Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2020-4
Stereotype Formation but No Dissociation: Contradicting Statistics Reduce Explicit and Implicit Stereotypes Engendered by Disproportional Crime Reporting
This study investigated the formation of criminal stereotypes about novel groups. Over 2 days, 316 participants from Prolific Academic read either equal or unequal proportions of crime reports about fictitious groups, Laapians and Niffians. On the second day, additional crime statistics indicating equal crime rates among both groups or control statistics were presented. Unequal crime reporting resulted in explicit (d = .44, p < .001) and implicit (d = .23, p = .001) stereotypes assessed with an Implicit Association Test, while equal reporting did not. On the second day, only explicit stereotypes increased in the unequal crime reporting condition (d = .25, p = .025). Contrary to predictions of the associative-propositional evaluation model, but congruent with De Houwer’s single-process propositional model, crime statistics contradicting the learned regularities reduced both explicit (d = −.43, p = .010) and implicit stereotypes (d = −.20, p = .003).
ArendtF. (2010). Cultivation effects of a newspaper on reality estimates and explicit and implicit attitudes. Journal of Media Psychology, 22, 147–159. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000020
2.
ArendtF. (2012). A newspaper’s effect on the strength of automatic associations in memory. Journal of Media Psychology, 24, 1–8. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000057
3.
ArendtF. (2013). Dose-dependent media priming effects of stereotypic newspaper articles on implicit and explicit stereotypes. Journal of Communication, 63, 830–851. doi:10.1111/jcom.12056
4.
BizerG.BardenJ.PettyR. E. (2003). Attitudes. In NadelL. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (Vol. 1, pp. 247–253). Hampshire, England: MacMillan.
5.
CorneilleO.StahlC. (2018). Associative attitude learning: A closer look at evidence and how it relates to attitude models. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1–29. doi:10.1177/10888683187632
6.
CorrellJ.ParkB.JuddC. M.WittenbrinkB. (2007). The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1102–1117. doi:10.1002/ejsp.450
7.
CunninghamW. A.PreacherK. J.BanajiM. R. (2001). Implicit attitude measures: Consistency, stability, and convergent validity. Psychological Science, 12, 163–170. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00328
8.
De HouwerJ. (2009). The propositional approach to associative learning as an alternative for association formation models. Learning & Behavior, 37, 1–20. doi:10.3758/LB.37.1.1
9.
De HouwerJ. (2014a). A propositional model of implicit evaluation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 342–353. doi:10.1111/spc3.12111
10.
De HouwerJ. (2014b). Why a propositional single-process model of associative learning deserves to be defended. In ShermanJ. W.GawronskiB.TropeY. (Eds.), Dual-process theories of the social mind (pp. 530–541). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
11.
DevineP. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5
12.
DixonT. L. (2017a). Good guys are still always in white? Positive change and continued misrepresentation of race and crime on local television news. Communication Research, 44, 775–792. doi:10.1177/0093650215579223
13.
DixonT. L. (2017b). Understanding how the Internet and social media accelerate racial stereotyping and social division. In LindR. A. (Ed.), Race and gender in electronic media: Content, context, culture (pp. 206–226). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
14.
DixonT. L.AzocarC. L. (2007). Priming crime and activating blackness: Understanding the psychological impact of the overrepresentation of blacks as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of Communication, 57, 229–253. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00341.x
15.
DixonT. L.LinzD. (2000). Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of African Americans and Latinos as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of Communication, 50, 131–154. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02845.x
16.
DuncanT. E.DuncanS. C. (2004). An introduction to latent growth curve modeling. Behavior Therapy, 35, 333–363. doi:10.1016/S0005-7894(04)80042-X
17.
FiedlerK. (2000). Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases. Psychological Review, 107, 659–676. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.107.4.659
18.
FiedlerK. (2014). From intrapsychic to ecological theories in social psychology: Outlines of a functional theory approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 657–670. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2069
19.
FinneyS. J.DiStefanoC. (2013). Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 439–492). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
20.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692–731. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692
21.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2011). The associative-propositional evaluation model: Theory, evidence and open questions. In OlsonJ. M.ZannaM. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 44, pp. 59–128). Waltham, MA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-385522-0.00002-0
22.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2018). Evaluative conditioning from the perspective of the associative-propositional evaluation model. Social Psychological Bulletin, 13, 1–33. doi:10.5964/spb.v13i3.28024
23.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
24.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A. (2001). Health of the implicit association test at age 3. Zeitschrift für experimentelle Psychologie [Experimental Psychology], 48, 85–93. doi:10.1026//0949-3946.48.2.85
25.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197
26.
HancockG. R.FrenchB. F. (2013). Power analysis in structural equation modeling. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 117–159). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
27.
HuX.GawronskiB.BalasR. (2017). Propositional versus dual-process accounts of evaluative conditioning: I. The effects of co-occurrence and relational information on implicit and explicit evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 17–32. doi:10.1177/0146167216673351
28.
JohnsonI. R.KoppB. M.PettyR. E. (2018). Just say no! (and mean it): Meaningful negation as a tool to modify automatic racial attitudes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 88–110. doi:10.1177/1368430216647189
29.
KurdiB.BanajiM. R. (2017). Repeated evaluative pairings and evaluative statements: How effectively do they shift implicit attitudes?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146, 194–213. doi:10.1037/xge0000239
30.
KutznerF.FiedlerK. (2017). Stereotypes as pseudocontingencies. European Review of Social Psychology, 28, 1–49. doi:10.1080/10463283.2016.1260238
31.
LaiC. K.MariniM.LehrS. A.CerrutiC.ShinJ. L.Joy-GabaJ. A.…NosekB. A. (2014). Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1765–1785. doi:10.1037/a0036260
32.
LaneK. A.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G. (2007). Understanding and using the implicit association test: IV. In WittenbrinkB.SchwarzN. (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes (pp. 59–102). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
PayneB. K.VuletichH. A.LundbergK. B. (2017). The bias of crowds: How implicit bias bridges personal and systemic prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 28, 233–248. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2017.1335568
38.
PeerE.BrandimarteL.SamatS.AcquistiA. (2017). Beyond the turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153–163. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006
39.
PetersK. R.GawronskiB. (2011). Are we puppets on a string? Comparing the impact of contingency and validity on implicit and explicit evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 557–569. doi:10.1177/0146167211400423
40.
PettyR. E.BriñolP.DeMarreeK. G. (2007). The meta–cognitive model (MCM) of attitudes: Implications for attitude measurement, change, and strength. Social Cognition, 25, 657–686. doi:10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.657
41.
R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 3.3.0) [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved fromhttps://www.R-project.org/
42.
RatliffK. A.NosekB. A. (2010). Creating distinct implicit and explicit attitudes with an illusory correlation paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 721–728. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.04.011
43.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02
44.
SatorraA. (2000). Scaled and adjusted restricted tests in multi-sample analysis of moment structures. In HeijmansR. D.PollockD. S.SatorraA. (Eds.), Innovations in multivariate statistical analysis. A Festschrift for Heinz Neudecker (pp. 233–247). London, England: Kluwer Academic.
45.
SatorraA.BentlerP. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514. doi:10.1007/BF02296192
46.
ShermanJ. W.GawronskiB.GonsalkoraleK.HugenbergK.AllenT. J.GroomC. J. (2008). The self-regulation of automatic associations and behavioral impulses. Psychological Review, 115, 314–335. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.314
47.
ThompsonM. S.GreenS. B. (2013). Evaluating between-group differences in latent variable means. In HancockG. R.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 163–218). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
48.
Van DesselP.MertensG.SmithC. T.De HouwerJ. (2017). The mere exposure instruction effect: Mere exposure instructions influence liking. Experimental Psychology, 64, 299–314. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000376
49.
WeisbuchM.PaukerK.AmbadyN. (2009). The subtle transmission of race bias via televised nonverbal behavior. Science, 326, 1711–1714. doi:10.1126/science.1178358
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.
