Exaggerating Accessible Differences: When Gender Stereotypes Overestimate Actual Group Differences

Norms for gender stereotypically congruent, stereotypically incongruent, semantically correct, and semantically incorrect sentences in Polish and English

The present contribution provides ratings for a database of gender stereotypically congruent, stereotypically incongruent, semantically correct, and semantically incorrect sentences in Polish and English. A total of 942 volunteers rated 480 sentences (120 per condition) in each language in terms of their meaningfulness, probability of use, and stereotypicality. The stimuli were highly controlled for their length and critical words, which were shared across the conditions. The results of the ratings revealed that stereotypically incongruent sentences were consciously evaluated as both less meaningful and probable to use relative to sentences that adhere to stereotype-driven expectations regarding males and females, indicating that stereotype violations communicated through language exert influence on language perception. Furthermore, the results yielded a stronger internalization of gender stereotypes among sex-typed individuals, thus pointing to the crucial role of gender schema in the sensitivity to gender stereotypical attributes. The ratings reported in the present article aim to broaden researchers' stimulus choices and allow for consistency across different laboratories and research projects on gender stereotype processing. The adaptation of this database to other languages or cultures could also enable a cross-cultural comparison of empirical findings on stereotype processing.

Exaggerating differences back and forth: Two levels of intergroup accentuation

Social perceivers tend to exaggerate existing differences between groups, a phenomenon known as intergroup accentuation. In two preregistered experiments, we tested the hypothesis that accentuation originates in the initial learning of information about a novel group. In both experiments, perceivers exaggerated differences between two fictitious social groups that differed probabilistically in two dimensional traits. As hypothesized, accentuation was stronger for the group encountered second, confirming that accentuation originates partly in processes operating during the acquisition of group information. However, accentuation was also robust for the group encountered first, suggesting that it also occurs 'backward' even when group learning was unbiased. We discuss implications for stereotype formation generally and the perception of social minorities and out-groups specifically. As these groups are often encountered second in social reality, stereotypes of them might be particularly polarized.

Misplaced Divides? Discussing Political Disagreement With Strangers Can Be Unexpectedly Positive

Differences of opinion between people are common in everyday life, but discussing those differences openly in conversation may be unnecessarily rare. We report three experiments (N = 1,264 U.S.-based adults) demonstrating that people's interest in discussing important but potentially divisive topics is guided by their expectations about how positively the conversation will unfold, leaving them more interested in having a conversation with someone who agrees versus disagrees with them. People's expectations about their conversations, however, were systematically miscalibrated such that people underestimated how positive these conversations would be-especially in cases of disagreement. Miscalibrated expectations stemmed from underestimating the degree of common ground that would emerge in conversation and from failing to appreciate the power of social forces in conversation that create social connection. Misunderstanding the outcomes of conversation could lead people to avoid discussing disagreements more often, creating a misplaced barrier to learning, social connection, free inquiry, and free expression.

"When" Versus "Whether" Gender/Sex Differences: Insights From Psychological Research on Negotiation, Risk-Taking, and Leadership

We present a conceptual framework of situational moderators of gender/sex effects in negotiation, risk-taking, and leadership-three masculine-stereotypic domains associated with gender/sex gaps in pay and authority. We propose that greater situational ambiguity and higher relevance and salience of gender/sex increase the likelihood of gender/sex-linked behaviors in these domains. We argue that greater ambiguity increases the extent to which actors and audiences must search inwardly (e.g., mental schema, past experience) or outwardly (e.g., social norms) for cues on how to behave or evaluate a situation and thereby widens the door for gender/sex-linked influences. Correspondingly, we propose that gender/sex effects on behavior and evaluations in these domains will be more likely when gender/sex is more relevant and salient to the setting or task. We propose further that these two situational moderators may work jointly or interactively to influence the likelihood of gender/sex effects in negotiation, risk-taking, and leadership. We conclude by discussing applications of our conceptual framework to psychological science and its translation to practice, including directions for future research.

Does dispositional preference for solitude predict better psychological outcomes during times of social distancing? Beliefs and reality

OBJECTIVE

People value solitude for themselves. Yet little is known about how people perceive dispositional preference for solitude in others. Does dispositional preference for solitude represent a protective factor from psychological distress during times of social distancing? And do laypeople have accurate beliefs about the role of preference for solitude?

METHOD

To answer these questions, we conducted four studies (three preregistered, Ntotal  = 1418) at the early and a later stage of the COVID-19 pandemic using experimental, longitudinal, and experience sampling designs.

RESULTS

People expected targets with a higher solitude preference to be more resilient (e.g., less lonely, more satisfied with life) during social distancing, and consequently prioritize them less when allocating supportive resources for maintaining social connections (Studies 1 and 2). Compared to these beliefs, the actual difference between individuals with higher versus lower solitude preference was smaller (Study 2) or even negligible (Study 3). Did people form more calibrated beliefs two years into the pandemic? Study 4 suggested no.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, these studies show that people overestimate the role of preference for solitude in predicting others' psychological experience. As a result, solitude-seeking individuals may miss out on supportive resources, leading to higher risks for mental health issues.

Girlboss? Highlighting versus downplaying gender through language

Emerging research points to the power of language to shape how we think of gender in the professional domain. However, there is tension between two opposing strategies for communicating gender: gender marking and gender neutrality. Each strategy has the potential to combat gender bias, but also to reinforce it.