Factors Determining Group Stereotypes

The Group as a Basis for Emergent Stereotype Consensus

“…Consensus also varied within studies that manipulated features of the context in which particular groups were judged but where there was no variation in a priori prejudice or familiarity. For example, in a study reported by Diab (1963), 62% of Arab-Moslem subjects described Americans as "rich" when this group was juxtaposed with Russians, but only 36% did so when the implied contrast was with Germans and the English.…”

“…The advantage of the checklist method, then, is that its hermeneutic flavour is more transparent and hence more easily becomes a topic for direct investigation: for example, in studies which show how changes in trait meaning are predicted by judgemental context (Asch, 1951;Vinacke, 1956). Finally, we would argue that reviews of research which has relied on checklist methodology suggest that this work does provide important-although frequently overlooked-insights into the stereotyping process (indicating, for example, that stereotypes are shaped by comparative context and intergroup relations: e.g., Diab, 1963;Meenes, 1943: cf. Haslam, 1991.…”

Context‐dependent variation in social stereotyping 1: The effects of intergroup relations as mediated by social change and frame of reference

“…Diab, 1963a) or large variation in the number of comparison groups (cf. Diab, 1963b). The purpose here was to make sure that the subjects' own group was presented in all cases so that what was manipulated was the discrepancy between one outgroup (Americans) and others (cf.…”

When “different” means “worse”: In-group prototypicality in changing intergroup contexts

“…To manipulate in-group stereotypes while holding the in-group constant, we varied the frame of reference for intergroup comparisons (see also Diab, 1963;Haslam & Turner, 1992;Wilder & Shapiro, 1984). Comparisons with different out-groups should make different in-group attributes seem distinctive.…”