Contrast effects in stereotype formation and change: the role of comparative context

Motivation and prediction-driven processing of social memoranda

Social semantic memory guides many aspects of behavior. Individuals rely on acquired and inferred knowledge about personal characteristics and group membership to predict the behavior and character of social targets. These predictions then determine the expectations from, the behavior in, and the interpretations of social interactions. According to predictive processing accounts, mnemonic and attentional mechanisms should enhance the processing of prediction-violating events. However, empirical findings suggest that prediction-consistent social events are often better remembered. This mini-review integrates recent evidence from social and non-social memory research to highlight the role of motivation in explaining these discrepancies. A particular emphasis is given to the continuous nature of prediction-(in)consistency, the epistemic tendency of perceivers to maintain or update their knowledge, and the dynamic influences of motivation on multiple steps in prediction-driven social memory. The suggested framework provides a coherent outlook of existing work and offers promising future directions to better understand the ebb and flow of social memoranda.

Bad Is Stronger Than Good for Stigmatized, but Not Admired Outgroups: Meta-Analytical Tests of Intergroup Valence Asymmetry in Individual-to-Group Generalization Experiments

Theories of risk aversion, epistemic defense, and ingroup enhancement converge in predicting greater impact of negative (vs. positive) experiences with outgroup members on generalized evaluations of stigmatized outgroups. However, they diverge in predictions for admired outgroups. Past tests have focused on negative outgroups using correlational designs without a control group. Consequently, they have not distinguished between alternative explanations or ascertained the direction of causality/generalization, and they have suffered from self-selection biases. These limitations were redressed by a meta-analysis of experimental research on individual-to-group generalization with positive and negative outgroups (59 tests; 3,012 participants). Controlling for modest confounds, the meta-analysis found a generalization advantage of negative experiences for stigmatized outgroups and a generalization advantage of positive experiences for admired outgroups. These results highlight the centrality of valenced expectations about outgroups, consistent with epistemic defense and ingroup enhancement and inconsistent with risk aversion. Implications for positive changes in intergroup dynamics are discussed.

Social Categorization and Fear Reactions to the September 11th Terrorist Attacks

Two experiments were run in The Netherlands and Belgium 1 week after the terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001. The aim was to investigate whether social categorization affected emotional reactions, behavioral tendencies, and actual behaviors. Results showed that focusing participants’ attention on an identity that included American victims into a common ingroup led them to report more fear and stronger fear-related behavioral tendencies and to engage more often in fear-related behaviors than when victims were categorized as outgroup members. Results are discussed with respect to appraisal theories of emotion and E. R. Smith’s model of group-based emotions.

And Yet They Move: The Impact of Direction of Deviance on Stereotype Change

In 4 studies the authors compared the effect of exemplars that deviate from the prototype in one or the other direction while controlling for the absolute amount of deviance. Incongruent exemplars typically do not change a stereotype. Yet, it is unclear whether this is also the case with exemplars that are more extreme than the stereotype, named supercongruent hereafter. Within Study 1 the authors showed that supercongruent exemplars can be differentiated from congruent exemplars and that they are perceived as more typical than incongruent exemplars. Study 2 demonstrated that supercongruent exemplars increase the perceived differences between groups, while incongruent exemplars do not lead to a decrease. In Study 3, a supercongruent exemplar was generalized to the stereotype, while an incongruent exemplar did not affect the stereotype. Study 4 replicated this finding and excluded the alternative hypothesis that this effect is due to the greater extremity and thus diagnosticity of supercongruent information.

Attribution and Categorization Effects in the Representation of Gender Stereotypes

Social stereotypes involve judgments of how typical certain personality traits are of a group. According to the attribution hypothesis, judgments of trait typicality depend on the perceived prevalence of the trait in the target group. According to the categorization hypothesis, such judgments depend on the degree to which a trait is thought to be more or less prevalent in the target group than in a relevant comparison group. A study conducted with women and men as target groups showed that the attribution hypothesis fit the data best when typicality ratings were made in an absolute format. When, however, typicality ratings were made in a comparative format (how typical is the trait of women as compared with men?), both hypotheses received support. Analytical derivation, supported by empirical evidence, showed an inverse relationship between the size of perceived group differences and their weight given in stereotyping. Implications for stereotype measurement and the rationality of social perception are discussed.

Social categorization and fear reactions to the September 11th terrorist attacks

Two experiments were run in The Netherlands and Belgium 1 week after the terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001. The aim was to investigate whether social categorization affected emotional reactions, behavioral tendencies, and actual behaviors. Results showed that focusing participants' attention on an identity that included American victims into a common ingroup led them to report more fear and stronger fear-related behavioral tendencies and to engage more often in fear-related behaviors than when victims were categorized as outgroup members. Results are discussed with respect to appraisal theories of emotion and E. R. Smith's model of group-based emotions.