Condoning stereotyping? How awareness of stereotyping prevalence impacts expression of stereotypes.
Abstract
The deleterious effects of stereotyping on individual and group outcomes have prompted a search for solutions. One approach has been to increase awareness of the prevalence of stereotyping in the hope of motivating individuals to resist natural inclinations. However, it could be that this strategy creates a norm for stereotyping, which paradoxically undermines desired effects. The present research demonstrates that individuals who received a high prevalence of stereotyping message expressed more stereotypes than those who received a low prevalence of stereotyping message (Studies 1a, 1b, 1c, and 2) or no message (Study 2). Furthermore, working professionals who received a high prevalence of stereotyping message were less willing to work with an individual who violated stereotypical norms than those who received no message, a low prevalence of stereotyping message, or a high prevalence of counter-stereotyping effort message (Study 3). Also, in a competitive task, individuals who received a high prevalence of stereotyping message treated their opponents in more stereotype-consistent ways than those who received a low prevalence of stereotyping message or those who received a high prevalence of counter-stereotyping effort message (Study 4).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Duguid and Thomas-Hunt found that individuals informed the vast majority harbour stereotypes showed more stereotyping than those told few are biased.
“individuals informed that the vast majority of people harbour stereotypes that bias their social evaluations subsequently showed themselves more stereotyping in their own social evaluations than those told that only very few people are biased by their stereotypes (and controls;Duguid and Thomas-Hunt [2015]).”
From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Duguid and Thomas-Hunt [2015]
Some of the ten claims are closely related to statements used in the reviewed studies, or are supported by other studies.
“some of these claims are very closely related to the statements used in the studies reviewed (see claim 2 and Sparkman and Walton [2017]; claim 4 and Gerber and Rogers [2009]; claim 5 and Duguid and Thomas-Hunt [2015]), or are supported by other studies”
From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Duguid and Thomas-Hunt [2015]
In the empirical literature on descriptive norms, discussions of experimental results typically focus only on how descriptive norms can be used by policy-makers to bring about positive social change.
“in the empirical literature on descriptive norms, the focus in discussions of experimental results is typically only on how descriptive norms can be used by, for instance, policy-makers to bring about positive social change”
From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Duguid and Thomas-Hunt [2015]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 115 · Cited by 200
- Authors
- Duguid, M. M., & Thomas-Hunt, M. C.
- Affiliations
- Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering (US)
- University of Virginia (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 343-359
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W1975184803
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 115
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6
- FWCI
- 30.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (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 › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Keywords
- stereotyping, counter-stereotyping, normative influence, intergroup relations, competitive behavior, counterproductive work behavior
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Awareness, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Social Behavior, Social Perception, Stereotyping, Negotiating, Young Adult
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
