Researchers measure stereotype accuracy by comparing judgments to aggregated self-ratings

Evidence

In our 1993 paper (Judd & Park, 1993), we reviewed a number of early studies that presented evidence relevant to the issue of the accuracy of stereotypic group judgments. We will not repeat that review here. Rather we will concentrate on studies that have generally adopted the perspective outlined above. In all of this work, the criterion measurement issue has been dealt with by asking group members to rate themselves and then aggregating these ratings. Thus stereotypic judgments of a group are compared to aggregated self-judgments. As discussed previously, there are certainly pitfalls in this approach. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 874

In our 1993 paper (Judd & Park, 1993), we reviewed a number of early studies that presented evidence relevant to the issue of the accuracy of stereotypic group judgments. We will not repeat that review here. Rather we will concentrate on studies that have generally adopted the perspective outlined above. In all of this work, the criterion measurement issue has been dealt with by asking group members to rate themselves and then aggregating these ratings. Thus stereotypic judgments of a group are compared to aggregated self-judgments. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 874

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the aggregate self-rating criterion method used throughout stereotype accuracy research.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 874; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 874