DOCSLIB.ORG

The Nature–Nurture Debates: 25 Years of Challenges In

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Nature–Nurture Debates: 25 Years of Challenges In PPSXXX10.1177/1745691613484767Eagly, WoodThe Nature–Nurture Debates: 25 Years of Challenges 484767research-article2013 Perspectives on Psychological Science XX(X) 1 –18 The Nature–Nurture Debates: 25 Years © The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav of Challenges in Understanding the DOI: 10.1177/1745691613484767 Psychology of Gender pps.sagepub.com Alice H. Eagly1 and Wendy Wood2 1Northwestern University and 2University of Southern California Abstract Nature–nurture debates continue to be highly contentious in the psychology of gender despite the common recognition that both types of causal explanations are important. In this article, we provide a historical analysis of the vicissitudes of nature and nurture explanations of sex differences and similarities during the quarter century since the founding of the Association for Psychological Science. We consider how the increasing use of meta-analysis helped to clarify sex difference findings if not the causal explanations for these effects. To illustrate these developments, this article describes socialization and preferences for mates as two important areas of gender research. We also highlight developing research trends that address the interactive processes by which nature and nurture work together in producing sex differences and similarities. Such theorizing holds the promise of better science as well as a more coherent account of the psychology of women and men that should prove to be more influential with the broader public. Keywords psychology of gender, sex differences and similarities, nature and nurture, meta-analysis Is nature or nurture the stronger influence on sex differ- pairing its title and author (conducted March 29, 2013). ences and similarities? If asked, most psychologists would Written in part from the perspective of the author’s own probably reply that the question is misguided. Obviously, career decisions, the article cites mainly the opinions both are influential. Yet, as we show in this article, expressed by other women with highly successful careers nature–nurture debates have remained highly conten- (e.g., Sheryl Sandberg, Elizabeth Warren). tious in the psychology of gender, and contemporary Although Slaughter’s presentation is highly engaging, researchers only sometimes integrate the two causal many of the topics that she covered could have been influences. More commonly, researchers focus on one linked to extensive psychological research (e.g., maternal type of cause to the exclusion of the other or treat them employment, stereotype threat, work–life balance). When as competing explanations. In analyzing the state of these touching on the key issue of causes of the parental divi- nature–nurture debates in psychological science, we sion of childcare responsibilities, Slaughter opted for her invoke the terms in their broadest meaning, whereby personal insight that, despite the influence of social nature refers to biological structures and processes and expectations, maternal instinct (“a maternal imperative,” nurture refers to sociocultural influences. p. 92) is critical. Even though Slaughter’s expertise is in There is no doubt that these issues are important and international relations, it is fair to ask why scientific psy- absorbing to the general public as well as scientists. chology did not enter into her analysis. Moreover, However, despite the immense amount of psychological Slaughter’s approach is not unusual: Authors who write research on gender, often it does not inform public dis- about the engaging gender questions of the day often fail course on gender issues. For example, 2012’s most widely to ground their answers in psychological research. Why? discussed journalistic treatment of gender issues is Anne- Marie Slaughter’s article “Why Women Still Can’t Have It Corresponding Author: All,” which appeared in the July–August issue of The Alice Eagly, Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Atlantic. Evidence of the article’s success lies in the Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60201 approximately 370,000 hits produced by a Google search E-mail: [email protected] 2 Eagly, Wood In this article, we argue that these failures are due in part instinct (e.g., Galton, 1907; McDougall, 1923; Thorndike, to the conflicting messages that scientists convey to the 1906). In keeping with their gender-as-nurture message, public about the psychology of women and men. feminist psychologists also advocated separating sex as a In this article, we analyze changes in psychologists’ biological influence from gender as a sociocultural influ- thinking about nature and nurture by tracing the psychol- ence (e.g., Unger, 1979). In feminist research, gender ogy of gender from the founding of the Association for then received far more emphasis than sex, as illustrated Psychological Science in 1988 to the present day. We thus by Bem’s (1974, 1981) studies demonstrating that gender consider the last quarter century of research. Though we identity, as an individual difference, predicted sex-related recognize the highly varied content of research in basic behavior better than the dichotomous variable of sex. and applied domains, we focus this article on the central The 1980s marked the end of this relative supremacy issue of nature and nurture causation of sex differences of nurture explanations of the psychology of women and and similarities in traits, abilities, behavioral tendencies, men and the beginning of a powerful reassertion of and attitudes and beliefs. For researchers who address nature. Evolutionary psychologists advocated for nature these issues, one dramatic shift in the last quarter century by emphasizing evolved, inherited dispositions in women is the general acceptance by psychologists of meta-analysis and men, as illustrated by Buss’s research (1989) on the as the most appropriate method for aggregating the find- mate preferences of women and men. The theoretical ings of groups of related studies that have compared the writings of Tooby and Cosmides (1989, 1992) attracted sexes. Although this methodological advance guides gen- attention, and Daly and Wilson’s (1983) engaging book der researchers toward acknowledging the systematic pat- proposing evolutionary explanations of various human terning of sex differences and similarities, resolving behaviors reached a wide audience. Although evolution- nature–nurture causal issues remains fraught with conflict. ary theory had been applied to human behavior in the preceding decade, labeled as sociobiology (e.g., Trivers, Historical Trends in Research on Sex 1972; Wilson, 1975), it gained prominence mainly through Differences and Similarities evolutionary psychology. Another source of the rise of nature in the 1980s and The beginning of the past quarter century marked the beyond was psychologists’ increasing efforts to apply the end of an era in psychology with a strong tilt toward science of brain structure and hormones to the psychol- nurture-related explanations of sex-related differences. In ogy of women and men (Hines, 1982; Hines & Green, that period, most developmental psychologists had 1991; Notman & Nadelson, 1991). Although skeptics emphasized socialization and learning as important abounded, especially among feminists (Bleier, 1991), causes (Bandura, 1977; Kagan, 1964; Mischel, 1966), and research in this area proceeded at a rapid pace. The social and personality psychologists had emphasized ste- hypothesis that prenatal and early postnatal androgens reotypes, norms, identities, and roles that support gender affect brain structure and subsequent behavior had roots differentiation in cognition and social behavior (e.g., in earlier research (e.g., Money & Ehrhardt, 1972) and Bem, 1974; Deaux, 1984; Eagly, 1983; Spence & Helmreich, became well-accepted in the 1990s (Collaer & Hines, 1978; Williams & Best, 1982). Despite this emphasis on 1995). Popular themes included sex differences in the nurture, Maccoby and Jacklin’s (1974) influential review relative dominance of the cerebral hemispheres and in considered both biological factors and socialization as the size of the corpus callosum, which connects the cere- potentially causal and raised questions about the consis- bral hemispheres (e.g., Davatzikos & Resnick, 1998). tency and quality of the evidence on sex differences and Researchers also focused attention on the ways that hor- similarities. mones activate behaviors, especially testosterone’s rela- The feminist movement was an important influence tions to dominance and aggression (e.g., Mazur & Booth, on theories of gender because most psychologists who 1998; Sherwin, 1988). Somewhat later, oxytocin became a were allied with the wave of feminism that began in the focus of research concentrating on its relation to sex dif- 1960s were firmly in the nurture camp (Eagly, Eaton, ferences in stress-induced responses and bonding (Taylor Rose, Riger, & McHugh, 2012). Feminist psychologists et al., 2000). argued that many scientists had wrongly ascribed the This rise of nature explanations of sex-related differ- behaviors of women to their intrinsic nature and failed to ences in the 1980s and beyond did not staunch the flow recognize the causes embedded in the social context of of research favoring nurture explanations. Instead, psy- women’s lives (e.g., Weisstein, 1968). In vividly making chologists exploring the effects of social experience on this point, Shields (1975) challenged the gender-as-nature men and women developed many new research ques-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Strength of Social Norms Across Human Groups
    PPSXXX10.1177/1745691617708631Gelfand et al.Strength of Social Norms 708631research-article2017 Perspectives on Psychological Science 2017, Vol. 12(5) 800 –809 The Strength of Social Norms Across © The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permissions: Human Groups sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617708631 10.1177/1745691617708631 www.psychologicalscience.org/PPS Michele J. Gelfand1, Jesse R. Harrington1, and Joshua Conrad Jackson2 1University of Maryland and 2University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Abstract Social norms are a defining feature of human psychology, yet our understanding of them is still underdeveloped. In this article, we present our own cross-cultural research program on tightness-looseness (TL)—which draws on field, experimental, computational, and neuroscience methods—to illustrate how going beyond Western borders is critical for understanding social norms’ functions and their multilevel consequences. Cross-cultural research enables us to account for the universal features of norm psychology but also explains the great cultural diversity we see in social norms around the globe. Keywords culture, diversity, neuroscience, individual differences, environment Imagine a world where everyone drives on both sides around town, to having conversations, to running an of the road. There are stoplights but no one pays atten- organization turn into an uncoordinated mess. tion to them. Trains, buses, and airplanes don’t operate Perhaps because of their important role in human with any fixed schedule. In conversations, people don’t behavior, social norms have been a central topic of greet each other, interrupt each other frequently, and study in psychology. The earliest studies of normative invade each other’s space.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Real Human Personality on Social Presence With
    International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence Eurographics Symposium on Virtual Environments (2016) D. Reiners, D. Iwai, and F. Steinicke (Editors) The Influence of Real Human Personality on Social Presence with a Virtual Human in Augmented Reality Kangsoo Kim1 Gerd Bruder1 Divine Maloney2 Greg Welch1 1The University of Central Florida 2Sewanee: The University of the South Figure 1: Participant interacting with a virtual human in our experimental augmented reality environment. (A) The participant wears an optical see-through head-mounted display and sees the virtual human in either of two experimental conditions: (B) in the “Ignoring/Inconsistency” behavior condition, the virtual human passes through the physical chair (no occlusion) and does not ask for help from the participant, and (C) in the “Requesting/Consistency” behavior condition, the virtual human is naturally occluded by the physical objects and proactively asks help from the participant, to move the physical chair out of the way. Abstract Human responses to an interaction with a Virtual Human (VH) can be influenced by both external factors such as technology- related limitations, and internal factors such as individual differences in personality. While the impacts of external factors have been studied widely, and are typically controlled for in application scenarios, less attention has been devoted to the impacts of internal factors. We present the results of a human-subject experiment where we investigated a particular internal factor: the effects of extraversion–introversion traits of participants on the sense of social presence with a VH in an Augmented Reality (AR) setting. Our results indicate a positive association between a condition where the VH proactively requests help from the participant, and participants indicating higher social presence with the VH, regardless of their personality.
    [Show full text]
  • Reflections on Social Norms and Human Rights
    The Psychology of Social Norms and the Promotion of Human Rights Deborah A. Prentice Princeton University Chapter to appear in R. Goodman, D. Jinks, & A. K. Woods (Eds.), Understanding social action, promoting human rights. New York: Oxford University Press. This chapter was written while I was Visiting Faculty in the School of Social Sciences at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ. I would like to thank Jeremy Adelman, JoAnne Gowa, Bob Keohane, Eric Maskin, Dale Miller, Catherine Ross, Teemu Ruskola, Rick Shweder, and Eric Weitz for helpful discussions and comments on earlier drafts of the chapter. Please direct correspondence to: Deborah Prentice Department of Psychology Princeton University Green Hall Princeton, NJ 08540 [email protected] 1 Promoting human rights means changing behavior: Changing the behavior of governments that mistreat suspected criminals, opponents of their policies, supporters of their political rivals, and members of particular gender, ethnic, or religious groups; changing the behavior of corporations that mistreat their workers, damage the environment, and produce unsafe products; and changing the behavior of citizens who mistreat their spouses, children, and neighbors. In this chapter, I consider what an understanding of how social norms function psychologically has to contribute to this very worthy project. Social norms have proven to be an effective mechanism for changing health-related and environmental behaviors, so there is good reason to think that they might be helpful in the human-rights domain as well. In the social sciences, social norms are defined as socially shared and enforced attitudes specifying what to do and what not to do in a given situation (see Elster, 1990; Sunstein, 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Identification and Prediction of Human Behavior Through Mining Of
    S S symmetry Review Identification and Prediction of Human Behavior through Mining of Unstructured Textual Data Mohammad Reza Davahli 1,*, Waldemar Karwowski 1 , Edgar Gutierrez 1,2 , Krzysztof Fiok 1 , Grzegorz Wróbel 3, Redha Taiar 4 and Tareq Ahram 1 1 Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816, USA; [email protected] (W.K.); [email protected] (E.G.); fi[email protected] (K.F.); [email protected] (T.A.) 2 Center for Latin-American Logistics Innovation, LOGyCA, Bogota 110111, Colombia 3 Department of Logistics and Process Engineering, University of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszów, 35-225 Rzeszów, Poland; [email protected] 4 Sport Science Department, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, 51100 Reims, France; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 30 September 2020; Accepted: 17 November 2020; Published: 19 November 2020 Abstract: The identification of human behavior can provide useful information across multiple job spectra. Recent advances in applying data-based approaches to social sciences have increased the feasibility of modeling human behavior. In particular, studying human behavior by analyzing unstructured textual data has recently received considerable attention because of the abundance of textual data. The main objective of the present study was to discuss the primary methods for identifying and predicting human behavior through the mining of unstructured textual data. Of the 823 articles analyzed, 87 met the predefined inclusion criteria and were included in the literature review. Our results show that the included articles could be symmetrically classified into two groups. The first group of articles attempted to identify the leading indicators of human behavior in unstructured textual data.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender, Status, and Leadership
    Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 57, No. 4, 2001, pp. 637–655 Gender, Status, and Leadership Cecilia L. Ridgeway* Stanford University More than a trait of individuals, gender is an institutionalized system of social practices. The gender system is deeply entwined with social hierarchy and leader- ship because gender stereotypes contain status beliefs that associate greater status worthiness and competence with men than women. This review uses expectation states theory to describe how gender status beliefs create a network of constraining expectations and interpersonal reactions that is a major cause of the “glass ceil- ing.” In mixed-sex or gender-relevant contexts, gender status beliefs shape men’s and women’s assertiveness, the attention and evaluation their performances receive, ability attributed to them on the basis of performance, the influence they achieve, and the likelihood that they emerge as leaders. Gender status beliefs also create legitimacy reactions that penalize assertive women leaders for violating the expected status order and reduce their ability to gain complaince with directives. More than a trait of individuals, gender is an institutionalized system of social practices for constituting males and females as different in socially significant ways and organizing inequality in terms of those differences (Ridgeway & Smith- Lovin, 1999). Widely shared gender stereotypes are in effect the “genetic code” of the gender system, since they constitute the cultural rules or schemas by which people perceive and enact gender difference and inequality. Expectation states the- ory argues that gender is deeply entwined with social hierarchy and leadership because the rules for the gender system that are encoded in gender stereotypes con- tain status beliefs at their core (Wagner & Berger, 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Science
    Outline of science The following outline is provided as a topical overview of • Empirical method – science: • Experimental method – The steps involved in order Science – systematic effort of acquiring knowledge— to produce a reliable and logical conclusion include: through observation and experimentation coupled with logic and reasoning to find out what can be proved or 1. Asking a question about a natural phenomenon not proved—and the knowledge thus acquired. The word 2. Making observations of the phenomenon “science” comes from the Latin word “scientia” mean- 3. Forming a hypothesis – proposed explanation ing knowledge. A practitioner of science is called a for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a "scientist". Modern science respects objective logical rea- scientific hypothesis, the scientific method re- soning, and follows a set of core procedures or rules in or- quires that one can test it. Scientists generally der to determine the nature and underlying natural laws of base scientific hypotheses on previous obser- the universe and everything in it. Some scientists do not vations that cannot satisfactorily be explained know of the rules themselves, but follow them through with the available scientific theories. research policies. These procedures are known as the 4. Predicting a logical consequence of the hy- scientific method. pothesis 5. Testing the hypothesis through an experiment – methodical procedure carried out with the 1 Essence of science goal of verifying, falsifying, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis. The 3 types of
    [Show full text]
  • Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norm Internalization Sergey Gavriletsa,B,C,1 and Peter J
    Collective action and the evolution of social norm internalization Sergey Gavriletsa,b,c,1 and Peter J. Richersond aDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996; bDepartment of Mathematics, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996; cNational Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996; and dDepartment of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 Edited by Simon A. Levin, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, and approved May 4, 2017 (received for review March 7, 2017) Human behavior is strongly affected by culturally transmitted processing, and decision making (11) and the costs of monitor- norms and values. Certain norms are internalized (i.e., acting ing, punishments, or conditional rewards that would otherwise be according to a norm becomes an end in itself rather than merely necessary to ensure cooperation (9, 14). Internalization of norms a tool in achieving certain goals or avoiding social sanctions). allows individuals and groups to adjust their utility functions Humans’ capacity to internalize norms likely evolved in our ances- in situations with a rapidly changing environment when genetic tors to simplify solving certain challenges—including social ones. mechanisms would be too slow to react (9). A society’s values are Here we study theoretically the evolutionary origins of the capac- transmitted through the internalization of norms (15), with some ity to internalize norms. In our models, individuals can choose societies being more successful than others due to their norms to participate in collective actions as well as punish free rid- and institutions (16). The presence of both costs and benefits of ers.
    [Show full text]
  • Alice Eagly • Diane Schanzenbach...8–11 a Total of 175 Scholars Monica Exceptional Promise
    1 Fall 2015 Vol. 37, No. 2 Northwestern University news I P R INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH INTERDISCIPLINARY • NONPARTISAN • POLICY RELEVANT Biology and Beyond Education in the Digital Age Interdisciplinary scholars IPR panelists discuss the digital revolution in the classroom explore new models of human development When the Human Genome Project began visit www.ipr.northwestern.edu. information, more For in 1990, experts believed Photos Leslie Kossoff/LK that people carried an estimated 100,000 or more genes. Since then, the overall count has fallen to fewer than 25,000 genes—or about 7,000 fewer than a fleshy tomato. Does this mean that a human being is less complex than a salad ingredient? No, says IPR biological anthropologist From left: U.S. Rep. Bob Dold (R–IL, 10th District) greets Ellen Wartella, Thomas McDade, who directs Cells Eszter Hargittai, and David Figlio prior to IPR’s policy research briefing on Capitol Hill. to Society (C2S): The Center on Social Disparities and Health at the Institute The pros and cons of online classes, the and offer suggestions about its effective- for Policy Research. Still, the comparison worrying gap in young people’s Internet ness and use in classrooms. indicates the subtle complexity of gene- skills, and a dramatic increase in pre- “Education is the building block for environment interplay. school iPad use were just a few of the everything we want to do as a nation,” topics broached during IPR’s May 19 said U.S. Rep. Bob Dold (R–IL,10th) in (Continued on page 24) policy research briefing on Capitol Hill.
    [Show full text]
  • School, Studying, and Smarts: Gender Stereotypes and Education
    School, Studying, and Smarts: Gender Stereotypes and Education Across 80 Years of American Print Media, 1930-2009* Andrei Boutyline University of Michigan Alina Arseniev-Koehler University of California, Los Angeles Devin J. Cornell Duke University May 22, 2020 * We thank Elizabeth Armstrong, Elizabeth Bruch, Erin Cech, Fabiana Silva, and Mark Mizruchi for reading the manuscript and providing insightful commentary. We also thank attendees at the University of Michigan Measuring and Modeling Culture workshop and the University of Chicago Computational Social Science workshop for their feedback. We are grateful to Yinan Wang and Hannah Simon for their help as undergraduate research assistants. We are also grateful to the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute for bringing us together and providing the opportunity to begin this collaboration. Please direct all correspondence to Andrei Boutyline at Department of Sociology, University of Michigan, Room 3115 LSA Building, 500 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT Gender stereotypes have important consequences for boys’ and girls’ academic outcomes. In this article, we apply computational word embeddings to a 200-million-word corpus of American print media (1930-2009) to examine how these stereotypes changed as women’s educational attainment caught up with and eventually surpassed men’s. This transformation presents a rare opportunity to observe how stereotypes change alongside the reversal of an important pattern of stratification. We track six stereotypes that prior work has linked to academic outcomes. Our results suggest that stereotypes of socio-behavioral skills and problem behaviors—attributes closely tied to the core stereotypical distinction between women as communal and men as agentic—remained unchanged.
    [Show full text]
  • Race Matters for Women Leaders: Intersectional Effects on Agentic Deficiencies and Penalties
    The Leadership Quarterly 27 (2016) 429–445 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect The Leadership Quarterly journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/leaqua Race matters for women leaders: Intersectional effects on agentic deficiencies and penalties Ashleigh Shelby Rosette a, Christy Zhou Koval a, Anyi Ma a,RobertLivingstonb a Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, PO Box 90120, 100 Fuqua Drive, Durham, NC 27708-0120, USA b Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University, 79 John F. Kennedy Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA article info abstract Article history: A significant amount of the research on two types of biases against women leaders—agentic Received 5 April 2015 deficiency (perceptions that women have minimal leadership potential) and agentic penalty Received in revised form 22 January 2016 (backlash for counter-stereotypical behavior)—has generally presumed that the descriptive, Accepted 23 January 2016 prescriptive, and proscriptive stereotypes on which the biases are based are comparable for Available online 16 March 2016 women across racial groups. We propose that the degree to which agentic deficiencies and Editors: Alice Eagly and Madeline Heilman penalties occur is contingent on the dimension of agency that is under consideration and its relation to the stereotypes associated with the target's gendered and racial group. The results of our literature review and analysis suggest that when considered in the context of gender Keywords: and leadership research, at least two dimensions of agency, competence and dominance, close- Leadership fi Gender ly align with perceptions of agentic de ciency and agentic penalty, respectively. Based on our Race analysis and the prevalent stereotypes of Black and Asian American women that are likely Agency most relevant to the two types of biases against women leaders, we examined the interactive Intersectionality effects of racial stereotypes and the agentic biases.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychology Defined ᮢ
    Psychology Defined ᮢ Gregg R. Henriques James Madison University A new form of knowledge technology is used to diagnose psychology’s epistemological woes and provide a solution to the difficulties. The argu- ment presented is that psychology has traditionally spanned two separate but intimately related problems: (a) the problem of animal behavior and (b) the problem of human behavior. Accordingly, the solution offered divides the field into two broad, logically consistent domains. The first domain is psychological formalism, which is defined as the science of mind, corre- sponds to animal behavior, and consists of the basic psychological sci- ences. The second domain is human psychology, which is defined as the science of human behavior at the individual level and is proposed as a hybrid that exists between psychological formalism and the social sciences. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol 60: 1207–1221, 2004. Keywords: Tree of Knowledge (ToK) System; psychological formalism; unified theory; mental behaviorism; Justification Hypothesis We persevere in looking at small questions instead of large ones and our view of the forest is forever obscured by the trees. (Bevan, 1991, p. 475) What is psychology? Is it a single, coherent scientific discipline awaiting transfor- mation from the current preparadigmatic state into a more mature unified one? Or, is it a heterogeneous federation of subdisciplines that will ultimately fragment into a multitude of smaller, more specialized fields? This is, in essence, the “to be or not to be” question of the field. Currently, psychology exists as an uneasy compromise between unification and fragmentation. On the one hand, the existence of numerous societal institutions sug- gests that psychology is a singular entity at some level.
    [Show full text]
  • How Group Stereotypes Are Changed by Changing the Roles in Which Group Members Are Observed
    How Group Stereotypes Are Changed by Changing the Roles in which Group Members Are Observed In an article recently published in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (“Evidence for the Social Role Theory of Stereotype Content: Observations of Groups’ Roles Shape Stereotypes,” 2014, Vol. 107, 371-392), Anne Koenig and Alice Eagly applied social role theory to account for the content of a wide range of stereotypes of social groups. Their key hypothesis was that these stereotypes derive from people’s observations of the social roles in which members of the groups are overrepresented relative to their numbers in the general population. People thus infer group members’ traits from observing their typical role behaviors in everyday life, though direct experience and media exposure. Thus, even though stereotypes of groups can seem arbitrary, they reflect inferences of traits from everyday observations. In this novel test of how stereotypes can develop from observations, preliminary research collected participants’ beliefs about the occupational roles (e.g., lawyer, teacher, fast food worker, chief executive officer, store clerk, manager) in which members of social groups (e.g., Black women, Hispanics, White men, the rich, senior citizens, high school dropouts) are overrepresented relative to their numbers in the general population. These beliefs about groups’ typical occupational roles proved to be generally accurate when evaluated in relation to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Then, correlational studies predicted participants’ stereotypes of social groups from the attributes ascribed to group members’ typical occupational roles (Studies 1a, 1b, and 1c), the behaviors associated with those roles (Study 2), and the occupational interest profile of the roles (Study 3).
    [Show full text]