Chronic and temporarily activated causal uncertainty beliefs and stereotype usage.

Abstract

In 3 studies, we examined the hypothesis that the effects of stereotype usage on target judgments are moderated by causal uncertainty beliefs and related accuracy goal structures. In Study 1, we focused on the role of chronically accessible causal uncertainty beliefs as predictors of a target's level of guilt for an alleged academic misconduct offense. In Study 2, we examined the role of chronic causal uncertainty reduction goals and a manipulated accuracy goal; in Study 3, we investigated the role of primed causal uncertainty beliefs on guilt judgments. In all 3 studies, we found that activation of causal uncertainty beliefs and accuracy concerns was related to a reduced usage of stereotypes. Moreover, this reduction was not associated with participants' levels of perceived control, depression, state affect, need for cognition, or personal need for structure. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for the model of causal uncertainty and, more generally, in terms of the motivational processes underlying stereotype usage.Within the past decade, there has been an explosion of renewed interest in goals and their effects on cognition, affect, and behavior (Gollwitzer & Bargh, 1996;Higgins & Sorrentino, 1990;Sorrentino & Higgins, 1986. Although much of this work focused on specific goal contents and their affective and behavioral sequelae, a major interest of contemporary theorists and researchers has been the various cognitive processes involved in goal-directed action. Individuals (e.g., Carver & Scheier, 1990;Weary & Edwards, 1996) working within this more recent tradition generally have viewed goals as cognitive representations of desired end states, and they have focused their attention on the cognitive processes and strategies used in the pursuit of goal attainment and/or disengagement.In addition to this focus on the cognitive bases of motivation and goal pursuit, several investigators (e.g., Bargh & Gollwitzer, 1994; Gifford Weary, Jill A. Jacobson, and Stephanie J. Tobin, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University; John A. Edwards, Department of Psychology, Oregon State University.Jill A. Jacobson is now at the Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine.This research was supported in part by National Science Foundation Research Grant SBR-970954I and by National Institute of Mental Health Training Grant T32-MH19728. Study 2 was conducted in connection with Jill A. Jacobson's dissertation research. Partial reports of the data for Study 2 were presented at the 1999 American Psychological Society meeting in Denver, CO. We thank Galen Bodenhausen for sharing his experimental materials with us.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gifford Weary, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, 1885 Neil Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210. Electronic mail may be sent to weary.l@osu.edu. Spencer, Fein, Wolfe, Fong, & Dunn, 1998) have begun to focus on the possible implicit, or automatic, activation of goal-relevant cognitive structures. Thes...

Causal Uncertainty and Stereotype Avoidance: The Role of Perceived Category Fit

“…As in Weary et al (2001), we also examined the effect of category information among low CU participants, β = .42, t(179) = 4.19, p < .001, and among high CU participants, β = .10, t(179) = 1.01, p = .32. Only low CU participants estimated a higher GPA for the honors student compared to the junior.…”

“…We also direct interested readers to Weary et al (2001) for additional tests involving the following correlates of CU: affect, perceived control, personal need for structure, need for cognition, and depression. None of these constructs accounted for the findings of stereotype avoidance among high CU perceivers.…”

“…This work has uncovered an association between accessible CU beliefs and stereotype avoidance. Specifically, Weary and her colleagues found that when asked to read an ambiguous academic misconduct case summary and estimate the likelihood that a student-defendant was guilty, the judgments of high, in contrast to low, CU individuals were not influenced by an available stereotype (Weary, Jacobson, Edwards, & Tobin, 2001). These researchers argued that the judgments of high CU participants did not reveal stereotype effects because task instructions activated their CU beliefs and associated accuracy goals.…”

“…These possibilities were examined in a study that used Weary et al's (2001) academic misconduct paradigm (Tobin, Weary, Wichman, & Jacobson, 2001). In this study, high and low CU perceivers read about an athlete or junior who was accused of cheating on a test.…”

Stereotyping and Society: a Barrier to Achieving Social Equality

“…Stereotypes function to organize the social world, acting as cognitive shortcuts and preventing us from becoming overwhelmed by the complexity of the social information that we encounter on a daily basis (Weary et al, 2001). As part of this process, people make automatic judgments about individuals of certain sexes or races, simplifying social reality and minimizing effortful thoughtprocessing (Tajfel, 1969).…”