Social categorization

Categorization

The process of understanding what something is by knowing what other things it is equivalent to and what other things it is different from

What defines typicality is the WHAT of the category

What defines typicality is the PROTOTYPES of the category

What are prototypes

The most representative members of a category - they are the most available 

Categorization of less typical members may be WHAT or prone to WHAT because they are less WHAT (making accommodations to our schemas)

Categorization of less typical members may be SLOWER or prone to ERROR because they are less AVAILABLE (making accommodations to our schemas)

When dealing with social categories we refer to prototypes as WHAT

When dealing with social categories, we refer to prototypes as STEREOTYPES

Illusory correlation

the belief that two variables are associated with one another when in fact there is little or no actual association

Category structure can be split into two things

• WHAT

• WHAT

Category structure can be split into two things

• Homogenous

• Heterogenous

Homogenous

Perceived to be made up of many different sorts of people 

Heterogenous

Perceived to be made up of only a few types of people who are all very similar to each other 

What is out group homogeneity effect

The general tendency that people have to perceive outgroup members to be more homogenous than ingroup members 

Categorization does two things

1. WHAT

2. WHAT

Categorization does two things

1. Save us time in cognitive processing

2. Clarifies and refines our perception of the world (reduces uncertainty and predicts social behaviour) (meaning) 

What are the three key factors that determine whether a category will be activated without awareness:

1. WHAT

2. WHAT

3. WHAT

What are the three key factors that determine whether a category will be activated without awareness:

1. Temporal primacy

2. Perceptual primacy

3. Chronic accessibility

Temporal primacy

we categorize on the basis of the features we encounter first

Perceptual salience

When difference becomes salient (male in a room of females)

Chronic accessibility

categorization in terms of some categories - race, age, gender- is so common that it can become automatized

The problem with trying to suppress a stereotype

• When an individual is no longer trying to suppress their stereotype, and encountering a member of the stereotype category it can result in WHAT stereotyping and stereotype-WHAT behaviour than if no attempt was made to suppress the stereotype in the first place

The problem with trying to suppress a stereotype

• When an individual is no longer trying to suppress their stereotype, and encountering a member of the stereotype category it can result in GREATER stereotyping and stereotype-CONSISTENT behaviour than if no attempt was made to suppress the stereotype in the first place

Consequences of categorization

• Categorization leads to heightened accessibility of WHAT information 

• Stereotypes can influence our WHAT and what we WHAT about social scenes 

• Increase WHAT

• Increase WHAT

Consequences of categorization

• Categorization leads to heightened accessibility of STEREOTYPE-CONSISTENT information 

• Stereotypes can influence our ATTENTION and what we REMEMBER about social scenes 

• Increase ASSIMILATION

• Increase CONTRAST

Assimilation

The cognitive tendency to perceive members of the same group as more similar to one another than they actually are

Contrast

the tendency to exaggerate the differences between different social groups.

prejudice

• People recall more WHAT than WHAT information about someone in their group and more WHAT about someone in another group 

prejudice

• People recall more POSITIVE than NEGATIVE information about someone in their group and more NEGATIVE about someone in another group 

Inconsistent information is WHAT - sometimes is better remembered but remembering inconsistent information requires WHAT effort 

Inconsistent information is SALIENT - sometimes is better remembered but remembering inconsistent information requires COGNITIVE effort 

cognitive overload

A condition that encourages the use of heuristics - leads people to use categories and stereotypes, therefore reducing memory of inconsistent information

Even when stereotype-inconsistent information is remembered its remembered as an WHAT to the rule or a WHAT 

Even when stereotype-inconsistent information is remembered its remembered as an EXCEPTION to the rule or a SUBTYPE 

behavioural assimilation

when thinking about categories people unconsciously begin to act in line with the stereotype associated with those categories

People who are WHAT with a category start to act like that category - Behavioural assimilation

People who are PRIMED with a category start to act like that category - Behavioural assimilation

Priming

Activating a specific attitude, for example a stereotype, can exert an influence on people’s subsequent behaviour

Stereotyping threat

predicament felt by people in situations where they could conform to negative stereotypes associated with their own group membership, do worse because they believe the stereotype,

Example

• African Americans do worse on a test because they know the stereotype of them being dumb

Cognitive load can be a cause for WHAT - this is because the negative stereotype causes them to expend more WHAT when performing the task at hand

Cognitive load can be a cause for STEREOTYPING THREAT - this is because the negative stereotype causes them to expend more COGNITIVE EFFORT when performing the task at hand

Example:

• Am i making mistakes

Those experiencing stereotyping threat become more motivated to identify and WHAT any indication that they might be conforming to the stereotype - but this causes WHAT results since you are expending WHAT energy on smth else

Those experiencing stereotyping threat become more motivated to identify and SUPPRESS any indication that they might be conforming to the stereotype - but this causes POORER results since you are expending MORE energy on smth else

Individuals conform more to their group norms when

1. WHAT

2. WHAT

Individuals conform more to their group norms when

1. Drawing on multiple social identities

2. Reframing a threat as a challenge

Drawing on multiple social identities

• We have multiple WHAT (age, gender, ethnicity); therefore, it depends on which identity is WHAT at the time if  a stereotype threat emerges 

• If given a good and bad stereotype simultaneously, the stereotype threat was WHAT (they believed they only focused on the good one) 

• Additionally, people who have successfully negotiated counter-sterotypic domain such as women who are successful in male-dominated fields, can deflect WHAT

Drawing on multiple social identities

• We have multiple IDENTITIES (age, gender, ethnicity); therefore, it depends on which identity is SALIENT at the time if  a stereotype threat emerges 

• If given a good and bad stereotype simultaneously, the stereotype threat was AVERTED (they believed they only focused on the good one) 

• Additionally, people who have successfully negotiated counter-sterotypic domain such as women who are successful in male-dominated fields, can deflect STEREOTYPE THREAT

Reappraising the threatening situation

1. WHAT

2. WHAT

Reappraising the threatening situation

1. Threat appraisal

2. Challenge appraisal

Threat appraisal

Generates physiological responses and impairs performance 

Challenge appraisal

Facilitates performance by inducing an adaptive stress response

Reappraising the threatening situation

• WHAT can have an impact on performance

• Performance is WHAT when told about stereotype threat beforehand

Reappraising the threatening situation

• FRAMING can have an impact on performance

• Performance is EQUAL when told about stereotype threat beforehand