TOWARD APPRECIATING GROUP DIFFERENCES Edited byYueh-Ting Lee, Lee J. Jussim, and Clark R. McCauley American Psychological Association Washington, DC Table of Contents List of Contributors .x.i. Preface xlll Part One: Introduction 1 Why Study Stereotype Accuracy and Inaccuracy? 3 Lee J. Jussim, Clark R. McCauley, and Yueh-Ting Lee 2 Accuracy: A Neglected Component of Stereotype Research 29 Victor Ottati and Yueh-Ting Lee Part Two: Theory, Concepts, and Methodology 3 Accuracy of Stereotypes: What Research on Physical Attractiveness Can Teach Us 63 Richard D. Ashmore and Laura C. Long0 4 The Shifting Standards Model Implications of Stereotype Accuracy for Social Judgment 87 Monica Biernat 5 An Ecological View of Stereotype Accuracy 115 Reuben M. Baron 6 Stereotypes, Base Rates, and the Fundamental Attribution Mistake: A Content-Based Approach to Judgmental Accuracy 141 David C. Funder 7 Stereotype Accuracy in Multicultural Business 157 Yueh-Ting Lee and Guillermo Duenas Part Three: Empirical Studies of Accuracy and Inaccuracy in Stereotypes 8 Motivations and the Perceiver’s Group Membership: Consequences for Stereotype Accuracy 189 Carey S. Ryan ix CONTENTS 9 Are Stereotypes Exaggerated? A Sampling of Racial, Gender, Academic, Occupational, and Political Stereotypes 215 Clark R. McCauley 10 Are Teacher Expectations Biased by Students’ Gender, Social Class, or Ethnicity? 245 Lee J. Jussim and Jacquelynne Eccles Part Four: Conclusion: Opposing Views 11 Content and Application Inaccuracy in Social Stereotyping 275 Charles Stangor 12 Stereotype Accuracy: Toward Appreciating Group Differences 293 Clark R. McCauley, Lee J. Jussim, and Yueh-Ting Lee Author Index 313 Subject Index 321 About the Editors 329 X Contributors Richard D. Ashmore, Livingston College, Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey Reuben M. Baron, University of Connecticut Monica Biernat, University of Kansas Guillermo Duenas, Philadelphia College of Textiles and Science Jacquelynne Eccles, University of Michigan David C. Funder, University of California, Riverside Lee J. Jussim, Livingston College, Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey Yueh-Ting Lee, Westfield State College Laura C. Longo, Livingston College, Rutgers-The State University of New Jersey Clark R. McCauley, Bryn Mawr College Victor Ottati, Purdue University Carey S. Ryan, University of Pittsburgh Charles Stangor, University of Maryland xi Preface It is not easy to do research on stereotype accuracy, for both scientific and political reasons. Many of the scientific reasons are clearly articulated in the chapters constituting this book. The political difficulties are at least as troubling. The intellectual content of this book commits multiple here- sies. First, research on any type of accuracy in social perception was all but unthinkable until the 1980s. Theoretically, social psychology has been and continues to be dominated by a focus on social cognition that emphasizes error and bias; research finding evidence of accuracy runs against the the- oretical zeitgeist. As Thomas Kuhn might have predicted, this is probably one of the major sources of resistance to accuracy research. Second, the idea that stereotypes may sometimes have some degree of accuracy is ap- parently anathema to many social scientists and laypeople. Those who doc- ument accuracy run the risk of being seen as racists, sexists, or worse. Against such impediments, this book emerges only with the help of a great deal of teamwork. The three editors have thoroughly enjoyed work- ing with each other and with the expert and professional colleagues who have contributed chapters to this book. In addition, we have enjoyed out- standing support from institutions and colleagues who went out of their way to help us. Here we would like to acknowledge the institutions whose support made the book possible. First and most important is the American Psy- chological Association, in particular, the APA Science Directorate, which provided financial support both for the Stereotype Accuracy Conference held at Bryn Mawr College and for the development of conference con- tributions into this book. Second, the following institutions also provided financial and logistical support: Bryn Mawr College, Philadelphia College of Textiles and Science, Rutgers University, and Westfield State College. ... Xlll PREFACE We would also like to extend our thanks to the following individuals. Albert Pepitone (University of Pennsylvania) served as a discussant at the Stereotype Accuracy Conference at Bryn Mawr and offered us many help- ful comments and suggestions. John Aiello (Rutgers University), Linda Albright (Westfield State College), Dana Bramel (State University of New York at Stony Brook), Tom Malloy (Rhode Island College), Melvin Manis (University of Michigan), Albert Pepitone (University of Pennsyl- vania), David Wilder (Rutgers University), and Arlene Walker- Andrews (Rutgers University) assisted us in reviewing our manuscripts carefully and provided us with their insightful and constructive criticisms for revising the chapters that appear in the book. Any weaknesses re- maining are our own. David Kenny (University of Connecticut) and Harry Triandis (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) provided us with important collaboration and encouragement. Peggy Schlegel, Kathryn Lynch, and other APA staff helped us in editing and producing this book in a meticulous and proficient way. Finally, we are grateful to our families. Their nurturance, encourage- ment, and support inspired hope and optimism in us beyond what can be put into words. Y. T. L. L. J. C. R. M. xiv P A R T O N E Introduction Why Study Stereotype Accuracy and Inaccuracy? Lee J. Jussim, Clark R. McCauley, and Yueh-Ting Lee I s this book necessary? The chapters contained each address issues of stereotype accuracy and inaccuracy. But don’t we already know that stereotypes are inaccurate, exaggerated, resistant to change, ethnocentric, and harmful? Aren’t only racists and sexists interested in stereotype accu- racy? Our answers are yes (a book on accuracy and inaccuracy is sorely needed), no (we do not know that stereotypes are generally inaccurate), and no (racism and sexism have no place in the study of stereotype ac- curacy). However, these questions highlight an important limitation and bias within the social sciences: The preponderance of scholarly theory and research on stereotypes assumes that they are bad and inaccurate. If so, then it might well be true that people interested in showing that stereo- types are accurate have hidden racist and sexist agendas. In fact, however, understanding stereotype accuracy and inaccuracy is much more inter- esting and complicated than simpleminded accusations of racism or sex- ism would seem to imply. Correspondence concerning this chapter should be addressed to Lee J. Jussim,D epartment of Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903. 3 JUSSIM ET AL. The idea that stereotypes are inaccurate and unjustified pervades the social sciences, many educational and business communities, and the everyday discourse of pundits and politicians. It often influences the con- tent of programs designed to promote diversity. It is a common theme in everyday cultural discourse. Therefore, we believe that this book is poten- tially important for anyone interested in understanding the issues of cul- ture, race, class, and gender that so trouble American society at the end of the twentieth century. This book also addresses the impact of stereotyping on judgments of individual members of stereotyped groups. Thus, this book addresses is- sues frequently confronted by professionals responsible for evaluation of individuals in government, business, and educational institutions and or- ganizations. These issues can be difficult. In recent years, the fairness of an individual’s evaluation has not infrequently been subject to legal chal- lenge, on grounds that amount to claiming that the evaluation was based more on group stereotypes than on individual qualifications or perfor- mance. For this reason, we believe that not only psychologists, sociolo- gists, and other social scientists but also legal professionals, and the man- agers and personnel officers they serve should find this book of use. For example, issues of fairness in selection, employment, and promotion are increasingly pertinent in work settings today. In the conclusion of this chapter, we discuss more specifically how each chapter serves these audiences. Before describing the chapters, how- ever, we would like to concentrate on the assumption that stereotypes are bad and inaccurate. We intend to show that this assumption is conceptu- ally problematic and empirically unjustified, and we identify both theo- retical and practical reasons why the scientific study of stereotype accu- racy and inaccuracy is both timely and important. ARE STEREOTYPES NECESSARILY INACCURATE? The answer to this question depends on whether one defines stereotypes as inaccurate beliefs about groups (see, e.g., Brigham, 1971; Mackie, 1973). If so, then, by definition, they must be inaccurate. However, defining 4