Six experiments were conducted to test assumptions of a schema-maintenance through compensation analysis. The results of these experiments indicated that perceivers can compensate for the inconsistent action of one individual (the target) by altering their attribution concerning the action of a fellow group member. When the target performed an inconsistent behavior, perceivers compensated by making especially extreme stereotypically consistent attributions concerning a fellow group member’s subsequent action. In addition, in Experiment 5, perceivers compensated via a fellow group member for a target’s inconsistent action while maintaining their general view of group members. Experiments also provided tests of the capability and motivation assumptions of the schema-maintenance through compensation analyses.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
2.
Crocker, J., Hannah, D. B., & Weber, R. (1983). Person memory and causal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 55-66.
3.
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating process: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1-74). New York: Academic Press.
4.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
5.
Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. (1996). Perceiving persons and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 336-355.
6.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.
7.
Hewstone, M. (1989). Causal attribution. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
8.
Johnston, L., Bristow, M., & Love, N. (2000). An investigation of the link between attributional judgments and stereotype-based judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 551-568.
9.
Johnston, L., & Hewstone, M. (1992). Cognitive models of stereotype change. Subtyping and the perceived typicality of disconfirming group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 360-386.
10.
Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 220-266). New York: Academic Press.
11.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28, 107-128.
12.
Kunda, Z., & Oleson, K. C. (1997). When exceptions prove the rule. How extremity of deviance determines the impact of deviant examples on stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 965-979.
13.
Martin, L. L., & Seta, J. J. (1983). Perceptions of unity and distinctiveness as determinants of attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 755-764.
14.
Moreno, K., & Bodenhausen, G. (1999). Resisting stereotype change: The role of motivation and attentional capacity in defending social beliefs. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 2, 5-16.
15.
Seta, J. J., & Seta, C. E. (1982). Personal equity: An intrapersonal comparator system analysis of reward value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 222-235.
16.
Seta, J. J., & Seta, C. E. (1992). Personal equity-comparison theory: An analysis of value and the generation of compensatory and noncompensatory expectancies. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 47-66.
17.
Seta, J. J., & Seta, C. E. (1993). Stereotypes and the generation of compensatory and noncompensatory expectancies of group members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 722-731.
18.
Seta, J. J., Seta, C. E., & Erber, M. W. (1993). The role of cost in generating expectations and value: A personal equity comparison theory analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 103-119.
19.
Seta, C. E., Seta, J. J., & Goodman, R. C. (1998). Social identity orientation and the generation of compensatory expectancies. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20, 280-295.
20.
Stapel, D. A., & Spears, R. (1996). Event accessibility and context effects in causal inference: Judgment of a different order. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(10), 979-992.
21.
Weber, R., & Crocker, J. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 961-977.
22.
Wilder, D. A., Simon, A. F., & Faith, M. (1996). Enhancing the impact of counterstereotype information: Dispositional attributions for deviance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 276-287.
23.
Wilson, T. D., Lisle, D. J., Kraft, D., & Wetzel, C. G. (1989). Preferences as expectation-driven inferences: Effects of affective expectations on affective experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 519-530.
24.
Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 231-248.
25.
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Coull, A., & Rocher, S. (1999). The role of cognitive resources in the maintenance of stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 449-462.
26.
Yzerbyt, V. Y., Rogier, A., & Fiske, S. (1998). Groups entitativity and social attributions: On translating situational constraints into stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1089-1103.
