Priming of Disability and Elderly Stereotype in Motor Performance: Similar or Specific Effects?

Abstract

In three experimental studies, the effects of priming participants with the disability stereotype were investigated with respect to their subsequent motor performance. Also explored were effects of activating two similar stereotypes, persons with a disability and elderly people. In Study 1, participants were primed with the disability stereotype versus with a neutral prime, and then asked to perform on a motor coordination task. In Studies 2 and 3, a third condition was introduced: priming participants with the elderly stereotype. Results indicated that priming participants with the disability stereotype altered their motor performance: they showed decreased manual dexterity and performed slower than the non-primed participants. Priming with the elderly stereotype decreased only performance speed. These findings underline that prime-to-behavior effects may depend on activation of specific stereotype content.

From primed concepts to action: A meta-analysis of the behavioral effects of incidentally presented words.

“…Some priming paradigms mixed primes with distractor words (e.g., 15 out of 30 words in Bargh et al, 1996; seven out of 13 words in Bargh et al, 2001), whereas others presented only prime words (e.g., Chartrand & Bargh, 1996; McCulloch et al, 2008). Finally, studies have widely differed on their selection of behavioral measures, including performance measures (e.g., anagrams, word searches; Bargh et al, 2001; Crusius & Mussweiler, 2012), categorical choices of behavior or products (e.g., Albarracin, Wang, & Leeper, 2009; Sela & Shiv, 2009; Strahan et al, 2002), rates of helping or donation behavior (e.g., Macrae & Johnston, 1998; Smeesters, Wheeler, & Kay, 2009), and motor behaviors (e.g., time spent, number of pegs dropped during a manual dexterity task, the 9-hole peg test; Mathiowetz et al, 1985; Ginsberg, Rohmer, & Louvet, 2012; Wryobeck & Chen, 2003), among others. These factors were considered in an exploratory fashion, as a way of providing information on the future design of behavior priming studies.…”

Is disability really an obstacle to success? Impact of a disability simulation on motivation and performance

“…Based on the assumption that simulating impairment activates beliefs about disability, we predicted that the behaviors of participants enrolled in simulations would be consistent with their beliefs about people with disabilities. Previous studies found that priming disability decreased the performance speed and manual dexterity of students without any disability (Ginsberg et al, ). In the same vein, simulating blindness caused participants to judge blind individuals as less successful and less autonomous than those in the no simulation condition (Silverman, Gwinn, & Van Boven, ).…”

“…To conclude, the mere simulation of disability (i.e., no actual impairment) increased participants’ motivation and led them to be slower and more persevering, characteristics that echo stereotypical beliefs about disability (Ginsberg et al, ). Importantly, those results extended those of Study 1, in that here participants were led to simulate a disability without being actually impaired.…”

“…In such a situation, participants simulating a disability were still expected to display effort at the behavioral level (spending more time than control participants), due to the automatic occurrence of stereotypically consistent behaviors. However, they were also expected to decrease their expression of motivation, especially the adoption of performance goals, because in such competitive contexts, performance goals should be considered incompatible with stereotypical beliefs about disability (Barron, Evans, Baranik, Serpell, & Buvinger, ; Ginsberg et al, ; Rohmer & Louvet, ; Sideridis, Stamovlasis, & Antoniou, ).…”

“…In line with a long tradition of work focusing on the motivational and behavioral impact of stereotypes about social groups, the purpose of the present research was to highlight how the simulation of disability can shape participants’ performance and motivation. Based on previous research showing that attitudes toward persons with disabilities are difficult to explicitly express but can be understood through behaviors (Clément‐Guillotin et al, ; Ginsberg et al, ; Rohmer & Louvet, , ), we devised a design that highlighted beliefs about disability without having to directly question participants. We asked participants without a disability to simulate a visual impairment by wearing special glasses (Studies 1 and 2), or a motor impairment by moving around in a wheelchair (Studies 3 and 4).…”