How Stereotypes Are Shared Through Language: A Review and Introduction of the Social Categories and Stereotypes Communication (SCSC) Framework
Open accessAbstract
Language use plays a crucial role in the consensualization of stereotypes within cultural groups. Based on an integrative review of the literature on stereotyping and biased language use, we propose the Social Categories and Stereotypes Communication (SCSC) framework. The framework integrates largely independent areas of literature and explicates the linguistic processes through which social-category stereotypes are shared and maintained. We distinguish two groups of biases in language use that jointly feed and maintain three fundamental cognitive variables in (shared) social-category cognition: perceived category entitativity, stereotype content, and perceived essentialism of associated stereotypic characteristics. These are: (1) Biases in linguistic labels used to denote categories, within which we discuss biases in (a) label content and (b) linguistic form of labels; (2) Biases in describing behaviors and characteristics of categorized individuals, within which we discuss biases in (a) communication content (i.e., what information is communicated), and (b) linguistic form of descriptions (i.e., how is information formulated). Together, these biases create a self-perpetuating cycle in which social-category stereotypes are shared and maintained. The framework allows for a better understanding of stereotype maintaining biases in natural language. We discuss various opportunities for further research.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The labeling of groups may grant legitimacy to boundaries, define relational differences between groups, and reinforce social hierarchies and power imbalances, often with real and material consequences that can segregate, marginalize, and oppress.
“The labeling of groups may grant legitimacy to these boundaries, define relational differences between groups, and reinforce social hierarchies and power imbalances, often with very real and material consequences that can segregate, marginalize, and oppress (Beukeboom and Burgers 2019; Hanna et al. 2020).”
From Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Beukeboom and Burgers 2019
The opening summary (pp. 1–2) says that linguistic labels help maintain social-category stereotypes, supporting the claim that labeling can reinforce group distinctions. The passages available from our copy do not substantiate the further claims about legitimizing boundaries, reinforcing power imbalances, or causing material segregation, marginalization, and oppression. (LLM, conf=0.77)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredLanguage plays an important role in how people understand and think about the world, including gender.
“language plays an important role in how people understand and think about the world (Beukeboom & Burgers, 2019; Fiedler, 2008; Lucy, 1992; Samuel et al., 2019), including gender (Sczesny et al., 2016)”
From A Sexist Language? Gender Differences in Attitudes and Use of Gender-Inclusive Pronouns (2025) · cites this paper as Beukeboom & Burgers, 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 156 · Cited by 126
- Authors
- Beukeboom, C. J., & Burgers, C.
- Affiliations
- Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES)
- Venue
- Review of Communication Research
- Publisher
- UK Zhende Publishing Limited Company
- Published
- 2019
- Volume
- 7
- Pages
- 1-37
- ISSN
- 2255-4165 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2809770202
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 156
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 25.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Review of Communication Research (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Social Sciences › Communication › Swearing, Euphemism, Multilingualism
- Keywords
- stereotypes, language bias, social categories, stereotype maintenance, essentialism, linguistic labels, communication content, linguistic form, social cognition, language and prejudice
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