Emotions fluctuate over time while stereotypes remain stubbornly stable

Evidence

Considering prejudice and intergroup relations as involving emotion opens up several new research directions. First, emotions are time-dependent states. Self-evidently, they ebb and flow across time, over scales ranging from seconds to perhaps hours or days. This contrasts with stereotypes and prejudice (conceptualized as an attitude), which are notoriously stable and therefore difficult to change even when change is desired. Emphasizing the role of emotion suggests measuring reactions to groups across time, perhaps using daily diary measures or experience-sampling methods (Smith & Mackie, in press). People may be particularly likely to perform emotiondriven behaviors or to show biases in judgment processes precisely when they are experiencing intense group-based emotions. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2285 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The apparent inconsistencies in Allport’s thinking, however, stem in part from the complexity of the phenomenon. A prominent example concerns the role of stereotyping in prejudice. Early on in The Nature of Prejudice, in chapter 2, he implicated stereotypic thinking as a foundation for prejudice. He observed, “The category saturates all that it contains with the same ideational and emotional flavor” (1954/1979, p. 21). Later, in chapter 12, he wrote that stereotypes are “primarily rationalizers. They adapt to the prevailing temper of prejudice or the needs of the situation. While it does no harm (and may do some good) to combat them … it must not be thought that this attack alone will eradicate the roots of prejudice” (p. 204). Allport explicitly addressed the apparent contradiction in these statements, embracing stereotypes as both causes and consequences of prejudice: “The stereotype acts as both a justificatory device for categorical acceptance or rejection of a group, and as a screening or selective device to maintain simplicity in perception and thinking” (p. 192). Fifty years later, after thousands of studies on stereotyping, the extent to which stereotypes are cause or consequence of prejudice remains a subject of lively debate. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 101 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Facts shift constantly while manipulative techniques stay stable across millennia — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 1003; Stereotypes remain stable despite contradicting observations or even reversing; Stereotypes can be after-the-fact rationalizations justifying pre-existing emotions (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Group emotions fluctuate on short timescales unlike stable stereotypes #corroborates (0.95) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2285
• Whether stereotypes cause or rationalize prejudice is still unresolved after fifty years of study #complicates (0.70) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 101