Factors Affecting Studies of National Stereotypes

Context‐dependent variation in social stereotyping 2: The relationship between frame of reference, self‐categorization and accentuation

“…These findings are clearly interesting in that they lend support to a theory of stereotyping that is capable of accounting for stereotype flexibility in a more rigorous manner than previous models (e.g. Diab, 1963a). Furthermore, they also demonstrate the centrality of the processes of assimilation and contrast to this phenomenon.…”

“…Diab, 1963a). Furthermore, they also demonstrate the centrality of the processes of assimilation and contrast to this phenomenon.…”

Is Limited Information Processing Capacity the Cause of Social Stereotyping?

“…Thus, when Arab-Moslem students were asked to assign traits to Americans, the stereotype was more positive in the context of relatively unpopular groups (e.g. Algerians, Egyptians) than when Americans were rated with favourable groups (Diab, 1963a). In the second study subjects assigned traits to a total of either 13 or five different social groups.…”

Manipulating stereotype rating tasks: understanding questionnaire context effects on measures of attitudes, social identity and stereotypes

“…Meenes, 1943), which suggested that stereotype content was not ®xed but could change in dierent contexts. Using the Katz±Braly paradigm, Diab (1962Diab ( , 1963a demonstrated empirically how stereotype content can vary depending on the number and type of groups respondents are asked to make judgements of, and the order in which judgements are made. Typically, however, these early studies of stereotype variation failed to explain ®ndings in the context of a coherent and persuasive theoretical perspective.…”