Stereotype (In)Accuracy in Perceptions of Groups and Individuals

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 490-497

  Jussim, Lee ^a   Crawford, Jarret T ^b   Rubinstein, Rachel S ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Health and Exercise Science   (United States)

Author keywords

accuracy; bias; person perception; social perception; stereotypes

Indexed keywords

EID: 84950286622     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: 14678721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963721415605257     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. S.E.BrodtL.D.Ross (1998). (See References). A field study that showed that college students’ predictions about individual dorm residents were more accurate when they relied on, rather than ignored, stereotypes relevant to those dorm residents.
2. J.T.CrawfordL.JussimS.MadonT.R.CainS.T.Stevens (2011). (See References). Provides empirical evidence that diagnosticity was the primary factor determining whether people relied on stereotypes, individuating information, or both (i.e., that people relied on stereotypes and/or individuating information in an approximately rational manner) in political person-perception judgments.
3. L.Jussim (2012). (See References). An accessibly written book that reviews experimental and survey data regarding stereotype accuracy and biases in social perception, showing that stereotypes are often accurate and that the biases in social perception they produce are generally weak.
4. L.JussimT.CainJ.CrawfordK.HarberF.Cohen (2009). The unbearable accuracy of stereotypes. In T.Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 199–227). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. A chapter that provides a logically coherent definition of “stereotype,” reviews conceptual issues and empirical evidence regarding the accuracy of stereotypes, and considers the role of stereotypes in increasing or reducing accuracy in person perception.
5. C.S.Ryan (2002). (See References). A paper that reviews methodological issues and empirical findings in the domain of stereotype accuracy, arguing that stereotypes can be accurate and useful despite their potential negative consequences.
6. G.W.Allport (1979). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. (Original work published 1954)
7. American Psychological Association. (1991). In the Supreme Court of the United States: Price Waterhouse v. Ann B. Hopkins (Amicus curiae brief). American Psychologist, 46, 1061–1070.
8. E.Aronson (2011). The social animal (11th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
9. R.D.AshmoreF.K.Del Boca (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In D.L.Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 1–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. M.R.BanajiA.G.Greenwald (2013). Blindspot: Hidden biases of good people. New York, NY: Delacorte Press.
11. J.A.BarghT.L.Chartrand (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462–479.
12. R.F.BaumeisterB.J.Bushman (2014). Social psychology and human nature (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
13. S.E.BrodtL.D.Ross (1998). The role of stereotyping in overconfident social prediction. Social Cognition, 16, 225–252.
14. R.Brown (2010). Prejudice: Its social psychology (2nd ed.). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
15. W.ChanR.R.McCraeF.De FruytL.JussimC.LockenhoffM.De BolleA.. Terracciano (2012). Stereotypes of age differences in personality traits: Universal and accurate?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 1050–1066.
16. J.Cohen (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Academic Press.
17. P.T.CostaJr.R.R.McCrae (2008). The revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). In G.J.BoyleG.MatthewsD.H.Saklofske (Eds.), The Sage handbook of personality theory, and assessment: Vol. 2. Personality measurement and testing (pp. 179–198). London, England: Sage.
18. J.T.CrawfordL.JussimS.MadonT.R.CainS.T.Stevens (2011). The use of stereotypes and individuating information in political person perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 529–542.
19. R.J.CrispR.N.Turner (2014). Essential social psychology (3rd ed.). London, England: Sage Publications.
20. A.Eagly (2015). Mischaracterizing social psychology to support the laudable goal of increasing its political diversity. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 38, 24. doi:10.1017/S0140525X14001411
21. S.T.FiskeS.E.Taylor (2008). Social cognition: From brains to culture. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
22. J.GrahamB.A.NosekJ.Haidt (2012). The moral stereotypes of liberals and conservatives: Exaggeration of differences across the political spectrum. PLoS ONE, 7(12), e50092. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050092. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0050092
23. J.GreenbergT.SchmaderJ.ArndtM.Landau (2015). Social psychology: The science of everyday life. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
24. S.GrisonT.F.HeathertonM.S.Gazzaniga (2015). Psychology in your life. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
25. S.J.HeineE.E.BuchtelA.Norenzayan (2008). What do cross-national comparisons of personality traits tell us? The case of conscientiousness. Psychological Science, 19, 309–313.
26. J.HenrichS.J.HeineA.Norenzayan (2010). The weirdest people in the world?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135.
27. C.M.JuddB.Park (1993). Definition and assessment of accuracy in social stereotypes. Psychological Review, 100, 109–128.
28. L.Jussim (2012). Social perception and social reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
29. L.JussimJ.T.CrawfordS.M.AnglinJ.R.ChambersS.T.StevensF.Cohen (in press). Stereotype accuracy: One of the largest and most replicable effects in all of social psychology. To appear in T.Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. L.JussimJ.T.CrawfordS.T.StevensS.M.Anglin (in press). The politics of social psychological science: Distortions in the social psychology of intergroup relations. To appear in P.ValdesoloJ.Graham (Eds.), Psychology of political polarization (The Claremont Symposium on applied social psychology series).
31. L.A.King (2013). Experience psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
32. J.KruegerM.Rothbart (1988). Use of categorical and individuating information in making inferences about personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 187–195.
33. Z.KundaP.Thagard (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103, 284–308.
34. R.T.LaPiere (1936). Type-rationalizations of group antipathy. Social Forces, 15, 232–237.
35. W.Lippmann (1991). Public opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published 1922)
36. C.E.LockenhoffW.ChanR.R.McCraeF.De FruytL.JussimM.De BolleA.. Terracciano (2014). Gender stereotypes of personality: Universal and accurate?Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45, 1–20.
37. R.R.McCraeW.ChanL.JussimF.De FruytC.E.LockenhoffM.De BolleT.V.. Avdeyeva (2013). The inaccuracy of national character stereotypes. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 831–842.
38. F.D.RichardC.F.BondJr.J.J.Stokes-Zoota (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7, 331–363.
39. R.Rosenthal (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
40. C.S.Ryan (2002). Stereotype accuracy. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 75–109.
41. D.L.SchacterD.T.GilbertD.M.WegnerM.K.Nock (2015). Introducing psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
42. C.SternT.V.WestJ.T.JostN.O.Rule (2013). The politics of gaydar: Ideological differences in the use of gendered cues in categorizing sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 520–541.
43. J.Surowiecki (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations. New York, NY: Doubleday.
44. J.WestfallL.Van BovenJ.ChambersC.M.Judd (2015). Perceiving political polarization in America: Party identity strength and attitude extremity exacerbate the perceived partisan divide. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 145–158.
45. B.WhitleyM.Kite (2009). The psychology of prejudice and discrimination. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.