Once categorized, group members are assumed similar within and different across categories

Evidence

Following Lippmann’s (1922) influential analysis, Allport observed that the members of a group, once categorized, are assumed to be similar to one another. The accentuation of within-category similarity (“They’re all alike”) and between-category differences (“They’re different from other folks”) is now a well-documented effect (e.g., Judd & Park, ch. 8 this volume). — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1379

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Transformation happens by assuming shared categories rather than questioning them. — Farhan Samanani, Conviviality and its others: for a…, 47; Aggregating distinct Multiracial groups as one category erases their differing experiences. — Tatiana I. Zamora and Amado M. Padilla, Making sense of conflicting messages of…, 51; State recognition channels subordinate-group organization into state-defined categories — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 572