An early-emerging explanatory heuristic promotes support for the status Quo

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Volumn 109, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 739-752

  Hussak, Larisa J ^a   Cimpian, Andrei ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Development; Explanation; Inherence heuristic; Social cognition; System justification

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CHILD; CHILD DEVELOPMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; THINKING;

ADULT; CHILD; CHILD DEVELOPMENT; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HIERARCHY, SOCIAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIAL PERCEPTION; THINKING;

EID: 84946500738     PISSN: 00223514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000033     Document Type: Article

References (99)

1. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The "other" authoritarian. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2
2. Baron, J. (1994). Thinking and deciding (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3. Barr, R. A., & Caplan, L. J. (1987). Category representations and their implications for category structure. Memory & Cognition, 15, 397-418. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03197730
4. Brandt, M. J. (2013). Do the disadvantaged legitimize the social system? A large-scale test of the status-legitimacy hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 765-785. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031751
5. Brescoll, V. L., Uhlmann, E. L., & Newman, G. E. (2013). The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 891-908. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034701
6. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13
7. Choe, S. (2015, January 18). Prominent North Korean defector recants parts of his story of captivity. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://nyti.ms/15o94pa
8. Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 47-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.47
9. Cichocka, A., & Jost, J. T. (2014). Stripped of illusions? Exploring system justification processes in capitalist and post-Communist societies. Inter national Journal of Psychology, 49, 6-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12011
10. Cimpian, A. (2015). The inherence heuristic: Generating everyday explanations. In R. Scott & S. Kosslyn (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 1-15). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0341
11. Cimpian, A., & Markman, E. M. (2009). Information learned from generic language becomes central to children's biological concepts: Evidence from their open-ended explanations. Cognition, 113, 14-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.07.004
12. Cimpian, A., & Markman, E. M. (2011). The generic/nongeneric distinction influences how children interpret new information about social others. Child Development, 82, 471-492. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01525.x
13. Cimpian, A., & Salomon, E. (2014). Author's reply: Refining and expanding the proposal of an inherence heuristic in human understanding. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 506-527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X14000028
14. Cimpian, A., & Salomon, E. (2014). The inherence heuristic: An intuitive means of making sense of the world, and a potential precursor to psychological essentialism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 461-480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13002197
15. Cimpian, A., & Steinberg, O. D. (2014). The inherence heuristic across development: Systematic differences between children's and adults' explanations for everyday facts. Cognitive Psychology, 75, 130-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.09.001
16. Cooper, A. (2012, December 2). Three generations of punishment. 60 Minutes. New York, NY: CBS Broadcasting.
17. Dalbert, C. (2001). The justice motive as a personal resource: Dealing with challenges and critical life events. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3383-9
18. Dalbert, C., & Yamauchi, L. A. (1994). Belief in a just world and attitudes toward immigrants and foreign workers: A cultural comparison between Hawaii and Germany. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1612-1626. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01565.x
19. Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2011). Genetic essentialism: On the deceptive determinism of DNA. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 800-818. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021860
20. Diamond, J. (1998). Guns, germs, and steel: The fates of human societies. New York, NY: Norton & Co.
21. Eidelman, S., & Crandall, C. S. (2014). The intuitive traditionalist: How biases for existence and longevity promote the status quo. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 53-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800284-1.00002-3
22. Eidelman, S., Crandall, C. S., & Pattershall, J. (2009). The existence bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 765-775. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017058
23. Eidelman, S., Pattershall, J., & Crandall, C. S. (2010). Longer is better. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 993-998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.008
24. Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006). The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science, 17, 311-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01704.x
25. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2006). The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 378-395. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193858
26. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
27. Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: An introduction. New York, NY: Random House.
28. Gawronski, B. (2004). Theory-based bias correction in dispositional inference: The fundamental attribution error is dead, long live the correspondence bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 15, 183-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10463280440000026
29. Gelman, S. A. (2003). The essential child: Origins of essentialism in everyday thought. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195154061.001.0001
30. Gelman, S. A. (2004). Psychological essentialism in children. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 404-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.07.001
31. Gelman, S. A., Heyman, G. D., & Legare, C. H. (2007). Developmental changes in the coherence of essentialist beliefs about psychological characteristics. Child Development, 78, 757-774. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01031.x
32. Gentner, D., & Rattermann, M. (1991). Language and the career of similarity. In Perspectives on language and thought: Interrelations in development (pp. 225-277). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511983689.008
33. Gilbert, D. T., & Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 21-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.21
34. Gilbert, D. T., Pelham, B. W., & Krull, D. S. (1988). On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 733-740. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.733
35. Hafer, C. L., & Bègue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128-167.
36. Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. (1996). Perceiving persons and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 336-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.336
37. Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 39 (Pt. 1), 113-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466600164363
38. Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice? The British Journal of Social Psychology, 41 (Pt. 1), 87-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466602165072
39. Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (pp. 133-168). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
40. Hirschfeld, L. A. (1995). Do children have a theory of race? Cognition, 54, 209-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)91425-R
41. Hussak, L. J., & Cimpian, A. (2014, November). Facts about inherent features are highly accessible in memory: Evidence for an inherence heuristic in explanation. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Long Beach, CA.
42. Jones, E. E. (1979). The rocky road from acts to dispositions. American Psychologist, 34, 107-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.2.107
43. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in systemjustification and the production of false consciousness. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x
44. Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881-919. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
45. Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10463280240000046
46. Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00377.x
47. Jost, J. T., Kivetz, Y., Rubini, M., Guermandi, G., & Mosso, C. (2005). System-justifying functions of complementary regional and ethnic stereotypes: Cross-national evidence. Social Justice Research, 18, 305-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11211-005-6827-z
48. Jost, J. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Simon, L. (1999). Effects of epistemic motivation on conservatism, intolerance and other system-justifying attitudes. In L. Thompson, J. Levine, & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 91-116). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49. Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., & Sullivan, B. N. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.127
50. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
51. Kashima, Y., Kashima, E., Chiu, C., Farsides, T., Gelfand, M., Hong, Y.,. Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2005). Culture, essentialism, and agency: Are individuals universally believed to be more real entities than groups? European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 147-169.
52. Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., Peach, J. M., Laurin, K., Friesen, J., Zanna, M. P., & Spencer, S. J. (2009). Inequality, discrimination, and the power of the status quo: Direct evidence for a motivation to see the way things are as the way they should be. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 421-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015997
53. Kay, A. C., & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of "poor but happy" and "poor but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823-837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823
54. Keller, J. (2005). In genes we trust: The biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 686-702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.686
55. Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans' views of what is and what ought to be. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.
56. Kraus, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2013). Social class rank, essentialism, and punitive judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 247-261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0032895
57. Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 992-1004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016357
58. Lerner, M. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0448-5
59. Lerner, M. J., & Simmons, C. H. (1966). Observer's reaction to the "innocent victim": Compassion or rejection? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 203-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0023562
60. LeVine, R., & Campbell, D. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behavior. New York, NY: Wiley.
61. Lewis, D. (1983). Extrinsic properties. Philosophical Studies, 44, 197-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00354100
62. Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.223
63. Liviatan, I., & Jost, J. T. (2011). Special issue: System justification theory: Motivated social cognition in the service of the status quo. Social Cognition, 29, 231-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.3.231
64. McConnell, A. R., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L. (1997). Target entitativity: Implications for information processing about individual and group targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 750-762. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.4.750
65. McRae, K., Cree, G. S., Seidenberg, M. S., & McNorgan, C. (2005). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 37, 547-559. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03192726
66. Medin, D., & Ortony, A. (1989). Psychological essentialism. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 179-195). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511529863.009
67. Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psychological Bulletin, 82, 213-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076486
68. Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 949-971. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.949
69. Morton, T. A., Postmes, T., Haslam, S. A., & Hornsey, M. J. (2009). Theorizing gender in the face of social change: Is there anything essential about essentialism? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 653-664. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012966
70. Newheiser, A. K., Dunham, Y., Merrill, A., Hoosain, L., & Olson, K. R. (2014). Preference for high status predicts implicit outgroup bias among children from low-status groups. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1081-1090. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035054
71. Nier, J. A., Bajaj, P., McLean, M. C., & Schwartz, E. (2013). Group status, perceptions of agency, and the correspondence bias: Attributional processes in the formation of stereotypes about high and low status groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16, 476-487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1368430212454925
72. Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Hansen, J. J., Devos, T., Lindner, N. M., Ranganath, K. A.,. Banaji, M. R. (2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10463280701489053
73. Olson, K. R., Dweck, C. S., Spelke, E. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2011). Children's responses to group-based inequalities: Perpetuation and rectification. Social Cognition, 29, 270-287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.3.270
74. Prasada, S., & Dillingham, E. M. (2006). Principled and statistical connections in common sense conception. Cognition, 99, 73-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.003
75. Prasada, S., & Dillingham, E. M. (2009). Representation of principled connections: A window onto the formal aspect of common sense conception. Cognitive Science, 33, 401-448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01018.x
76. Rhodes, M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). A developmental examination of the conceptual structure of animal, artifact, and human social categories across two cultural contexts. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 244-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.05.001
77. Rhodes, M., Leslie, S. J., & Tworek, C. M. (2012). Cultural transmission of social essentialism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA of the United States of America, 109, 13526-13531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208951109
78. Richland, L. E., Morrison, R. G., & Holyoak, K. J. (2006). Children's development of analogical reasoning: Insights from scene analogy problems. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 94, 249-273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2006.02.002
79. Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2011). The role of need for closure in essentialist entitativity beliefs and prejudice: An epistemic needs approach to racial categorization. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 50 (Pt. 1), 52-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466610X491567
80. Ross, L. D. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 173-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60357-3
81. Ross, L. D., Amabile, T. M., & Steinmetz, J. L. (1977). Social roles, social control, and biases in social-perception processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 485-494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.7.485
82. Rothbart, M., & Taylor, M. (1992). Category labels and social reality: Do we view social categories as natural kinds? In G. R. Semin & K. Fiedler (Eds.), Language, interaction, and social cognition (pp. 11-36). London, England: SAGE Publications.
83. Salomon, E., & Cimpian, A. (2014). The inherence heuristic as a source of essentialist thought. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1297-1315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167214541659
84. Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review, 115, 336-356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336
85. Sengupta, N. K., Osborne, D., & Sibley, C. G. (2014). The statuslegitimacy hypothesis revisited: Ethnic-group differences in general and dimension-specific legitimacy. Advance online publication. The British Journal of Social Psychology.
86. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175043
87. Skitka, L. J., Mullen, E., Griffin, T., Hutchinson, S., & Chamberlin, B. (2002). Dispositions, scripts, or motivated correction? Understanding ideological differences in explanations for social problems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 470-487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.470
88. Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511720468
89. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
90. Stanovich, K. E. (2009). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
91. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00003435
92. Taylor, M. G., Rhodes, M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Boys will be boys; cows will be cows: Children's essentialist reasoning about gender categories and animal species. Child Development, 80, 461-481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01272.x
93. Tetlock, P. E., & Levi, A. (1982). Attribution bias: On the inconclusiveness of the cognition-motivation debate. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 68-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(82)90082-8
94. Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Rational thinking and cognitive sophistication: Development, cognitive abilities, and thinking dispositions. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1037-1048. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034910
95. Trope, Y., & Gaunt, R. (2007). Attribution and person perception. In M. Hogg & J. Cooper (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social psychology (pp. 176-194). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
96. Unger, R. (1983). The critical legal studies movement. Harvard Law Review, 96, 561-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1341032
97. Watts, D. (2011). Everything is obvious once you know the answer. New York, NY: Random House.
98. Weatherson, B., & Marshall, D. (2014). Intrinsic vs. extrinsic properties. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retreived from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intrinsic-extrinsic/
99. Williams, M. J., & Eberhardt, J. L. (2008). Biological conceptions of race and the motivation to cross racial boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 1033-1047. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1033