Willem Koomen

Seeing one thing and doing another : Contrast effects in automatic behavior

Research on automatic behavior demonstrates the ability of stereotypes to elicit stereotype-consistent behavior. Social judgment research proposes that whereas traits and stereotypes elicit assimilation, priming of exemplars can elicit judgmental contrast by evoking social comparisons. This research extends these findings by showing that priming exemplars can elicit behavioral contrast by evoking a social comparison. In Study 1, priming professor or supermodel stereotypes led, respectively, to more and fewer correct answers on a knowledge test (behavioral assimilation), but priming exemplars of these categories led to the reverse pattern (behavioral contrast). In Study 2, participants walked away faster after being primed with an elderly exemplar. In Study 3, the proposition that contrast effects reflect comparisons of the self with the exemplar was supported.

WHEN BAD ISNT ALL BAD : STRATEGIC USE OF SAMPLE INFORMATION IN GENERALIZATION AND STEREOTYPING

The influence of the reliability and valence of sample information on generalization to in-group and out-group target populations was investigated in 2 studies. In both studies the valence of the information was either favorable (i.e., a positive in-group sample and a negative out-group sample) or unfavorable. The reliability of sample information was manipulated in terms of sample variability (Study 1) and sample size (Study 2). In both studies the perceived central tendency of favorable sample information was directly generalized, but unfavorable and unreliable sample information was not. Moreover, generalizations based on unfavorable and unreliable samples were characterized by enhanced variability estimates for both in-group and out-group populations, thereby undermining unfavorable group differences. These results are discussed in terms of strategic use of sample information in the formation of social stereotypes.

Consequences of Stereotype Suppression and Internal Suppression Motivation: A Self-Regulation Approach

The present research studied the effects of suppression of stereotypes on subsequent stereotyping. Moreover, the moderating influence of motivation to suppress stereotypes was examined. The first three experiments showed that suppression of stereotypes leads to the experience of engaging in self-control (Study 1), to depleted regulatory resources as indicated by worse performance on an unrelated subsequent task that involves self-regulation (Study 2), and to hyperaccessibility of the suppressed thoughts (Study 3). However, these effects were moderated by internal suppression motivation: Increased self-control, depleted regulatory resources, and hyperaccessibility of suppressed thoughts only occur for people with low internal suppression motivation. Furthermore, in line with the argument that depletion of regulatory resources after suppression also should result in increased stereotyping in general, it was found that suppression of a specific stereotype leads to an increased use of stereotypes in general, but only for people with low internal suppression motivation (Study 4).

Distinctness of others, mutability of selves: Their impact on self-evaluations

The authors postulate that the outcome of social comparison processes is determined by the role social comparison information serves during the self-evaluation process. Assimilation is more likely in situations that instigate the inclusion of social comparison information in self-representations. Contrast is the more probable outcome when information about another person is used as a reference point for self-judgments. Whether comparison information instigates interpretation or comparison effects depends on the distinctness of this information as well as the perceived mutability of the self. The authors found support for their perspective using different types of manipulations of the distinctness construct, treating self-mutability as a contextual as well as an individual-difference variable, and measuring the effects of social comparisons on measures likely to reveal both assimilation and contrast effects (self-evaluative judgments and behavioral predictions), assimilation effects only (mood measures), and motivational self-repair effects (importance ratings of the focal comparison dimension).

The Referents of Trait Inferences: The Impact of Trait Concepts Versus Actor-Trait Links on Subsequent Judgments

The authors investigated the hypothesis that when trait inferences refer to abstract behavior labels they act as a general interpretation frame and lead to assimilation in subsequent judgments of an ambiguous target, whereas when they refer to a specific actor-trait link they will be used as a scale anchor and lead to contrast. Similar to G.B. Moskowitz and R.J. Romans ( 1992 ) study, participants who were instructed to memorize trait-implying sentences showed assimilation, and participants who were instructed to form an impression of the actors in these sentences showed contrast. However, exposure to trait-implying sentences that described actors with real names and were accompanied with photos of the actors resulted in contrast under both memorization and impression instructions (Experiment 1 ). Furthermore, contrast ensued when trait-implying sentences were accompanied with information that suggested a person attribution, whereas assimilation ensued when that information suggested a situation attribution, independent of processing goals (Experiment 2). These findings are interpreted as support for referent-based explanations of the consequences of trait inferences.

The effect of comparative context on central tendency and variability judgements and the evaluation of group characteristics

A study is reported that examines the effects of comparative context on central tendency and variability judgements of groups, and the evaluation of group characteristics. The central assumption is that these social judgements are not absolute, but depend on the social context in which they are grounded. It is demonstrated that people vary their description of the ingroup in terms of central tendency and group variability as a function of the possibility of comparing the ingroup favourably with other groups in the judgemental task. In a similar vein, it is shown that the evaluation of an ingroup characteristic is not fixed, but depends on its relative favourability within the comparative context. The results of this study clearly demonstrate the importance of comparative context in group perception and are discussed with reference to self-categorization theory and alternative models of social judgement.

Short Note: Using primed exemplars during impression formation: interpretation or comparison?

Two studies demonstrate that when priming stimuli consist of (1) trait concepts and person exemplars, (2) trait concepts and non-person exemplars, (3) only non-person exemplars, assimilation in judgments of an ambiguous person follows. However, when priming stimuli consist of (4) only person exemplars, contrast in judgments of both ambiguous and well-known persons ensues.

Sex differences in emotional and behavioral responses to HIV+ individuals' expression of distress

Two studies examined the influence of HIV+ individuals expression of distress on perceivers’ emotional and behavioral reactions. In Study 1 (N = 224), HIV+ individuals expression of distress was experimentally manipulated by means of vignettes. Men and women reacted differently when persons with HIV conveyed distress: women reported stronger feelings of pity, whereas men reported stronger feelings of anger. Study 2 (N = 136) replicated this study in a realistic experimental setting with additional behavioral measures. Similarly, women reported stronger pro-social behavior than men when confronted with a person with HIV who conveyed distress. Results of the present study shed additional light to the self-presentational dilemma of ill persons. Conveying moderate levels of distress may evoke pro-social responses in women, but not in men.

The influence of prejudice and stereotypes on anticipated affect: Feelings about a potentially negative interaction with another ethnic group

In this research we investigated whether feelings about an imagined potentially negative interaction with a member of another ethnic group was affected more by valence than content of stereotypes, and whether the differential influence of perception and meta-perception was similar for dominant and dominated groups within a given society. Prejudice, cultural stereotypes and meta-stereotypes were measured for both the dominant and the subordinate group, white and black South Africans, respectively. We found that prejudice was related to the perception of a more negative cultural stereotype of the other ethnic group, and to the perception of a more positive meta-stereotype of ones own ethnic group. However, this latter result was found only for the dominant group. Furthermore, for both the dominant and the subordinate groups, prejudice predicted more negative than positive feelings. For the subordinate group, a more negative cultural stereotype predicted more anxiety-related feelings, and a more negative meta-stereotype predicted less happy feelings about such an interaction. For the dominant group, stereotypes were not predictive of feelings about the interaction. Overall, the relationship between stereotypes, prejudice, and feelings appears to be based on valence rather than on specific content of the stereotypes.

When We Wonder What it all Means: Interpretation Goals Facilitate Accessibility and Stereotyping Effects

In four studies, the authors show that interpretation goals facilitate accessibility and stereotyping effects. Study 1 shows that priming traits that are descriptively inapplicable to a target stimulus affect target interpretations when an interpretation goal is primed but not when no such goal is present. Studies 2 and 3 show that the range of judgment dimensions affected by applicable trait primes increases when people are interpretation motivated. Studies 3 and 4 show that behavior that is only weakly related to stereotypical beliefs is interpreted in stereotypical terms when an interpretation goal is activated, whereas no such stereotyping effect occurs when perceivers are not so motivated. Implications for models of accessibility and stereotyping effects are discussed.