Stereotypes remain stable despite contradicting observations or even reversing

Evidence

When people confront individuals whose character disputes their outgroup stereotypes, they readily admit the individual exceptions only to “re-fence” the stereotype (Allport, 1954/1979, p. 23): People create small subtypes to contain the exceptions, thereby protecting their overall categories (for references, see Fiske, 1998). Subtypes are cognitively convenient because they allow people to retain their comfortable categories. And they are socially convenient because they justify the status quo. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 304 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Never violating a taboo prevents learners from disconfirming it, preserving it via negativity bias. — Joseph Henrich, The Secret of Our Success: How Culture…, 519; Individuals who contradict stereotypes get subtyped so the overall stereotype survives intact — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 304; Conflicting stereotype traits reveal justification logic overriding consistency — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1371 (+11 more)

Broader Connections

• Individuals who contradict stereotypes get subtyped so the overall stereotype survives intact #expands (0.95) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 304
• Contradictory evidence is neutralized by subtyping rather than revising stereotypes #expands (0.93)
• Stereotypes are context-dependent and malleable, not rigid belief systems #contradicts (0.92)
• Stereotype repetition does not confirm stereotype truth, but frames how future evidence is read #complicates (0.72) — Carl W. Ernst, Islamophobia in America_ The Anatomy of…, 94