Oversampling of minority categories drives misperceptions of group compositions

Stereotypes as Bayesian prediction of social groups

A stereotype is a generalization about a class of people which is often used to make probabilistic predictions about individuals within that class. Can stereotypes can be understood as conditional probabilities that distinguish among groups in ways that follow Bayesian posterior prediction? For instance, the stereotype of Germans as industrious can be understood as the conditional probability of someone being industrious given that they are German. Whether such representations follow Bayes' rule was tested in a replication and extension of past work. Across three studies (N = 2,652), we found that people's judgments of different social categories were appropriately Bayesian, in that their direct posterior predictions were aligned with what Bayes' rule suggests they should be. Moreover, across social categories, traits with a high calculated diagnostic ratio generally distinguished stereotypic from non-stereotypic traits. The effects of cognitive ability, political orientation, and motivated stereotyping were also explored.

"They're Everywhere!": Symbolically Threatening Groups Seem More Pervasive Than Nonthreatening Groups

The meaning of places is socially constructed, often informed by the groups that seem pervasive there. For instance, the University of Pennsylvania is sometimes called "Jew-niversity of Pennsylvania," and the city of Decatur, Georgia, is disparagingly nicknamed "Dyke-atur," connoting the respective pervasiveness of Jewish students and gay residents. Because these pervasiveness perceptions meaningfully impact how people navigate the social world, it is critical to understand the factors that influence their formation. Across surveys, experiments, and archival data, six studies (N = 3,039 American adults) revealed the role of symbolic threat (i.e., perceived differences in values and worldviews). Specifically, holding constant important features of the group and context, we demonstrated that groups higher in symbolic threat are perceived as more populous in a place and more associated with that place than groups lower in symbolic threat. Ultimately, this work reveals that symbolic threat can both distort how people understand their surroundings and shape the meaning of places.

Minority salience and the overestimation of individuals from minority groups in perception and memory

Our cognitive system is tuned toward spotting the uncommon and unexpected. We propose that individuals coming from minority groups are, by definition, just that—uncommon and often unexpected. Consequently, they are psychologically salient in perception, memory, and visual awareness. This minority salience creates a tendency to overestimate the prevalence of minorities, leading to an erroneous picture of our social environments—an illusion of diversity. In 12 experiments with 942 participants, we found evidence that the presence of minority group members is indeed overestimated in memory and perception and that masked images of minority group members are prioritized for visual awareness. These findings were consistent when participants were members of both the majority group and the minority group. Moreover, this overestimated prevalence of minorities led to decreased support for diversity-promoting policies. We discuss the theoretical implications of the illusion of diversity and how it may inform more equitable and inclusive decision-making.