El Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee y Schwartz, 1998) es un instrumento flexible para la medida de las asociaciones automáticas que subyacen a los estereotipos y al prejuicio. El presente estudio mide los estereotipos implícitos sobre poderosos y no poderosos. Algunas líneas previas de investigación han mostrado que el contenido de estos estereotipos parece ser sistemático: los grupos poderosos son generalmente percibidos como competentes pero no sociables, mientras que los grupos subordinados son vistos como sociables pero incompetentes. Se realizó un estudio utilizando el IAT, el cual apoya esta hipótesis respecto al componente automático de los estereotipos de poderosos y no poderosos. Se discuten las implicaciones de nuestros resultados para el mantenimiento de la estructura social y su cambio.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AschS. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.
2.
AugoustinosM.WalkerI. (1996). Social Cognition. An Integrated Introduction.Londres: Sage (2a ed.).
3.
BarghJ. A. (1999). The cognitive monster: the case against the controllability of automatic stereotype effects. EnChaikenS.TropeY. (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 339–360). Nueva York: Guildford.
4.
BrauerM.WaselW.NiedhentalP. (2000). Implicit and explicit components of prejudice. Reviw of General Psychology, 4, 1, 79–101.
5.
DevineP. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.
6.
ErberR.FiskeS. T. (1984). Outcome dependency and attention to inconsistent information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 709–726.
7.
FiskeS. T.DèpretE. (1996). Control, interdependence, and power: understanding social cognition in its social context. En.StroebeW.HewstoneM. (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 31–61). Nueva York: Guilford.
8.
FiskeS. T.RuscherJ. B. (1993). Negative interdependence and prejudice: Whence the affect? EnMackieD. M.HamiltonD. L. (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 239–268). Nueva York: Academic Press.
9.
FiskeS. T.XuJ.CuddyA. C.GlickP. (1999). (Dis)respecting verus (Dis)liking: Status and Interdependence Predict Ambivalent Stereotypes of Competence and Warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473–489.
10.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 3, 491–512.
11.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1999). Sexism and other «Isms»: Interdependencie, Status and the Ambivalent Content of Stereotypes. EnSexism and Stereotypes in modern society (pp. 193–221). Washinton: American Psychological Association.
12.
GoffmanE. (1956). The nature of deference and demeanor. American Anthropologist, 58, 473–502.
13.
GoodwinS. A.GubinA.FiskeS. T.YzerbytV. Y. (2000). Power biases impression formation: Stereotyping subordinates by default and by design. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, 227–256.
14.
GreenwaldA. G.McgheeD. E.SchwartL. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 6, 1464–1480.
15.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R.RudmanL. A.FarnhamS. D.NosekB. A.RosierM. (2000). Prologue to a unified theory of attitudes, stereotypes, and self-concept. EnForgasJ. P. (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: the role of affect in social cognition and behavior (pp. 308–330). Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
HenleyN. (1975). Power, sex, and nonverbal communication. EnThorneB.HenleyN. (Eds.), Language and sex: Difference and dominance (pp. 184–203). Rowley: Newbury.
17.
HoffmanC.HurstN. (1990). Gender stereotypes: Perception or rationalization?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 197–208.
18.
HuiciC. (1984). The individual and social functions of sex stereotypes. EnTajfelH. (Ed.), The social dimension: European developments in social psychology (Vol 2, pp. 579–602). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
HuiciC. (1999). Estereotipos. EnMoralesJ. F. (Coord.) y otros, Psicología Social (pp. 87–98). Madrid: McGraw-Hill (2a edición).
20.
JackmanM. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations.Berkeley: University of California Press.
21.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.
22.
LeyensJ. P.YzerbytV.SchadronG. (1994). Stereotypes and Social Cognition.Londres: Sage.
23.
MoyaM. (1999). Percepción de personas. EnMoralesJ. F. (Coord.), Psicología Social (pp. 93–122). Madrid: McGraw-Hill (2a edición).
24.
OakesP. J.HaslamS. A.TurnerJ. C. (1994). Stereotypes and social reality.Oxford: Blackwell.
25.
Rodríguez-bailónR.MoyaM.YzerbytV. (2000). Why do superiors attend to the negative stereotypic information about their subordinates?. Effects of power legitimacy on social perception. European Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 651–571.
26.
Rodríguez-bailónR. (2000). Factores socio-estructurales en la formación de impresiones. Efectos del poder y su legitimidad en la estereotipia y juicios sociales. Tesis Doctoral, sin publicar. Universidad de Granada.
27.
RudmanL. A.AshmoreR.GaryM. (2000). Unlearning automatic biases: The malleability of implicit stereotypes and prejudice. Manuscrito submitido para su publicación.
28.
SchneiderD. J. (1996). Modern Stereotype Research: Unfinish Business. EnMacraeC. N.StangorC.HewstoneM., Stereotypes and Stereotyping (pp. 419–453). Nueva York: Guildford Press.
29.
StangorC.SchallerM. (1996). Stereotypes as Individual and Collective Representations. EnMacraeC. N.StangorC.HewstoneM., Stereotypes and Stereotyping (pp. 3–37). Nueva York: Guilford Press.
30.
SwansonJ. E.RudmanL. A.GreenwaldA. G. (2001). Using the Implicit Association Test to investigate attitude-behaviour consistency for stigmatised behaviour. Cognition and Emotion, 15 (2), 207–230.
31.
TajfelH. (1984). Grupos humanos y categorías sociales.Barcelona: Herder. (Original 1981).
32.
TajfelH. (1984). The social dimension.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
WegnerD. M.BarghJ. A. (1998). Control and automaticity in social life. EnGilbertD. T.FiskeS. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 446–496). Nueva York: McGraw-Hill (4th ed.).
