Motivated observers replace subtype exceptions with genuine subgroup variety within categories

Evidence

People find it convenient to retain overgeneralized categories because “it takes less effort, and effort … is disagreeable” (Allport, 1954/1979, p. 21). But even convenience has its limits. Allport amended the principle of least effort: “except in the area of our most intense interests” (p. 21). When observers are motivated (and knowledgeable), they move from subtypes to subgroups. That is, they do not merely exclude the few exceptional subtypes but begin to see variety within the category: subsets of similar individuals within the overall group. People learn that the larger category contains subgroup clusters (e.g., within Latinos, subgroups of Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans). Although Allport did not anticipate the subgroup idea, his subtype idea paved the way for the distinction between them. Because subgroups increase the perceived variability of the category, they limit the tyranny of categories, whereas subtypes (which “fence off” exceptions to the general stereotype) maintain it. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 305

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sharp distinction between subtypes (fenced-off exceptions preserving the stereotype) and subgroups (perceived variety that loosens the category’s hold) — a conceptual fork worth keeping straight.