Perceived group entitativity mediates the effects of other group variables on stereotyping.

Evidence

Spencer- Rodgers, Hamilton, et al. (2007) investigated the role of entitativity, and other group-relevant concepts, in stereotyping. Participants rated four social categories (e.g., Latinos) and four task groups (e.g., juries) on scales assessing perceived entitativity, homogeneity, essence (boundedness, inductive potential, meaningfulness, stability, naturalness, and inalterability; Haslam et al., 2000), role differentiation (extent that there is role delineation among group members and behaviors typical of group members), and agency (ability to act collectively and effectively). They also rated the groups on 38 attributes, and for each group, eight of the attributes were (based on pretesting) stereotypic of that group. Analyses showed that perceived entitativity directly predicted stereotyping for each of the eight groups. In addition, although the other group-related variables also predicted (at least to some degree) stereo typing, mediational analyses showed that entitativity significantly mediated the effects of those variables—homogeneity, essentialism, role differentiation, and agency—on stereotyping. Finally, additional analyses showed that the relationship between perceived entitativity and stereotyping was not mediated by homogeneity, essentialism, role differentiation, and agency. These findings led Spencer-Rodgers, Hamilton, et al. to conclude that entitativity plays a central role in stereotyping and group perception more generally. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 279

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

• XREF: Connects to the 1996 Brewer/Harasty and Hamilton/Sherman re-introduction of entitativity discussed throughout this chapter.

Related

• Perceived entitativity is the central causal mechanism through which homogeneity and essentialism drive stereotyping. (similarity 0.96)
• Perceived entitativity of a group shapes stereotyping and member interchangeability (similarity 0.89)
• Entitativity research has measured perception but not its behavioral effects (similarity 0.89)
• Perceived entitativity arises from both cognitive information-processing and contextual-motivational variables. (similarity 0.87)
• Perceived entitativity cues may not match a group’s actual entitativity. (similarity 0.86)
• Perceived agency correlates with entitativity more strongly than homogeneity or essence does (similarity 0.86)
• Perceived group activity and entitativity mutually imply each other (similarity 0.85)
• Perceiving a group as an entity precedes stereotyping and discrimination against it (similarity 0.85)
• Groups high in entitativity are processed like individual persons (similarity 0.84)
• Research neglects perceived entitativity of the intimacy and task groups people actually live in (similarity 0.84)
• People apply distinct essence and agency theories when perceiving group entitativity (similarity 0.84)
• Entitativity research has measured cognition but not behavior. (similarity 0.84)
• High member interaction, shared attributes, and common goals increase perceived group entitativity. (similarity 0.83)
• Groups perceived as unified are processed like single persons (similarity 0.83)
• Groups perceived as highly unified are treated like individual persons in impression formation. (similarity 0.83)