An explicit stereotype refers to stereotypes that you know you have and are aware of using to judge people. If Person A makes judgments about a particular Person B of Group G and Person A has an explicit stereotype for Group G, his decision bias may be partially mitigated by conscious control; However, attempts to balance bias based on stereotype consciousness often fail to be truly impartial because the amount of bias generated by the stereotype is underestimated or overestimated. Apart from printing, the first mention of “stereotype” dates back to 1850, as a name meaning an image that has been maintained without alteration. [11] However, it was not until 1922 that the American journalist Walter Lippmann first used the term “stereotype” in the modern psychological sense in his book Public Opinion. [12] Media stereotypes about women first appeared in the early 20th century. Various stereotypical depictions or “types” of women appeared in magazines, including Victorian ideals of femininity, the new woman, the Gibson girl, the femme fatale and the flapper. [88] [119] The distinctive explanation of Hamilton and Gifford`s stereotypes was later expanded. [42] A 1994 study by McConnell, Sherman and Hamilton found that people formed stereotypes based on information that was indistinguishable at the time of presentation but was considered distinctive at the time of judgment. [46] As soon as a person determines that non-distinctive information from memory is distinctive, that information is recoded and represented as if it had been distinctive when it was first processed. [46] Stereotypes lead people to expect certain actions from members of social groups. These stereotypical expectations can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies in which inaccurate expectations of a person`s behavior through social interaction cause that person to act stereotypically in a consistent manner, thereby confirming false expectations and confirming the stereotype. [89] [90] [91] Stereotypes are common in various cultural media, where they take the form of dramatic characters.

Immediate recognition of stereotypes means that they are effective in advertising and sitcoming. [111] Alexander Fedorov (2015) proposed a concept for analyzing media stereotypes. This concept refers to the identification and analysis of stereotypical images of people, ideas, events, stories, themes, etc. in the media context. [112] Early theories of stereotyped content, proposed by social psychologists such as Gordon Allport, assumed that stereotypes of external groups reflected a unified antipathy. [22] [23] For example, in their classic 1933 study, Katz and Braly argued that ethnic stereotypes were uniformly negative. [21] Research on the role of illusory correlations in stereotype formation suggests that stereotypes can develop from false inferences about the relationship between two events (e.g., social group membership and good or bad traits). This means that at least some stereotypes are inaccurate. [39] [41] [43] [46] In literature and art, stereotypes are clichéd or predictable characters or situations. White participants interviewed black and white subjects who had been trained to act in a standardized manner prior to the experiments. Analysis of videotaped interviews showed that Black candidates were treated differently: they had shorter interview times and less eye contact; Interviewers made more speech errors (e.g., stuttering, sentence incompleteness, incoherent sounds) and physically distanced themselves from Black candidates. In a second experiment, trained investigators were asked to treat candidates who were all white as whites or blacks had been treated in the first experiment.

As a result, candidates treated as blacks in the first experiment behaved more nervously and received more negative performance scores than respondents who received the treatment previously given to whites. [92] Empirical social science research shows that stereotypes are often true. [66] [67] Jussim et al. reviewed four studies on racial stereotypes and seven studies on gender stereotypes related to demographics, academic achievement, personality and behaviour. On this basis, the authors argued that some aspects of ethnic and gender stereotypes are accurate, while stereotypes related to political affiliation and nationality are much less accurate. [68] A study by Terracciano et al. also found that stereotypical beliefs about nationality do not reflect the actual personality traits of people from different cultures. [69] Based on prejudices against the public sector,[36] Döring and Willems (2021)[37] found that public sector workers are considered less professional than private sector workers. They are based on the assumption that the bureaucratic and bureaucratic nature of the public sector affects the perception of workers employed in the sector. Using an experimental study of vignettes, they analyze how citizens process information about employee affiliation with the sector and incorporate the referencing of non-professional roles to test the stereotyped confirmation hypothesis that underlies the representativeness heuristic. The results show that references to sectoral and non-work-related roles influence employees` perceived professionalism, but have little impact on confirming certain stereotypes in the public sector. [38] Furthermore, the results do not confirm the congruence effect of consistent stereotyped information: the referencing of non-professional roles does not exacerbate the negative impact of sector affiliation on employees` perceived professionalism.

“Stereotypes”. Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, Retrieved 11 October 2022. In a seminal study, David Hamilton and Richard Gifford (1976) investigated the role of illusory correlation in stereotypes. Subjects were asked to read descriptions of behaviours performed by members of groups A and B. Negative behaviours outperformed positive actions and Group B was smaller than Group A, making negative behaviours and belonging to Group B relatively rare and distinctive. Participants were then asked who had performed a series of actions: a person from group A or group B. The results showed that the subjects overestimated how often the two different events, belonging to group B and negative behavior, occurred at the same time, and rated group B more negatively. This was despite the fact that the ratio of positive to negative behaviour was equal for both groups and there was no real correlation between group membership and behaviour. [41] Although Hamilton and Gifford found a similar effect for positive behaviour as rare events, a meta-analytic review of the studies showed that illusory correlation effects are stronger when rare and distinctive information is negative.

[39] Ambiguity in attribution has been shown to affect an individual`s self-esteem.