Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The out-group homogeneity effect is the perception of out-group members as more similar to one another than are in-group members, e.g. "they are alike; we are diverse". [1] Perceivers tend to have impressions about the diversity or variability of group members around those central tendencies or typical attributes of those group members.
Form function attribution bias In human–robot interaction, the tendency of people to make systematic errors when interacting with a robot. People may base their expectations and perceptions of a robot on its appearance (form) and attribute functions which do not necessarily mirror the true functions of the robot. [96] Fundamental pain bias
Categorization of people into social groups increases the perception that group members are similar to one another. An outcome of this is the out-group homogeneity effect. This refers to the perception of members of an out-group as being homogenous, while members of one's in-group are perceived as being diverse, e.g. "they are alike; we are ...
Self-categorization accounts for the outgroup homogeneity effect as a function of perceiver motivation and the resultant comparative context, [4] [15] which is a description of the psychologically available stimuli at any one time. The theory argues that when perceiving an outgroup the psychologically available stimuli include both ingroup and ...
In-group favoritism, sometimes known as in-group–out-group bias, in-group bias, intergroup bias, or in-group preference, is a pattern of favoring members of one's in-group over out-group members. This can be expressed in evaluation of others, in allocation of resources, and in many other ways.
Cultivation theory was founded by George Gerbner.It was developed to seek out the influence that television media may have on the viewers. Most of the formative research underlying cultivation theory was conducted by Gerbner along with his University of Pennsylvania colleague Larry Gross and their students-turned-colleagues Michael Morgan and Nancy Signorielli. [4]
This bias is partially attributed to migrants’ exclusion from their original groups and the increased cognitive effort needed to categorize them. [18] Additionally, the minimal group paradigm explored the out-group homogeneity. [18] Participants were split into two groups, each assigned two positive and two negative traits.
[12] [22] For an example of how this works (and the proposed connections to outgroup favoritism): Burkley and Blanton conducted a 2008 study in which they asked men and women to complete a math test. All participants received failure feedback and were additionally asked to complete a stereotype endorsement measure with the order of these two ...