People spontaneously stereotype groups to rationalize their existing social roles

Evidence

Hoffman and Hurst (1990) similarly stress the importance of social roles in determining the contents of stereotypes. Following Eagly, they argue that gender stereotypes “originate in an attempt to rationalize the division of labor by attributing to each sex those qualities deemed necessary for performance of the assigned functions” (pp. 206–207). By asking subjects to complete trait ratings of two fictional groups, “Orinthians” and “Ackmians,” whose occupations were listed as “childraisers” and “city workers,” respectively, Hoffman and Hurst demonstrate that people spontaneously stereotype the groups in ways that justify their alleged division into separate roles in society. Specifically, childraisers were judged to be more patient, kind, and understanding than city workers, who were judged to be self-confident and forceful. Furthermore, stereotyping in general was more prevalent when subjects were first asked to explain why the groups occupied different roles, lending support to the notion that stereotypes are created by a demand to justify an existing arrangement. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2920

Categorization

• XREF: Pairs with SIT theory and self-serving bias concepts from earlier in this book on how people rationalize social arrangements. — connects to: Social role arrangement alone produces justifying stereotypes in both parties. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2914
• SEED: The fictional-groups experiment (Orinthians/Ackmians) is a clean demonstration that stereotyping acts as post-hoc rationalization - could anchor an essay on how we mistake justification for perception.