CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 805Social and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status DynamicsCategorization, perception, and language

Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs.

Weber, Reneé, Crocker, Jennifer·1983·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.45.5.961
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Northwestern University Stereotypes have often been assumed to be resistant to change, although some evidence indicates that they are responsive to new information. The present studies examine stereotype change using three models: the bookkeeping model, in which each instance of stereotype-relevant information is used to modify the stereotype gradually; the conversion model, in which stereotypes change radically in response to dramatic or salient instances; and the subtyping model, in which new Stereotypic structures are developed to accommodate instances not easily assimilated by existing stereotypes. The models predict different response patterns as a function of variations in the pattern of stereotype-in consistent evidence and the number of instances encountered. In Experiment 1, subjects were given information about either a small or a large sample of group members in which stereotype-inconsistent evidence was dispersed across many members or concentrated within a few members. Results generally supported the subtyping model when evidence was concentrated and the bookkeeping model when evidence was dispersed. Experiment 3 suggested that the development of subtypes occurs because dramatically inconsistent individuals are seen as unrepresentat ive of the group as a whole. Although the present studies generally favored the subtyping and bookkeeping models, conditions under which the conversion model may operate are considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.45.5.961

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies on topics as diverse as inductive reasoning, social cognition, and lexical categories indicate that the function of representativeness or typicality is increased generalization-prototypes show increased generalization to other members of the category, relative to nonprototypes.

    “Thus, studies on topics as diverse as inductive reasoning, social cognition, and lexical categories indicate that the function of representativeness or typicality is increased generalization-prototypes show increased generalization to other members of the category, relative to nonprototypes.”

    From Human adults and human infants show a “perceptual magnet effect” for the prototypes of speech categories, monkeys do not (1991) · cites this paper as Weber & Crocker, 1983

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Weber, R., & Crocker, J.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
ORCID
Crocker, Jennifer
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1983-11
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
961-977
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/0022-3514.45.5.961
OpenAlex
W2060297782
Cited by
805
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 37
FWCI
40.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
stereotype change, cognitive processes, bookkeeping models, conversion model, group representations, cognitive dissonance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review