People with biological essentialist beliefs about social groups also tend to endorse biased beliefs about individuals in those groups, including intensified emphasis on the group, stereotypes, and prejudices. These correlations could be due to biological essentialism causing bias, and some experimental studies support this causal direction. Given this prior work, we expected to find that biological essentialism would lead to increased bias compared with a control condition and set out to extend this prior work in a new direction (regarding “value-based” essentialism). But although the manipulation affected essentialist beliefs and essentialist beliefs were correlated with group emphasis (Study 1), stereotyping (Studies 2, 3a, 3b, and 3c), prejudice (Studies 3a), there was no evidence that biological essentialism caused these outcomes (NTotal = 1,903). Given these findings, our initial research question became moot. We thus focus on reexamining the relationship between essentialism and bias.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
2.
AndreychikM. R.GillM. J. (2015). Do natural kind beliefs about social groups contribute to prejudice? Distinguishing bio-somatic essentialism from bio-behavioral essentialism, and both of these from entitativity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18(4), 454–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430214550341
3.
AtranS. (1998). Folk biology and the anthropology of science: Cognitive universals and cultural particulars. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 547–609. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X98001277
4.
BaileyA. H.KnobeJ.NewmanG. (2021). Value-based essentialism: Essentialist beliefs about social groups with shared values. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 150(10), 1994–2014. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000822
5.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2006). Psychological essentialism and stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.03.003
6.
BrescollV.LaFranceM. (2004). The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science, 15(8), 515–520. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00712.x
7.
BrewerM. B. (1979). Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324.
8.
BrewerM. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In SrullT.K.WyerR.S., Jr. (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (pp. 1–36). Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
BrownR. (2020). The origins of the minimal group paradigm. History of Psychology, 23(4), 371–382.
10.
CarvalhoK.Peretz-LangeR.MuentenerP. (2021). Causal explanations for weight influence children’s social preferences: Biological-essentialist explanations reduce, and behavioral explanations promote, preferences for thin friends. Child Development, 92(2), 682–690.
11.
ChaoM. M.HongY.ChiuC. (2013). Essentializing race: Its implications on racial categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 619–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031332
CimpianA.BrandoneA. C.GelmanS. A. (2010). Generic statements require little evidence for acceptance but have powerful implications. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1452–1482.
14.
CimpianA.SalomonE. (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(5), 461–480.
15.
ConradP.MarkensS. (2001). Constructing the “gay gene” in the news: Optimism and skepticism in the US and British press. Health, 5(3), 373–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/136345930100500306
Dar-NimrodI.HeineS. J. (2011). Genetic essentialism: On the deceptive determinism of DNA. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 800–818. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021860
18.
DasguptaN.GreenwaldA. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 800–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.800
19.
DiesendruckG.haLeviH. (2006). The role of language, appearance, and culture in children’s social category-based induction. Child Development, 77(3), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00889.x
DixonA. R.TellesE. E. (2017). Skin color and colorism: Global research, concepts, and measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 43(1), 405–424.
22.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L. (2004). Aversive racism. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 36, pp. 1–52). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(04)36001-6
23.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.SchnabelN.SaguyT.JohnsonJ. (2010). Recategorization and prosocial behavior. The Psychology of Prosocial Behavior: Group Processes, Intergroup Relations, and Helping, 289–309.
24.
DunhamY.BaronA. S.CareyS. (2011). Consequences of “minimal” group affiliations in children. Child Development, 82(3), 793–811.
25.
DunleaJ. P.HeiphetzL. (2022). Language shapes children’s attitudes: Consequences of internal, behavioral, and societal information in punitive and nonpunitive contexts. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 151(6), 1233–1251.
26.
DunningD. (1999). A newer look: Motivated social cognition and the schematic representation of social concepts. Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1001_1
27.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
28.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878
29.
FurnhamA. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(5), 795–817.
30.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. The Psychology Press.
31.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F.AnastasioP. A.BachmanB. A.RustM. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26.
32.
GallagherN. M.BodenhausenG. V. (2021). Gender essentialism and the mental representation of transgender women and men: A multimethod investigation of stereotype content. Cognition, 217, 104887.
33.
GarretsonJ.SuhayE. (2016). Scientific communication about biological influences on homosexuality and the politics of gay rights. Political Research Quarterly, 69(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912915620050
Gil-WhiteF. (2001). Are ethnic groups biological species to the human brain? Essentialism in human cognition of some social groups. Current Anthropology, 42, 515–554. https://doi.org/10.1086/321802
36.
GohJ.HallJ.RosenthalR. (2016). Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(10), 535–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12267
37.
HammondM. D.CimpianA. (2017). Investigating the cognitive structure of stereotypes: Generic beliefs about groups predict social judgments better than statistical beliefs. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 146(5), 607–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000297
38.
HardenK. P.KoellingerP. D. (2020). Using genetics for social science. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(6), 567–576.
39.
HaslamN.BastianB.BainP.KashimaY. (2006). Psychological essentialism, implicit theories, and intergroup relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206059861
40.
HaslamN.LevyS. R. (2006). Essentialist beliefs about homosexuality: Structure and implications for prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(4), 471–485. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205276516
41.
HaslamN.RothschildL.ErnstD. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164363
42.
HaslamN.RothschildL.ErnstD. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice?British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165072
43.
HoA. K.RobertsS. O.GelmanS. A. (2015). Essentialism and racial bias jointly contribute to the categorization of multiracial individuals. Psychological Science, 26(10), 1639–1645. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615596436
44.
HodsonG.SkorskaM. (2015). Tapping generalized essentialism to predict outgroup prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 371–382.
45.
HussakL. J.CimpianA. (2015). An early-emerging explanatory heuristic promotes support for the status quo. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(5), 739–752.
46.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919.
47.
KellerJ. (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(4), 686–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.686
48.
KrausM. W.KeltnerD. (2013). Social class rank, essentialism, and punitive judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(2), 247–261.
49.
KundaZ. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498.
LandyJ. F.PiazzaJ.GoodwinG. P. (2016). When it’s bad to be friendly and smart: The desirability of sociability and competence depends on morality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(9), 1272–1290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216655984
52.
LevyS. R.StroessnerS. J.DweckC. S. (1998). Stereotype formation and endorsement: The role of implicit theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1421–1436.
53.
MandalaywalaT. M. (2020). Does essentialism lead to racial prejudice? It is not so Black and White. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 59, 195–245.
54.
MandalaywalaT. M.AmodioD. M.RhodesM. (2018). Essentialism promotes racial prejudice by increasing endorsement of social hierarchies. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(4), 461–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617707020
55.
MartinC. L.ParkerS. (1995). Folk theories about sex and race differences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295211006
56.
MedinD. L.OrtonyA. (1989). Psychological essentialism. In VosniadouS.OrtonyA. (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 179–195). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511529863.009
57.
MorganG. S.MullenE.SkitkaL. J. (2010). When values and attributions collide: Liberals’ and conservatives’ values motivate attributions for alleged misdeeds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(9), 1241–1254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210380605
NewmanG. E.KnobeJ. (2019). The essence of essentialism. Mind & Language, 34(5), 585–605.
60.
PaukerK.AmbadyN.ApfelbaumE. P. (2010). Race salience and essentialist thinking in racial stereotype development. Child Development, 81(6), 1799–1813.
61.
Peretz-LangeR. (2021). Why does social essentialism sometimes promote, and other times mitigate, prejudice development? A causal discounting perspective. Cognitive Development, 59, 101085.
62.
Peretz-LangeR.PerryJ.MauentenerP. (2021). Developmental shifts toward structural explanations and interventions for social status disparities. Cognitive Development, 58, 101042.
63.
PlantE. A.DevineP. G. (1998). Internal and external motivation to respond without prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 811–832. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.811
64.
PrenticeD. A.CarranzaE. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066
RangelU.KellerJ. (2011). Essentialism goes social: Belief in social determinism as a component of psychological essentialism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(6), 1056–1078. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022401
68.
RhodesM.LeslieS.SaundersK.DunhamY.CimpianA. (2018). How does social essentialism affect the development of inter-group relations?Developmental Science, 21(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12509
69.
RhodesM.LeslieS. J.TworekC. M. (2012). Cultural transmission of social essentialism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(34), 13526–13531.
70.
RhodesM.MotyK. (2020). What is social essentialism and how does it develop?Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 59, 1–30.
71.
RobertsS. O.RizzoM. T. (2021). The psychology of American racism. American Psychologist, 76(3), 475–487.
RothbartM.TaylorM. (1992). Category labels and social reality: Do we view social categories as natural kinds? In SeminG. R.FiedlerK. (Eds.), Language, interaction and social cognition (pp. 11–136). SAGE.
74.
RudmanL. A.GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E. (2001). Implicit self-concept and evaluative implicit gender stereotypes: Self and ingroup share desirable traits. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(9), 1164–1178.
75.
SaguyT.Reifen-TagarM.JoelD. (2021). The gender-binary cycle: The perpetual relations between a biological-essentialist view of gender, gender ideology, and gender-labelling and sorting. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 376, 20200141.
76.
SuhayE.BrandtM. J.ProulxT. (2017). Lay belief in biopolitics and political prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(2), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616667615
77.
SuhayE.GarretsonJ. (2018). Science, sexuality, and civil rights: Does information on the causes of sexual orientation change attitudes?The Journal of Politics, 80(2), 692–696. https://doi.org/10.1086/694896
78.
SuhayE.JayaratneT. E. (2013). Does biology justify ideology? The politics of genetic attribution. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(2), 497–521. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs049
79.
SutherlandS. L.CimpianA. (2019). Developmental evidence for a link between the inherence bias in explanation and psychological essentialism. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 177, 265–281.
80.
TabbK.LebowitzM. S.AppelbaumP. S. (2019). Behavioral genetics and attributions of moral responsibility. Behavior Genetics, 49(2), 129–135.
81.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 94–109). Brooks-Cole.
82.
TaylorM. G.RhodesM.GelmanS. A. (2009). Boys will be boys; cows will be cows: Children’s essentialist reasoning about gender categories and animal species. Child Development, 80(2), 461–481.
83.
UfkesE. G.CalcagnoJ.GlasfordD. E.DovidioJ. F. (2016). Understanding how common ingroup identity undermines collective action among disadvantaged-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 26–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.11.006
84.
WilliamsM. J.EberhardtJ. L. (2008). Biological conceptions of race and the motivation to cross racial boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(6), 1033–1047. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1033
85.
YangX.DunhamY. (2019). Minimal but meaningful: Probing the limits of randomly assigned social identities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 185, 19–34.
86.
YangX.NaasR.DunhamY. (2022). Testing the limits of structural thinking about gender. Developmental Science, 25(2), e13169.
87.
YzerbytV.CorneilleO.EstradaC. (2001). The interplay of subjective essentialism and entitativity in the formation of stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(2), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0502_5
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
