Stereotypes facilitate the processing of expectancy-consistent (vs expectancy-inconsistent) information, yet the underlying origin of this congruency effect remains unknown. As such, here we sought to identify the cognitive operations through which stereotypes influence decisional processing. In six experiments, participants responded to stimuli that were consistent or inconsistent with respect to prevailing gender stereotypes. To identify the processes underpinning task performance, responses were submitted to a hierarchical drift diffusion model (HDDM) analysis. A consistent pattern of results emerged. Whether manipulated at the level of occupational (Expts. 1, 3, and 5) or trait-based (Expts. 2, 4, and 6) expectancies, stereotypes facilitated task performance and influenced decisional processing via a combination of response and stimulus biases. Specifically, (1) stereotype-consistent stimuli were classified more rapidly than stereotype-inconsistent stimuli; (2) stereotypic responses were favoured over counter-stereotypic responses (i.e., starting-point shift towards stereotypic responses); (3) less evidence was required when responding to stereotypic than counter-stereotypic stimuli (i.e., narrower threshold separation for stereotypic stimuli); and (4) decisional evidence was accumulated more efficiently for stereotype-inconsistent than stereotype-consistent stimuli and when targets had a typical than atypical facial appearance. Collectively, these findings elucidate how stereotypes influence person construal.
BarM. (2007). The proactive brain: Using analogies and associations to generate predictions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 280–289.
5.
BemS. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.
6.
BlairI. V.BanajiM. R. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1142–1163.
7.
BlairI. V.ChapleauK. M.JuddC. M. (2005). The use of Afrocentric features as cues for judgment in the presence of diagnostic information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 59–68.
8.
BlairI. V.JuddC. M.ChapleauK. M. (2004). The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing. Psychological Science, 15, 674–679.
9.
BodenhausenG. 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.
10.
BodenhausenG. V.LichtensteinM. (1987). Social stereotypes and information-processing strategies: The impact of task complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 871–880.
11.
BodenhausenG. V.MacraeC. N. (1998). Stereotype activation and inhibition. In WyerR. S. (Ed.), Advances in Social Cognition: Vol. 11. Stereotype activation and inhibition (pp. 1–52). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
BodenhausenG. V.WyerR. S. (1985). Effects of stereotypes in decision making and information-processing strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 267–282.
13.
BrewerM. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In SrullT. K.WyerR. S. (Eds.), Advances in Social Cognition: Vol. 1. A dual process model of impression formation (pp. 1–36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14.
CarpinellaC. M.HehmanE.FreemanJ. B.JohnsonK. L. (2016). The gendered face of partisan politics: Consequences of facial sex typicality for vote choice. Political Communication, 33, 21–38.
15.
CarpinellaC. M.JohnsonK. L. (2013). Appearance-based politics: Sex-typed facial cues communicate political party affiliation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 156–160.
16.
CassidyB. S.SproutG. T.FreemanJ. B.KrendlA. C. (2017). Looking the part (to me): Effects of racial prototypicality on race perception vary by prejudice. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12, 685–694.
17.
CastelliL.MacraeC. N.ZogmaisterC.ArcuriL. (2004). A tale of two primes: Contextual limits on stereotype activation. Social Cognition, 22, 233–247.
18.
CorbettaM.MiezinF. M.DobmeyerS.ShulmanG. L.PetersenS. E. (1990). Attentional modulation of neural processing of shape, color, and velocity in humans. Science, 248, 1556–1559.
19.
CorrellJ.WittenbrinkB.CrawfordM. T.SadlerM. S. (2015). Stereotypic vision: How stereotypes disambiguate visual stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 219–233.
20.
CrockerJ.HannahD. B.WeberR. (1983). Person memory and causal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 55–66.
21.
DeauxK.LewisL. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 991–1004.
22.
DixonT. L.MaddoxK. B. (2005). Skin tone, crime news, and social reality judgments: Priming the stereotype of the dark and dangerous black criminal. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1555–1570.
23.
DovidioJ. F.HewstoneM.GlickP.EssesV. M. (2010). Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination: Theoretical and empirical overview. In DovidioJ. F.HewstoneM.GlickP.EssesV. M. (Eds.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp. 3–28). London, England: SAGE.
24.
DuncanB. L. (1976). Differential social perception and attribution of intergroup violence: Testing the lower limits of stereotyping of Blacks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 590–598.
25.
DunovanK. E.TremelJ. J.WheelerM. E. (2014). Prior probability and feature predictability interactively bias perceptual decisions. Neuropsychologia, 61, 210–221.
26.
EaglyA. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
FiskeS. T.NeubergS. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1–74). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
28.
FreemanJ. B.AmbadyN. (2009). Motions of the hand expose the partial and parallel activation of stereotypes. Psychological Science, 20, 1183–1188.
29.
FreemanJ. B.AmbadyN. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118, 247–279.
30.
FreemanJ. B.JohnsonK. L. (2016). More than meets the eye: Split-second social perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 362-374.
31.
GolubickisM.FalbénJ. K.CunninghamW. A.MacraeC. N. (2018). Exploring the self-ownership effect: Separating stimulus and response biases. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44, 295–306.
32.
GolubickisM.FalbénJ. K.SahraieA.VisokomogilskiA.CunninghamW. A.SuiJ.MacraeC. N. (2017). Self-prioritization and perceptual matching: The effects of temporal construal. Memory & Cognition, 45, 1223–1239.
33.
GolubickisM.HoN. S. P.FalbénJ. K.MackenzieK. M.BoschettiA.CunninghamW. A.MacraeC. N. (2018). Mine or mother’s? Exploring the self-ownership effect across cultures. Culture and Brain. doi:10.1007/s40167-018-0068-0
34.
GrossbergS. (1987). Competitive learning: From interactive activation to adaptive resonance. Cognitive Science, 11, 23–63.
35.
HagiwaraN.KashyD. A.CesarioJ. (2012). The independent effects of skin tone and facial features on Whites’ affective reactions to Blacks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 892–898.
36.
HainesE. L.DeauxK.LofaroN. (2016). The times they are a-changing… or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 353–363.
37.
HamiltonD. L. (1979). A cognitive -attributional analysis of stereotyping. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 53–84). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
38.
HeilmanM. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 113–135.
HutterR. R.CrispR. J.HumphreysG. W.WatersG. M.MoffittG. (2009). The dynamics of category conjunctions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 673–686.
41.
JohnsonD. J.CesarioJ.PleskacT. J. (2018). How prior information and police experience impact decisions to shoot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 601–623.
42.
JohnsonD. J.HopwoodC. J.CesarioJ.PleskacT. J. (2017). Advancing research on cognitive processes in social and personality psychology: A hierarchical drift diffusion model primer. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 413–423.
43.
JohnstonW. A.HawleyK. J. (1994). Perceptual inhibition of expected inputs: The key that opens closed minds. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 56–72.
44.
JuddC. M.WestfallJ.KennyD. A. (2012). Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 54–69.
45.
JussimL.CainT. R.CrawfordJ. T.HarberK.CohenF. (2009). The unbearable accuracy of stereotypes. In NelsonT. (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 199–227). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
KawakamiK.AmodioD. M.HugenbergK. (2017). Intergroup perception and cognition. An integrative framework for understanding the causes and consequences of social categorization. In OlsonJ. M. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 55, pp. 1–79). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
47.
KernahanC.BartholowB. D.BettencourtB. A. (2000). Effects of category-based expectancy violation on affect-related evaluations: Toward a comprehensive model. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 22, 85–100.
48.
KiteM. E.DeauxK.HainesE. L. (2008). Gender stereotypes. In DenmarkF. L.PaludiM. A. (Eds.), Psychology of women: A handbook of issues and theories (2nd ed., pp. 205–236). London, England: Praeger Books.
49.
KlauerK. C.VossA.SchmitzF.Teige-MocigembaS. (2007). Process components of the Implicit Association Test: A diffusion-model analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 353–368.
50.
KundaZ.ThagardP. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103, 284–308.
51.
LeiteF. P.RatcliffR. (2011). What cognitive processes drive response biases? A diffusion model analysis. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 651–687.
52.
LinkS. W. (1975). The relative judgment theory of two choice response time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 12, 114–135.
53.
LinkS. W.HeathR. A. (1975). A sequential theory of psychological discrimination. Psychometrika, 40, 77–105.
54.
LivingstonR. W.BrewerM. B. (2002). What are we really priming? Cue-based versus category-based processing of facial stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 5–18.
55.
LockeV.MacraeC. N.EatonJ. L. (2005). Is person categorization modulated by exemplar typicality?Social Cognition, 23, 417–428.
56.
MaD. S.CorrellJ.WittenbrinkB. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47, 1122–1135.
57.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93–120.
58.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V.SchloerscheidtA. M.MilneA. B. (1999). Tales of the unexpected: Executive function and person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 200–213.
59.
MacraeC. N.CloutierJ. (2009). A matter of design: Priming context and person perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1012–1015.
60.
MacraeC. N.MartinD. (2007). A boy primed Sue: Feature-based processing and person construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 793–805.
61.
MacraeC. N.MilneA. B.BodenhausenG. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 37–47.
62.
MacraeC. N.StangorC.MilneA. B. (1994). Activating social stereotypes: A functional analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 370–389.
63.
MacraeC. N.VisokomogilskiA.GolubickisM.CunninghamW. A.SahraieA. (2017). Self-relevance prioritizes access to visual awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 438–443.
64.
MartinD.MacraeC. N. (2007). A face with a cue: Exploring the inevitability of person categorization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 806–816.
65.
McClellandJ. L.McNaughtonB. L.O’ReillyR. C. (1995). Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: Insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. Psychological Review, 102, 419–457.
66.
MeyerM.GelmanS. A. (2016). Gender essentialism in children and parents: Implications for the development of gender stereotyping and gender-typed preferences. Sex Roles, 75, 409–421.
PaukerK.AmbadyN. (2009). Multiracial faces: How categorization affects memory at the boundaries of race. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 69–86.
69.
PinheiroJ.BatesD.DebRoyS.SarkarD., & R Development Core Team. (2015). nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. Vienna, Austria: The Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN).
70.
PleskacT. J.CesarioJ.JohnsonD. J. (2018). How race affects evidence accumulation during the decision to shoot. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 1301–1330.
71.
PosnerM. I.SnyderC. R.DavidsonB. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 160–174.
72.
QuadfliegS.FlanniganN.WaiterG. D.RossionB.WigG. S.TurkD. J.MacraeC. N. (2011). Stereotype-based modulation of person perception. NeuroImage, 57, 549–557.
73.
RatcliffR. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108.
74.
RatcliffR.RouderJ. N. (1998). Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychological Science, 9, 347–356.
75.
RatcliffR.SmithP. L.BrownS. D.McKoonG. (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 260–281.
76.
SczesnyS.KühnenU. (2004). Meta-cognition about biological sex and gender-stereotypic physical appearance: Consequences for the assessment of leadership competence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 13–21.
77.
SczesnyS.SpreemannS.StahlbergD. (2006). Masculine = competent? Physical appearance and sex as sources of gender-stereotypic attributions. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 65, 15–23.
78.
ShermanJ. W.LeeA. Y.BessenoffG. R.FrostL. A. (1998). Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: Encoding flexibility under cognitive load. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 589–606.
79.
ShermanJ. W.MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). Attention and stereotyping: Cognitive constraints on the construction of meaningful social impressions. European Review of Social Psychology, 11, 145–175.
80.
SoferC.DotschR.WigboldusD. H.TodorovA. (2015). What is typical is good: The influence of face typicality on perceived trustworthiness. Psychological Science, 26, 39–47.
81.
SrullT. K.WyerR. S. (1989). Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96, 58–83.
82.
StangorC.CrandallC. S. (Eds.) (2013). Stereotyping and prejudice. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
83.
SummerfieldC.de LangeF. P. (2014). Expectation in perceptual decision making: Neural and computational mechanisms. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15, 745–756.
84.
van RavenzwaaijD.MulderM. J.TuerlinckxF.WagenmakersE. J. (2012). Do the dynamics of prior information depend on task context? An analysis of optimal performance and an empirical test. Frontiers in Cognitive Science, 3, Article 132. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00132
85.
von StockhausenL.KoeserS.SczesnyS. (2013). The gender typicality of faces and its impact on visual processing and on hiring decisions. Experimental Psychology, 60, 444–452.
VossA.RothermundK.BrandtstädterJ. (2008). Interpreting ambiguous stimuli: Separating perceptual and judgmental biases. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1048–1056.
88.
VossA.RothermundK.GastA.WenturaD. (2013). Cognitive processes in associative and categorical priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 536–559.
89.
VossA.VossJ. (2007). Fast-dm: A free program for efficient diffusion model analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 767–775.
90.
VossA.VossJ.LercheV. (2015). Assessing cognitive processes with diffusion model analyses: A tutorial based on fast-dm-30. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 336. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00336
91.
WagenmakersE. J. (2009). Methodological and empirical developments for the Ratcliff diffusion model of response times and accuracy. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21, 641–671.
92.
WalkerM.WänkeM. (2017). Caring or daring? Exploring the impact of facial masculinity/femininity and gender category information on first impressions. PLoS ONE, 12, e0181306. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181306
93.
WangP.TanC.-H.ZhangY. L. Q.WangY.-B.LuoJ.-L. (2018). Event-related potential N270 as an index of social information conflict in explicit processing. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 123, 199–206.
94.
WenturaD.RothermundK. (2014). Priming is not priming is not priming. Social Cognition, 32, 47–67.
95.
WhiteC. N.PoldrackR. A. (2014). Decomposing bias in different types of simple decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 385–398.
96.
WhiteK. R.CritesS. L.Jr.TaylorJ. H.CorralG. (2009). Wait, what? Assessing stereotype incongruities using the N400 ERP component. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 4, 191–198.
97.
WieckiT. V.SoferI.FrankM. J. (2013). HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the drift-diffusion model in python. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 7, Article 14. doi:10.3389/fninf.2013.00014
98.
WittenbrinkB.JuddC. M.ParkB. (2001). Spontaneous prejudice in context: Variability in automatically activated attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 815–827.
99.
WoodW.EaglyA. H. (2010). Gender. In FiskeS. T.GilbertD. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, 5th ed., pp. 629–667). New York, NY: Wiley.
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.
