Positive stereotype

Last updated

In social psychology, a positive stereotype refers to a subjectively favourable belief held about a social group. [1] Common examples of positive stereotypes are Asians with better math ability, African Americans with greater athletic ability, and women with being warmer and more communal. As opposed to negative stereotypes, positive stereotypes represent a "positive" evaluation of a group that typically signals an advantage over another group. [2] As such, positive stereotypes may be considered a form of compliment or praise. [3] However, positive stereotypes can have a positive or negative effect on targets of positive stereotypes. The positive or negative influence of positive stereotypes on targets depends on three factors: (1) how the positive stereotype is stated, (2) who is stating the positive stereotype, (3) in what culture the positive stereotype is presented (e.g., Western contexts vs. East Asian contexts). [4]

Contents

Prevalence

In The Nature of Prejudice (1954), Gordon Allport suggested that the categorisation of people into groups is adaptive. Although, this categorisation may allow for quicker processing of information present in one's environment, this process may result in stereotyping. [5] Stereotypes have implications for targets of stereotypes and interpersonal interactions generally, because stereotypes assign traits and abilities to members of social groups due simply to their perceived group membership. [4] Much research on prejudice and stereotypes has largely focused on negative stereotypes (e.g., the association of older adults with frailty) and the result of their prevalence (e.g., stereotype threat) on perceivers and targets. [6]

Composed of three studies spanning nearly 40 years, the Princeton Trilogy (1933) is noted as one of the earliest set of studies documenting the actual content of stereotypes attributed to different ethnic groups and the change in content over time. [7] [8] [9] In the initial study of Princeton students in 1933, students were asked to list the traits that were associated with various racial/ethnic groups (e.g., Germans, Jews, Negroes). In this initial study, students were found to associate distinct traits with each social group and that there was a high consensus among beliefs (e.g., Germans were scientifically minded and industrious, Italians were artistic, and Negroes were superstitious and lazy). [7] In the follow-up studies in 1951 and in 1969, the researchers found that the consensus and content of the stereotypes had changed in the four decades after the initial study. [10]

In the U.S., the content of stereotypes that people explicitly associate to other groups have become more positive since the onset of early studies, such as the Princeton Trilogy, that measured stereotype content. [10] The positive change in content can be attributed to multiple factors: [4] [10]

Although both positive stereotypes and negative stereotypes require making generalisations about a group, positive stereotypes and their expression may not be seen as rooted in prejudice because of their positive valence. [1] Additionally, because positive stereotypes may, on the surface, indicate a positive view of a social identity, expression of positive stereotypes in social interactions may not be as readily suppressed. [5] As a result, positive stereotypes are more likely to be used to when describing a group than a negative stereotype, (e.g., "Women are more warm than men" versus saying "Women are less competent than men") which may contribute to their increase in prevalence. [4] [10] [11]

Interaction with negative stereotypes

In their stereotype content model (SCM), Fiske and colleagues (2002) provided evidence that being positively stereotyped in one domain typically leads to being correspondingly negatively stereotyped in another domain. [11] In their model of "mixed" stereotype content, they focused on the stereotypes of warmth and competence. In their model, they propose that "people want to know others’ intent (i.e., warmth) and their capability to pursue their intentions (i.e., competence)" (p. 879) [11]

The researchers indicated that the motivation to positively stereotype groups as either warm or competent stemmed from perceived status and competition of an out-group. According to the SCM, out-groups are positively stereotyped as more competent to the extent that they are more powerful or hold higher-status. And correspondingly, out-groups are positively stereotyped as more warm to the extent that they are seen as less competition. However being positively stereotyped on one dimension usually corresponded with being negatively stereotyped on the other dimension.

Stereotype Content Model from Fiske et al., 2002 Mixed stereotype content model (Fiske et al.).png
Stereotype Content Model from Fiske et al., 2002

For instance, social out-groups viewed as subordinate and not competitive (e.g., elderly people) are often stereotyped as higher in warmth, but lower in competence. Being high in warmth and low in competence is considered to be a paternalistic stereotype, as the out-group is perceived as not inclined or incapable to harm the in-group. On the other end of the spectrum, an out-group that is perceived as high-status and highly competitive (e.g., rich people) may evoke an envious stereotype. These groups would likely be positively stereotyped as being high in competence to justify their higher relative position in society (compared to one's own in-group). However, feelings of envy or resentment about the group's higher status is justified by perceiving them as more cold (i.e., lower in warmth). [11]

Follow-up research has identified that for some subordinate groups being positively stereotyped as high in competence may vary in meaning. For instance, Black athletes and Black musicians are positively stereotyped as high in competence. However, when investigated further, the high competence rating was attributed to being competent due to talent rather than due to intelligence. [12]

Advantages

Researchers have found that being associated with a group that is positively stereotyped in a domain (e.g., academics) can result in enhanced performance if one is led to think about one's group membership, but not the specific stereotype. For instance, researchers have studied how the performance of Asian-Americans is affected when they are exposed to the common stereotype that Asian-Americans are good at mathematics. In one study, before taking a math test, one group of Asian-Americans were subtly led to think about the association of Asians and better math ability through answering questions about their ethnic identity and family history (e.g., what languages they spoke, how many generations of their family lived in America). Compared to both another group of Asian-Americans that were explicitly reminded about the positive association between Asian-Americans and math and a control condition that was not reminded of their ethnicity or the positive stereotype, the group lead to indirectly think of the positive Asian stereotype answered more math questions correctly. [13] In a separate study, Asian-American women subtly led to think about their ethnic identity (i.e., Asian) performed more accurately on a quantitative task than did Asian-American women led to think about their gender identity (i.e., woman) and women that were not made to think about either identity. [14] In a study of age and memory, older individuals primed to think of positive stereotypes associated with older age and wisdom showed increased performance on a set of memory tasks. [15]

Disadvantages

When positive stereotypes are expressed or simply believed as true about a group and its members, positive stereotypes can be related to a number negative consequences for targets’ emotional and psychological states, their performance-based behaviors, and others’ judgments of them. The ambiguity of positive stereotypes when encountered over time might come to be seen as a form of microaggression. [4] [16]

Depersonalization

Because stereotypes communicate beliefs held about a group, being the target of a stereotype can evoke a sense of being depersonalized or being seen only by one's group membership instead of as a unique individual. Feeling depersonalized has been found to determine the extent of a person's negative reaction to being the target of a positive stereotype. [17] For example, women who were told that they had performed well on a math test reported higher levels of anger and greater desire to attack or avoid the male test administrator if when he gave them their positive feedback, he said, "Wow...you did really well for a woman" versus if he simply said, "Wow...you did really well." [18] In a set of studies by Siy and Cheryan (2013), women and U.S.-born Asian Americans were made the target of positive stereotypes (e.g., You women are so cooperative, I know all Asians are good at math). Both women and Asian-American targets expressed greater dislike and negativity towards the person expressing the stereotype. In the study of Asian-Americans, those participants that were the target of positive stereotypes reported feeling greater levels of anger and annoyance than those who were not targets of positive stereotypes. The amount of negativity felt and expressed was influenced by the extent that the positive stereotype made the participants feel depersonalised. [17]

To determine whether this negative reaction to feeling depersonalized by a positive stereotype is found across different cultures, Siy and Cheryan (2013) also studied U.S. born Asian-Americans compared to non-U.S. born Asian-Americans. They found that both U.S. and non-U.S. born groups reported similar levels of depersonalization as a result of being a target of a positive stereotype. However, unlike in their previous studies, the extent of feeling depersonalized did not predict negative reactions to being stereotyped for non-U.S. born Asian-Americans. [17] The researchers asserted that non-U.S. born Asian-Americans may react less negatively to being depersonalized and thus would react less negatively to being the target of a positive stereotype. This difference was attributed to general differences in values of East Asian cultures, which place more value on interdependence, and Western cultures (e.g., U.S. culture), which place more value on independence. Eastern cultures promote more collectivistic values and individuals are more likely to describe themselves in relation to others and by their group memberships. In contrast, Western cultures promote more individualistic values and thus individuals place high importance on being seen as a unique individual, separate from others. [19] Because being the target of a stereotype may signal that an individual is being judged by their group membership and not by their individual traits, someone who values being viewed as an individual may have an increased negative reaction to being depersonalized. Thus, the extent of a target's negative reaction to being depersonalized by a positive stereotype can depend largely on the relevant culture in which the stereotype is expressed, and importantly, how a person views themselves and wants to be viewed in relation to others. [17]

Association with negative stereotypes

"Positive stereotypes may signal to targets that negative stereotypes are not far behind" -In Prejudice Masquerading as Praise (Siy & Cheryan, 2016, p. 953) [1]

Social groups typically are associated with both positive and negative stereotypes. [11] For example, women are positively stereotyped as warm but negatively stereotyped as weak; Asian-Americans are positively stereotyped as competent but negatively stereotyped as cold; Black Americans are positively stereotyped as athletic but negatively stereotyped as unintelligent. [2] An individual targeted by a positive stereotype associated with their social group may assume that the stereotyper also believes they possess the negative stereotypes associated with the group. [1] The negative stereotype that is assumed to be held by the stereotyper depends on to what social group the positive stereotype references. In a study by Siy & Cheryan (2016), Asian-American men were either exposed to a positive stereotype about their race (e.g., "Asians are ambitious") or their gender (e.g., "Men are ambitious"). Asian men that were positively stereotyped based on their gender were more likely to believe that negative gender stereotypes (e.g., aggressive, dominant) were also being applied to them than those who were only targets of positive racial stereotypes. In a similar manner, Asian men that were targets of positive racial stereotypes were more likely to believe that negative racial stereotypes (e.g., bad at driving, bad at English) were also being applied to them. [1]

Example

The Model Minority Myth perfectly explains how positive stereotypes have negative consequences. The model minority myth is a stereotype against Asian Americans and it states how all Asian Americans are intelligent, hard-working, and academically more successful than other minorities. In order words, it says that Asian Americans outperform other racial groups in school.

The model minority myth is a positive stereotype, which says Asian Americans outperform other groups, but it also has negative stereotypes associated with it. Due to this stereotype, Asian Americans are faced with frequent racism, which causes interracial tension. On top of that, the myth deemphasizes the academic problems that Asian Americans have. Since Asian Americans are perceived with this “positive” stereotype, they tend to hide their personal problems because they don’t want to break this “positive" stereotype around them. It makes people hide in a shell because they don't want to be the odd one out. They want to fit into the stereotype, even if they don't. This positive stereotype ignores the diversity in the group of Asian Americans by not understanding that not all Asian Americans have same resources or even the same experiences.

The model minority myth puts into perspective how good stereotypes can still be associated with negative stereotypes, so people need to be careful of their words because it can make someone feel less of a person in their group.

Related Research Articles

The halo effect is the tendency for positive impressions of a person, company, country, brand, or product in one area to positively influence one's opinion or feelings. Halo effect is ”the name given to the phenomenon whereby evaluators tend to be influenced by their previous judgments of performance or personality.” The halo effect is a cognitive bias which can prevent someone from accepting a person, a product or a brand based on the sum of all objective circumstances at hand.

The physical attractiveness stereotype, commonly known as the "beautiful-is-good" stereotype, is the tendency to assume that physically attractive individuals, coinciding with social beauty standards, also possess other desirable personality traits, such as intelligence, social competence, and morality. The target benefits from what has been coined as “pretty privilege”, namely social, economic, and political advantages or benefits. Physical attractiveness can have a significant effect on how people are judged in terms of employment or social opportunities, friendship, sexual behavior, and marriage.

The implicit-association test (IAT) is an assessment intended to detect subconscious associations between mental representations of objects (concepts) in memory. Its best-known application is the assessment of implicit stereotypes held by test subjects, such as associations between particular racial categories and stereotypes about those groups. The test has been applied to a variety of belief associations, such as those involving racial groups, gender, sexuality, age, and religion but also the self-esteem, political views, and predictions of the test taker. The implicit-association test is the subject of significant academic and popular debate regarding its validity, reliability, and usefulness in assessing implicit bias.

Stereotype threat is a situational predicament in which people are or feel themselves to be at risk of conforming to stereotypes about their social group. It is theorized to be a contributing factor to long-standing racial and gender gaps in academic performance. Since its introduction into the academic literature, stereotype threat has become one of the most widely studied topics in the field of social psychology.

Self-determination theory (SDT) is a macro theory of human motivation and personality that concerns people's innate growth tendencies and innate psychological needs. It pertains to the motivation behind people's choices in the absence of external influences and distractions. SDT focuses on the degree to which human behavior is self-motivated and self-determined.

Susan Tufts Fiske is an American psychologist who serves as the Eugene Higgins Professor of Psychology and Public Affairs in the Department of Psychology at Princeton University. She is a social psychologist known for her work on social cognition, stereotypes, and prejudice. Fiske leads the Intergroup Relations, Social Cognition, and Social Neuroscience Lab at Princeton University. Her theoretical contributions include the development of the stereotype content model, ambivalent sexism theory, power as control theory, and the continuum model of impression formation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stereotype</span> Generalized but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing

In social psychology, a stereotype is a generalized belief about a particular category of people. It is an expectation that people might have about every person of a particular group. The type of expectation can vary; it can be, for example, an expectation about the group's personality, preferences, appearance or ability. Stereotypes are often overgeneralized, inaccurate, and resistant to new information. A stereotype does not necessarily need to be a negative assumption. They may be positive, neutral, or negative.

Implicit attitudes are evaluations that occur without conscious awareness towards an attitude object or the self. These evaluations are generally either favorable or unfavorable and come about from various influences in the individual experience. The commonly used definition of implicit attitude within cognitive and social psychology comes from Anthony Greenwald and Mahzarin Banaji's template for definitions of terms related to implicit cognition: "Implicit attitudes are introspectively unidentified traces of past experience that mediate favorable or unfavorable feeling, thought, or action toward social objects". These thoughts, feelings or actions have an influence on behavior that the individual may not be aware of.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Self-image</span> Mental picture of self that comes from different sources

Self-image is the mental picture, generally of a kind that is quite resistant to change, that depicts not only details that are potentially available to an objective investigation by others, but also items that have been learned by persons about themselves, either from personal experiences or by internalizing the judgments of others. In some formulations, it is a component of self-concept.

Ambivalent prejudice is a social psychological theory that states that, when people become aware that they have conflicting beliefs about an outgroup, they experience an unpleasant mental feeling generally referred to as cognitive dissonance. These feelings are brought about because the individual on one hand believes in humanitarian virtues such as helping those in need, but on the other hand also believes in individualistic virtues such as working hard to improve one's life.

Benevolent prejudice is a superficially positive prejudice expressed in terms of positive beliefs and emotional responses, which are associated with hostile prejudices or result in keeping affected groups in inferior societal positions. Benevolent prejudice can be expressed towards those of different race, religion, ideology, country, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

In social psychology, self-stereotyping is a process by which an individual integrates and internalizes commonly held characterizations of an in-group into their self-concept. It is described as part of social identity theory (SIT) and, more specifically, self-categorization theory (SCT).

The women-are-wonderful effect is the phenomenon found in psychological and sociological research which suggests that people associate more positive attributes with women when compared to men. This bias reflects an emotional bias toward women as a general case. The phrase was coined by Alice Eagly and Antonio Mladinic in 1994 after finding that both male and female participants tend to assign positive traits to women, with female participants showing a far more pronounced bias. Positive traits were assigned to men by participants of both genders, but to a far lesser degree.

Role congruity theory proposes that a group will be positively evaluated when its characteristics are recognized as aligning with that group's typical social roles. Conversely, the stereotype fit hypothesis suggests that group members will experience discrimination in different social roles or positions to the extent that their group stereotypically does not have characteristics associated with success in the position. For instance, women may not be considered a good fit for a managerial position if being aggressive is seen as a characteristic of a successful manager. Due to stereotype fit, men may be considered more qualified for the position and are not only more likely to be hired, but are also more likely to be promoted as well.

In social psychology, the stereotype content model (SCM) is a model, first proposed in 2002, postulating that all group stereotypes and interpersonal impressions form along two dimensions: (1) warmth and (2) competence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amy Cuddy</span> American psychologist

Amy Joy Casselberry Cuddy is an American social psychologist, author and speaker. She is a proponent of "power posing", a self-improvement technique whose scientific validity has been questioned. She has served as a faculty member at Rutgers University, Kellogg School of Management and Harvard Business School. Cuddy's most cited academic work involves using the stereotype content model that she helped develop to better understand the way people think about stereotyped people and groups. Though Cuddy left her tenure-track position at Harvard Business School in the spring of 2017, she continues to contribute to its executive education programs.

Praise as a form of social interaction expresses recognition, reassurance or admiration.

Intergroup relations refers to interactions between individuals in different social groups, and to interactions taking place between the groups themselves collectively. It has long been a subject of research in social psychology, political psychology, and organizational behavior.

In social psychology, a metastereotype is a stereotype that members of one group have about the way in which they are stereotypically viewed by members of another group. In other words, it is a stereotype about a stereotype. They have been shown to have adverse effects on individuals that hold them, including on their levels of anxiety in interracial conversations. Meta-stereotypes held by African Americans regarding the stereotypes White Americans have about them have been found to be largely both negative and accurate. People portray meta-stereotypes of their ingroup more positively when talking to a member of an outgroup than to a fellow member of their ingroup.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Axes of subordination</span>

In social psychology, the two axes of subordination is a racial position model that categorizes the four most common racial groups in the United States into four different quadrants. The model was first proposed by Linda X. Zou and Sapna Cheryan in the year 2017, and suggests that U.S. racial groups are categorized based on two dimensions: perceived inferiority and perceived cultural foreignness. Support for the model comes from both a target and perceivers perspective in which Whites are seen as superior and American, African Americans as inferior and American, Asian Americans as superior and foreign, and Latinos as inferior and foreign.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Siy, John Oliver; Cheryan, Sapna (2016-07-01). "Prejudice Masquerading as Praise The Negative Echo of Positive Stereotypes". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 42 (7): 941–954. doi:10.1177/0146167216649605. ISSN   0146-1672. PMID   27287753. S2CID   36153890.
  2. 1 2 Czopp, Alexander M. (2008-03-01). "When is a compliment not a compliment? Evaluating expressions of positive stereotypes". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 44 (2): 413–420. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.007.
  3. ↑ Mae, Lynda; Carlston, Donal E. (2005-05-01). "Hoist on your own petard: When prejudiced remarks are recognized and backfire on speakers". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 41 (3): 240–255. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.06.011.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Czopp, Alexander M.; Kay, Aaron C.; Cheryan, Sapna (2015-07-01). "Positive Stereotypes Are Pervasive and Powerful". Perspectives on Psychological Science. 10 (4): 451–463. doi:10.1177/1745691615588091. ISSN   1745-6916. PMID   26177947. S2CID   5968202.
  5. 1 2 Pittinsky, Todd L.; Shih, Margaret; Ambady, Nalini (2000). "Will a Category Cue Affect You? Category Cues, Positive Stereotypes and Reviewer Recall for Applicants". Social Psychology of Education. 4 (1): 53–65. doi:10.1023/A:1009656413789. ISSN   1381-2890. S2CID   956818.
  6. ↑ National Research Council (US) Committee on Aging Frontiers in Social Psychology (2006). "Opportunities Lost: The Impact of Stereotypes on Self and Others". Personality, and Adult Developmental Psychology.
  7. 1 2 Katz, D.; Braly, K. W. (1933). "Racial stereotypes of one-hundred college students". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 28 (3): 280–290. doi:10.1037/h0074049.
  8. ↑ Gilbert, G. M. (1951). "Stereotype persistence and change among college students". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 46 (2): 245–254. doi:10.1037/h0053696. PMID   14841006.
  9. ↑ Karlins, M.; Coffman, T. L.; Walters, G. (1969). "On the fading of social stereotypes: Studies in three generations of college students". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 13 (1): 1–16. doi:10.1037/h0027994. PMID   5352372.
  10. 1 2 3 4 Madon, Stephanie; Guyll, Max; Aboufadel, Kathy; Montiel, Eulices; Smith, Alison; Palumbo, Polly; Jussim, Lee (2001-08-01). "Ethnic and National Stereotypes: The Princeton Trilogy Revisited and Revised". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 27 (8): 996–1010. doi:10.1177/0146167201278007. ISSN   0146-1672. S2CID   145194707.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 Fiske, Susan T.; Cuddy, Amy J. C.; Glick, Peter; Xu, Jun (Jun 2002). "A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 82 (6): 878–902. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.320.4001 . doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878. PMID   12051578. S2CID   17057403.
  12. ↑ Walzer, Amy S.; Czopp, Alexander M. (2011-09-01). "Able But Unintelligent: Including Positively Stereotyped Black Subgroups in the Stereotype Content Model". The Journal of Social Psychology. 151 (5): 527–530. doi:10.1080/00224545.2010.503250. ISSN   0022-4545. PMID   22017070. S2CID   31468700.
  13. ↑ Shih, Margaret; Ambady, Nalini; Richeson, Jennifer A.; Fujita, Kentaro; Gray, Heather M. (2002). "Stereotype performance boosts: The impact of self-relevance and the manner of stereotype activation". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83 (3): 638–647. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.419.7462 . doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.3.638. PMID   12219859.
  14. ↑ Shih, Margaret; Pittinsky, Todd L.; Ambady, Nalini (1999-01-01). "Stereotype Susceptibility: Identity Salience and Shifts in Quantitative Performance". Psychological Science. 10 (1): 80–83. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00111. ISSN   0956-7976. S2CID   3852881.
  15. ↑ Levy, Becca (1996). "Improving memory in old age through implicit self-stereotyping". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 71 (6): 1092–1107. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1092. PMID   8979380. S2CID   14442482.
  16. ↑ Sue, Derald Wing; Capodilupo, Christina M.; Torino, Gina C.; Bucceri, Jennifer M.; Holder, Aisha M. B.; Nadal, Kevin L.; Esquilin, Marta (2007). "Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice". American Psychologist. 62 (4): 271–286. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.62.4.271. PMID   17516773. S2CID   7326535.
  17. 1 2 3 4 Siy, John Oliver; Cheryan, Sapna (2013). "When compliments fail to flatter: American individualism and responses to positive stereotypes". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 104 (1): 87–102. doi:10.1037/a0030183. PMID   23025500. S2CID   11392176.
  18. ↑ Garcia, Amber L.; Miller, Daniel A.; Smith, Eliot R.; Mackie, Diane M. (2006-07-01). "Thanks for the Compliment? Emotional Reactions to Group-Level Versus Individual-Level Compliments and Insults". Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 9 (3): 307–324. doi:10.1177/1368430206064636. ISSN   1368-4302. S2CID   145565550.
  19. ↑ Markus, H. R.; Kitayama, S. (1991). "Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation". Psychological Review. 98 (2): 224–253. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.320.1159 . doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.