Increased category salience is associated with increased stereotyping. Prior research has not examined the processes that may account for this relationship. That is, it is unclear whether category salience leads to increased stereotyping by increasing stereotype activation (i.e., increased accessibility of stereotypic information), application (i.e., increasing the tendency to apply activated stereotypes), or both processes simultaneously. We examined this question across three studies by manipulating category salience in an implicit stereotyping measure and by applying a process model that provides independent estimates of stereotype activation and application. Our results replicated past findings that category salience increases stereotyping. Modeling results showed that category salience consistently increased the extent of stereotype application but increased stereotype activation in more limited contexts. Implications for models of social categorization and stereotyping are discussed.

Stereotypes can influence social perception in undesirable ways. However, activated stereotypes are not always applied in judgments. The present research investigated how stereotype activation and application processes impact social judgments as a function of available resources for control over stereotypes. Specifically, we varied the time available to intervene in the stereotyping process, and used multinomial modeling to independently estimate stereotype activation and application. As expected, social judgments were less stereotypic when participants had more time to intervene. In terms of mechanisms, stereotype application, and not stereotype activation, corresponded with reductions in stereotypic biases. With increasing time, stereotype application was reduced, reflecting the fact that controlling application is time-dependent. In contrast, stereotype activation increased with increasing time, apparently due to increased engagement with stereotypic material. Thus, stereotype activation was highest when judgments were least stereotypical. Thus, reduced stereotyping may coincide with increased stereotype activation if stereotype application is simultaneously decreased.

Stereotypes can influence social perception in undesirable ways. However, activated stereotypes are not always applied in judgments. The present research investigated how stereotype activation and application processes impact social judgments as a function of available resources for control over stereotypes. Specifically, we varied the time available to intervene in the stereotyping process and used multinomial modeling to independently estimate stereotype activation and application. As expected, social judgments were less stereotypic when participants had more time to intervene. In terms of mechanisms, stereotype application, and not stereotype activation, corresponded with reductions in stereotypic biases. With increasing time, stereotype application was reduced, reflecting the fact that controlling application is time-dependent. In contrast, stereotype activation increased with increasing time, apparently due to increased engagement with stereotypic material. Stereotype activation was highest when judgments were least stereotypical, and thus, reduced stereotyping may coincide with increased stereotype activation if stereotype application is simultaneously decreased.

Research has found that implementation intentions, if-then action plans (e.g., "if I see a Black face, I will think safe"), reduce stereotyping on implicit measures. However, it is unknown by what process(es) implementation intentions reduce implicit stereotyping. The present research examines the effects of implementation intentions on stereotype activation (e.g., extent to which stereotypic information is accessible) and stereotype application (e.g., extent to which accessible stereotypes are applied in judgment). In addition, we assessed the efficiency of implementation intentions by manipulating cognitive resources (e.g., digit-span, restricted response window) while participants made judgments on an implicit stereotyping measure. Across four studies, implementation intentions reduced implicit stereotyping. This decrease in stereotyping was associated with reductions in both stereotype activation and application. In addition, these effects of implementation intentions were highly efficient and associated with reduced stereotyping even for groups for which people may have little practice inhibiting stereotypes (e.g., gender).

Although research findings are increasingly accessible to the public, people may choose to rely on anecdotal over evidence-based information when making important decisions. Thus, a key challenge facing the scientific community is to develop effective strategies for increasing people's reliance on research evidence in their decision-making. Focusing on the critical context of cancer-screening decisions, we find that a brief, distance-based intervention can influence people's intentions to follow evidence-based rather than anecdotal information. Specifically, in a preregistered and well-powered experiment (N=224), participants who set a screening schedule for the next ten years before considering a decision for an upcoming appointment were more inclined to follow the implications of evidence-based screening guidelines (vs. an anecdote), compared to participants who only considered the upcoming appointment. The success of this distance-based intervention represents an important first step in translating decades of laboratory research on distance into practical interventions for more complex and consequential decisions.