Factors that contribute to accurately perceiving anti-black racism and sexism overlap

Past research demonstrates that prejudice toward women and Black Americans often co-occur in individuals. The present studies examine factors related to accuracy in estimating the co-occurrence, or overlap, of prejudice toward women and Black Americans. Across two studies, criterion overlap percentages were computed using national datasets and separate participant samples estimated prejudice overlap. Results indicate that beliefs about the generalized nature of prejudice can improve accuracy by reducing faulty underestimation of the overlap in anti-Black racism and sexism. In addition to greater displayed accuracy in perceptions of prototypical perpetrators of prejudice (i.e., estimates of White men compared to White women), the present work suggests that accuracy is improved when estimating sexist attitudes from racist attitudes, rather than vice versa. Together, this work documents the accuracy of prejudice overlap perceptions, for the first time, and factors that facilitate accuracy (i.e., perpetrator prototypicality, known prejudicial attitude), with implications for intergroup dynamics research.

Asymmetries in Mutual Understanding: People With Low Status, Power, and Self-Esteem Understand Better Than They Are Understood

All too often, people who develop exceptionally astute insights into others remain mysterious to these others. Evidence for such asymmetric understanding comes from several independent domains. Striking asymmetries occur among those who differ in status and power, such that individuals with low status and power understand more than they are understood. We show that this effect extends to people who merely perceive that they have low status: individuals with low self-esteem. Whereas people with low self-esteem display insight into people with high self-esteem, people with high self-esteem fail to reciprocate. Conceptual analysis suggests that asymmetries in mutual understanding may be reduced by addressing deficits in information and motivation among perceivers. Nevertheless, several interventions have been unsuccessful, indicating that the path to symmetric understanding is a steep and thorny one. Further research is needed to develop strategies for fostering understanding of those who are most misunderstood: people with low self-esteem, low status, and low power.

A Reconceptualization of How We Study Issues of Racial Prejudice

This article shows that when confronted with a problem as complex as racial prejudice, researchers cannot afford to limit themselves to studying prejudice from the perspective of Whites. Many argue that in the research that does focus on Blacks and prejudice, Blacks are studied primarily in terms of their reactions to prejudice. This article challenges researchers to examine how Blacks' racial attitudes and behaviors influence intergroup dynamics between Whites and Blacks. Four areas of research in the prejudice and stereotyping literature that could be used to study Blacks' role in understanding racial prejudice are discussed. Moreover, the implications of studying Blacks in these 4 areas are explored.

Effects of Stereotypes and Outcome Dependency on the Processing of Information about Group Members

The present study investigated the effects of stereotype strength and outcome dependency on information processing. Participants' outcomes were either symmetrically independent, symmetrically interdependent, asymmetrically independent, or asymmetrically dependent with respect to a target (a sorority member). Participants whose outcomes depended on the target recalled more stereotype-inconsistent information about her, whereas participants whose outcomes were independent of the target attended to and recalled more stereotype-consistent information. Participants exhibited the least stereotype use when the target was dependent on them. Effects for recall were moderated by stereotype strength. Stronger stereotypes were also associated with more stereotypic target judgments and greater confidence in those judgments, regardless of the dependency relationship. Results are consistent with and extend previous research on outcome dependency and stereotypes.

Multicultural and Colorblind Ideology, Stereotypes, and Ethnocentrism among Black and White Americans

We examined Blacks' and Whites' perceptions of group variability and positivity as well as their beliefs about the extent to which multiculturalism and colorblindness would improve intergroup relations. In two studies, responses to questionnaires indicated that the tendency to endorse multiculturalism more than colorblindness was greater among Blacks than Whites; Blacks consistently endorsed multiculturalism more than colorblindness and Whites endorsed colorblindness more than did Blacks. Both studies also revealed evidence of out-group homogeneity and ethnocentrism. Stronger endorsement of multiculturalism relative to colorblindness predicted stronger stereotypes among Blacks, whereas stronger endorsement of colorblindness relative to multiculturalism predicted stronger stereotypes among Whites. In Study 2, stronger endorsement of multiculturalism relative to colorblindness predicted less ethnocentrism; this relationship did not depend on ethnicity.

Stereotype Accuracy: Estimating the Academic Performance of Ethnic Groups

The authors investigated the accuracy of stereotypes of the academic performance of ethnic groups. Ninety-four participants estimated the mean academic performance of Toronto highschool students from nine ethnic groups and completed measures of right-wing authoritarianism, intelligence, and attitudes toward the groups. The estimated academic performance means were compared with the true means as derived from data published by the Toronto Board of Education. These comparisons revealed that, on average, participants were fairly accurate in their perceptions of both the relative standings of groups and the magnitude of between-group variability. Underestimation of between-group variability was associated with lower authoritarianism, whereas overestimation of between-group variability was associated with lower intelligence. Attitudes toward a group were significantly correlated with estimates of the group’s mean academic performance, but only for the three groups whose mean academic performance levels were significantly over-or underestimated by participants overall.

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.

The moral stereotypes of liberals and conservatives: exaggeration of differences across the political spectrum

We investigated the moral stereotypes political liberals and conservatives have of themselves and each other. In reality, liberals endorse the individual-focused moral concerns of compassion and fairness more than conservatives do, and conservatives endorse the group-focused moral concerns of ingroup loyalty, respect for authorities and traditions, and physical/spiritual purity more than liberals do. 2,212 U.S. participants filled out the Moral Foundations Questionnaire with their own answers, or as a typical liberal or conservative would answer. Across the political spectrum, moral stereotypes about “typical” liberals and conservatives correctly reflected the direction of actual differences in foundation endorsement but exaggerated the magnitude of these differences. Contrary to common theories of stereotyping, the moral stereotypes were not simple underestimations of the political outgroup's morality. Both liberals and conservatives exaggerated the ideological extremity of moral concerns for the ingroup as well as the outgroup. Liberals were least accurate about both groups.

They’re All the Same!. . . but for Several Different Reasons

Researchers studying people’s perceptions of variability among members of social groups, or perceived group variability, have tended to focus on the ways in which perceivers’ group affiliations lead to in-group and out-group homogeneity effects, including the other-race effect. However, recent advances have highlighted the role of additional influences. In this review, we consider the influence of (a) the perceiver’s group affiliation, (b) the group’s objective variability, (c) the group’s social position, and (d) the group’s central tendency on trait dimensions. We focus on recent research in these areas that has highlighted the strategic, context-dependent, and symbolic nature of perceived group variability. We conclude that future research needs to adopt a multicausal approach in order to provide a more complete and comprehensive account of perceived group variability.

Majority, Minority, and Parity: Effects of Gender and Group Size on Perceived Group Variability

We investigated the effects of gender and group size on perceptions of group variability, using groups of students taking different majors that varied in the proportion of men and women (female-majority, parity, and male-majority). We found that both group size and gender had consistent effects on perceived out-group variability, even when potentially confounded alternative explanations were assessed. Men showed a stronger out-group homogeneity effect than women, except when women were in the majority (Studies One and Two), and women showed no in-group homogeneity effect. There was an association between out-group homogeneity and the tendency to generate more subgroups for the in-group than out-group (Study Two), but perceived variability was not associated with familiarity, distinctiveness, perceived group size, or perceived group status. These consistent effects qualify the conclusions of prior research in important ways, and cannot be explained in terms of differences in stereotype accuracy (Study Three), or a confound between the gender majority of a major and its perceived status (Study Four). We discuss our findings in terms of theoretical explanations for gender and size effects on out-group homogeneity, and methodological considerations.

Ethnic minorities' racial attitudes and contact experiences with white people

In this article, the authors examine the relationship between ethnic minorities' racial attitudes and their intergroup contact experiences with White people. In Studies 1 and 2, the authors demonstrate that the more negative the racial attitudes held by ethnic minorities, the less positive their interactions are with White friends and roommates. With a daily report methodology, Study 2 revealed that ethnic minorities' racial attitudes predicted the decline in the quality of their intergroup contact experiences over a 3-week period. In Study 3, the authors examined a possible mechanism underlying the relationship between racial attitudes and intergroup contact, as well as the influence of ethnic minorities' racial attitudes on White participants' experiences in intergroup contact settings. The authors discuss the findings in terms of the importance of examining ethnic minorities' attitudes in research on intergroup relations.

Stereotyping among providers and consumers of public mental health services. The role of perceived group variability

The authors examine stigmatization and mental illness, focusing on the role of perceived group variability in stereotype use. Consumers' and providers' in-group and out-group stereotypes were assessed. Although providers had extensive experience, they judged consumers more stereotypically and just as negatively as did the consumers themselves. Consumers' education and involvement in services were weakly predictive of more stereotypic, less variable, and more negative views of providers, whereas providers' education and involvement in services predicted more stereotypic but also more variable views of both groups. Perceived group stereotypicality predicted more stereotypic judgments of individuals, whereas perceived variability predicted less confidence in judgments. Because providers perceived greater variability, they were less confident in applying the stereotype to individuals. We suggest that increasing perceptions of the variability among consumers may lead to more sensitive use of diagnostic criteria, more individualized treatment, and a decrease in the negative effects of stigmatization.

Individual differences in race schematicity as predictors of African American and white children's race-relevant memories and peer preferences

Race schematicity, memories for racially stereotyped portrayals, and race-based peer preferences of 70 young children (32 African American, 38 White) were assessed. Consistent with schema-based models of stereotyping, race schematicity was positively and significantly associated with memory distortions of racial stereotype-inconsistent drawings into stereotype-consistent ones. Conversely, race schematicity was negatively and significantly associated with accurate memories for racial stereotype-inconsistent content, and with memory distortions of racial stereotype-consistent portrayals into stereotype-inconsistent ones. As predicted, race schematicity was positively and significantly associated with same-race peer preference bias, as was children's age in months. Results support application of the schematicity construct and relevant social psychological research with adults to the study of young African American and White children's racial stereotyping and processing of race-relevant information.