Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SPSP Annual Meeting 2010

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

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
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
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schaller, M.
Right arrow Articles by Heim, S. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Schaller, M.
Right arrow Articles by Heim, S. J.
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?

Training in Statistical Reasoning Inhibits the Formation of Erroneous Group Stereotypes

Mark Schaller

University of British Columbia

Charles H. Asp

University of Montana

Michelle Ceynar Roseil

University of Montana

Stephen J. Heim

Northwestern University

Erroneous group stereotypes can result from people's failure to engage in sufficiently sophisticated reasoning strategies. Three experiments tested the hypothesis that training in statistical reasoning inhibits the formation of these stereotypes. In Study 1, 60 students were assigned randomly to a control condition or one of two training conditions in which they received training in the logic of analysis of covariance. Approximately 1 week later, they were presented with a group impression formation task. Control participants formed erroneous stereotypes, but those who received statistical training formed more accurate group impressions. Study 2 (N = 82) replicated these results, addressed concerns with experimental demand, and provided preliminary evidence concerning possible moderating effects of motivation. Study 3 (N = 44) tested a different alternative explanation and provided further clues about the inferential processes through which statistical training influences group impressions.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 22, No. 8, 829-844 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167296228006
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?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
K. Fiedler, E. Walther, P. Freytag, and S. Nickel
Inductive Reasoning and Judgment Interference: Experiments on Simpson's Paradox
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2003; 29(1): 14 - 27.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
S. R. Levy, J. E. Plaks, Y.-y. Hong, C.-y. Chiu, and C. S. Dweck
Static Versus Dynamic Theories and the Perception of Groups: Different Routes to Different Destinations
Personality and Social Psychology Review, May 1, 2001; 5(2): 156 - 168.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
T. Betsch, F. Siebler, P. Marz, S. Hormuth, and D. Dickenberger
The Moderating Role of Category Salience and Category Focus in Judgments of Set Size and Frequency of Occurrence
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, April 1, 1999; 25(4): 463 - 481.
[Abstract] [PDF]