The Dynamics of Category Conjunctions

In three experiments we investigated the dynamics of impression formation when perceivers encounter unsurprising (e.g. male mechanic) versus surprising (e.g. female mechanic) social category conjunctions. In Experiment 1, participants took longer to form an impression of targets described using a surprising versus an unsurprising conjunction of categorizations. In Experiment 2, we investigated the stages during which impressions of category conjunctions are formed. While unsurprising category combinations were characterized with reference to ‘constituent’ stereotypic traits, surprising combinations were characterized initially by stereotypic traits but later by ‘emergent’ impressions. In Experiment 3, we investigated motivational states that drive the dynamics of category conjunction. We found that higher Personal Need for Structure (PNS) predicted the use of more emergent and fewer constituent attributes in the impressions formed of surprising combinations. Across all three experiments, more ‘causal attributes’ were used in descriptions of the surprising combination. We discuss the implications of these findings for developing a model of the dynamics and composition of social category conjunctions.

[1]  Astrid M. Schloerscheidt,et al.  Tales of the unexpected: executive function and person perception. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  J. Krueger,et al.  Use of categorical and individuating information in making inferences about personality. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  Frank Siebler.  Emergent Attributes in Person Perception A Comparative Test of Response Time Predictions , 2008 .

[4]  S. Asch.  Forming impressions of personality. , 1946, Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

[5]  Y. Bar-Tal,et al.  The effect on mundane decision‐making of the need and ability to achieve cognitive structure , 1994 .

[6]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  Personal Need for Structure: Individual Differences in the Desire for Simple Structure , 1993 .

[7]  Eugene Borgida,et al.  Sex stereotypes and social judgment , 1980 .

[8]  Natalie A. Wyer.  Not all Stereotypic Biases are Created Equal: Evidence for a Stereotype-Disconfirming Bias , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[9]  Lance J. Rips,et al.  Combining Prototypes: A Selective Modification Model , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[10]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Combining prototypes: A selective modification model. , 1988 .

[11]  M. J. Wilkenfeld,et al.  Similarity and emergence in conceptual combination , 2001 .

[12]  Charles Stangor,et al.  Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. , 1992 .

[13]  Joseph E LeDoux.  The emotional brain , 1996 .

[14]  U. Neisser.  Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization , 1989 .

[15]  T. K. Srull,et al.  A Dual process model of impression formation , 1988 .

[16]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  The instability of graded structure: implications for the nature of concepts , 1987 .

[17]  Marilynn B. Brewer,et al.  Social Identity Complexity , 2002 .

[18]  Solomon E. Asch,et al.  THINKING ABOUT PERSONS , 1984 .

[19]  T. B. Ward,et al.  The Emergence of Novel Attributes in Concept Modification , 2002 .

[20]  A. Baddeley.  Exploring the Central Executive , 1996 .

[21]  A. Guinote,et al.  Who exhibits more stereotypical thinking? The effect of need and ability to achieve cognitive structure on stereotyping , 2002 .

[22]  Reid Hastie,et al.  Creating complex social conjunction categories from simple categories , 1990 .

[23]  Eliot R. Smith,et al.  Knowledge acquisition, accessibility, and use in person perception and stereotyping: simulation with a recurrent connectionist network. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[24]  M. Brewer,et al.  Perceptions of the Elderly: Stereotypes as Prototypes , 1981 .

[25]  Lawerence W. Barsalou.  Intraconcept similarity and its implications for interconcept similarity , 1989 .

[26]  D. Norman,et al.  Attention to Action: Willed and Automatic Control of Behavior Technical Report No. 8006. , 1980 .

[27]  A. Tversky,et al.  On the psychology of prediction , 1973 .

[28]  James A. Hampton,et al.  Emergent attributes in combined concepts. , 1997 .

[29]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Combining Social Concepts: The Role of Causal Reasoning , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[30]  R. Crisp,et al.  Implications of Cognitive Busyness for the Perception of Category Conjunctions , 2006, The Journal of social psychology.

[31]  M. D’Esposito.  Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.

[32]  J. Eccles.  The emotional brain. , 1980, Bulletin et memoires de l'Academie royale de medecine de Belgique.

[33]  R. Crisp,et al.  The Composition of Category Conjunctions , 2005, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[34]  T. K. Srull,et al.  Person memory and judgment. , 1989, Psychological review.

[35]  Anne Locksley,et al.  Social stereotypes and judgments of individuals: An instance of the base-rate fallacy , 1982 .

[36]  Larry E. Toothaker,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions , 1991 .

[37]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation , 1990 .