Irrelevant details conveniently explain away deviant cases that threaten stereotypes

Evidence

Consistent with Allport’s view on stereotype preservation, various studies on stereotype change have emphasized the active role that perceivers play in keeping their preconceptions intact. Kunda and Oleson (1995) found that the presence of an irrelevant piece of information facilitated perceivers’ work in fencing off the deviant. Initially neutral, the irrelevant information was now deemed to “explain” the deviance, allowing perceivers to keep their general expectations intact. Only when no irrelevant information was provided were perceivers forced to integrate the information about the deviant in their representation of the group as a whole. There are thus limits to people’s ability to bend reality. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1177 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Irrelevant info is repurposed to explain away stereotype-disconfirming deviance — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1177; Maintaining a stereotype against deviant evidence requires attentional resources people willingly spend — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1178; People protect stereotypes by carving out subtypes for exceptions (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• Irrelevant info is repurposed to explain away stereotype-disconfirming deviance #expands (1.00) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1177