Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

Click here to register today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
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 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 arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lambert, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wells, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Lambert, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wells, J.
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?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 24, No. 8, 807-820 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167298248003
© 1998 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

The Influence of Group Variability and Processing Goals on the Ease of Making Judgments about Social Categories

Alan J. Lambert

Washington University-St. Louis, alambert{at}artsci.wustl.edu

Lauren R. Barton

Washington University-St. Louis

Brian Lickel

Washington University-St. Louis

Jennifer Wells

Washington University-St. Louis

This article examined the effects of group variability and processing goals on the ease of making judgments about social groups. Participants were presented with a heterogeneous or homogeneous category and were instructed either to form an impression of the group (impression set) or to attend to the similarities among, and the differences between, group members (integration set). Under impression sets, we predicted that participants would find it harder to judge heterogeneous groups as compared to homogeneous groups. Under integration sets, however, judgments were predicted to be relatively easy, regardless of group variability. These predictions were supported, regardless of whether judgment ease was operationalized via response latencies (Experiment 1) or through subjective reports (Experiment 2). Experiment 2 suggested that these effects were driven by the effects of group variability and instructional set on the importance of subtypes formed at the subordinate level. Implications of these results for research on the consequences of group variability are discussed.


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
Behav ModifHome page
C. S. Ryan, D. R. Robinson, and L. R. M. Hausmann
Stereotyping among Providers and Consumers of Public Mental Health Services: The Role of Perceived Group Variability
Behav Modif, July 1, 2001; 25(3): 406 - 442.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
Z. Richards and M. Hewstone
Subtyping and Subgrouping: Processes for the Prevention and Promotion of Stereotype Change
Personality and Social Psychology Review, February 1, 2001; 5(1): 52 - 73.
[Abstract] [PDF]