Ambivalent stereotypes justify unequal treatment while appearing to not contradict prejudice

Evidence

By emphasizing the importance of the perceived relative status of groups, the role of ambivalent stereotypes that ‘typically do not contradict prejudice or reduce discrimination but reinforce unfl attering stereotypes on the other dimension and justify unequal treatment’ (Cuddy et al ., 2008 , p. 68) and how different types of prejudice (paternalistic and envious) operate (Glick and Fiske, 2001 ), social psychologists are offering robust evidence in support of the broader idea embraced by sociologists that the perceived relative status of groups serves as an anchor for judgements of the worthiness of majority and minority social actors (Ridgeway, 2014 ). — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice, 197

Categorization

• QUESTION: Worth chasing: how do positive-dimension stereotypes (competence of Jews, warmth of women) function as intensifiers rather than correctives of discrimination? What mechanisms make a flattering trait reinforcing?

Related

• Positive stereotyped traits become double-edged liabilities in incongruent roles (similarity 0.79)
• Some prejudices involve positive affect combined with low respect (similarity 0.79)
• Positive stereotypes become evaluative liabilities when mismatched to a role’s demands (similarity 0.78)