Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krueger, J. I.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, M. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Attribution and Categorization Effects in the Representation of Gender Stereotypes

Joachim I. Krueger

Brown University, Joachim_Krueger{at}Brown.edu

Julie H. Hall

University at Buffalo

Paola Villano

Università di Bologna

Meredith C. Jones

University of Denver

Social stereotypes involve judgments of how typical certain personality traits are of a group. According to the attribution hypothesis, judgments of trait typicality depend on the perceived prevalence of the trait in the target group. According to the categorization hypothesis, such judgments depend on the degree to which a trait is thought to be more or less prevalent in the target group than in a relevant comparison group. A study conducted with women and men as target groups showed that the attribution hypothesis fit the data best when typicality ratings were made in an absolute format. When, however, typicality ratings were made in a comparative format (how typical is the trait of women as compared with men?), both hypotheses received support. Analytical derivation, supported by empirical evidence, showed an inverse relationship between the size of perceived group differences and their weight given in stereotyping. Implications for stereotype measurement and the rationality of social perception are discussed.

Key Words: accentuation • bias • gender stereotypes • rational

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 11, No. 3, 401-414 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430208092542
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?