When race and gender go without saying

Felicia Pratto, Josephine D Korchmaros, Peter Hegarty

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We hypothesize that people fail to designate typical race and gender features because of communication pragmatics and because people assume that their category norms-their implicit sense of which features are typical or atypical of a category-are shared. In Experiment 1, participants wrote what made celebrities typical or not typical of their occupations. Participants almost never designated typical race and gender when instructed to describe how celebrities were typical, although they often designated atypical features when instructed to say how celebrities were not typical. Experiment 2 showed that verbal designation of race and gender occurs most when features are either atypical or are unshared with one's communication partner, and that designating atypical features under suchcircumstances facilitates communication. Experiment 3 showed that the common ground goal determines the higher rate of designating atypical than typical race and gender features. Implications for the communication of bias are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)221-247
Number of pages27
JournalSocial Cognition
Volume25
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2007

Fingerprint

Communication
Interpersonal Relations
Occupations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Social Psychology

Cite this

When race and gender go without saying. / Pratto, Felicia; Korchmaros, Josephine D; Hegarty, Peter.

In: Social Cognition, Vol. 25, No. 2, 04.2007, p. 221-247.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pratto, Felicia ; Korchmaros, Josephine D ; Hegarty, Peter. / When race and gender go without saying. In: Social Cognition. 2007 ; Vol. 25, No. 2. pp. 221-247.
@article{70d220b4bed44706b11f5fa309792696,
title = "When race and gender go without saying",
abstract = "We hypothesize that people fail to designate typical race and gender features because of communication pragmatics and because people assume that their category norms-their implicit sense of which features are typical or atypical of a category-are shared. In Experiment 1, participants wrote what made celebrities typical or not typical of their occupations. Participants almost never designated typical race and gender when instructed to describe how celebrities were typical, although they often designated atypical features when instructed to say how celebrities were not typical. Experiment 2 showed that verbal designation of race and gender occurs most when features are either atypical or are unshared with one's communication partner, and that designating atypical features under suchcircumstances facilitates communication. Experiment 3 showed that the common ground goal determines the higher rate of designating atypical than typical race and gender features. Implications for the communication of bias are discussed.",
author = "Felicia Pratto and Korchmaros, {Josephine D} and Peter Hegarty",
year = "2007",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1521/soco.2007.25.2.221",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "221--247",
journal = "Social Cognition",
issn = "0278-016X",
publisher = "Guilford Publications",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - When race and gender go without saying

AU - Pratto, Felicia

AU - Korchmaros, Josephine D

AU - Hegarty, Peter

PY - 2007/4

Y1 - 2007/4

N2 - We hypothesize that people fail to designate typical race and gender features because of communication pragmatics and because people assume that their category norms-their implicit sense of which features are typical or atypical of a category-are shared. In Experiment 1, participants wrote what made celebrities typical or not typical of their occupations. Participants almost never designated typical race and gender when instructed to describe how celebrities were typical, although they often designated atypical features when instructed to say how celebrities were not typical. Experiment 2 showed that verbal designation of race and gender occurs most when features are either atypical or are unshared with one's communication partner, and that designating atypical features under suchcircumstances facilitates communication. Experiment 3 showed that the common ground goal determines the higher rate of designating atypical than typical race and gender features. Implications for the communication of bias are discussed.

AB - We hypothesize that people fail to designate typical race and gender features because of communication pragmatics and because people assume that their category norms-their implicit sense of which features are typical or atypical of a category-are shared. In Experiment 1, participants wrote what made celebrities typical or not typical of their occupations. Participants almost never designated typical race and gender when instructed to describe how celebrities were typical, although they often designated atypical features when instructed to say how celebrities were not typical. Experiment 2 showed that verbal designation of race and gender occurs most when features are either atypical or are unshared with one's communication partner, and that designating atypical features under suchcircumstances facilitates communication. Experiment 3 showed that the common ground goal determines the higher rate of designating atypical than typical race and gender features. Implications for the communication of bias are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35549001311&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35549001311&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1521/soco.2007.25.2.221

DO - 10.1521/soco.2007.25.2.221

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:35549001311

VL - 25

SP - 221

EP - 247

JO - Social Cognition

JF - Social Cognition

SN - 0278-016X

IS - 2

ER -