Cited by 345Death Anxiety and Social ExclusionSocial and Intergroup PsychologyDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Stereotypes and terror management: Evidence that mortality salience enhances stereotypic thinking and preferences.

Schimel, Jeff, Simon, Linda, Greenberg, Jeff, Pyszczynski, Tom, Solomon, Sheldon, Waxmonsky, Jeannette, Arndt, Jamie·1999·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

If stereotypes function to protect people against death-related concerns, then mortality salience should increase stereotypic thinking and preferences for stereotype-confirming individuals. Study 1 demonstrated that mortality salience increased stereotyping of Germans. In Study 2, it increased participants' tendency to generate more explanations for stereotype-inconsistent than stereotype-consistent gender role behavior. In Study 3, mortality salience increased participants' liking for a stereotype-consistent African American and decreased their liking for a stereotype-inconsistent African American; control participants exhibited the opposite preference. Study 4 replicated this pattern with evaluations of stereotype-confirming or stereotype-disconfirming men and women. Study 5 showed that, among participants high in need for closure, mortality salience led to decreased liking for a stereotype-inconsistent gay man.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.905

Cites

97 of 97 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?

  • Mortality salience promotes racism and stereotyping.

    “and promotes racism and stereotyping”
  • Terror management processes contribute to intergroup biases, racism and stereotyping, and aggression towards individuals who threaten one's cultural worldview.

    “Research has repeatedly demonstrated that terror management processes contribute to intergroup biases [7,16], racism and stereotyping [17], and aggression towards individuals who threaten one's cultural worldview [9].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schimel, J., Simon, L., Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Solomon, S., Waxmonsky, J., & Arndt, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
  • University of Missouri (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1999
Volume
77
Issue
5
Pages
905-926
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2126015705
Cited by
345
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 21
FWCI
9.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
mortality salience, terror management theory, stereotypes, gender role behavior, intergroup attitudes, need for closure, gay men, African Americans, German, fear of death
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude to Death, Black or African American, Colorado, Female, Gender Identity, Germany, Humans, Male, Prejudice, Random Allocation, Social Perception, Stereotyping, Violence, Case-Control Studies, Homosexuality, Male, Black People

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