Implicit Theories: Assumptions That Shape Social and Moral Cognition

Plaks, Jason E.

doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.02.003

Cited by 36 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 156 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such lay understanding is characterized in the literature of social cognition as “implicit theories” concerning the properties of people. According to Plaks (), the term implicit is used because this type of knowledge is intuitive and therefore not fully articulated, and the term theory is used because the naive representations are assumed to provide subjective explanation of why the characters of certain people are made up in the way they are. When an implicit theory is concerned with a social group or category, and if the group is perceived to require its members to possess some core definitive elements, then the theory is called psychological essentialism (Gelman, ; Medin, ; Prentice & Miller, ).…”

Section: Psychological Essentialism Involving Social Categoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of its “sharedness,” various social and contextual cues can automatically activate essentialist views without the perceiver's conscious effort (Dar‐Nimrod & Heine, ; Gil‐White, ; Levy, Stroessner, & Dweck, ). Additionally, implicit theories, like this one, are assumed to be difficult to articulate verbally and/or logically (Plaks, ). Evidence certainly shows that essentialist thinking about social groups is often associated with subtle forms of prejudices and discrimination that may take place outside of the perceiver's conscious control (Bastian, Loughnan, & Koval, ).…”

Section: Psychological Essentialism Involving Social Categoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychological Essentialism at the Explicit and Implicit Levels: The Unique Status of Social Categories

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychological essentialism refers to a naive theory concerning fundamental elements that bring a category into its existence. The present study examined the structure of this lay theory as well as its implicitness, with a special focus on social categories. In Study 1, Japanese college students rated a number of categories that were natural‐kind, social, or human artifacts, in terms of different elements of essentialist beliefs. A factor analysis revealed that entitativity and naturalness are the common underlying dimensions across these category domains. We also identified some natural‐kind and human artifact categories that can be used as two extreme referent points for the examination of naturalness perceived in a whole array of social categories. Study 2 assessed implicit and automatic judgments on naturalness using a go/no‐go task, and compared them to explicit judgments. Unlike natural kinds and artifacts, social categories were essentialized to a greater extent at the implicit level. These results suggest a dual process of intuitive and deliberate cognition, particularly involving social categories, with implications concerning the bases of stereotypes and prejudices.

show abstract

Section: Psychological Essentialism Involving Social Categoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Psychological Essentialism Involving Social Categoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Essentialism at the Explicit and Implicit Levels: The Unique Status of Social Categories

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To explain how mindsets influence fans' reactions to major losses, we propose that beliefs in the malleability or stability of human characteristics influence cognition by directing one's attention, making some information more memorable and attributing successful and flawed performances to stable or malleable factors (Plaks, ). If our proposition is correct and we assume that brands and teams can be perceived as having human‐like characteristics (Fournier, ), mindsets would have implications for how sports consumers evaluate brands and teams after a successful and flawed performance.…”

Section: Implicit Theories and Consumer Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

7–0? That is awful! Should I trust my national team again?: The role of mindsets in team trust

Puente‐Díaz

Cavazos‐Arroyo

2019

Int J Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This investigation examined the role of mindsets in team trust after a major loss. It is proposed that individuals can believe that personal characteristics are fixed and that there is not much one can do about it (a fixed mindset) or that personal characteristics are malleable and that one can improve (a growth mindset). The participants, self‐identified football fans, were shown a picture of a major loss experienced by the Mexican national team and then answered questions that assessed the participants' team trust, intention to provide future support, and mindsets. We conceptualised mindsets as latent variables and classes to test our hypotheses. The results from the latent variable model showed a significant, positive influence of a growth mindset on team trust. Similarly, the results from the latent class model showed that the class characterised by high levels of a growth mindset was more likely to trust the national team. Regarding intentions to provide future support to the national team, a growth mindset had an indirect, positive effect through its influence on team trust. Similarly, the class with high levels of a growth mindset was more likely to support the national team in the future. The implications for social psychology and consumer behaviour are discussed.

show abstract

“…At the core of implicit theories is the belief that entities (humans, brands, groups, companies) are fixed with little room for improvement, i.e a fixed mindset, or the belief that entities change, improve, and grow, i.e. a growth mindset (Dweck, 2000;Plaks, 2017). This simple, yet robust theoretical proposition has caught the attention of researchers in different areas, including organizational (Murphy & Dweck, 2010) and consumer behavior (Wheeler & Omair, 2016), with important implications for understanding brand trust after a brand has been involved in a negative incident.…”

Section: Implicit Theories and Consumer Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding mindsets, the key assumption is that they -whether one believes in the malleability or stability of things -influence cognition by directing one's attention, making some information more memorable, and attributing successful and flawed performances to stable or malleable factors (Plaks, 2017). Hence, mindsets can generate a bias in which individuals tend to pay more attention and interpret information in a way that is consistent with their mindset, influencing judgments of product failures.…”

Section: Implicit Theories and Consumer Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

That is disgusting! Should I trust you?: The role of mindsets in brand trust after a negative incident

Puente‐Díaz

Cavazos‐Arroyo

2019

RBGN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this investigation was to examine the influence of mindsets on consumers' reactions to a negative event involving a corporate brand.Design/methodology/approach -We conducted two studies, one qualitative and one quantitative. In study 1, participants were shown a picture of the incident with a caption and personal interviews were conducted with consumers of the category involved in the event, i.e. green chilies. In study 2, participants were shown the same picture as in study 1 and completed a set of questionnaires assessing mindsets, brand trust, and purchase intention.Findings -Study 1 showed the presence of a theme involving the stability versus malleability of brands, used to explain the decision to either trust and purchase the brand again or not. Study 2 showed a positive relationship between a growth mindset and brand trust. Similarly, brand trust was positively related to purchase intention. The latent class model showed that the two classes with higher levels of a growth mindset were more likely to trust the brand and purchase it after the negative event.Originality/value -To our knowledge, only one investigation has examined the role of mindsets in consumers' reactions after a negative incident involving a corporate brand. Hence, this investigation tried to answer a recent call from several consumer behavior scholars for more research on mindsets.

show abstract

Implicit Theories: Assumptions That Shape Social and Moral Cognition

Cited by 36 publications

References 156 publications

Psychological Essentialism at the Explicit and Implicit Levels: The Unique Status of Social Categories

Psychological Essentialism at the Explicit and Implicit Levels: The Unique Status of Social Categories

7–0? That is awful! Should I trust my national team again?: The role of mindsets in team trust

That is disgusting! Should I trust you?: The role of mindsets in brand trust after a negative incident

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About