David A. Wilder

Social Categorization: Implications for Creation and Reduction of Intergroup Bias

Publisher Summary This chapter presents implications for creations and reduction of intergroup bias. It presents the observation that persons organize their social environment by categorizing themselves and others into groups. Categorization serves two functions, enables to simplify the present social environment and to predict future social behavior. Although reliance on categories is efficient, there is a risk error when using a category based on phenotypic similarities to infer genotypic properties. (Thus, members of a group may share similar opinions on matters relevant to the group but that similarity may not reflect an underlying similarity of motives or dispositions.) Categorizing others into ingroups and outgroups produces a set of consistent and quite logical effects, including assumptions of similarity within and dissimilarity between groups, assumed homogeneity of the outgroup, and overreliance on information that supports these assumptions. Further, categorization leads to intergroup comparisons and ingroup favoritism over outgroups even when no obvious justifications are present for bias.

Intergroup contact: The typical member and the exception to the rule

Abstract Three studies examined the role of the perceived typicalness of an out-group member on her effectiveness in improving evaluations of her group. Subjects were students at two adjacent colleges. In the first study they interacted with a member of the out-group college. The interaction was either pleasant or unpleasant, and the contact person either confirmed or disconfirmed several stereotypes of the out-group (typicalness manipulation). Subjects evaluated the out-group most favorably when they interacted with the typical-pleasant member of the out-group. The second study demonstrated that contact with a highly typical member is not beneficial if her typicalness is based on stereotypes that reflect negatively on the subjects in-group. Several explanations of the typicalness findings were considered in a third study. Support was found for the hypothesis that the more typical member is perceived to be more predictive of the personality and actions of other out-group members.

Chapter 5 – The Role of Anxiety in Facilitating Stereotypic Judgments of Outgroup Behavior

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the role of anxiety in facilitating stereotypic judgment of outgroup behavior. Anxiety increases ones reliance on social stereotypes and makes the person traitor to his or her objective reason. When anxiety distracts persons from careful attention to the environment, they rely more on available cognitive structures such as social stereotypes in making judgments of others. Increased reliance on stereotypes manifests in two ways. First, stereotypes supply best guesses to complete gaps in information created by anxiety. Second, counter-stereotypic information loses impact when persons are anxious and their attention is restricted. In the research discussed in the chapter, stereotypes are beliefs about the characteristics or behaviors of most members of a social group.

Role of competition-induced anxiety in limiting the beneficial impact of positive behavior by an out-group member.

Several variables influence whether contact with a favorable out-group member has a beneficial impact on intergroup relations. In two experiments we examined the effect of competition-induced anxiety on reaction to the behavior of a favorable out-group member. In Experiment 1 a competitive context produced (a) anxiety, relative to a cooperative context, and (b) assimilation of a favorable out-group member to the unfavorable majority. Experiment 2 replicated this finding and showed that when anxiety was reduced, those who expected to compete with the out-group formed a more favorable and veridical impression of the positive out-group member. Taken together, results support the hypothesis that the expectation of an unpleasant competitive encounter with an out-group generates anxiety that, in turn, lessens the impact of positive behavior by an out-group member. Implications of this research for intergroup relations are discussed.

Effects of anxiety on impression formation in a group context: an anxiety-assimilation hypothesis

Abstract In this article we present evidence that feeling anxious can result in assimilation of a target to the interpersonal context in which the target appears. Anxious subjects rated an incompetent member of a competent group more favorably and a competent member of an incompetent group less favorably than did nonanxious subjects. Anxiety can interfere with information processing in that anxious individuals use less information about a target than do nonanxious persons. When unfavorable information about a target is embedded in a positive context, this information may be “lost” by anxious perceivers who then view the target more similarly to the context than do nonanxious perceivers. In three experiments subjects were exposed to three discussants who acted competently and a fourth who acted incompetently. The fourth member was judged more similar to the others and was rated more positively by anxious than by nonanxious perceivers. The context was reversed in a fourth experiment in which subjects viewed a competent member of an incompetent group. Paralleling Experiments 1–3, anxious subjects underrated differences between the competent deviant and the incompetent majority.

Effect of Predictability on Units of Perception and Attribution

Research indicates that persons do not employ a constant unit of perception in processing social information. An experiment investigated effects of varying the predictability of an actors behavior upon the manner in which observers partitioned it into units of action and made attributions of behavioral causality. Subjects viewed a tape of an actor who behaved either predictably throughout, predictably at first and then unpredictably, unpredictably at first and then predictably, or unpredictably all the time. Subjects divided the actors behavior into more units (a) when the behavior began unpredictably than when it began predictably and (b) when the pattern of behavior changed (from predictable to unpredictable or vice versa) than when no change occurred. Number of units was positively correlated with dispositional attributions of causality.

Predictability of Behaviors, Goals, and Unit of Perception

Research has shown that unpredictable behavior is con- sidered more meaningful than predictable behavior. But it is unclear whether such findings were due to the unpredictability of the persons specific behaviors or to the uncertainty of the goal. In this experi- ment the predictability of a persons behavior was varied on two levels--predictability of the goal (molar level) and predictability of the specific actions (molecular level). Behavior was segmented into the most units of action and was viewed as most dispositionally caused when unpredictable on both molecular and molar levels.

Facilitation of outgroup stereotypes by enhanced ingroup identity

Abstract Three experiments examined the role of an audience in the facilitation of stereotype usage. In a series of experiments subjects learned to associate a set of traits with a fictitious outgroup university. Then they observed and rated a member of that outgroup alone, in the presence of an expert audience, or in the presence of fellow subjects from their ingroup university. Judgments of the target member of the outgroup were significantly more in agreement with outgroup stereotypes when subjects were in the presence of fellow ingroup members than when either the experts or no audience was present. Moreover, subjects rated the target as more typical of the outgroup and themselves as more like fellow ingroup members in the ingroup audience condition. Consistent with social categorization research, salience of the ingroup increased identification with the ingroup and resulted in judgments of an outgroup member in terms of general expectations or stereotypes of the outgroup.

Homogeneity of jurors

A dissenting juror faces considerable social pressure from the majority to acept their position. This article postulated that whether the dissenter conforms or not should be dependent, in part, on attributions made about the cause of the majoritys behavior. Specifically, it was hypothesized that to the extent the majority jurors are perceived to be independent of one another, their credibility should be high and the dissenter will likely adopt their position. On the other hand, agreement among homogeneous jurors may be attributed to mutual influence or similar personalities and, therefore, discounted as a reliable source of information about the case. Two studies investigated the relationship between both attributions of independence and social influence, and the homogeneity of the jurors attempting influence. Overall, findingsfrom the studies indicate that the manner in which jurors are initially categorized into social groups affects their perceived independence and persuasive impact.