Irrelevant info is repurposed to explain away stereotype-disconfirming deviance

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

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. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1177

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the general finding that people can rationalize anything with an ‘explanation’ — connects to the Cassandra/weather and to how conspiracy theories use any information as supporting detail. — connects to: People cling to self-interest vocabularies even when they contradict experienced motives; the MOC “The False Compass: How Racial Categories Reorder Bodies, Minds, and the Self”
• SEED: Essay angle: the ‘irrelevant detail’ as an escape hatch — how adding noise to any claim (news, rumor, gossip) makes it easier to dismiss counterevidence, not harder.
• QUESTION: Is there a parallel in how conspiracy theories recruit irrelevant details to absorb contradictory evidence? This mechanism — extra information being drafted to ‘explain’ deviance — seems generalizable.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1177; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1177