SOCIAL STEREOTYPES AND INFORMATION-PROCESSING STRATEGIES - THE IMPACT OF TASK COMPLEXITY
SOCIAL STEREOTYPES AND INFORMATION-PROCESSING STRATEGIES - THE IMPACT OF TASK COMPLEXITY
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0022-3514.52.5.871
复制
发表时间：
1987-05-01
影响因子：
7.6
通讯作者：
LICHTENSTEIN, M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
BODENHAUSEN, GV;LICHTENSTEIN, M
实验对象在阅读刑事审判中被告的信息时，首先要判断被告的罪责（罪责判断目标）或攻击性（特质判断目标）。被告要么是西班牙裔，要么是没有种族特征的。在考虑了证据之后，受试者做出了内疚和攻击性的判断（不管他们在阅读信息时被指示做出哪种类型的判断），然后尽可能多地回忆起他们所阅读的信息。研究结果支持这样的假设，即当受试者面对复杂的判断情况时，他们会使用刻板印象（当可用且相关时）作为简化判断的一种方式。具体来说，他们将刻板印象作为中心主题，围绕这个主题组织与刻板印象一致的证据，而忽略不一致的信息。具有（复杂）内疚判断客观的被试认为，如果被告是西班牙裔，他们相对更有负罪感和攻击性，并且回忆起更多关于被告的负面信息。相比之下，具有（简单）特质判断目标的受试者并不认为两名被告的罪责或攻击性有明显的不同，并且在回忆证据时没有表现出任何显著的偏见。这些结果和其他结果在信息处理策略方面进行了讨论，当受试者期望做出不同类型的判断时，他们可能会使用这些策略。（PsycINFO数据库记录(c) 2016 APA，版权所有）
Subjects read information about a defendant in a criminal trial with initial instructions to judge either his guilt (guilt judgment objective) or his aggressiveness (trait judgment objective). The defendant was either Hispanic or ethnically nondescript. After considering the evidence, subjects made both guilt and aggressiveness judgments (regardless of which type of judgment they were instructed to make at the time they read the information) and then recalled as much of the information they read as they could. Results favored the hypothesis that when subjects face a complex judgmental situation, they use stereotypes (when available and relevant) as a way of simplifying the judgment. Specifically, they use the stereotype as a central theme around which they organize presented evidence that is consistent with it, and they neglect inconsistent information. Subjects with a (complex) guilt judgment objective judged the defendant to be relatively more guilty and aggressive and recalled more negative information about him if he was Hispanic than if he was ethnically nondescript. In contrast, subjects with a (simple) trait judgment objective did not perceive either the guilt or aggressiveness of the two defendants to be appreciably different, and did not display any significant bias in their recall of the evidence. These and other results are discussed in terms of the information-processing strategies subjects are likely to use when they expect to make different types of judgments.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)