There is evidence that people with multiple stigmatized identities sometimes experience psychological invisibility—perceivers show difficulty remembering information about these targets (e.g., their faces, spoken statements). In three experiments (total N = 397; within-subject design), we examined how North African gay men’s invisibility is impacted by the perceived incongruence between their minority identities. Across all studies, participants made more memory errors for North African gay men’s statements when they personally believed that being both gay and North African is highly incongruent. In addition, evidence for the salience of intersectional categories as an underlying psychological mechanism was found (Study 3). The present work adds to the literature by showing that invisibility depends on the characteristics of the targets but also on perceivers’ beliefs about targets’ identity incongruence.
AbbeyJ. D.MeloyM. G. (2017). Attention by design: Using attention checks to detect inattentive respondents and improve data quality. Journal of Operations Management, 53–56(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2017.06.001
2.
BushmanB. J.BonacciA. M. (2004). You’ve got mail: Using e-mail to examine the effect of prejudiced attitudes on discrimination against Arabs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(6), 753–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.001
3.
CarnaghiA.StragàM.ColadonatoR.BianchiM.PiccoliV. (2020). Extrapolating stereotypical information on sexual orientation from race categories: The case of Black and Asian men. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 21(2), 224–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000225
4.
ColadonatoR.BianchiM.CaseF.CarnaghiA. (2022). Age stereotyping of gay and heterosexual men: Why does a minority sexual orientation blur the age of old men, in particular?European Journal of Social Psychology, 52(4), 611–625. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2841
5.
CrabtreeC.KimJ. Y.GaddisS. M.HolbeinJ. B.GuageC.MarxW. W. (2023). Validated names for experimental studies on race and ethnicity. Scientific Data, 10(1), Article 130. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-01947-0
6.
DevineP. G.ElliotA. J. (1995). Are racial stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(11), 1139–1150. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672952111002
7.
Di StasioV.LarsenE. N. (2020). The racialized and gendered workplace: Applying an intersectional lens to a field experiment on hiring discrimination in five European labor markets. Social Psychology Quarterly, 83(3), 229–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272520902994
8.
El-TayebF. (2012). “Gays who cannot properly be gay”: Queer Muslims in the neoliberal European city. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 19(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506811426388
9.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
10.
GoffP. A.ThomasM. A.JacksonM. C. (2008). “Ain’t I a woman?” Towards an intersectional approach to person perception and group-based harms. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 59(5–6), 392–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9505-4
11.
HallE. V.HallA. V.GalinskyA. D.PhillipsK. W. (2019). MOSAIC: A model of stereotyping through associated and intersectional categories. Academy of Management Review, 44(3), 643–672. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2017.0109
12.
HutterR. R. C.CrispR. J. (2005). The composition of category conjunctions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(5), 647–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271575
13.
JohnsonK. L.FreemanJ. B.PaukerK. (2012). Race is gendered: How covarying phenotypes and stereotypes bias sex categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025335
14.
JuddC. M.McClellandG. H.RyanC. S. (2017). Data analysis: A model comparison approach to regression, ANOVA, and beyond. Routledge.
KlauerK. C.WegenerI. (1998). Unraveling social categorization in the “who said what?” paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(5), 1155–1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1155
17.
LeiR. F.LeshinR. A.MotyK.Foster-HansonE.RhodesM. (2022). How race and gender shape the development of social prototypes in the United States. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(8), 1956–1971. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001164
18.
LeichtC.de MouraG. R.CrispR. J. (2014). Contesting gender stereotypes stimulates generalized fairness in the selection of leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 1025–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.05.001
19.
MepschenP.DuyvendakJ. W. (2012). European sexual nationalisms: The culturalization of citizenship and the sexual politics of belonging and exclusion. Perspectives on Europe, 42(1), 70–76. https://hdl.handle.net/11245/1.378687
20.
NeelR.LasseterB. (2019). The stigma of perceived irrelevance: An affordance-management theory of interpersonal invisibility. Psychological Review, 126(5), 634–659. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000143
21.
OppenheimerD. M.MeyvisT.DavidenkoN. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 867–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009
22.
PedullaD. S. (2014). The positive consequences of negative stereotypes: Race, sexual orientation, and the job application process. Social Psychology Quarterly, 77(1), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272513506229
23.
PetskoC. D.BodenhausenG. V. (2019). Race–crime congruency effects revisited: Do we take defendants’ sexual orientation into account?Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(1), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617736111
24.
PetskoC. D.RosetteA. S.BodenhausenG. V. (2022). Through the looking glass: A lens-based account of intersectional stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(4), 763–787. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000382
25.
Purdie-VaughnsV.EibachR. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59(5), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4
26.
RakićT.SteffensM. C.SazegarA. (2020). Do people remember what is prototypical? The role of accent–religion intersectionality for individual and category memory. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 39(4), 476–494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20933330
27.
RubinM. (2021). When to adjust alpha during multiple testing: A consideration of disjunction, conjunction, and individual testing. Synthese, 199, 10969–11000. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03276-4
28.
SchugJ.AltN. P.KlauerK. C. (2015). Gendered race prototypes: Evidence for the non-prototypicality of Asian men and Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 56, 121–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.09.012
29.
SchwartzS. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
30.
SchwartzS. H.StruchN. (1989). Values, stereotypes, and intergroup antagonism. In Bar-TalD.GraumannC. F.KruglanskiA. W.StroebeW. (Eds.), Stereotyping and prejudice: Changing conceptions (pp. 151–167). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3582-8_7
31.
SeskoA. K.BiernatM. (2010). Prototypes of race and gender: The invisibility of Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 356–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.016
32.
SeskoA. K.BiernatM. (2018). Invisibility of Black women: Drawing attention to individuality. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(1), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430216663017
33.
SimM.AlmarazS. M.HugenbergK. (2022). Stereotyping at the intersection of race and weight: Diluted threat stereotyping of obese Black men. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 99, Article 104274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104274
34.
SternbergB.BadeaC. (2022, July11–13). Invisibilité intersectionnelle et mémorisation d’informations: le rôle de l’incompatibilité perçue entre les groupes stigmatisés [Intersectional invisibility and information memory: The role of perceived incompatibility between stigmatized groups] [Conference session]. 14th International Congress of Social Psychology, Bordeaux, France. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20111.05286
35.
SternbergB.BadeaC.RubinM. (2023). Intersectional person perception: A scoping review of studies investigating the roles of category relationships and cognitive processes. Social Cognition, 41(2), 165–192. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2023.41.2.165
36.
TaylorS. E.FiskeS. T.EtcoffN. L.RudermanA. J. (1978). Categorical and contextual bases of person memory and stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(7), 778–793. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.7.778
37.
Von RestorffH. (1933). Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld [On the effect of field formations in the trace field]. Psychologische Forschung, 18, 299–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409636
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.
