MOSAIC: A Model of Stereotyping Through Associated and Intersectional Categories

Hall, Erika V.; Hall, Alison; Galinsky, Adam D.; Phillips, Katherine W.

doi:10.5465/amr.2017.0109

Cited by 138 publications

(146 citation statements)

References 128 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead, integration models assume that the meaning the perceiver makes of a woman's gender is constructed in light of whatever else the perceiver notices about her (e.g., her race, age, sexual orientation, religious identity, and so on). Many integration models argue that perceivers’ minds are best understood as connectionist networks (Hall, Hall, Galinsky, & Phillips, ; Kawakami, Amodio, & Hugenberg, ; Kunda & Thagard, ). In these perspectives, stereotypes about a target's social class, for example, can only be understood as resulting from the way perceivers conceptualize the interconnections between social class and other group memberships—like targets’ gender groups, sexual orientation groups, ethnic groups, and so on (Ghavami & Mistry, ).…”

Section: Prevailing Theoretical Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifarious person perception: How social perceivers manage the complexity of intersectional targets

Petsko

Bodenhausen

2019

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Prevailing Theoretical Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifarious person perception: How social perceivers manage the complexity of intersectional targets

Petsko

Bodenhausen

2019

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although research has traditionally considered gender and racial stereotypes separately, intersectional approaches suggest that gender stereotype content varies by racial identity, and that in Western societies generic stereotypes of “women” and “men” most closely match those of White women and men (Ghavami & Peplau, 2013). Hall, Hall, Galinsky, and Phillips () have recently proposed MOSAIC (Model Of Stereotyping Through Associated and Intersectional Categories) that hypothesizes that in Western countries the intersection of gender and race identities can lead to either an amplification (e.g., Asian women and Black men) or dilution (e.g., Asian men and Black women) of the effects of “generic” gender stereotypes.…”

Section: Justice and Workplace Gender Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Does Workplace Gender Diversity Matter? Justice, Organizational Benefits, and Policy

Fine

Sojo

Lawford‐Smith

2019

Social Issues Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why does workplace gender diversity matter? Here, we provide a review of the literature on both justice-based and organizational benefits of workplace gender diversity that, importantly, is informed by evidence regarding sex differences and their relationship with vocational behavior and outcomes. This review indicates that the sexes are neither distinctly different, nor so similar as to be fungible. Justice-based gains of workplace gender diversity include that it may cause less sex discrimination and may combat androcentrism in products and services. We then consider potential instrumental benefits of workplace gender diversity to organizations, including for team and firm performance, innovation, occupational well-being, and corporate governance. The evidence of positive association is currently strongest for occupational well-being and governance. We recommend that policy makers ground gender diversity initiatives in this comprehensive and evidence-based understanding of the benefits of workplace gender diversity.

show abstract

“…Beyond individual demographic categories, we encourage future research to specify intersectional comparison groups (e.g., see Purdie-Vaughns & Eibach, 2008;Hall, Galinsky, & Phillips, 2015;Hall et al, 2019). Integrating disparities among multiple demographic lines, including age, gender, and race, may allow researchers to specify what kind of inequality they are studying, and move beyond the implicit decontextualized "default" that is widespread in current research.…”

Section: What Reference Groups?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Inequality in Researchers’ Minds: Four Guiding Questions for Studying Subjective Perceptions of Economic Inequality

Jachimowicz¹,

Davidai²,

Goya‐Tocchetto³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The extent of inequality that people perceive in the world is often a stronger predictor of individual and societal outcomes than the level of inequality that actually exists. It is therefore imperative for researchers to theoretically conceptualize and empirically operationalize perceived inequality in a coherent and consistent manner. However, the lack of consensus on what constitutes perceived inequality can lead researchers to use the same words to study different phenomena. What seem like minor methodological decisions made in the study of inequality can substantially influence the outcomes and conclusions that researchers dra from their work. In this review, we draw on a wide range of interdisciplinary work, including from social and cognitive psychology, economics, political science, and sociology, to unpack the assumptions researchers often make. We develop the four questions framework which illustrates the important theoretical and empirical decisions researchers are recommended to address when studying perceived inequality: (1) What kind of inequality? (2) What level of analysis? (3) What part of the distribution? and (4) What comparison group? We posit that this framework provides the conceptual clarity necessary for understanding when, how, and why perceptions of inequality affect individuals and societies.

show abstract

MOSAIC: A Model of Stereotyping Through Associated and Intersectional Categories

Cited by 138 publications

References 128 publications

Multifarious person perception: How social perceivers manage the complexity of intersectional targets

Multifarious person perception: How social perceivers manage the complexity of intersectional targets

Why Does Workplace Gender Diversity Matter? Justice, Organizational Benefits, and Policy

Inequality in Researchers’ Minds: Four Guiding Questions for Studying Subjective Perceptions of Economic Inequality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About