Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI 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 arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Demoulin, S.
Right arrow Articles by Yzerbyt, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 9, No. 1, 25-42 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430206059856
© 2006 SAGE Publications

Lay Theories of Essentialism

Stéphanie Demoulin

Jacques-Philippe Leyens

Vincent Yzerbyt

Catholic University of Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

This article investigates the essentialist perception of social categories and differentiates it from two closely related concepts, namely entitativity and natural kind-ness. We argue that lay perceptions of social categories vary along three dimensions: natural kind-ness, entitativity, and essentialism. Depending on whether membership in social categories is forced or chosen, people develop different theories and associate different types of characteristics. Perceived control upon membership in the categories influences perceptions of entitativity and natural kind-ness but has no direct impact on the attribution of essentialism to the groups.

Key Words: entitativity • natural kind-ness • subjective essentialism

References

  • Abelson, R. P., Dasgupta, N., Park, J., & Banaji, M. R. (1998). Perceptions of the collective other . Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 243–250 .
  • Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley .
  • Campbell, D. T. (1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities . Behavioural Sciences, 3, 14–25 .
  • Crawford, M. T., Sherman, S. J., & Hamilton, D. L. (2001). Unpublished data, Indiana University.
  • Dasgupta, N., Banaji, M. R., & Abelson, R. P. (1999). Group entitativity and group perception: Associations between physical features and psychological judgment . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 991–1003 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Demoulin, S., Cortes, B. P., Viki, T. G., Rodriguez, A. P., Rodriguez, R. T., Paladino, M. P. et al. (2002). The role of ingroup identification in infra-humanization. Unpublished manuscript.
  • Demoulin, S., Rodriguez, R. T., Rodriguez, A. P., Vaes, J., Paladino, M. P., Gaunt, R. et al. (2005). Emotional prejudice can lead to infra-humanization. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology, 15, 259–296.
  • Gaertner, L., & Schopler, J. (1998). Perceived ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias: An interconnection of self and others . European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 963–980 .[CrossRef][ISI]
  • Gelman, S. A. (1988). The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories . Cognitive Psychology, 20, 65–95 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Gelman, S. A., & Wellman, H. M. (1991). Insides and essences: Early understandings of the non-obvious . Cognition, 38, 213–244 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. (1996). Perceiving persons and groups . Psychological Review, 103, 336–355 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hamilton, D. L., Sherman, S. J., & Lickel, B. (1998). Perceiving social groups: The importance of the Entitativity Continuum. In C. Sedikides,J. Schopler, & C. A. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior(pp. 47–74). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
  • Haslam, N., Bain, P., Douge, L., Lee, M., & Bastian, B. (in press). More human than you: Attributing humanness to self and others . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
  • Haslam, N., & Levy, S. R. (in press). Essentialist beliefs about homosexuality: Structure and implication for prejudice . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
  • Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories . British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 113–127 .
  • Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice? British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 87–100 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hirschfeld, L. A. (1996). Race in the making: Cognition culture and the child's construction of the human kind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
  • Krech, D., & Crutchfield, R. S. (1948). Theories and problems of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill .
  • Levy, S. R., Stroessner, S. J., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Stereotype formation and endorsement: The role of implicit theories . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1421–1436 .[CrossRef]
  • Leyens, J. P., Paladino, P. M., Rodriguez, R. T., Vaes, J., Demoulin, S., Rodriguez, A. P. et al. (2000). The emotional side of prejudice: The role of secondary emotions . Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 186–197 .
  • Leyens, J. P., Rodriguez, A. P., Rodriguez, R. T., Gaunt, R., Paladino, P. M., Vaes, J. (2001). Psychological essentialism and the differential attribution of uniquely human emotions to ingroups and outgroups . European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 395–411 .[CrossRef]
  • Lickel, B., Hamilton, D., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A. C., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223–246 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Lillard, A. (1998). Ethnopsychologies: Cultural variations in theories of mind . Psychological Bulletin, 123, 3–32 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • McGarty, C., Haslam, S. A., Hutchinson, K. J., & Grace, D. M. (1995). Determinants of perceived consistency: The relationship between group entitativity and the meaningfulness of categories . British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 237–256 .
  • Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure . American Psychologist, 44, 1469–1481 .[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Medin, D. L., & Ortony, A. (1989). Psychological essentialism. In S. Vosnaidou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning(pp. 179–195). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Miller, J. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961–978 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Plaks, J. E., Stroessner, S. J., Dweck, C. S., & Sherman, J. W. (2001). Person theories and attention allocation: Preferences for stereotypic versus counterstereotypic information . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 876–893 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rogier, A., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (1999). Social attribution: The role of homogeneity in subjective essentialism . Swiss Journal of Psychology, 54, 233–240 .[CrossRef]
  • Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill .
  • Rothbart, M., & Taylor, M. (1992). Category labels and social reality: Do we view social categories as natural kinds? In G. Semin & F. Fiedler (Eds.), Language, interaction and social cognition (pp. 11–36). London: Sage .
  • Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press .
  • Verkuyten, M. (2003). Discourses about ethnic group (de-)essentialism: Oppressive and progressive aspects . British Journal of Social Psychology 42, 371–391 .[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Wilder, D., & Simon, A. F. (1998). Categorical and dynamic groups: Implications for social perception and intergroup behaviors. In C. Sedikides, J. Schopler, & C. A. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Buidin, G. (1998). The impact of naive theories about the nature of the groups on the accentuation effect. Unpublished raw data, Catholic University of Louvain at Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., Corneille, O., & Estrada, C. (2001). The interplay of subjective essentialism and entitativity in the formation of stereotypes . Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 141–155 .
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., Estrada, C., Corneille, O., Seron, E., & Demoulin, S. (2004). Subjective essentialism in action: Self-anchoring and social control as consequences of fundamental social divides. In V. Y. Yzerbyt, C. M. Judd, & O. Corneille (Eds.), The psychology of group perception. Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism. London: Psychology Press .
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., Judd, C. M., & Corneille O. (2004) The psychology of group perception. Perceived variability, entitativity, and essentialism. London: Psychology Press .
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., Rocher, S. J., & Schadron, G. (1997). Stereotypes as explanations: A subjective essentialistic view of group perception. In R. Spears, P. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & A. Haslam (Eds.), The psychology of stereotyping and group life (pp. 20–50). London: Basil Blackwell .
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Rogier, A. (2001). Blame it on the group: Entitativity, subjective essentialism and social attribution. In J. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
  • Yzerbyt, V. Y., Rogier, A., & Fiske, S. (1998). Group entitativity and social attribution: On translating situational constraints into stereotypes . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1090–1104 .

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
S. R. Levy, C.-y. Chiu, and Y.-y. Hong
Lay Theories and Intergroup Relations
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, January 1, 2006; 9(1): 5 - 24.
[Abstract] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI 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 arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Demoulin, S.
Right arrow Articles by Yzerbyt, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?