us to prejudice?