The use of stereotypes and individuating information in political person perception

Structure learning principles of stereotype change

Why, when, and how do stereotypes change? This paper develops a computational account based on the principles of structure learning: stereotypes are governed by probabilistic beliefs about the assignment of individuals to groups. Two aspects of this account are particularly important. First, groups are flexibly constructed based on the distribution of traits across individuals; groups are not fixed, nor are they assumed to map on to categories we have to provide to the model. This allows the model to explain the phenomena of group discovery and subtyping, whereby deviant individuals are segregated from a group, thus protecting the group's stereotype. Second, groups are hierarchically structured, such that groups can be nested. This allows the model to explain the phenomenon of subgrouping, whereby a collection of deviant individuals is organized into a refinement of the superordinate group. The structure learning account also sheds light on several factors that determine stereotype change, including perceived group variability, individual typicality, cognitive load, and sample size.

Some psychological determinants of broad union attitudes

Many societies are grappling with how to reduce high levels of economic inequality. Although often overlooked, labor unions can have significant flattening effects on inequality. However, unions are not highly supported by the general public. To provide some psychological explanation as to why this may be the case, we examined five potential predictors of general union attitudes (i.e., political orientation, prejudice toward union members, meritocratic beliefs, union knowledge and social mobility beliefs). We tested each variable at least twice across three studies (two in the U.S., one in Canada, total N = 1756). Results indicated that stronger political conservative orientation, prejudice feelings towards union members and less accurate knowledge of union activities uniquely explained lower pro-union attitudes across studies. Meritocratic and social mobility beliefs did not meaningfully explain union attitudes. Although mostly correlational, this research provides insight into potential reasons why everyday citizens may support or condemn unions in an increasingly unequal world. Implications for altering union attitudes and support for related policies are discussed.

In the Face of Opportunities: Facial Structures of Scientists Shape Expectations of STEM Environments

Impressions of role leaders provide information about anticipated opportunities in a role, and these perceptions can influence attitudes about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pathways. Specifically, the facial structures of role leaders influenced perceived affordances of working with that person, such as the availability of communal and agentic opportunities (e.g., mentorship; achievement). STEM faculty with trustworthy (relative to dominant) faces were seen as valuing communal goals (Studies 1-3), and in turn, perceived as affording both communal and agentic opportunities in their research groups (Studies 2-3b). These heightened goal opportunities aligned with perceptions that trustworthy-faced advisors would enact more group-supportive behaviors (Study 2). Consequently, students anticipated fairer treatment and reported greater interest in labs directed by trustworthy- than dominant-faced leaders (Studies 3a-4a), even when images were accompanied by explicit information about leaders' collaborative behavior (Study 4b). The faces of leaders can thus function as the "face" of that role and the surrounding culture.

Big Boys Don't Cry: Evaluations of Politicians Across Issue, Gender, and Emotion

Emotional appeals are powerful motivators of political action. Yet the gender of a politician and the existing stereotypes held by audiences complicate the determination of which type of emotional appeal is best suited for different issue areas. In what ways do politicians' emotional appeals serve to mitigate or exacerbate the impact of gender stereotypes across different policy domains? This research examines when politicians pay penalties or gain rewards for their emotional expressions using a survey experiment on a diverse national sample. We find evidence that women politicians are on equal footing or stand to benefit when expressing masculine emotions while also having greater emotional freedom across policy domains. Men politicians, on the other hand, are significantly punished for not acting "manly" enough in masculine policy domains. Nonetheless, these patterns become complicated by both situational context and partisan expectations. The results provide promise for the future prospects of women politicians while pointing to the continued relevance of gendered stereotypes about emotionality in today's political world.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11109-021-09727-5.

Is there evidence for statistical discrimination against ethnic minorities in hiring? Evidence from a cross-national field experiment

While statistical discrimination theory is often proposed as an important explanation for ethnic discrimination in hiring, research that empirically scrutinizes its underlying assumptions is scant. To test these assumptions, we combine data from a cross-national field experiment with secondary data indicative of the average labor productivity of ethnic communities. We find little evidence that adding diagnostic personal information reduces discrimination against ethnic minorities. Furthermore, we do not find an association between language similarity or the socioeconomic resources of the ethnic community and hiring discrimination. However, our findings show that discrimination is related to the socioeconomic development of the country of ancestry. Finally, the impact of these indicators of group productivity is generally not moderated by the amount of diagnostic personal information. Taken together, these findings question several core assumptions of statistical discrimination theory.

Bald and Bad?

According to (a) the beauty ideal of a full head of hair and (b) the physical attractiveness stereotype (PAS; "what is beautiful is good"), bald men should appear less attractive than nonbald men, not only physically but also socially. To explain inconsistent results on this prediction in previous research, we suggest two antagonistic processes: the automatic activation of the PAS at the implicit level and its suppression at the explicit level, the latter process selectively triggered by individuating information about the target person. In line with this account, we only found negative social attractiveness ratings for bald men by same-aged women when individuating target information was lacking (Experiment 1). In contrast, irrespective of whether individuating information was available or not, we reliably found evidence for the PAS in different implicit paradigms (the implicit association test in Experiment 2 and a source monitoring task in Experiment 3). We conclude that individuating information about bald men suppresses PAS application, but not PAS activation.

Seeing beyond political affiliations: The mediating role of perceived moral foundations on the partisan similarity-liking effect

Decades of research have demonstrated that we like people who are more similar to us. The present research tested a potential mechanism for this similarity-liking effect in the domain of politics: the stereotype that people's political orientation reflects their morals. People believe that Democrats are more likely to endorse individualizing morals like fairness and Republicans are more likely to endorse binding morals like obedience to authority. Prior to the 2016 election, American participants (N = 314) viewed an ostensible Facebook profile that shared an article endorsing conservative ideals (pro-Trump or pro-Republican), or liberal ideals (pro-Clinton or pro-Democrat). Participants rated the favorability of the profile-owner, and completed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire for the profile-owner and themselves. As predicted, participants liked the profile-owner more when they shared political beliefs, and used political stereotypes to infer the moral foundations of the profile-owner. Additionally, the perceived moral foundation endorsement of the profile owner differentially mediated the relationship between the ideology and evaluations of the profile owner based on the party affiliation of the participant: perceived individualizing foundations mediated the relationship for Democratic participants and perceived binding foundations mediated the relationship for Republican participants. In other words, people liked their in-group members more because they thought that the profile-owner endorsed a specific type of morals. In Study 2 (N = 486), we ruled out the potential explanation that any political stereotype can account for the similarity-liking effect, replicating the results of Study 1 even when controlling for perceptions of other personality differences. Taken together, these studies highlight that there may be something unique about the perceived type of morality of political in-group and out-group members that may be contributing to the similarity-liking effect in politics.

Implications of fear of negative evaluation, state anxiety, and implied level of target-dominance on perceptions of personality traits

Fear of negative evaluation (FNE), state anxiety (SA), and dominance have consequences for social functioning. The present study assessed how FNE, SA, and a target's dominance-relevant label are related to perceptions of personality. One hundred seventy-eight participants who scored high or low on FNE underwent a laboratory manipulation of SA, viewed a photograph of a target with a high or low dominance-relevant label, and rated the target on the Big Five personality traits and dominance. FNE and SA were unrelated to perceptions, but the high-dominance label was associated with perceptions of higher dominance, conscientiousness, and openness. In conclusion, judges did use information about others when making initial judgments of personality, but these judgments were not impacted by trait or state psychological distress.

Stereotype (In)Accuracy in Perceptions of Groups and Individuals

Are stereotypes accurate or inaccurate? We summarize evidence that stereotype accuracy is one of the largest and most replicable findings in social psychology. We address controversies in this literature, including the long-standing and continuing but unjustified emphasis on stereotype inaccuracy, how to define and assess stereotype accuracy, and whether stereotypic (vs. individuating) information can be used rationally in person perception. We conclude with suggestions for building theory and for future directions of stereotype (in)accuracy research.

Précis of Social Perception and Social Reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy

Social Perception and Social Reality (Jussim 2012) reviews the evidence in social psychology and related fields and reaches three conclusions: (1) Although errors, biases, and self-fulfilling prophecies in person perception are real, reliable, and occasionally quite powerful, on average, they tend to be weak, fragile, and fleeting. (2) Perceptions of individuals and groups tend to be at least moderately, and often highly accurate. (3) Conclusions based on the research on error, bias, and self-fulfilling prophecies routinely greatly overstate their power and pervasiveness, and consistently ignore evidence of accuracy, agreement, and rationality in social perception. The weight of the evidence – including some of the most classic research widely interpreted as testifying to the power of biased and self-fulfilling processes – is that interpersonal expectations relate to social reality primarily because they reflect rather than cause social reality. This is the case not only for teacher expectations, but also for social stereotypes, both as perceptions of groups, and as the bases of expectations regarding individuals. The time is long overdue to replace cherry-picked and unjustified stories emphasizing error, bias, the power of self-fulfilling prophecies, and the inaccuracy of stereotypes, with conclusions that more closely correspond to the full range of empirical findings, which includes multiple failed replications of classic expectancy studies, meta-analyses consistently demonstrating small or at best moderate expectancy effects, and high accuracy in social perception.