Automatic stereotypic associations operate preconsciously and independently of self-reported prejudice

Evidence

A landmark study demonstrated that people make preconscious, automatic stereotypic associations to race categories (Devine, 1989). Whites subliminally primed with black stereotypic words (black, lazy, athletic) subsequently rated a race-neutral person, who behaved ambiguously, as more (stereotypically) hostile, regardless of self-reported prejudice. The now widelyused Implicit Associations Test complements these results (for a review, see Greenwald et al., 2002). The IAT pairs category-relevant cues (e.g., stereotypically black or white names, black or white faces) with positive and negative terms. People more rapidly associate positive terms with higher-status groups (and sometimes ingroups) but more negative terms with lower-status groups (and sometimes outgroups). — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 298

Categorization

• XREF: Directly corroborates/updates Allport-era contact theory claims in the vault about automatic vs controlled prejudice; connects to vault’s Islamophobia/antisemitism claims on implicit bias being measurable despite explicit denial. — connects to: Measuring stereotypes indirectly reveals prejudice explicit surveys miss — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 194; Subliminal stereotype priming raises hostility judgments regardless of stated prejudice. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 199; The fame-judgment paradigm can be adapted to detect implicit gender stereotypes. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 209
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 298