Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery.

Blair, Irene V.; Jennifer, E.; Lenton, Alison P.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.828

Cited by 528 publications

(502 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

471

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Numerous strategies have been proposed for reducing implicit prejudices (e.g., intergroup contact (Turner & Crisp, 2010), counter-stereotypic imagery (Blair, Ma, & Lenton, 2001), exposure to counter-stereotypic exemplars (Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001)). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This generalisation requires reconciliation (and thus elaborative processing) of a positive experience with a negative out-group attitude. Likewise, imagery (Blair et al, 2001) and consideration of counter-stereotypic exemplars (Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001) both explicitly require individuals to elaborate upon counter-stereotypic information. Hence, encouraging elaborative processing (particularly among those who are not naturally disposed to it) may have added benefits when it comes to effectively reducing implicit prejudice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Easier done than undone… by some of the people, some of the time: The role of elaboration in explicit and implicit group preferences

Wyer

2016

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence suggests that while explicit evaluations of others are easily formed and equally easily changed, implicit evaluations are more intransigent. The present research investigated the role of individual and situational differences in determining whether explicit and implicit evaluations are changed in light of new information. In three studies, participants formed implicit and explicit evaluations of two groups before learning new information that objectively contradicted those evaluations. In Experiment 1, individuals characterized by a greater Personal Need for Structure (PNS) formed more extreme explicit evaluations but were also more likely to reverse them later. In contrast, whilst higher PNS individuals also formed more extreme implicit preferences, they were less likely to change them in response to new information. In Experiments 2a and 2b, the opportunity to re-assess the same evidence on which initial impressions were formed was essential to revising implicit evaluations, but was less important for changing explicit evaluations. These results confirm that differences in motivation and opportunity to engage in elaborative processing moderate the revision of implicit, but not explicit, group preferences.Keywords: implicit vs. explicit preferences, elaboration, personal need for structure 3 Easier Done than Undone… by Some of the People, Some of the Time: The Role of Elaboration in Explicit and Implicit Group Preferences You can't teach an old dog new tricks. A leopard never changes its spots. He's just awolf in sheep's clothing. Our language is replete with clichés that suggest that human nature is fixed, and that we should be sceptical of anyone who tries to convince us that their true character has really changed. Empirically, it seems that we take these clichés to heart -at least at an implicit level. Although social perceivers may be willing to acknowledge in their explicit reports that people can change, they may have difficulty overcoming mental associations with such people that tell them that no change has taken place. For example, Mary might learn about Jack, a violent gang member who spent 10 years in prison and came out a new and rehabilitated man. Mary might profess a belief that Jack is now harmless and not involved in crime, but may still feel immediately afraid and clutch her purse when she encounters Jack in a dark alley at night.Why don't our implicit evaluations always change in line with our explicit preferences? Numerous theories have been proposed to account for discrepancies between implicit and explicit evaluations. Research and theory over the past 30 years has promoted the idea that cognitive processing can be classified into at least two types: relatively automatic processes that draw on associative networks, versus relatively controlled processes that draw on explicit knowledge. Such dual process models are currently prevalent in social psychology (see Petty, Tormala, Brinol, & Jarvis, 2006; Smith & DeCoster, 2000; Strack & Deutsch, 2004; Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Easier done than undone… by some of the people, some of the time: The role of elaboration in explicit and implicit group preferences

Wyer

2016

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, IAT measures of racial attitudes indicate that White participants are less prejudiced against Black persons (a) when interacting with a Black experimenter than when interacting with a White experimenter (e.g., Lowery, Hardin, & Sinclair, 2001); (b) after seeing movie clips of Black individuals in a positive compared with a negative situational context (e.g., Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 2001); or (c) after seeing pictures of admired Black individuals and disliked White individuals compared with pictures of disliked Blacks and admired Whites (e.g., Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001). In studies on gender stereotypes, Blair, Ma, and Lenton (2001) showed that gender stereotypes as measured by IAT effects were less pronounced following counterstereotypic mental imagery but were stronger following stereotypic mental imagery. Note, however, that there is disagreement about whether these malleability effects provide evidence for the validity of IAT scores.…”

Section: Iat Effects the What Criterion: What Attributes Cause Variatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review.

Houwer¹,

Teige‐Mocigemba

Spruyt³

et al. 2009

Psychological Bulletin

729

657

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicit measures can be defined as outcomes of measurement procedures that are caused in an automatic manner by psychological attributes. To establish that a measurement outcome is an implicit measure, one should examine (a) whether the outcome is causally produced by the psychological attribute it was designed to measure, (b) the nature of the processes by which the attribute causes the outcome, and (c) whether these processes operate automatically. This normative analysis provides a heuristic framework for organizing past and future research on implicit measures. The authors illustrate the heuristic function of their framework by using it to review past research on the 2 implicit measures that are currently most popular: effects in implicit association tests and affective priming tasks.Keywords: implicit measures, automaticity, IAT, affective priming Most psychologists would argue that a full understanding of the behavior of an individual requires knowledge not only of the external situation in which the individual is present but also of the internal psychological attributes of the individual. Throughout the history of psychology, researchers have therefore attempted to measure interindividual differences in the psychological attributes of people (e.g., Anastasi, 1958;Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985;Mischel & Shoda, 1995). During the past decade, a major development in this research has been the introduction of so-called implicit measures. These measures were originally put forward mainly within the social psychology literature (e.g., Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995;Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) but have since then spread to various other subdisciplines of psychology, including differential psychology (e.g., Asendorpf, Banse, & Mücke, 2002), clinical psychology (e.g., Gemar, Segal, Sagrati, & Kennedy, 2001, consumer psychology (e.g., Maison, Greenwald, & Bruin, 2004), and health psychology (e.g., Wiers, van Woerden, Smulders, & de Jong, 2002).Despite the widespread use of implicit measures, the actual meaning of the term implicit measure is rarely defined. On the basis of the work of Borsboom (Borsboom, 2006;Borsboom, Mellenbergh, & van Heerden, 2004) and De Houwer (De Houwer, 2006;, we first provide a normative analysis of the concept "implicit measure." The analysis is normative in the sense that it stipulates the properties that an ideal implicit measure should have. As such, the analysis provides a heuristic framework for reviewing and evaluating existing research on implicit measures. By examining the extent to which a particular implicit measure exhibits these normative properties, one can clarify the way in which the measure is an implicit measure and highlight those issues on which further research is required. In the second part of this article, we perform this exercise with regard to the two types of implicit measures that are currently most popular: effects in implicit association tests (IATs;Greenwald et al., 1998) and affective priming tasks (Fazio et al., 1995). Before we present and ap...

show abstract

“…Until more recently, the commonly accepted assumption was that beliefs about others were inflexible (Dovidio & Fazio, 1992;Fazio, Jackson, Dunton & Williams, 1995), however, newer research suggests that in the presence of counter-stereotypic information beliefs are susceptible to malleability (Blair, Ma & Lenton, 2001;Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001). In particular, studies around impression formation show that when individuals exhibit characteristics that set them apart from others in their group, the generalised group beliefs are less likely to apply to that individual (Livingston & Brewer, 2002;Macrae, Mitchell & Pendry, 2002).…”

Section: Offenders' Racementioning

confidence: 99%

An exception to the rule: Belief in redeemability, desistance signals, and the employer’s decision to hire a job applicant with a criminal record

Reich

2017

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery.

Cited by 528 publications

References 65 publications

Easier done than undone… by some of the people, some of the time: The role of elaboration in explicit and implicit group preferences

Easier done than undone… by some of the people, some of the time: The role of elaboration in explicit and implicit group preferences

Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review.

An exception to the rule: Belief in redeemability, desistance signals, and the employer’s decision to hire a job applicant with a criminal record

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About