Stereotype
For other uses, see Stereotype (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with Stereotypy.
An 18th-century Dutch engraving of the peoples of the world, de-
picting the inhabitants of Asia, the Americas and Africa as sav-
ages. Shown below are an Englishman, a Dutchman, a German
and a Frenchman.
Police officers buying doughnuts and coffee, an example of per-
ceived stereotypical behavior in North America.
In social psychology, a stereotype is a thought that can
be adopted about specific types of individuals or cer-
tain ways of doing things.[1] These thoughts or beliefs
may or may not accurately reflect reality.[2][3] However,
this is only a fundamental psychological definition of
a stereotype.[3] Within psychology and spanning across
other disciplines, there are different conceptualizations
and theories of stereotyping that provide their own ex-
panded definition. Some of these definitions share com-
monalities, though each one may also harbor unique as-
pects that may contradict the others.
1
Only boys playing video games exemplifies a common stereo-
type that video games are predominantly made for and played
by boys.
1 Etymology
The term stereotype derives from the Greek words
στερεός (stereos), “firm, solid”[4] and τύπος (typos),
impression,[5] hence “solid impression on one or more
idea/theory.”
The term comes from the printing trade and was first
adopted in 1798 by Firmin Didot to describe a printing
plate that duplicated any typography. The duplicate print-
ing plate, or the stereotype, is used for printing instead of
the original.
Outside of printing, the first reference to “stereotype” was
in 1850, as a noun that meant image perpetuated without
change.[6] However, it was not until 1922 that “stereo-
type” was first used in the modern psychological sense by
American journalist Walter Lippmann in his work Public
Opinion.[7]
2 Relationship with other types of
intergroup attitudes
Stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination are under-
stood as related but different concepts.[8][9][10][11] Stereo-
types are regarded as the most cognitive component and
often occurs without conscious awareness, whereas prej-
udice is the affective component of stereotyping and dis-
crimination is one of the behavioral components of prej-
udicial reactions.[8][9][12] In this tripartite view of in-
tergroup attitudes, stereotypes reflect expectations and
beliefs about the characteristics of members of groups
perceived as different from one’s own, prejudice repre-
2 4 FUNCTIONS

sents the emotional response, and discrimination refers combinations of high and low levels of warmth and com-
to actions.[8][9] petence elicit distinct emotions.[18] The model explains
Although related, the three concepts can exist indepen- the phenomenon that some out-groups are admired but
dently of each other.[9][13] According to Daniel Katz disliked, whereas others are liked but disrespected. This
and Kenneth Braly, stereotyping leads to racial prejudice model was empirically tested on a variety of national and
when people emotionally react to the name of a group, as- international samples and was found to reliably predict
[16][19]
cribe characteristics to members of that group, and then stereotype content.
evaluate those characteristics.[10]
Possible prejudicial effects of stereotypes[3] are:
4 Functions
• Justification of ill-founded prejudices or ignorance
Early studies suggested that stereotypes were only used
• Unwillingness to rethink one’s attitudes and behav- by rigid, repressed, and authoritarian people. This idea
ior towards stereotyped groups has been refuted by contemporary studies that suggest
• Preventing some people of stereotyped groups from the ubiquity of stereotypes and it was suggested to regard
entering or succeeding in activities or fields[14] stereotypes as collective group beliefs, meaning that peo-
ple who belong to the same social group share the same
set of stereotypes.[13] Modern research asserts that full
3 Content understanding of stereotypes requires considering them
from two complementary perspectives: as shared within
a particular culture/subculture and as formed in the mind
of an individual person.[20]

4.1 Relationship between cognitive and so-

cial functions

Stereotyping can serve cognitive functions on an inter-

personal level, and social functions on an intergroup
level.[3][13] For stereotyping to function on an intergroup
level (see social identity approaches: social identity the-
ory and self-categorization theory), an individual must
see themselves as part of a group and being part of that
group must also be salient for the individual.[13]
Stereotype content model, adapted from Fiske et al. (2002): Four Craig McGarty, Russell Spears, and Vincent Y. Yzerbyt
types of stereotypes resulting from combinations of perceived
(2002) argued that the cognitive functions of stereotyping
warmth and competence.
are best understood in relation to its social functions, and
vice versa.[21]
Stereotype content refers to the attributes that people
think characterize a group. Studies of stereotype con-
tent examine what people think of others, rather than the 4.2 Cognitive functions
reasons and mechanisms involved in stereotyping.[15]
Early theories of stereotype content proposed by Stereotypes can help make sense of the world. They are
social psychologists such as Gordon Allport as- a form of categorization that helps to simplify and sys-
sumed that stereotypes of outgroups reflected uniform tematize information. Thus, information is more easily
antipathy.[16][17] For instance, Katz and Braly argued identified, recalled, predicted, and reacted to.[13] Stereo-
in their classic 1933 study that ethnic stereotypes were types are categories of objects or people. Between stereo-
uniformly negative.[15] types, objects or people are as different from each other
[1]
By contrast, a newer model of stereotype content theo- as possible. Within stereotypes, objects [1]
or people are
rizes that stereotypes are frequently ambivalent and vary as similar to each other as possible.
along two dimensions: warmth and competence. Warmth Gordon Allport has suggested possible answers to
and competence are respectively predicted by lack of why people find it easier to understand categorized
competition and status. Groups that do not compete with information.[22] First, people can consult a category to
the in-group for the same resources (e.g., college space) identify response patterns. Second, categorized informa-
are perceived as warm, whereas high-status (e.g., eco- tion is more specific than non-categorized information,
nomically or educationally successful) groups are con- as categorization accentuates properties that are shared
sidered competent. The groups within each of the four by all members of a group. Third, people can read-
4.4 Social functions: self-categorization 3

ily describe object in a category because objects in the

same category have distinct characteristics. Finally, peo-
ple can take for granted the characteristics of a particular
category because the category itself may be an arbitrary
grouping.
A complementary perspective theorizes how stereotypes
function as time- and energy-savers that allow people to
act more efficiently.[1] Yet another perspective suggests
that stereotypes are people’s biased perceptions of their
social contexts.[1] In this view, people use stereotypes as
shortcuts to make sense of their social contexts, and this
makes a person’s task of understanding his or her world
less cognitively demanding.[1]

4.3 Social functions: social categorization

In the following situations, the overarching purpose of

stereotyping is for people to put their collective self (their
ingroup membership) in a positive light:[23]

• when stereotypes are used for explaining social

events

• when stereotypes are used for justifying activities

An anti-semitic 1873 caricature depicting the stereotypical phys-
of one’s own group (ingroup) to another group
ical features of a Jewish male.
(outgroup)

• when stereotypes are used for differentiating the in- 4.3.3 Intergroup differentiation
group as positively distinct from outgroups
An assumption is that people want their ingroup to have a
positive image relative to outgroups, and so people want
to differentiate their ingroup from relevant outgroups in
4.3.1 Explanation purposes
a desirable way.[13] If an outgroup does not affect the in-
group’s image, then from an image preservation point of
As mentioned previously, stereotypes can be used to ex- view, there is no point for the ingroup to be positively
plain social events.[13][23] Henri Tajfel[13] described his distinct from that outgroup.[13]
observations of how some people found that the anti-
Semitic contents of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion People can actively create certain images for relevant out-
only made sense if Jews have certain characteristics. groups by stereotyping. People do so when they see
Therefore, according to Tajfel,[13] Jews were stereotyped that their ingroup is no longer as clearly and/or as pos-
as being evil and yearning for world domination to match itively differentiated from relevant outgroups, and they
the anti-Semitic ‘facts’ as presented in The Protocols of want to restore the intergroup
[13][23]
differentiation to a state
the Elders of Zion. that favours the ingroup.

4.4 Social functions: self-categorization

4.3.2 Justification purposes
People create stereotypes of an outgroup to justify the ac-
tions that their ingroup has committed (or plans to com-
mit) towards that outgroup.[13][22][23] For example, ac-
cording to Tajfel,[13] Europeans stereotyped Turkish, In-
dian, and Chinese people as being incapable of achieving
financial advances without European help. This stereo-
type was used to justify European colonialism in Turkey,
India, and China.
People change their stereotype of their ingroups and out-
groups to suit context.[3][23] People are likely to self-
stereotype their ingroup as homogenous in an intergroup
context, and they are less likely to do so in an intra-
group context where the need to emphasise their group
membership is not as great.[23] Stereotypes can empha-
sise a person’s group membership in two steps: First,
stereotypes emphasise the person’s similarities with in-
group members on relevant dimensions, and also the per-
4 5 FORMATION
son’s differences from outgroup members on relevant
dimensions.[23] Second, the more the stereotypes empha-
sise within-group similarities and between-group differ-
ences, the more salient the person’s social identity be-
comes, and the more depersonalised that person is.[23]
A depersonalised person abandons individual differences
and embraces the stereotypes associated with their rele-
vant group membership.[23]
4.5 Social functions: social influence and
consensus
Stereotypes are an indicator of ingroup consensus.[23]
When there are intragroup disagreements over stereo-
types of the ingroup and/or outgroups, ingroup members
take collective action to prevent other ingroup members
from diverging from each other.[23]
John C. Turner proposed in 1987[23] that if ingroup mem-
bers disagree on an outgroup stereotype, then one of three
possible collective actions follow: First, ingroup mem-
bers may negotiate with each other and conclude that
they have different outgroup stereotypes because they
are stereotyping different subgroups of an outgroup (e.g.,
Russian gymnasts versus Russian boxers). Second, in-
group members may negotiate with each other, but con-
clude that they are disagreeing because of categorical dif-
ferences amongst themselves. Accordingly, in this con-
text, it is better to categorise ingroup members under
different categories (e.g., Democrats versus Republican)
than under a shared category (e.g., American). Finally,
ingroup members may influence each other to arrive at a
common outgroup stereotype.
5 Formation
Different disciplines give different accounts of how
stereotypes develop: Psychologists may focus on an in-
dividual’s experience with groups, patterns of communi-
cation about those groups, and intergroup conflict. As
for sociologists, they may focus on the relations among
different groups in a social structure. They suggest that
stereotypes are the result of conflict, poor parenting, and
inadequate mental and emotional development. Once
stereotypes have formed, there are two main factors that
explain their persistence. First, the cognitive effects of
schematic processing (see schema) make it so that when
a member of a group behaves as we expect, the behavior
confirms and even strengthens existing stereotypes. Sec-
ond, the affective or emotional aspects of prejudice ren-
der logical arguments against stereotypes ineffective in
countering the power of emotional responses.[24]
5.1 Correspondence bias
Main article: Correspondence bias
Correspondence bias refers to the tendency to ascribe a
person’s behavior to disposition or personality, and to un-
derestimate the extent to which situational factors elicited
the behavior. Correspondence bias can play an important
role in stereotype formation.[25]
For example, in a study by Roguer and Yzerbyt (1999)
participants watched a video showing students who were
randomly instructed to find arguments either for or
against euthanasia. The students that argued in favor of
euthanasia came from the same law department or from
different departments. Results showed that participants
attributed the students’ responses to their attitudes al-
though it had been made clear in the video that students
had no choice about their position. Participants reported
that group membership, i.e., the department that the stu-
dents belonged to, affected the students’ opinions about
euthanasia. Law students were perceived to be more in
favor of euthanasia than students from different depart-
ments despite the fact that a pretest had revealed that sub-
jects had no preexisting expectations about attitudes to-
ward euthanasia and the department that students belong
to. The attribution error created the new stereotype that
law students are more likely to support euthanasia.[26]
Nier et al. (2012) found that people who tend to draw dis-
positional inferences from behavior and ignore situational
constraints are more likely to stereotype low-status groups
as incompetent and high-status groups as competent. Par-
ticipants listened to descriptions of two fictitious groups
of Pacific Islanders, one of which was described as being
higher in status than the other. In a second study, sub-
jects rated actual groups – the poor and wealthy, women
and men – in the United States in terms of their com-
petence. Subjects who scored high on the measure of
correspondence bias stereotyped the poor, women, and
the fictitious lower-status Pacific Islanders as incompe-
tent whereas they stereotyped the wealthy, men, and the
high-status Pacific Islanders as competent. The corre-
spondence bias was a significant predictor of stereotyping
even after controlling for other measures that have been
linked to beliefs about low status groups, the just-world
hypothesis and social dominance orientation.[27]
5.2 Illusory correlation
Main article: Illusory correlation
Research has shown that stereotypes can develop based
on a cognitive mechanism known as illusory correlation
– an erroneous inference about the relationship between
two events.[1][28][29] If two statistically infrequent events
co-occur, observers overestimate the frequency of co-
occurrence of these events. The underlying reason is
5.3 Common environment
that rare, infrequent events are distinctive and salient
and, when paired, become even more so. The height-
ened salience results in more attention and more effective
encoding, which strengthens the belief that the events are
correlated.[30][31][32]
In the intergroup context, illusory correlations lead peo-
ple to misattribute rare behaviors or traits at higher rates
to minority group members than to majority groups, even
when both display the same proportion of the behaviors
or traits. Black people, for instance, are a minority group
in the United States and interaction with blacks is a rel-
atively infrequent event for an average white American.
Similarly, undesirable behavior (e.g. crime) is statisti-
cally less frequent than desirable behavior. Since both
events “blackness” and “undesirable behavior” are dis-
tinctive in the sense that they are infrequent, the com-
bination of the two leads observers to overestimate the
rate of co-occurrence.[30] Similarly, in workplaces where
women are underrepresented and negative behaviors such
as errors occur less frequently than positive behaviors,
women become more strongly associated with mistakes
than men.[33]
In a landmark study, David Hamilton and Richard Gif-
ford (1976) examined the role of illusory correlation
in stereotype formation. Subjects were instructed to
read descriptions of behaviors performed by members
of groups A and B. Negative behaviors outnumbered
positive actions and group B was smaller than group A,
making negative behaviors and membership in group B
relatively infrequent and distinctive. Participants were
then asked who had performed a set of actions: a per-
son of group A or group B. Results showed that sub-
jects overestimated the frequency with which both dis-
tinctive events, membership in group B and negative be-
havior, co-occurred, and evaluated group B more nega-
tively. This despite the fact the proportion of positive
to negative behaviors was equivalent for both groups and
that there was no actual correlation between group mem-
bership and behaviors.[30] Although Hamilton and Gif-
ford found a similar effect for positive behaviors as the in-
frequent events, a meta-analytic review of studies showed
that illusory correlation effects are stronger when the in-
frequent, distinctive information is negative.[28]
Hamilton and Gifford’s distinctiveness-based explanation
of stereotype formation was subsequently extended.[31] A
1994 study by McConnell, Sherman, and Hamilton found
that people formed stereotypes based on information that
was not distinctive at the time of presentation, but was
considered distinctive at the time of judgement.[34] Once
a person judges non-distinctive information in memory
to be distinctive, that information is re-encoded and re-
represented as if it had been distinctive when it was first
processed.[34]
5
5.3 Common environment
One explanation for why stereotypes are shared is that
they are the result of a common environment that stimu-
lates people to react in the same way.[1]
The problem with the ‘common environment’ explanation
in general is that it does not explain how shared stereo-
types can occur without direct stimuli.[1] Research since
the 1930s suggested that people are highly similar with
each other in how they describe different racial and na-
tional groups, although those people have no personal ex-
perience with the groups they are describing.[35]
5.4 Socialization and upbringing
Another explanation says that people are socialised to
adopt the same stereotypes.[1] Some psychologists be-
lieve that although stereotypes can be absorbed at any age,
stereotypes are usually acquired in early childhood under
the influence of parents, teachers, peers, and the media.
If stereotypes are defined by social values, then stereo-
types only change as per changes in social values.[1] The
suggestion that stereotype content depend on social val-
ues reflects Walter Lippman's argument in his 1922 pub-
lication that stereotypes are rigid because they cannot be
changed at will.[10]
Studies emerging since the 1940s refuted the suggestion
that stereotype contents cannot be changed at will. Those
studies suggested that one group’s stereotype of another
group would become more or less positive depending on
whether their intergroup relationship had improved or
degraded.[10][36][37] Intergroup events (e.g., World War
Two, Persian Gulf conflict) often changed intergroup re-
lationships. For example, after WWII, Black American
students held a more negative stereotype of people from
countries that were the United States’s WWII enemies.[10]
If there are no changes to an intergroup relationship, then
relevant stereotypes do not change.[11]
5.5 Intergroup relations
According to a third explanation, shared stereotypes are
neither caused by the coincidence of common stimuli,
nor by socialisation. This explanation posits that stereo-
types are shared because group members are motivated
to behave in certain ways, and stereotypes reflect those
behaviours.[1] It is important to note from this explanation
that stereotypes are the consequence, not the cause, of
intergroup relations. This explanation assumes that when
it is important for people to acknowledge both their in-
group and outgroup, they will emphasise their difference
from outgroup members, and their similarity to ingroup
members.[1]
6 7 ACCURACY

6 Activation showed reduced stereotype activation.[44][45] This effect

is based on the learning of new and more positive stereo-
[45]
The dual-process model of cognitive processing of stereo- types rather than the negation of already existing ones.
types asserts that automatic activation of stereotypes
is followed by a controlled processing stage, during
6.1 Automatic behavioral outcomes
which an individual may choose to disregard or ignore
the stereotyped information that has been brought to
Empirical evidence suggests that stereotype activation
mind.[12]
can automatically influence social behavior.[46][47][48][49]
A number of studies have found that stereotypes are ac- For example, Bargh, Chen, and Burrows (1996) acti-
tivated automatically. Patricia Devine (1989), for exam- vated the stereotype of the elderly among half of their
ple, suggested that stereotypes are automatically activated participants by administering a scrambled-sentence test
in the presence of a member (or some symbolic equiv- where participants saw words related to age stereotypes.
alent) of a stereotyped group and that the unintentional Subjects primed with the stereotype walked significantly
activation of the stereotype is equally strong for high- more slowly than the control group (although the test
and low-prejudice persons. Words related to the cultural did not include any words specifically referring to slow-
stereotype of blacks were presented subliminally. During ness), thus acting in a way that the stereotype suggests
an ostensibly unrelated impression-formation task, sub- that elderly people will act. In another experiment, Bargh,
jects read a paragraph describing a race-unspecified tar- Chen, and Burrows also found that because the stereotype
get person’s behaviors and rated the target person on sev- about blacks includes the notion of aggression, sublimi-
eral trait scales. Results showed that participants who re- nal exposure to black faces increased the likelihood that
ceived a high proportion of racial words rated the target randomly selected white college students reacted with
person in the story as significantly more hostile than par- more aggression and hostility than participants who sub-
ticipants who were presented with a lower proportion of consciously viewed a white face.[50] Similarly, Correll et
words related to the stereotype. This effect held true for al. (2002) showed that activated stereotypes about blacks
both high- and low-prejudice subjects (as measured by can influence people’s behavior. In a series of experi-
the Modern Racism Scale). Thus, the racial stereotype ments, black and white participants played a video game,
was activated even for low-prejudice individuals who did in which a black or white person was shown holding a gun
not personally endorse it.[12][38][39] Studies using alterna- or a harmless object (e.g., a mobile phone). Participants
tive priming methods have shown that the activation of had to decide as quickly as possible whether to shoot the
gender and age stereotypes can also be automatic.[40][41] target. When the target person was armed, both black
Subsequent research suggested that the relation between and white participants were faster in deciding to shoot the
category activation and stereotype activation was more target when he was black than when he was white. When
complex.[39][42] Lepore and Brown (1997), for instance, the target was unarmed, the participants avoided shoot-
noted that the words used in Devine’s study were both ing him more quickly when he was white. Time pressure
[51]
neutral category labels (e.g., “Blacks”) and stereotypic made the shooter bias even more pronounced.
attributes (e.g., “lazy”). They argued that if only the
neutral category labels were presented, people high and
low in prejudice would respond differently. In a design 7 Accuracy
similar to Devine’s, Lepore and Brown primed the cate-
gory of African-Americans using labels such as “blacks”
and “West Indians” and then assessed the differential
activation of the associated stereotype in the subse-
quent impression-formation task. They found that high-
prejudice participants increased their ratings of the tar-
get person on the negative stereotypic dimensions and
decreased them on the positive dimension whereas low-
prejudice subjects tended in the opposite direction. The
results suggest that the level of prejudice and stereotype
endorsement affects people’s judgements when the cate-
gory – and not the stereotype per se – is primed.[43]
Research has shown that people can be trained to acti-
vate counterstereotypic information and thereby reduce
the automatic activation of negative stereotypes. In a A magazine feature from Beauty Parade from March 1952
study by Kawakami et al. (2000), for example, partic- stereotyping women drivers. It features Bettie Page as the model.
ipants were presented with a category label and taught
to respond “No” to stereotypic traits and “Yes” to non- Stereotypes can be efficient shortcuts and sense-making
stereotypic traits. After this training period, subjects tools. They can, however, keep people from process-
8.2 Stereotype threat
ing new or unexpected information about each individual,
thus biasing the impression formation process.[1] Early re-
searchers believed that stereotypes were inaccurate rep-
resentations of reality.[35] A series of pioneering studies
in the 1930s found no empirical support for widely held
racial stereotypes.[10] By the mid-1950s, Gordon Allport
wrote that, “It is possible for a stereotype to grow in de-
fiance of all evidence.”[22]
Research on the role of illusory correlations in the forma-
tion of stereotypes suggests that stereotypes can develop
because of incorrect inferences about the relationship be- sess one’s skills because performance-related evaluations
tween two events (e.g., membership in a social group and
bad or good attributes). This means that at least some
stereotypes are inaccurate.[28][30][32][34]
Empirical social science research shows that stereotypes succeed.
are often accurate.[52] Jussim et al. reviewed four studies
concerning racial and seven studies that examined gen-
der stereotypes about demographic characteristics, aca- 8.2 Stereotype threat
demic achievement, personality and behavior. Based
on that, the authors argued that some aspects of eth-
nic and gender stereotypes are accurate while stereo-
types concerning political affiliation and nationality are
much less accurate.[53] A study by Terracciano et al. also
found that stereotypic beliefs about nationality do not re-
flect the actual personality traits of people from different
cultures.[54]
8 Effects
8.1 Attributional ambiguity
Main article: Attributional ambiguity
Attributive ambiguity refers to the uncertainty that mem-
bers of stereotyped groups experience in interpreting the
causes of others’ behavior toward them. Stereotyped in-
dividuals who receive negative feedback can attribute it
either to personal shortcomings, such as lack of ability
or poor effort, or the evaluator’s stereotypes and prej-
udice toward their social group. Alternatively, positive
feedback can either be attributed to personal merit or dis-
counted as a form of sympathy or pity.[55][56][57]
Crocker et al. (1991) showed that when black partici-
pants were evaluated by a white person who was aware
of their race, black subjects mistrusted the feedback, at-
tributing negative feedback to the evaluator’s stereotypes
and positive feedback to the evaluator’s desire to appear
unbiased. When the black participants’ race was un-
known to the evaluator, they were more accepting of the
feedback.[58]
Attributional ambiguity has been shown to affect a per-
son’s self-esteem. When they receive positive evalua-
tions, stereotyped individuals are uncertain of whether
they really deserved their success and, consequently, they
7
find it difficult to take credit for their achievements. In the
case of negative feedback, ambiguity has been shown to
have a protective effect on self-esteem as it allows people
to assign blame to external causes. Some studies, how-
ever, have found that this effect only holds when stereo-
typed individuals can be absolutely certain that their neg-
ative outcomes are due to the evaluators’s prejudice. If
any room for uncertainty remains, stereotyped individu-
als tend to blame themselves.[56]
Attributional ambiguity can also make it difficult to as-
are mistrusted or discounted. Moreover, it can lead
to the belief that one’s efforts are not directly linked
to the outcomes, thereby depressing one’s motivation to
[55]
The effect of stereotype threat (ST) on math test scores for girls
and boys. Data from Osborne (2007).[59]
Main article: Stereotype threat
Stereotype threat occurs when people are aware of a
negative stereotype about their social group and expe-
rience anxiety or concern that they might confirm the
stereotype.[60] Stereotype threat has been shown to un-
dermine performance in a variety of domains.[61][62]
Claude M. Steele and Joshua Aronson conducted the first
experiments showing that stereotype threat can depress
intellectual performance on standardized tests. In one
study, they found that black college students performed
worse than white students on a verbal test when the task
was framed as a measure of intelligence. When it was
not presented in that manner, the performance gap nar-
rowed. Subsequent experiments showed that framing
the test as diagnostic of intellectual ability made black
students more aware of negative stereotypes about their
group, which in turn impaired their performance.[63]
Stereotype threat effects have been demonstrated for an
array of social groups in many different arenas, includ-
ing not only academics but also sports,[64] chess[65] and
business.[66]
8 9 ROLE IN ART AND CULTURE

8.3 Self-fulfilling prophecy rooted in specific stereotypes and that these stereotypes
loom large in many labor markets.[14] Agerström and
Main article: Self-fulfilling prophecy Rooth (2011) showed that automatic obesity stereotypes
captured by the Implicit Association Test can predict real
hiring discrimination against the obese.[74] Similarly, ex-
Stereotypes lead people to expect certain actions from
periments suggest that gender stereotypes play an impor-
members of social groups. These stereotype-based
tant role in judgments that affect hiring decisions.[75][76]
expectations may lead to self-fulfilling prophecies, in
which one’s inaccurate expectations about a person’s
behavior, through social interaction, prompt that per-
son to act in stereotype-consistent ways, thus con-
8.5 Self-stereotyping
firming one’s erroneous expectations and validating the
Main article: Self-stereotyping
stereotype.[67][68][69]
Word, Zanna, and Cooper (1974) demonstrated the ef-
Stereotypes can affect self-evaluations and lead to self-
fects of stereotypes in the context of a job interview.
stereotyping.[3][77] For instance, Correll (2001, 2004)
White participants interviewed black and white subjects
found that specific stereotypes (e.g., the stereotype that
who, prior to the experiments, had been trained to act in
women have lower mathematical ability) affect women’s
a standardized manner. Analysis of the videotaped in-
and men’s evaluations of their abilities (e.g., in math
terviews showed that black job applicants were treated
and science), such that men assess their own task ability
differently: They received shorter amounts of interview
higher than women performing at the same level.[78][79]
time and less eye contact; interviewers made more speech
Similarly, a study by Sinclair et al. (2006) has shown that
errors (e.g., stutters, sentence incompletions, incoherent
Asian American women rated their math ability more fa-
sounds) and physically distanced themselves from black
vorably when their ethnicity and the relevant stereotype
applicants. In a second experiment, trained interview-
that Asian Americans excel in math was made salient.
ers were instructed to treat applicants, all of whom were
In contrast, they rated their math ability less favorably
white, like the whites or blacks had been treated in the
when their gender and the corresponding stereotype of
first experiment. As a result, applicants treated like the
women’s inferior math skills was made salient. Sinclair et
blacks of the first experiment behaved in a more nervous
al. found, however, that the effect of stereotypes on self-
manner and received more negative performance ratings
evaluations is mediated by the degree to which close peo-
than interviewees receiving the treatment previously af-
ple in someone’s life endorse these stereotypes. People’s
forded to whites.[70]
self-stereotyping can increase or decrease depending on
A 1977 study by Snyder, Tanke, and Berscheid found a whether close others view them in stereotype-consistent
similar pattern in social interactions between men and or inconsistent manner.[80]
women. Male undergraduate students were asked to
Stereotyping can also play a central role in depression,
talk to female undergraduates, whom they believed to be
when people have negative self-stereotypes about them-
physically attractive or unattractive, on the phone. The
selves, according to Cox, Abramson, Devine, and Hol-
conversations were taped and analysis showed that men
lon (2012).[3] This depression that is caused by prejudice
who thought that they were talking to an attractive woman
(i.e., “deprejudice”) can be related to a group member-
communicated in a more positive and friendlier manner
ship (e.g., Me–Gay–Bad) or not (e.g., Me–Bad). If some-
than men who believed that they were talking to unattrac-
one holds prejudicial beliefs about a stigmatized group
tive women. This altered the women’s behavior: Female
and then becomes a member of that group, they may in-
subjects who, unknowingly to them, were perceived to be
ternalize their prejudice and develop depression. Peo-
physically attractive behaved in a friendly, likeable, and
ple may also show prejudice internalization through self-
sociable manner in comparison with subjects who were
stereotyping because of negative childhood experiences
regarded as unattractive.[71]
such as verbal and physical abuse.

8.4 Discrimination
Because stereotypes simplify and justify social reality,
they have potentially powerful effects on how people per-
ceive and treat one another.[72] As a result, stereotypes
can lead to discrimination in labor markets and other
domains.[73] For example, Tilcsik (2011) has found that
employers who seek job applicants with stereotypically
male heterosexual traits are particularly likely to engage
in discrimination against gay men, suggesting that dis-
crimination on the basis of sexual orientation is partly
9 Role in art and culture
Stereotypes are common in various cultural media, where
they take the form of dramatic stock characters. These
characters are found in the works of playwright Bertold
Brecht, Dario Fo, and Jacques Lecoq, who character-
ize their actors as stereotypes for theatrical effect. In
commedia dell'arte this is similarly common. The in-
stantly recognizable nature of stereotypes mean that they
are effective in advertising and situation comedy. These

American political cartoon titled The Usual Irish Way of Doing for its genre or category. Whereas declaring that a sto-
Things, depicting a drunken Irishman lighting a powder keg and ryteller has relied on cliché is to pejoratively observe a
swinging a bottle. Published in Harper’s Weekly, 1871.
stereotypes change, and in modern times only a few of
the stereotyped characters shown in John Bunyan's The
Pilgrim’s Progress would be recognizable.
Media stereotypes of women first emerged in the early
20th century. Various stereotypic depictions or “types” of
women appeared in magazines, including Victorian ide-
als of femininity, the New Woman, the Gibson Girl, the 10 See also
Femme fatale, and the Flapper.[81] More recently, artists
such as Anne Taintor and Matthew Weiner (the producer
of Mad Men) have used vintage images or ideas to insert
their own commentary of stereotypes for specific eras.
Weiner’s character Peggy Olson continually battles gen- [1] McGarty, Craig; Yzerbyt, Vincent Y.; Spears, Russel
der stereotypes throughout the series, excelling in a work-
place dominated by men.
Some contemporary studies indicate that racial, ethnic
and cultural stereotypes are still widespread in Hollywood
blockbuster movies.[82] Portrayals of Latin Americans in
film and print media are restricted to a narrow set of char-
acters. Latin Americans are largely depicted as sexual-
ized figures such as the Latino macho or the Latina vixen,
gang members, (illegal) immigrants, or entertainers. By
comparison, they are rarely portrayed as working profes-
sionals, business leaders or politicians.[83]
Stereotypes are also common in video games, with
women being portrayed as stereotypes such as the
"damsel in distress" or as sexual objects (see Gender rep-
resentation in video games). Black men are portrayed
most often in stereotypical roles such as athletes and
gangsters (see Racial representations in video games).
In literature and art, stereotypes are clichéd or predictable
characters or situations. Throughout history, storytellers
have drawn from stereotypical characters and situations
to immediately connect the audience with new tales.
9
Sometimes such stereotypes can be sophisticated, such
as Shakespeare's Shylock in The Merchant of Venice. Ar-
guably a stereotype that becomes complex and sophisti-
cated ceases to be a stereotype per se by its unique charac-
terization. Thus while Shylock remains politically unsta-
ble in being a stereotypical Jew, the subject of prejudicial
derision in Shakespeare’s era, his many other detailed
features raise him above a simple stereotype and into a
unique character, worthy of modern performance. Sim-
ply because one feature of a character can be catego-
rized as being typical does not make the entire character
a stereotype.
Despite their proximity in etymological roots, cliché and
stereotype are not used synonymously in cultural spheres.
For example, a cliché is a high criticism in narratology
where genre and categorization automatically associates
a story within its recognizable group. Labeling a situa-
tion or character in a story as typical suggests it is fitting
simplicity and lack of originality in the tale. To criticize
Ian Fleming for a stereotypically unlikely escape for James
Bond would be understood by the reader or listener, but
it would be more appropriately criticized as a cliché in
that it is overused and reproduced. Narrative genre re-
lies heavily on typical features to remain recognizable and
generate meaning in the reader/viewer.
11 References
(2002). “Social, cultural and cognitive factors in stereo-
type formation” (PDF). Stereotypes as explanations: The
formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–15. ISBN
978-0-521-80047-1.
[2] Judd, Charles M.; Park, Bernadette (1993). “Def-
inition and assessment of accuracy in social stereo-
types”. Psychological Review. 100 (1): 109–128.
doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.1.109.
[3] Cox, William T. L.; Abramson, Lyn Y.; Devine, Patri-
cia G.; Hollon, Steven D. (2012). “Stereotypes, Preju-
dice, and Depression: The Integrated Perspective” (PDF).
Perspectives on Psychological Science. 7 (5): 427–449.
doi:10.1177/1745691612455204. PMID 26168502.
[4] στερεός, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-
English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
[5] τύπος, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-
English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
[6] Online Etymology Dictionary
10
[7] Kleg, Milton (1993). Hate Prejudice and Racism. Albany:
State University of New York Press. pp. 135–137. ISBN
978-0-585-05491-9.
[8] Fiske, Susan T. (1998). “Stereotyping, Prejudice, and
Discrimination”. In Gilbert, Daniel T.; Fiske, Susan T.;
Lindzey, Gardner. The Handbook of Social Psychology.
Volume Two (4th ed.). Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill. p.
357. ISBN 978-0-19-521376-8.
[9] Denmark, Florence L. (2010). “Prejudice and Discrim-
ination”. In Weiner, Irving B.; Craigheaid, W. Edward.
The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. Volume Three
(4th ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley. p. 1277. ISBN
978-0-470-47921-6.
[10] Katz, Daniel; Braly, Kenneth W. (1935). “Racial prej-
udice and racial stereotypes”. The Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology. American Psychological Associa-
tion. 30 (2): 175–193. doi:10.1037/h0059800.
[11] Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & Turner, J. C. (1994).
Stereotyping and social reality. Oxford: Blackwell.
[12] Devine, Patricia G. (1989). “Stereotypes and Prejudice:
Their Automatic and Controlled Components” (PDF).
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 56 (1): 5–
18. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5.
[13] Tajfel, Henri (1981). “Social stereotypes and social
groups”. In Turner, John C.; Giles, Howard. Intergroup
behaviour. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 144–167. ISBN 978-
0-631-11711-7.
[14] Tilcsik, András (2011). “Pride and Prejudice: Em-
ployment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the
United States”. American Journal of Sociology. 117 (2):
586–626. doi:10.1086/661653. PMID 22268247.
[15] Operario, Don; Fiske, Susan T. (2003). “Stereotypes:
Content, Structures, Processes, and Context”. In Brown,
Rupert; Gaertner, Samuel L. Blackwell Handbook of So-
cial Psychology: Intergroup Processes. Malden, MA:
Blackwell. pp. 22–44. ISBN 978-1-4051-0654-2.
[16] Fiske, Susan T.; Cuddy, Amy J. C.; Glick, Peter; Xu, Jun
(2002). “A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype Content:
Competence and Warmth Respectively Follow From Per-
ceived Status and Competition” (PDF). Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology. American Psychologi-
cal Association. 82 (6): 878–902. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.82.6.878. PMID 12051578.
[17] Cuddy, Amy J. C.; Fiske, Susan T. (2002). “Doddering
But Dear: Process, Content, and Function in Stereotyping
of Older Persons”. In Nelson, Todd D. Ageism: Stereo-
typing and Prejudice against Older Persons. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-0-262-14077-5.
[18] Dovidio, John F.; Gaertner, Samuel L. (2010).
“Intergroup Bias”. In Susan T., Fiske; Gilbert, Daniel
T.; Lindzey, Gardner. Handbook of Social Psychology.
Volume Two (5th ed.). Hooboken, N.J.: John Wiley. p.
1085. ISBN 978-0-470-13747-5.
11 REFERENCES
[19] Cuddy, Amy J. C.; et al. (2009). “Stereotype content
model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and
some differences” (PDF). British Journal of Social Psy-
chology. British Psychological Society. 48 (1): 1–33.
doi:10.1348/014466608X314935.
[20] Macrae CN, Stangor C, Hewstone M. (eds.) “Stereotypes
and stereotyping.” 1995, p. 4
[21] McGarty, Craig; Spears, Russel; Yzerbyt, Vincent Y.
(2002). “Conclusion: stereotypes are selective, variable
and contested explanations”. Stereotypes as explanations:
The formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 186–199.
ISBN 978-0-521-80047-1.
[22] Allport, Gordon W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice.
Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley. p. 189. ISBN 978-
0-201-00175-4.
[23] Haslam, S. A., Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Reynolds, K.
J., & Doosje, B. (2002). From personal pictures in the
head to collective tools in the word: how shared stereo-
types allow groups to represent and change social real-
ity. In C. McGarty, V. Y. Yzerbyt, & R. Spears (Eds.).
Stereotypes as explanations: The formation of meaning-
ful beliefs about social groups (pp. 157-185). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
[24] Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2010). Social
Psychology (7th edition). New York: Pearson.
[25] Mackie, Diane M.; Hamilton, David L.; Susskind, Joshua;
Rosselli, Francine (1996). “Social Psychological Foun-
dations of Stereotype Formation”. In MacRae, C. Neil;
Stangor, Charles; Hewstone, Miles. Stereotypes and
Stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 48–49.
ISBN 978-1-57230-053-8.
[26] Rogier, Anouk; Yzerbyt, Vincent (1999). “Social at-
tribution, correspondence bias, and the emergence of
stereotypes” (PDF). Swiss Journal of Psychology. 58 (4):
233–240. doi:10.1024/1421-0185.58.4.233. Retrieved 5
April 2013.
[27] Nier, Jason A.; Bajaj, Priya; McLean, Meghan C.;
Schwartz, Elizabeth (2012). “Group status, perceptions
of agency, and the correspondence bias: Attributional pro-
cesses in the formation of stereotypes about high and low
status groups”. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations.
16: 1–12. doi:10.1177/1368430212454925.
[28] Mullen, Brian; Johnson, Craig (1990). “Distinctiveness-
based illusory correlations and stereotyping: A meta-
analytic integration”. British Journal of Social Psychol-
ogy. Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of the British Psycho-
logical Society. 29 (1): 11–28. doi:10.1111/j.2044-
8309.1990.tb00883.x.
[29] Meiser, Thorsten (2006). “Contingency Learning and Bi-
ased Group Impressions”. In Fiedler, Klaus; Justin, Pe-
ter. Information Sampling and Adaptive Cognition. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 183–209. ISBN
978-0-521-83159-8.

[30] Hamilton, David L.; Gifford, Robert K. (1976). “Il-
lusory correlation in interpersonal perception: A cogni-
tive basis of stereotypic judgments”. Journal of Exper-
imental Social Psychology. Elsevier. 12 (4): 392–407.
doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(76)80006-6.
[31] Berndsen, Mariëtte; Spears, Russel; van der Pligt, Joop;
McGarty, Craig (2002). “Illusory correlation and stereo-
type formation: making sense of group differences and
cognitive biases”. In McGarty, Craig; Yzerbyt, Vincent
Y.; Spears, Russel. Stereotypes as explanations: The for-
mation of meaningful beliefs about social groups. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 90–110. ISBN
978-0-521-80047-1.
[32] Stroessner, Steven J.; Plaks, Jason E. (2001). “Illusory
Correlation and Stereotype Formation: Tracing the Arc of
Research Over a Quarter Century”. In Moskowitz, Gor-
don B. Cognitive Social Psychology: The Princeton Sympo-
sium on the Legacy and Future of Social Cognition. Mah-
wah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 247–259.
ISBN 0-8058-3414-1.
[33] Moskowitz, Gordon B. (2005). Social Cognition: Under-
standing Self and Others. New York: Guilford Press. p.
182. ISBN 978-1-59385-085-2.
[34] McConnell, Allen R.; Sherman, Steven J.; Hamilton,
David L. (1994). “Illusory correlation in the perception of
groups: an extension of the distinctiveness-based account”
(PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 67
(3): 414–429. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.414.
[35] Katz, Daniel; Braley, Kenneth (1933). “Racial stereo-
types of one hundred college students”. The Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 28 (3): 280–290.
doi:10.1037/h0074049.
[36] Meenes, Max (1943). “A Comparison of Racial Stereo-
types of 1935 and 1942”. Journal of Social Psychology.
17 (2): 327–336. doi:10.1080/00224545.1943.9712287.
[37] Haslam, S. Alexander; Turner, John C.; Oakes, Penelope
J.; McGarty, Craig; Hayes, Brett K. (1992). “Context-
dependent variation in social stereotyping 1: The effects
of intergroup relations as mediated by social change and
frame of reference”. European Journal of Social Psychol-
ogy. 22 (1): 3–20. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420220104.
[38] Devine, Patricia G.; Monteith, Margo J. (1999).
“Automaticty and Control in Stereotyping”. In Chaiken,
Shelly; Trope, Yaacov. Dual-Process Theories in Social
Psychology. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 341–342.
ISBN 978-1-57230-421-5.
[39] Bargh, John A. (1994). “The Four Horsemen of Auto-
maticity: Awareness, Intention, Efficiency, Control in So-
cial Cognition”. In Wyer, Robert S.; Srull, Thomas K.
Handbook of Social Cognition. Two (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. p. 21. ISBN 978-0-8058-1056-
1.
[40] Banaji, Mahzarin R.; Hardin, Curtis D. (1996).
“Automatic Stereotyping” (PDF). Psychological
Science. 7 (3): 136–141. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
9280.1996.tb00346.x.
11
[41] Perdue, Charles W.; Gurtman, Michael B. (1990). “Ev-
idence for the automaticity of ageism”. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology. 26 (3): 199–216.
doi:10.1016/0022-1031(90)90035-K.
[42] Brown, Rupert (2010). Prejudice: Its Social Psychology
(2nd ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. p. 88. ISBN 978-
1-4051-1306-9.
[43] Lepore, Lorella; Brown, Rupert (1997). “Category and
Stereotype Activation: Is Prejudice Inevitable?" (PDF).
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 72 (2):
275–287. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.275.
[44] Kawakami, Kerry; et al. (2000). “Just say no (to stereo-
typing): effects of training in the negation of stereo-
typic associations on stereotype activation”. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 78 (5): 871–888.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.5.871. PMID 10821195.
[45] Gawronski, Bertram; et al. (2008). “When “Just Say No”
is not enough: Affirmation versus negation training and
the reduction of automatic stereotype activation”. Jour-
nal of Experimental Social Psychology. 44 (2): 370–377.
doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.004.
[46] Wheeler, S. Christian; Petty, Richard E. (2001). “The Ef-
fects of Stereotype Activation on Behavior: A Review of
Possible Mechanisms” (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 127
(6): 797–826. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.6.797. Re-
trieved 10 June 2013.
[47] Devos, Thierry; Huynh, Que-Lam; Banaji, Mahzarin D.
(2012). “Implicit self and identity”. In Leary, Mark R.;
Tangney, June Price. Handbook of self and identity (2nd
ed.). New York: Guilford Press. p. 164–165. ISBN 978-
1-4625-0305-6.
[48] Dijksterhuis, Ap (2001). “Automatic social influence:
The perception-behavior links as an explanatory mech-
anism for behavior matching”. In Forgas, Joseph P.;
Williams, Kipling D. Social influence: direct and indirect
processes. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. p. 99–
100.
[49] Operario, Din; Fiske, Susan T. (2001). “Causes and Con-
sequences of Stereotypes in Organizations”. In London,
Manuel. How People Evaluate Others in Organizations.
Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. p. 2012. ISBN 978-
0-8058-3612-7.
[50] Bargh, John A.; Chen, Mark; Burrows, Lara (1996).
“Automaticity of Social Behavior: Direct Effects of
Trait Construct and Stereotype Activation on Action”
(PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 71
(2): 230–244. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230. PMID
8765481. Retrieved 10 June 2013.
[51] Correll, Joshua; Park, Bernadette; Judd, Charles M.; Wit-
tenbrink, Bernd (2002). “The Police Officer’s Dilemma:
Using Ethnicity to Disambiguate Potentially Threaten-
ing Individuals” (PDF). Journal of Personality and So-
cial Psychology. 83 (6): 1314–1329. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.83.6.1314. Retrieved 10 June 2013.
12
[52] Yueh-Ting Lee, Lee J. Jussim, and Clark R. McCauley,
eds. (September 1995). Stereotype Accuracy: Toward
Appreciating Group Differences. American Psychological
Association. ISBN 978-1-55798-307-7.
[53] Jussim, Lee; Cain, Thomas R.; Crawford, Jarret T.; Har-
ber, Kent; Cohen, Florette (2009). “The unbearable ac-
curacy of stereotypes”. In Nelson, Todd D. Handbook
of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. New York:
Psychology Press. pp. 199–227. ISBN 978-0-8058-
5952-2.
[54] Terracciano, A; Abdel-Khalek, AM; Adám, N;
Adamovová, L; Ahn, CK; Ahn, HN; Alansari, BM;
Alcalay, L; et al. (2005). “National Character
Does Not Reflect Mean Personality Trait Levels
in 49 Cultures”. Science. 310 (5745): 96–100.
doi:10.1126/science.1117199. PMC 2775052 . PMID
16210536.
[55] Zemore, Sarah E.; Fiske, Susan T.; Kim, Hyun-Jeong
(2000). “Gender Stereotypes and the Dynamics of Social
Interaction”. In Eckes, Thomas; Trautner, Hanns Martin.
The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender. Mah-
wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 229–230.
ISBN 978-0-585-30065-8.
[56] Crocker, Jennifer; Major, Brenda; Stelle, Claude (1998).
“Social Stigma”. In Gilbert, Daniel T.; Fiske, Susan T.;
Lindzey, Gardner. The Handbook of Social Psychology.
Volume Two (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
pp. 519–521. ISBN 978-0-19-521376-8.
[57] Whiteley, Bernard E.; Kite, Mary E. (2010). The Psychol-
ogy of Prejudice and Discrimination (2nd ed.). Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. pp. 428–435. ISBN
978-0-495-59964-7.
[58] Crocker, Jennifer; Voelkl, Kristin; Testa, Maria; Ma-
jor, Brenda (1991). “Social stigma: The affective con-
sequences of attributional ambiguity”. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology. 60 (2): 218– 228.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.218.
[59] Osborne, Jason W. (2007). “Linking Stereotype Threat
and Anxiety”. Educational Psychology. 27 (1): 135–154.
doi:10.1080/01443410601069929.
[60] Quinn, Diane M.; Kallen, Rachel W.; Spencer, Steven J.
(2010). “Stereotype Threat”. In Dividio, John F.; et al.
The SAGE Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Dis-
crimination. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
pp. 379–394. ISBN 978-1-4129-3453-4.
[61] Inzlicht, Michael; Tullett, Alexa M.; Gutsell, Jennifer N.
(2012). “Stereotype Threat Spillover: The Short- and
Long-Term Effects of Coping with Threats to Social Iden-
tity”. In Inzlicht, Michael; Schmader, Toni. Stereotype
Threat: Theory, Process, and Application. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press. p. 108. ISBN 978-0-19-
973244-9.
[62] Aronson, Joshua; Stelle, Claude M. (2005). “Chapter
24: Stereotypes and the Fragility of Academic Compe-
tence, Motivation, and Self-Concept”. In Elliot, Andrew
11 REFERENCES
J.; Dweck, Carol S. Handbook of Competence and Moti-
vation. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 436, 443. ISBN
978-1-59385-123-1.
[63] Steele, Claude M.; Aronson, Joshua (November 1995).
“Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance
of African Americans” (PDF). Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 69 (5): 797–811. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.69.5.797. PMID 7473032.
[64] Stone, Jeff; Lynch, Christian I.; Sjomeling, Mike; Dar-
ley, John M. (1999). “Stereotype threat effects on
Black and White athletic performance”. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology. 77 (6): 1213–1227.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1213.
[65] Maass, Anne; D'Ettole, Claudio; Cadinu, Mara (2008).
“Checkmate? The role of gender stereotypes in the ulti-
mate intellectual sport” (PDF). European Journal of So-
cial Psychology. 38 (2): 231–245. doi:10.1002/ejsp.440.
[66] Gupta, V. K.; Bhawe, N. M. (2007). “The Influ-
ence of Proactive Personality and Stereotype Threat
on Women’s Entrepreneurial Intentions”. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies. 13 (4): 73–85.
doi:10.1177/10717919070130040901.
[67] Kassin, Saul M.; Fein, Steven; Markus, Hazel Rose
(2011). Social psychology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. p. 172. ISBN 978-0-
495-81240-1.
[68] Brown, Rupert (2010). Prejudice: Its Social Psychology
(2nd ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 94–97. ISBN
978-1-4051-1306-9.
[69] Chen, Mark; Bargh, John A. (1997). “Nonconscious Be-
havioral Confirmation Processes: The Self-Fulfilling Con-
sequences of Automatic Stereotype Activation” (PDF).
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 33 (5): 541–
560. doi:10.1006/jesp.1997.1329. Retrieved 5 April
2013.
[70] Word, Carl O.; Zanna, Mark P.; Cooper, Joel (1974).
“The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies
in interracial interaction”. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology. Elsevier. 10 (2): 109–120.
doi:10.1016/0022-1031(74)90059-6.
[71] Snyder, Mark; Tanke, Elizabeth D.; Berscheid, Ellen
(1977). “Social perception and interpersonal behavior:
On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes” (PDF).
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 35 (9):
656–666. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.656.
[72] Banaji, Mahzarin R. (2002). “The Social Psychology of
Stereotypes”. In Smelser, Neil; Baltes, Paul. International
Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. New
York: Pergamon. pp. 15100–15104. doi:10.1016/B0-
08-043076-7/01754-X. ISBN 978-0-08-043076-8.
[73] Fiske, Susan T.; Lee, Tiane L. (2008). “Stereotypes
and prejudice create workplace discrimination”. In Brief,
Arthur P. Diversity at Work. New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press. pp. 13–52. ISBN 978-0-521-86030-7.
 13

[74] Agerström, Jens; Rooth, Dan-Olof (2011). “The role of
automatic obesity stereotypes in real hiring discrimina-
tion”. Journal of Applied Psychology. 96 (4): 790–805.
doi:10.1037/a0021594. PMID 21280934.
[75] Davison, Heather K.; Burke, Michael J. (2000). “Sex Dis-
crimination in Simulated Employment Contexts: A Meta-
analytic Investigation”. Journal of Vocational Behavior.
56 (2): 225–248. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1999.1711.
[76] Rudman, Laurie A.; Glick, Peter (2001). “Prescriptive
Gender Stereotypes and Backlash toward Agentic
Women” (PDF). Journal of Social Issues. 57 (4):
743–762. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00239.
[77] Sinclair, Stacey; Huntsinger, Jeff (2006). “The Interper-
sonal Basis of Self-Stereotyping”. In Levin, Shana; Van
Laar, Colette. Stigma and Group Inequality: Social Psy-
chological Perspectives. Claremont Symposium on Ap-
plied Social Psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erl-
baum Associates. p. 239. ISBN 978-0-8058-4415-3.
[78] Correll, Shelley J. (2001). “Gender and the career choice
process: The role of biased self-assessments” (PDF).
American Journal of Sociology. 106 (6): 1691–1730.
doi:10.1086/321299.
[79] Correll, Shelley J. (2004). “Constraints into Prefer-
ences: Gender, Status, and Emerging Career Aspirations”
(PDF). American Sociological Review. 69 (1): 93–113.
doi:10.1177/000312240406900106.
• Stereotype & Society A Major Resource: Con-
stantly updated and archived
• Regenberg, Nina (2007). “Are Blonds Really
Dumb?". In mind (magazine) (3).
• Are Stereotypes True?
• Stereotype Susceptibility: Identity Salience and
Shifts in Quantitative Performance, Margaret Shih,
Todd L. Pittinsky, Nalini Ambady Research about
the effects of 'positive' and negative stereotypes on
encouraging/discouraging performance.
• Turner, Chris (2004). Planet Simpson: How a Car-
toon Masterpiece Documented an Era and Defined a
Generation. Foreword by Douglas Coupland. (1st
ed.). Toronto: Random House Canada. ISBN
0679313184. OCLC 55682258..
• Crawford, M. & Unger, R. (2004). Women and
Gender: A Feminist Psychology. McGraw Hill New
York. New York. 45-49.
• Spitzer, B.L.; Henderson, K; Zavian, M. T.
(1999). “Gender differences in population
versus media body sizes: A comparison over
four decades”. Sex Roles. 40: 545–565.
doi:10.1023/a:1018836029738.

[80] Sinclair, Stacey; Hardin, Curtis D.; Lowery, Brian S.

(2006). “Self-Stereotyping in the Context of Multiple So- 13 Antonym
cial Identities” (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. American Psychological Association. 90 (4): • Monotype
529–542. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.529.

[81] Kitch, Carolyn L. (2001). The Girl on the Magazine Cover:

The Origins of Visual Stereotypes in American Mass Media.
Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. pp.
1–16. ISBN 978-0-8078-2653-9.
[82] van Ginneken, Jaap (2007). Screening Difference: How
Hollywood’s Blockbuster Films Imagine Race, Ethnicity,
and Culture. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN
9780742555839.
[83] Román, Ediberto (2000). “Who Exactly Is Living La Vida
Loca: The Legal and Political Consequences of Latino-
Latina Ethnic and Racial Stereotypes in Film and Other
Media”. Journal of Gender, Race & Justice. 4 (1): 37–68.
12 Further reading
14 External links
• Interview with social psychologists Susan Fiske and
Mike North about the stereotyping of older people
• How gender stereotypes influence emerging career as-
pirations – lecture by Stanford University sociologist
Shelley Correll on 21 October 2010
• Social Psychology Network Stereotyping
• Stereotypes – Media Smarts, Canada’s Centre for
Digital and Media Literacy
• Age and Health based stereotyping Age and Health
based stereotyping

• Hilton, James L.; von Hippel, William

(1996). “Stereotypes”. Annual Re-
view of Psychology. 47 (1): 237–271.
doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.237.

• Stuart Ewen, Elizabeth Ewen, Typecasting: On the

Arts and Sciences of Human Inequality. New York
(Seven Stories Press) 2006
14 15 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

15 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

15.1 Text
• Stereotype Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype?oldid=765240495 Contributors: The Anome, -- April, ClaudineChionh, Deb,
William Avery, SimonP, Jtoomim, Anthere, Zadcat, Ewen, Frecklefoot, Edward, Patrick, Michael Hardy, Menchi, Ixfd64, Zanimum,
IZAK, Cameron Dewe, (, Paul A, Goatasaur, Tregoweth, Ahoerstemeier, Angela, Kingturtle, Vzbs34, Rotem Dan, Jiang, Jeandré du
Toit, MichaK, Jengod, Agtx, Saint-Paddy, Daniel Quinlan, SatyrTN, Freechild, Furrykef, Wiwaxia, Dpbsmith, Secretlondon, Slawo-
jarek, Bearcat, Robbot, Tonsofpcs, RedWolf, Donreed, Cogibyte, Altenmann, Mirv, FredR, Hemanshu, Auric, Andrew Levine, Hadal,
Benc, Dina, Adam78, Alan Liefting, Graeme Bartlett, Pretzelpaws, Zigger, Everyking, Snowdog, Avalean, Curps, Nkocharh, Mbover-
load, Taak, Allstar86, 159753, Alexf, Formeruser-81, Antandrus, Beland, J3ff, Loremaster, Piotrus, LERK, The MoUsY spell-checker,
Kiteinthewind, Jokestress, Rlquall, Neutrality, Ensrifraff, Jcw69, Ukexpat, Cab88, Lucidish, D6, Pastinakel, A-giau, Discospinster, Rich
Farmbrough, Oliver Lineham, YUL89YYZ, Westendgirl, User2004, Kzzl, Bender235, Goplat, The Iconoclast, Violetriga, Aranel, RJHall,
Kaszeta, Mr. Billion, JustPhil, Bobo192, Superking, Revolutionary, Elipongo, Fritz freiheit, Ziggurat, Neg, SpeedyGonsales, Jeodesic,
Ben@liddicott.com, Haham hanuka, OGoncho, Maberk, Alansohn, Thand, Gssq, Ricky81682, Ashley Pomeroy, Bz2, Flyspeck, Fritzpoll,
Benefros, Mailer diablo, Cdc, Wtmitchell, Benson85, ZeiP, QuixoticKate, Henry W. Schmitt, Bsadowski1, Computerjoe, I run like a
Welshman, Drbreznjev, Yurivict, Oleg Alexandrov, Crosbiesmith, Ian Moody, Woohookitty, Schroeder74, Swimmerz, StradivariusTV,
Robert K S, WadeSimMiser, Miss Madeline, Mihalis, Macaddct1984, CharlesC, Stefanomione, Sweetfreek, Dysepsion, Govus, Plush-
puffin, WBardwin, BD2412, Jclemens, Dpr, Mendaliv, Sjö, Rjwilmsi, Nightscream, Koavf, SMC, HappyCamper, Arbor, Leonardo2505,
MapsMan, Yamamoto Ichiro, Titoxd, FlaBot, TiagoTiago, Changchih228, Gurch, Brendan Moody, Alphachimp, King of Hearts, DVdm,
The Rambling Man, YurikBot, Wavelength, Sceptre, FlareNUKE, Gene.arboit, RussBot, Hauskalainen, TheDoober, Maris stella, Calicore,
Cryptic, Wimt, Jimphilos, NawlinWiki, Msikma, Robertvan1, Aeusoes1, Grafen, SigPig, ONEder Boy, SAE1962, JDoorjam, THB, R.G.,
Cholmes75, Moe Epsilon, Semperf, Jmatter1, N. Harmonik, Wknight94, Light current, Paul Magnussen, 21655, Cspalletta, Th1rt3en, Svet-
lana Miljkovic~enwiki, Vdegroot, JoanneB, Vicarious, Diddims, Allens, Katieh5584, NeilN, DVD R W, Jagz, Sardanaphalus, SmackBot,
Krychek, InverseHypercube, KnowledgeOfSelf, Jacek Kendysz, Kilo-Lima, Jagged 85, Jtneill, Verne Equinox, Frymaster, Boris Barowski,
Hbackman, Yopie, Iantnm, Gaff, Gilliam, Ohnoitsjamie, Hmains, Nowheresville, GeorgeBuchanan, Qtoktok, Mirokado, Chris the speller,
Master Jay, Memo@sdsu.edu, KaragouniS, EncephalonSeven, MartinPoulter, Oli Filth, Elagatis, SchfiftyThree, Bazonka, Neo-Jay, Doc-
torW, Darth Panda, Cogito-ergo-sum, CJGB, Mihai Capotă, Rapturerocks, Kavehmz, Chlewbot, Jorobeq, Sephiroth BCR, Snowmanra-
dio, Xiner, Rrburke, Addshore, Pax85, Jumping cheese, T-borg, Hoof Hearted, Pwjb, DMacks, Ultraexactzz, JamieJones, Suidafrikaan,
Mwelch, Ck lostsword, Lph, Kukini, Will Beback, Seraphcrono, Z-d, Attys, Zeraeph, Euchiasmus, J 1982, Loodog, Kiiimiko, Robofish,
Herunumen, Tktktk, ReZips, IronGargoyle, L.to.the.P, FrostyBytes, Slakr, George The Dragon, Irunwithscissors, Kyoko, Waggers, Mar-
tian.knight, Whomp, MTSbot~enwiki, Noleander, Etafly, Nabeth, Bobbaxter, Jcbutler, PDXblazers, Sifaka, Dl2000, Keitei, Guybrarian,
Levineps, Siebrand, Iridescent, Mishatx, Tawkerbot2, WolfgangFaber, SkyWalker, JForget, Wolfdog, LeeJ55, Deon, Wafulz, Neuropsy-
chology, Makeemlighter, BeenAroundAWhile, User92361, Erik Kennedy, Basawala, Dgw, El aprendelenguas, Thomasmeeks, Flying-
Toaster, Chartran, Penbat, Nnp, AndrewHowse, Cydebot, Mike2000~enwiki, Abeg92, Crito2161, Gogo Dodo, Bellerophon5685, R-41,
Vlad2000Plus, Dc freethinker, Soetermans, Difluoroethene, B, Clovis Sangrail, Bookgrrl, UnDeRsCoRe, NorthernThunder, Omicronper-
sei8, Maywoods, RickDC, JohnInDC, Blaise Joshua, JamesAM, Meol, Epbr123, Bbbrown, Qwyrxian, Nemesis 961, Anshuk, N5iln, Ace
ofgabriel, Anthius, Callmarcus, Thebanjohype, Mojo Hand, Marek69, WillMak050389, A3RO, NorwegianBlue, Ajo Mama, Wikidenizen,
Escarbot, Monnicat, Mentifisto, AntiVandalBot, Llykstw, Meph1986, Михајло Анђелковић, Emeraldcityserendipity, Suncrafter, Dark-
Audit, Dylan Lake, Gdo01, Falconleaf, Abusive Aussie Husband-Battered Southern Wife stereotype, Shedlund, NByz, Gökhan, Dreaded
Walrus, ClassicSC, JAnDbot, Elias Enoc, ThomasO1989, LeedsKing, Miss kat, Planetary, Davemarshall04, Janejellyroll, Realismad-
der, Ikanreed, Kerotan, Acroterion, Yahel Guhan, Bencherlite, Sfrostee, Alexandre Vassalotti, Magioladitis, Bongwarrior, VoABot II,
Avjoska, JNW, CTF83!, Inklein, WODUP, Aka042, Froid, Zanibas, WhatamIdoing, Mahitgar, Zib Blooog, Animum, Rippa76, Bof-
fob, Cpl Syx, Thibbs, DerHexer, JaGa, Lijnema, Hbent, Mrvoid, Welshleprechaun, Cocytus, Gjd001, Hdt83, MartinBot, Dennisthe2,
Packages, Jim.henderson, Rettetast, MNAdam, Keith D, AlexiusHoratius, Cinco555, Djm256, Gw2005, Mancl20, Thirdright, Manti-
core, J.delanoy, Trusilver, Sapphire Flame, USN1977, Extransit, Justinphd, Cpiral, Katalaveno, JayFout, Janus Shadowsong, Onexdata,
Gurchzilla, Malone23kid, SJP, Cobi, Christopher Kraus, Tanaats, Pundit, BigHairRef, Prhartcom, Theli34~enwiki, Stuartewen, RB972,
Mrmuk, Bonadea, Ja 62, Andy Marchbanks, Beezhive, BennettL, CardinalDan, Pietru, King Lopez, VolkovBot, ABF, Howth575, Mace-
donian, Hersfold, JohnBlackburne, Nburden, Soliloquial, Cliffy01, Clegs, Ryan032, Philip Trueman, TXiKiBoT, Oshwah, IPb0mb3r,
Maximillion Pegasus, Seb144, Tomsega, Anna Lincoln, Calineed, DennyColt, Slysplace, Jackfork, ^demonBot2, Justinfr, TheLadyRaven,
Christopher Connor, Cremepuff222, Ben Ward, Vicpro, Alexwany, Wykypydya, Classicstruggle, Terracciano, Shifter95, Billinghurst, An-
drewaskew, Meters, Clintville, Lova Falk, Falcon8765, Enviroboy, Temporaluser, Magiclite, Insanity Incarnate, Schickel, Zachary8222,
Notay001, Der kenner, Wavehunter, Onceonthisisland, Zorro-the-coyote, MalakronikMausi, SplingyRanger, Ponyo, SieBot, StAnselm,
Morenoodles, Milnivri, Arkwatem, Dreamafter, Moonriddengirl, Euryalus, Lowtech42, WTucker, Pengyanan, Caltas, Yintan, Revent,
Zane RH, Bentogoa, Flyer22 Reborn, Exert, ClydeOnline, Wikibruger, JD554, Oda Mari, Airpirate545, Lanztrain, Recardojoe, JSpung,
Oxymoron83, Antonio Lopez, Smaug123, BjörnEF, Hello71, Kräuter-Oliven~enwiki, Greatrobo76, Thisis0, Likeminas, MagicBear, Grim-
Gym, Maelgwnbot, Vituzzu, Willie44, Rednbluearmy, StaticGull, Capitalismojo, Rebeleleven, Mygerardromance, Hariva, Mr. Stradivar-
ius, Artdemon01, Escape Orbit, YVNP, Edwalton, Dancingwombatsrule, Twinsday, Ratemonth, Martarius, Rowmn, ClueBot, C xong,
Avenged Eightfold, GorillaWarfare, Fyyer, Tucker001, Crimzon Sun, The Thing That Should Not Be, All Hallow’s Wraith, IceUnshattered,
ImperfectlyInformed, Mike Klaassen, Konye obaji ori, Vinny Burgoo, SuperHamster, Boing! said Zebedee, Niceguyedc, PhoenixWing,
Auntof6, Rhotard, Vwu, Excirial, Gnome de plume, Robbie098, Andy pyro, Conical Johnson, Brews ohare, Jimmy da tuna, Cenarium,
Ninja-4976, DeltaQuad, Razorflame, Sophixer, Cleopatra*Cate, Hunt567, Prof tpms, Syst3mfailur3, Light show, Thingg, Mc95, Vegeta-
tor, Lokionly, MissQCgold2005, Ranjithsutari, Wcp07, Versus22, PotentialDanger, Ubardak, SoxBot III, ClanCC, DumZiBoT, Jayinhar,
Hignopulp, XLinkBot, Jovianeye, Avoided, TFOWR, WikHead, NellieBly, PL290, Karpouzi, Padfoot79, Yuvn86, Noctibus, Oranje-
boom31, Bit Lordy, Navy Blue, Abomasnow, Dnvrfantj, Airplaneman, Keyblade5, MatthewVanitas, The Squicks, Addbot, Doris Don't,
Lordoliver, Stacin61, DOI bot, Otisjimmy1, Kan06e, Hajahmz, Xerodn, Knight of Truth, Fgnievinski, Ronhjones, Fieldday-sunday, Jam-
bronination, Rx4evr, Fluffernutter, NjardarBot, Cst17, Protonk, Chamal N, Bloodkith, Glane23, Kschutz, Favonian, Bigcitydeserter, Gam-
biteer, Kurt10, Tassedethe, Joe9320, Cautioned band, Tide rolls, Voivod616, Boaby, Krano, ‫ماني‬, Lord Lugie, Luckas-bot, BoogieRock,
Yobot, Vague, Pink!Teen, Ptbotgourou, Kjell Knudde, ArchonMagnus, Reenem, AnomieBOT, DemocraticLuntz, PonileExpress, Rubin-
bot, Jim1138, PurpleAlex, Kirzmac, Piano non troppo, AdjustShift, Aditya, Kingpin13, Hamera123, Aasb, Ulric1313, Materialscientist,
ImperatorExercitus, TheTechieGeek63, Citation bot, E2eamon, Southafrican41, Carlsotr, Chickenfeeders, GB fan, ArthurBot, LilHelpa,
Happyapples19, Xqbot, Shnitzled, Blazin213, Addihockey10, Capricorn42, Drilnoth, Ipharvey09, Grim23, Eliteunited, Inferno, Lord of
Penguins, Sentenal01, Gatorgirl7563, Anonymous from the 21st century, GrouchoBot, Abce2, BorderlineWaxwork, Omnipaedista, Shirik,
15.2 Images 15

JhanCRUSH, Amaury, 78.26, Nazgul812, Kirkevan11, Der Falke, Doulos Christos, Mattis, Smallman12q, Shadowjams, PM800, Ca-
jade, Thehelpfulbot, Captain-n00dle, Bows&Arrows, FrescoBot, Haze120190, Lukefulford, Tobby72, Wikipe-tan, Capybara21, Lucas
Duke, Recognizance, Cro fever, Sizzlefoshizzle, Kwiki, Citation bot 1, IceCreamSammich, Toolboks, TigerBasenji, Dneyder, I dream
of horses, Nmatavka, Vicenarian, Endy Leo, LizzieBabes419, Calmer Waters, Rushbugled13, A8UDI, SpaceFlight89, Miss Mama Bear,
Phoenix7777, Meaghan, Lu-igi board, Cramyourspam, FoxBot, Trappist the monk, Vrenator, Vemblut, Carolinamnz, Drib55, Bjsmd, Suf-
fusion of Yellow, Tstormcandy, Lilleskvat, Reach Out to the Truth, Optoi, DARTH SIDIOUS 2, Mephistoe, RjwilmsiBot, Alph Bot, Salvio
giuliano, LcawteHuggle, DASHBot, , Oddball31593, EmausBot, John of Reading, Awesomeguy92, Gointemm, Heracles31, Optiguy54,
Kathleen.sheedy, GoingBatty, RA0808, L235, Tommy2010, Delbart27, Wikipelli, Dcirovic, K6ka, Bubblegumwrapper, Uvmcdi, ZéroBot,
John Cline, Fæ, MorbidEntree, KnowlegeFirst, Érico, Fisher.G, Kiwi128, Deitrib, JmanofAus, Highvale, Staszek Lem, TyA, GeorgeBar-
nick, IGeMiNix, L Kensington, Deutschgirl, Donner60, Fridek, ChuispastonBot, U3964057, Cat10001a, Sven Manguard, 28bot, Son-
icyouth86, ResearchRave, ‫خالقیان‬, ClueBot NG, KlappCK, Fagtard123, Edhabib, Dubious Irony, Iritakamas, Snotbot, Kowkamurka,
Cmptrsvyfm, Pryd3, Johnny 42, Karlbonner1982, Rezabot, Shanny98pretty, Widr, Shannon.jones553, ScholarK93, Crohall, Shovan
Luessi, Helpful Pixie Bot, Kittykat94, Psy463 1029, HMSSolent, Nightenbelle, Titodutta, RobbieTitwank, Polozooza, Eb00kie, DrOliPo,
Northamerica1000, Zimmygirl7, Wiki13, Richardspraus, Marcocapelle, Piguy101, Mark Arsten, Sandwichsauce, Rm1271, Sobarwiki,
CitationCleanerBot, Iluvdawgs, Vanished user e99239jf9rf980239ifmlsmlsi4u, Kiyokoakiyama, Writ Keeper, Hamish59, RscprinterBot,
Kg3042, NeonNiteLite, Klilidiplomus, Joost26, StillmakerR, Hagabaga, Mahmud Halimi Wardag, W.D., ChrisGualtieri, Zeboko13, Kevin-
ngo1234, Bfoxius, Khazar2, Sutcher, Pusalieth, Wakaw, Hmainsbot1, Roodaman1, U4667275, Ughmypussyhurts, Jackninja5, FonsScien-
tiae, Vanquisher.UA, TwoTwoHello, Frosty, Jamesx12345, Juliaguar, Socialpsychra, Ydong2, Juffodnreofdniruneo, Ekips39, Epicgenius,
Equalityactiv, Pearjones, Imaperson123, Howicus, Eyesnore, PATATAS6097, Tentinator, Ihearthero, AnthonyJ Lock, Jenyih, Haminoon,
Sam Sailor, Manul, Chrismorey, Rocky12349876, Dalesska, Thewikiguru1, Skr15081997, Timeline99, Monkbot, Madmad01, Buggiehug-
gie, Reyrey112, AwesomerAlex, Bag Your Nuts, Dexalkaline, Ingleburnhs, Showingjumpingeventer, Rainbowdolphin77, WikiCAW-
caw, FatCock69, DangerousJXD, Wikimax101, Anna thatchet, Walkamo24, MurderByDeadcopy, Ray mery, Blackhat999, KasparBot,
Torowhynot, Sas- -tabloner, Wiser87, Jaaaaaakc, Rapelsa, JustKillMeAlready, Kcarlone, Imminent77, G.higginbotham, Correlargo, Bold-
facecalibri, Dingdongdong222, Fanaticeditor, Johnnysinskishasins and Anonymous: 1554

15.2 Images
• File:18th_century_ethnography.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/18th_century_ethnography.jpg
License: Public domain Contributors: Series of school engravings by J. Ratelband & J. Bouwer first published in Amsterdam (1767 −1779).
Original artist: J. Ratelband & J. Bouwer
• File:Antisemitic_caricature_1873.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/Antisemitic_caricature_1873.
jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Geschichte Österreichs Original artist: ?
• File:Bettie_Page_driving.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Bettie_Page_driving.jpg License: Pub-
lic domain Contributors: Beauty Parade, http://vintagescans.blogspot.com/2008/12/bettie-page-remembered.html Original artist: Un-
known<a href='https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4233718' title='wikidata:Q4233718'><img alt='wikidata:Q4233718' src='https://upload.
wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/20px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png' width='20' height='11' srcset='https://
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/30px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.
org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Wikidata-logo.svg/40px-Wikidata-logo.svg.png 2x' data-file-width='1050' data-file-height='590'
/></a>
• File:Children_playing_video_games.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Children_playing_video_
games.jpg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Gamesingear
• File:Cops_in_a_Donut_Shop_2011_Shankbone.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Cops_in_a_
Donut_Shop_2011_Shankbone.jpg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Shankbone
• File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: Cc-by-
sa-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
• File:Lock-green.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Lock-green.svg License: CC0 Contributors: en:File:
Free-to-read_lock_75.svg Original artist: User:Trappist the monk
• File:Logo_sociology.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Logo_sociology.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: Own work Original artist: Tomeq183
• File:Mergefrom.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Mergefrom.svg License: Public domain Contribu-
tors: ? Original artist: ?
• File:Mixed_stereotype_content_model_(Fiske_et_al.).png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Mixed_
stereotype_content_model_%28Fiske_et_al.%29.png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Sonicyouth86
• File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
• File:Psi2.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Psi2.svg License: Public domain Contributors: No machine-
readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims). Original artist: No machine-readable author provided.
Gdh~commonswiki assumed (based on copyright claims).
• File:Question_book-new.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0
Contributors:
Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:
Tkgd2007
• File:Stereotype_threat_-_osborne_2007.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Stereotype_threat_-_
osborne_2007.png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Sonicyouth86
• File:TheUsualIrishWayofDoingThings.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/
TheUsualIrishWayofDoingThings.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://historyproject.ucdavis.edu/ic/image_details.
php?id=5046 Original artist: Thomas Nast
16 15 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

• File:Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg License: CC BY-

SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Dan Polansky based on work currently attributed to Wikimedia Foundation but originally
created by Smurrayinchester

15.3 Content license

• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0