Controlled processing of stereotype-inconsistent information (e.g., stereotype reduction, subtyping) requires motivation and ability. Research on ability in stereotyping has focused on general attentional resources, neglecting specific cognitive abilities underlying the controlled processing of stereotype-inconsistent information. We examined the roles of the executive functions of updating, inhibition, and switching in stereotype reduction and maintenance. In two studies, when a stereotype-inconsistent group member was presented, those with both greater inhibitory and greater updating ability showed more stereotype reduction, suggesting that these executive functions are jointly important for regulating stereotype accessibility and integrating stereotype-inconsistent information into group representations. In Study 2, this interaction was eliminated when information that could be used to subtype the stereotype-inconsistent group member was provided.
AmodioD.DevineP. G. (2010). Regulating behavior in the social world: Control in the context of intergroup bias. In HassinR. R.OchsnerK. N.TropeY. (Eds.), Self control in society, mind and brain (pp. 49–75). Oxford University Press.
2.
AmodioD. M. (2014). The neuroscience of prejudice and stereotyping. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(10), 670–682. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3800
3.
AmodioD. M.DevineP. G.Harmon-JonesE. (2007). A dynamic model of guilt: Implications for motivation and self-regulation in the context of prejudice. Psychological Science, 18(6), 524–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01933.x
4.
BarghJ. A. (1999). The cognitive monster: The case against the controllability of automatic stereotype effects. In ChaikenS.TropeY. (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 361–382). The Guilford Press.
5.
BartholowB. D.DickterC. L.SestirM. A. (2006). Stereotype activation and control of race bias: Cognitive control of inhibition and its impairment by alcohol. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(2), 272–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.272
6.
BaumeisterR. F.BratslavskyE.MuravenM.TiceD. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252
7.
BurnsM. D.MonteithM. J.ParkerL. R. (2017). Training away bias: The differential effects of counterstereotype training and self-regulation on stereotype activation and application. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.003
8.
DevineP. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5
9.
DevineP. G.MonteithM. J.ZuwerinkJ. R.ElliotA. J. (1991). Prejudice with and without compunction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 817–830. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.817
10.
DevineP. G.SharpL. B. (2009). Automaticity and control in stereotyping and prejudice. In NelsonT. D. (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 61–87). Psychology Press.
11.
EngleR. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00160
12.
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
13.
FazioR. H. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The mode model as an integrative framework. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 75–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60318-4
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. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60317-2
16.
FriedmanN. P.MiyakeA.CorleyR. P.YoungS. E.DeFriesJ. C.HewittJ. K. (2006). Not all executive functions are related to intelligence. Psychological Science, 17(2), 172–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01681.x
17.
GaldiS.GawronskiB.ArcuriL.FrieseM. (2012). Selective exposure in decided and undecided individuals: Differential relations to automatic associations and conscious beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 559–569. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211435981
18.
GawronskiB.LukeD. M.CreightonL. A. (2024). Dual-process theories. In CarlstonD. E.HugenbergK.JohnsonK. L. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social cognition (2nd ed., pp. 319–353). Oxford University Press.
19.
HigginsE. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In HigginsE. T.KruglanskiA. W. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). The Guilford Press.
20.
HofmannW.SchmeichelB. J.BaddeleyA. D. (2012). Executive functions and self-regulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(3), 174–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.01.006
21.
KundaZ.OlesonK. C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 565–579. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.565
22.
KundaZ.OlesonK. 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(5), 965–979. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.965
23.
LickD. J.AlterA. L.FreemanJ. B. (2018). Superior pattern detectors efficiently learn, activate, apply, and update social stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(2), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000349
24.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 93–120. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.93
25.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V.MilneA. B.JettenJ. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 808–817. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.5.808
26.
MiyakeA.FriedmanN. P.EmersonM. J.WitzkiA. H.HowerterA.WagerT. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
27.
MonsellS. (1996). Control of mental processes. In BruceV. (Ed.), Unsolved mysteries of the mind: Tutorial essays in cognition (pp. 93–148). Erlbaum (Uk) Taylor & Francis, Publ.
28.
MonteithM. J. (1993). Self-regulation of prejudiced responses: Implications for progress in prejudice-reduction efforts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(3), 469–485. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.3.469
29.
MonteithM. J.ShermanJ. W.DevineP. G. (1998). Suppression as a stereotype control strategy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0201_4
30.
MorenoK. N.BodenhausenG. V. (1999). Resisting stereotype change: The role of motivation and attentional capacity in defending social beliefs. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430299021001
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer-Verlag.
33.
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
34.
RichardsZ.HewstoneM. (2001). Subtyping and subgrouping: Processes for the prevention and promotion of stereotype change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(1), 52–73. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0501_4
35.
RydellR. J.Van LooK. J.BoucherK. L. (2014). Stereotype threat and executive functions: Which functions mediate different threat-related outcomes?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(3), 377–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213513475
36.
SchwarzN.BlessH. (1992). Assimilation and contrast effects in attitude measurement: An inclusion/exclusion model. Advances of Consumer Research, 19(1), 72–77.
37.
ShermanJ. W.GawronskiB.TropeY. (Eds.). (2014). Dual-process theories of the social mind. Guilford Press.
38.
SmithE. R.CollinsE. C. (2009). Dual-process models: A social psychological perspective. In EvansJ.FrankishK. (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (1st ed., pp. 197–216). Oxford University PressOxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230167.003.0009
39.
SpearsR.HaslamS. A. (1997). Stereotyping and the burden of cognitive load. In SpearsR.OakesP. J.EllemersN.HaslamS. A. (Eds.), The social psychology of stereotyping and group life (pp. 171–207). Blackwell Publishing.
40.
StroopJ. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651
41.
WeberR.CrockerJ. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(5), 961–977. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.5.961
42.
WegenerD. T.PettyR. E. (1997). The flexible correction model: The role of naive theories of bias in bias correction. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 141–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60017-9
43.
YzerbytV. Y.CoullA.RocherS. J. (1999). Fencing off the deviant: The role of cognitive resources in the maintenance of stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 449–462. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.449
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.
