Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination02:55

Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination

89.6K
Humans are very diverse and although we share many similarities, we also have many differences. The social groups we belong to help form our identities (Tajfel, 1974). These differences may be difficult for some people to reconcile, which may lead to prejudice toward people who are different. Prejudice is a negative attitude and feeling toward an individual based solely on one’s membership in a particular social group (Allport, 1954; Brown, 2010). Prejudice is common against people who...
89.6K
Stereotype Content Model02:16

Stereotype Content Model

13.9K
The Stereotype Content Model (SCM) was first proposed by Susan Fiske and her colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & Xu, 2002; see also Fiske, 2012 and Fiske, 2017). The SCM specifies that when someone encounters a new group, they will stereotype them based on two metrics: warmth—or that group’s perceived intent, and how likely they are to provide help or inflict harm—and competence—or their ability to carry out that objective. Depending on the warmth-competence...
13.9K
Stereotype Threat and Self-fulfilling Prophecies02:09

Stereotype Threat and Self-fulfilling Prophecies

37.2K
When we hold a stereotype about a person, we have expectations that he or she will fulfill that stereotype. A self-fulfilling prophecy is an expectation held by a person that alters his or her behavior in a way that tends to make it true. When we hold stereotypes about a person, we tend to treat the person according to our expectations. This treatment can influence the person to act according to our stereotypic expectations, thus confirming our stereotypic beliefs. Research by Rosenthal and...
37.2K
In- and Out-Groups01:31

In- and Out-Groups

38.6K
People all belong to a gender, race, age, and social economic group. These groups provide a powerful source of our identity and self-esteem (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and serve as our in-groups. An in-group is a group that we identify with or see ourselves as belonging to.
38.6K
Confirmation Biases01:31

Confirmation Biases

5.4K
The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
5.4K
Cause and Effect01:53

Cause and Effect

10.8K
While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
10.8K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The disputed role of knowledge in truth illusions: A critical test based on comparative judgments.

Cognition·2026
Same author

Cognitive processes underlying the repetition-based truth effect: A diffusion model study.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same author

All types of recognition errors are (at least partly) attributable to misleading memory evidence, even false alarms.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2026
Same author

Comment on: Probabilities of conditionals: The relevance effect might be confounded by the existence of boundary cases (2025) by Zhan and Wang.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2026
Same author

Modeling truncated and censored data with the diffusion model in Stan.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

Rethinking Knowledge's Impact on the Illusory Truth Effect.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2025
Same journal

Metacognitive and Interpersonal Intellectual Humility Are Asymmetrically Associated with Well-Being.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
Same journal

Intergroup Contact and Belonging Among Ethiopian Jews in Ethiopia.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
Same journal

A Taxonomy of Data Synthesis.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
Same journal

When and Why Beliefs About the Causes of a Policy Problem Predict Policy Support.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
Same journal

Prospects of Downward Mobility Cause Status Anxiety and Life Dissatisfaction.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
Same journal

Fluency as a Cue to Authenticity.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 13, 2025

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects
08:13

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects

Published on: May 10, 2019

6.2K

Reconsidering Categorization-Related Inferences from Multicultural and Colorblind Prejudice Reduction Interventions.

Manuel Becker1,2, Sarah Teige-Mocigemba1,2, Jeffrey W Sherman3

  • 1Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany.

Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin
|April 16, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study questions whether common methods for measuring social categorization accurately reflect differences between colorblind and multicultural interventions. Findings suggest these measures may not reliably assess social categorization, impacting prejudice reduction research.

Keywords:
colorblindmulticulturalprejudicesocial categorization

More Related Videos

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

17.3K
Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing
06:58

Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing

Published on: January 24, 2020

7.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 13, 2025

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects
08:13

Using the Race Model Inequality to Quantify Behavioral Multisensory Integration Effects

Published on: May 10, 2019

6.2K
Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

17.3K
Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing
06:58

Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing

Published on: January 24, 2020

7.3K

Area of Science:

  • Social Psychology
  • Intergroup Relations
  • Prejudice Reduction

Background:

  • The role of social categorization in moderating prejudice is a key debate in social psychology.
  • Prejudice reduction interventions often aim to alter social categorization (e.g., colorblind vs. multicultural approaches).
  • Existing research frequently relies on specific operationalizations to measure social categorization effects.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the convergent and discriminant validity of canonical operationalizations used to measure social categorization.
  • To determine if these operationalizations reliably differentiate between intervention conditions.
  • To investigate unintended effects of these operationalizations on perceptions of intergroup relations.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized unobtrusive measures to assess social categorization.
  • Examined the validity of established operationalizations in the context of prejudice reduction interventions.
  • Compared outcomes across different intervention types (colorblind vs. multicultural).

Main Results:

  • Provided the first evidence that canonical operationalizations may not yield intended differential levels of social categorization.
  • Observed unintended differences in how operationalizations portrayed intergroup relations as beneficial.
  • Suggested alternative explanations beyond social categorization for observed effects on prejudice.

Conclusions:

  • The validity of common operationalizations for social categorization in prejudice research is questioned.
  • Findings indicate that effects on prejudice may be influenced by factors other than social categorization.
  • A refined understanding of intervention mechanisms is needed to improve prejudice reduction strategies.