This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Peters, E. Articles by Rothbart, M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Peters, E. Articles by Rothbart, M. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Typicality Can Create, Eliminate, and Reverse the Dilution Effect

University of Oregon

Myron Rothbart

University of Oregon

Nisbett, Zukier, and Lemley presented evidence for a "dilution effect," in which information nonpredictive of a stimulus person’s behavior "watered down" or diluted the predictive value of categorical information diagnostic of that behavior. Two experiments suggest, however, that nondiagnostic information influences prediction by altering the perceived goodness of fit between the stimulus person and the diagnostic category. The authors conclude that (a) Nisbett et al. found evidence for dilution because their nondiagnostic items decreased the goodness of fit between the stimulus person and the diagnostic category and (b) depending on the typicality of the nondiagnostic items, it is possible to dilute, enhance, or leave unchanged the predictability between category and behavior. The structure of social categories, and the importance of typicality in the stereotyping process, is discussed.

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Kemmelmeier Does the Dilution Effect Have a Conversational Basis? Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 2007; 26(1): 48 - 60. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. R. Igou and H. Bless The Conversational Basis for the Dilution Effect Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 2005; 24(1): 25 - 35. [Abstract] [PDF]