Subgroups increase perceived variability and weaken stereotypes, while subtypes preserve them

Evidence

People find it convenient to retain overgeneralized categories because “it takes less effort, and effort … is disagreeable” (Allport, 1954/1979, p. 21). But even convenience has its limits. Allport amended the principle of least effort: “except in the area of our most intense interests” (p. 21). When observers are motivated (and knowledgeable), they move from subtypes to subgroups. That is, they do not merely exclude the few exceptional subtypes but begin to see variety within the category: subsets of similar individuals within the overall group. People learn that the larger category contains subgroup clusters (e.g., within Latinos, subgroups of Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans). Although Allport did not anticipate the subgroup idea, his subtype idea paved the way for the distinction between them. Because subgroups increase the perceived variability of the category, they limit the tyranny of categories, whereas subtypes (which “fence off” exceptions to the general stereotype) maintain it. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 305

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the crucial subtypes-vs-subgroups distinction and why they work in opposite directions on category tyranny.
• QUESTION: Does real-world contact alter categories toward subgrouping rather than subtype ‘fencing’ — a testable condition under which contact reduces prejudice?
• XREF: Refines Allport’s own least-effort principle and connects to the vault’s contact-theory claims about when contact changes generalized stereotypes. — connects to: Competent-but-cold groups form a stable stereotype cluster across samples. — Susan T. Fiske et al., A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype…, 189
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 305