Copyright © 1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Stereotyping is the process by which people use social categories (e.g., race, sex) in acquiring, processing, and recalling information about others. Stereotypes are the traits and roles associated with certain groups and may relate to the belief component of attitudes. By most historical accounts, Walter Lippmann introduced the term "stereotype" to behavioral scientists in 1922 to represent the typical picture that comes to mind when thinking about a particular social group.
Three general conceptual approaches have been applied historically to understand stereotyping (Ashmore and Del Boca 1981). The psychodynamic approach, which has its origins in Freudian psychology, emphasizes the functions of stereotyping in satisfying personal needs (such as for esteem and status) and in operating as a defense mechanism (involving displacement and projection of negative feelings and characteristics). The sociocultural approach views stereotyping as an aspect of social learning in which stereotypes are acquired and transmitted along with other types of social "knowledge." At the societal level, stereotypes may help to rationalize and justify differential treatment of various social groups (such as limiting their rights). The cognitive approach describes stereotypes as mental representa-tions and stereotyping in terms of information processing. This approach is derivative of the more general SOCIAL COGNITION framework. From this perspective, stereotyping is rooted in people's needs to simplify and organize social information. Although psychodynamic, sociocultural, and cognitive approaches are complementary rather than competing perspectives, the cognitive approach is the prevailing one in contemporary social psychology.
All of these perspectives view stereotyping as functional (Dovidio et al. 1996). Early accounts of stereotyping, influenced substantially by the psychodynamic approach, generally represented this process as functional but flawed. On the one hand, stereotyping was assumed to help manage the complexity of one's environment by simplifying the social world (see JUDGMENT HEURISTICS). On the other hand, stereotyping was considered a faulty process because (1) it was a rigid form of thinking that was highly resistant to change, and (2) it produced overgeneralizations that unfairly emphasized the influence of inborn and unalterable psychological characteristics relative to social or environmental influences. In line with the cognitive orientation that has characterized recent research on stereotyping, many current theorists have stressed the information-processing (e.g., simplification) function of stereotypes while deemphasizing any necessary objectionable aspects.
Needs to understand, to predict, and potentially to control one's environment lead to the development of social stereotypes (Mackie et al. 1996). Because of the complexity of the social environment and people's limited cognitive resources, people tend to categorize others into social groups. These categories are often based on readily apparent, salient similarities, such as physical characteristics associated with sex or race. However, the social context significantly influences which characteristics are the most relevant bases of categorization (Oakes, Haslam, and Turner 1994), even with minimal physical distinctiveness (e.g., first-year students vs. upper-class students). Once categorization occurs, members of the group are viewed as more similar to one another (the outgroup homogeneity effect) and as having common characteristics. Personal traits (dispositional attributions; see ATTRIBUTION THEORY) are often overemphasized in stereotypes because they offer more stable explanations for the group's behavior (which enhance feelings of predictability) than do situational or environmental attributions. Although not necessarily so, stereotypic characterizations of other groups also tend to be relatively negative. Perceiving members of other groups as possessing less favorable characteristics can increase personal feelings of regard as well as esteem for the group with which one identifies. Categorizing people into ingroups and outgroups typically initiates a process in which people attend to dimensions on which their group is superior and the other group is inferior (Tajfel 1981).
Once established, stereotypes operate as cognitive structures that influence how others are perceived and how information about others is stored and retrieved. These stereotyping processes operate in unconscious and unintentional ways, as well as consciously (Greenwald and Banaji 1995). Consistent with general principles of AUTOMATICITY, repetition during socialization or personal experience may make some social stereotypes so overlearned that they will automatically become activated when people are presented with a representative or symbol of that group. There are individual differences in attitudes that can influence the likelihood and strength of this effect (Lepore and Brown 1997), but often this effect occurs generally for people sharing common socialization experiences (Devine 1989). What distinguishes high and low prejudiced people is their difference in the likelihood of automatically activating stereotypes and their motivation to suppress these stereotypes when they are automatically activated. Nevertheless, attempts at suppressing automatically activated stereotypic thoughts, particularly for those who do not normally do so, can result in rebound effects in which stereotypical thoughts are even more prevalent than normally so (Macrae et al. 1994).
When stereotypes are activated, people are judged in terms of the group's standards. For example, an aggressive woman may be judged as more aggressive than an objectively comparable aggressive man because women are stereotyped as being less aggressive than men in general. Furthermore, behaviors that are consistent with a stereotype are assumed to reflect dispositional characteristics and traits, and are described in that way, more than those that are inconsistent. In addition, ambiguous behaviors by group members are interpreted in stereotype-consistent ways.
People not only tend to interpret the behaviors of others in ways consistent with stereotypes, but also, once interpreted in that way, people show a bias in the way that information is subsequently recalled. Stereotype-consistent information has a recall advantage: People recall information better and more readily when it is consistent with a pre-existing stereotype than when it is inconsistent (Bodenhausen 1988). This recall advantage for consistent over inconsistent information may reflect how stereotypes facilitate retrieval of information rather than differences in how well the information is represented in MEMORY. Thus, this effect can be reversed or eliminated when recognition rather than recall measures are used (Stangor and McMillan 1992).
People also develop expectations about others substantially on the basis of their group membership and the associated stereotypes, although this effect may be undermined by providing information about the unique characteristics of a person (Fiske 1998). Stereotypes are particularly likely to influence expectations, inferences, and impressions when people are not motivated to attend to individuating information or are limited in their capacity to process information due to other demands on their attention and thoughts. Because stereotypes shape interpretations, influence how information is recalled, and guide expectations and inferences in systematic ways, they tend to be self-perpetuating. They also can produce self-fulfilling prophecies in social interaction, in which the stereotypes of the perceiver influence the interaction in ways that conform to stereotypical expectations (Jussim 1991). Stereotypes can also directly influence members of stereotyped groups. Under conditions that make stereotypes salient, such as aptitude testing situations or situations in which the group member has solo or token status, the performance of members of the stereotyped group may be adversely affected even though they do not personally endorse the stereotype (Steele and Aronson 1995).
Perhaps because of the functional properties of stereotyping, stereotypes are difficult to change or eliminate. Cognitive strategies focus on providing counterstereotypic or nonstereotypic information about group members to undermine or dilute stereotypic associations. This approach is more effective when stereotype-disconfirming information is dispersed among a broad range of group members rather than concentrated in one person or in a small number of group members (Weber and Crocker 1983). In the latter case, people are likely to maintain their overall stereotype of the group while subtyping, with a different stereotype, the set of group members who disconfirm the general group stereotype (e.g., black athletes; Hewstone 1994). Intergroup approaches to changing stereotypes focus on changing the social category representations on which the stereotypes are based (Gaertner et al. 1993). Decategorization approaches attempt to degrade group boundaries by drawing attention to the individualized or personalized characteristics of people originally perceived in terms of their group membership. Recategorization strategies involve redefining group boundaries either (1) to change the representations from separate groups to one group which reflects a common identity; or (2) to maintain the original group categories but simultaneously to emphasize connection to a larger entity through common goals and mutual interdependence (Hewstone and Brown 1986). Whereas the former approach may be more effective at changing attitudes and stereotypes of people immediately present in the situation, the latter approach may produce more generalized stereotype change because it maintains the associative links to group members not present in a contact situation. Producing significant and enduring stereotype change typically requires direct, sustained, and personal intergroup contact.
Ashmore, R. D., and F. K. DelBoca. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In D. L. Hamilton, Ed., Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 1-35.
Bodenhausen, G. V. (1988). Stereotypic biases in social decision making and memory: Testing process models of stereotype use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55:726-737.
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56:5-18.
Dovidio, J. F., J. C. Brigham, B. T. Johnson, and S. L. Gaertner. (1996). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination: Another look. In N. Macrae, C. Stangor, and M. Hewstone, Eds., Foundations of Stereotypes and Stereotyping. New York: Guilford, pp. 276-322.
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey, Eds., The Handbook of Social Psychology. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gaertner, S. L., J. F. Dovidio, P. A. Anastasio, B. A. Bachman, and M. C. Rust. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. In W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone, Eds., European Review of Social Psychology, vol. 4. London: Wiley, pp. 1-26.
Greenwald, A. G., and M. R. Banaji. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review 102:4-27.
Hamilton, D. L., and J. W. Sherman. (1994). Stereotypes. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. and T. K. Srull, Eds., Handbook of Social Cognition 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 1-68.
Hewstone, M. (1994). Revision and change of stereotypic beliefs: In search of the elusive subtyping model. In W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone, Eds., European Review of Social Psychology, vol. 5. London: Wiley, pp. 69-109.
Hewstone, M., and R. J. Brown. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the contact hypothesis. In M. Hewstone and R. Brown, Eds., Contact and Conflict in Intergroup Encounters. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 1-44.
Jussim, L. (1991). Social perception and social reality: A reflection- construction model. Psychological Review 98:54-73.
Lepore, L., and R. J. Brown. (1997). Category and stereotype activation: Is prejudice inevitable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72:275-287.
Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt-Brace.
Mackie, D. M., D. L. Hamilton, J. Susskind, and F. Rosselli. (1996). Social psychological foundations of stereotype formation. In N. Macrae, C. Stangor, and M. Hewstone, Eds., Foundations of Stereotypes and Stereotyping. New York: Guilford, pp. 41-78.
Macrae, C. N., G. V. Bodenhausen, A. B. Milne, and J. Jetten. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67:808-817.
Oakes, P. J., S. J. Haslam, and J. C. Turner, Eds. (1994). Stereotyping and Social Reality. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stangor, C., and D. McMillan. (1992). Memory for expectancy-congruent and expectancy-incongruent information: A review of the social and developmental literatures. Psychological Bulletin 111:42-61.
Steele, C. M., and J. Aronson. (1995). Stereotype threat and intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69:797-811.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Social stereotypes and social groups. In J. C. Turner and H. Giles, Eds., Intergroup Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 144-167.
Weber, R., and J. Crocker. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypical beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45:961-977.
Basow, S. A. (1992). Gender Stereotypes and Roles. 3rd edition. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Higgins, E. T., and A. W. Kruglanski, Eds. (1996). Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford.
Lee, Y., L. J. Jussim, and C. R. McCauley, Eds. (1995). Stereotype Accuracy: Toward Appreciating Group Differences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Leyens, J.-P., V. Yzerbyt, and G. Schadron. (1994). Stereotypes and Social Cognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mackie, D. M., and D. L. Hamilton, Eds. (1993). Affect, Cognition, and Stereotyping: Interactive Processes in Group Perception. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Macrae, N., C. Stangor, and M. Hewstone, Eds. (1996). Foundations of Stereotypes and Stereotyping. New York: Guilford.
Spears, R., P. J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, and S. A. Haslam, Eds. (1997). The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Uleman, J. S., and J. A. Bargh, Eds. (1989). Unintended Thought. New York: Guilford .
Copyright © 1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology