Benutzer Diskussion:JohUllrich/Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie/Archiv/1

Diese Seite ist ein Archiv abgeschlossener Diskussionen. Ihr Inhalt sollte daher nicht mehr verändert werden. Benutze bitte die aktuelle Diskussionsseite, auch um eine archivierte Diskussion weiterzuführen.

Um einen Abschnitt dieser Seite zu verlinken, klicke im Inhaltsverzeichnis auf den Abschnitt und kopiere dann Seitenname und Abschnittsüberschrift aus der Adresszeile deines Browsers, beispielsweise

[[Benutzer Diskussion:JohUllrich/Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie/Archiv/1#Thema 1]]

oder als Weblink zur Verlinkung außerhalb der Wikipedia

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie/Archiv/1#Thema_1

Week 6

Improving the Stereotypes article by adding Sherifs Studies

I'd propose adding the summer camp study conducted by Sherif to the article about Stereotypes under the in-group relationships and how those contribute to the development of stereotypes. Cmariams (Diskussion) 15:11, 27. Sep. 2023 (CEST)

Hi Cmariams. It's a great idea! It could be a valuable addition to the "Formation" section, specifically the subsection on "Intergroup Relations," in the English Stereotype article. Citing the realistic conflict theory could provide insight into stereotype formation and support the notion that stereotypes might be a consequence, rather than a cause, of intergroup relations (with the underlying cause being competition over resources). It might be worthwhile to cite the minimal group paradigm from Tajfel as well.--Gg179 (Diskussion) 12:39, 29. Sep. 2023 (CEST)

While Sherif's studies illustrate how intergroup conflict may arise, the topic of stereotypes is rather peripherally related to these studies. For example, in the paper in Scientific American, they talk about hostility manifesting in verbal (calling the outgroup names) and non-verbal behavior (raiding their camp). We need to keep in mind the definition of stereotypes and how it is different from prejudice. Nevertheless, it was a good idea to think about how conflict impacts on the activation and application of stereotypes. Perhaps you want to do another literature search, focusing on studies which measure or manipulate conflict and also assess stereotyping? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:07, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Article about stereotypes regarding mental illness

I've noticed that there is no English article about stereotypes regarding mental illness. As this is a topic where stereotypes play an especially important role due to the direct effects on the wellbeing of those affected, I think an article about it could be interesting and educational.

There is a german article which touches on those topics [[1]], however it is quite short and only has 5 sources, so editing that might also be an option.

Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 11:44, 29. Sep. 2023 (CEST)

In our class on clinical psychology we read a paper on the stigmatisation of mental illness . This might be useful. (It's written in german.) --JasminMoor (Diskussion) 14:05, 29. Sep. 2023 (CEST)

This is a very important topic. In my opinion it would be interesting to add how media pushes these stereotypes through movies, journalism or click-bait in our news flooded everyday life. Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 22:07, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

As others have also noted, the more common term in this context is Stigma, and you will find that the English language Wikipedia covers this here and here. Then there are German pages you identified about Stigmatisierung and Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker, so it's up to you to decide which of these articles you would like to improve, e.g. by drawing on psychological research on mental health stigma. Feel free to continue thinking in this direction so that you will be able to propose more specific changes later on! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:33, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I really like this idea! It may be useful to pick one or two mental illnesses and really dive deep into them because looking at mental illness, in general, may be overwhelming. It may be interesting to see if this stereotype has changed over time from a few decades ago to now with more people talking about mental illness and accepting it. You might be able to relate this topic to how stereotypes affect people with mental illness (do they start to believe the stereotype too, do current stereotypes worsen their mental illness?). Similarly to what was said above, you may want to look at media's role in mental health stereotypes. Do you think many people exposed to such stereotypes online may self-diagnose because of overuse of these stereotypes, particularly when used incorrectly in a casual way e.g people saying they have OCD people they are a neat person... another example is people saying that something slightly embarrassing or stressful gave them PTSD. It may be interesting to investigate how these stereotypes used in casual conversation and so widely online affect people's beliefs and responses to mental illnesses. This is an interesting article that you may like:

Calabro, Alexys (2019) "The Media’s Portrayal of Mental Illness and Its Treatment: An Analysis of the Existing Literature from a Social Work Perspective," Locus: The Seton Hall Journal of Undergraduate Research: Vol. 2 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/locus/vol2/iss1/2

• Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 20:49, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Paragraph about perceptual narrowing and critical periods

I would find it interesting to add a paragraph on perceptual narrowing and critical period and their importance for the creation of stereotypes to the 'Formation' section, using implicit racial bias (IRB) as an example . This addition could provide a more cognitive perspective and add nuance to the already listed Formation hypotheses.--Gg179 (Diskussion) 13:29, 29. Sep. 2023 (CEST)

My impression is that these concepts are too remote from the concept of stereotyping to be useful. You could try to make a case for why the concepts really are important to understand the formation of stereotypes or perhaps look more closely into the literature on formation of stereotypes and see what is being discussed there, e.g. here (see especially introduction for useful references).

P.S. As for the hyperlinks, the articles are in the English language Wikipedia - see the source code in my response to "Article about stereotypes regarding mental illness" above in which I cite the English Wikipedia. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:15, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Ps.: I don't know why, but the hyperlinks to existing Wikipedia articles don't work. Here are the relevant links:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptual_narrowing
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period

Stereotype suppression

I propose mentioning the boomerang effect of stereotype suppression in our article "Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie", perhaps in the section "Aktivierung und Anwendung". A source I would like to cite is the study conducted in 1994 by Macrae et al., which we have discussed in the introduction course on social psychology.--JasminMoor (Diskussion) 09:51, 30. Sep. 2023 (CEST)

This is a very interesting study! After describing the study, you could explain how the boomerang effect impacts gender stereotypes or racial stereotypes and what kind of consequences could occur (for instance in the working environment). --2A04:EE41:4:16E9:48FB:6329:B164:2742 10:25, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST) --AleMeil

How about mentioning the boomerang effect in the section on "Interventionen"? I thought that might be the place to mention ideas related to reduce stereotyping, and suppression would fit here quite well. It would be interesting to find out if there have been any replications of their work (the studies were based on rather small sample sizes). You could search within the literature citing this article for "replication". --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:23, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Overcoming Stereotypes

I would like to write an article on how to overcome stereotypes. This could include strategies to break down stereotypes; on the one hand on a personal level, on the other hand on a social level. For this purpose I would refer to the "Kontinuummodell der Eindrucksbildung" (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990) --AleMeil (Diskussion) 10:37, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This topic is very interesting, and I think it would be interesting to add information to it - how educational institutions can help in the overcome stereotypes, since our education (our environment in kindergarten, school, books) is one of the few factors that shape our worldview. --Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) 12:03, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I found this topic really interesting and useful! I think it would be very important to explain how you identify that something is stereotyped and give tips so people can identify these phenomena for themselves and start a change.--Camcar27 (Diskussion) 14:15, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I also think that this is an interesting point! In particular, we can maybe also try to emphasise here that one can also catch oneself stereotyping. Here, as already mentioned, one could look for ways to react consciously in such situations in order to correct this behaviour. For this, the point with educational institutions from Yeliz gets as well important. --Leoniiie (Diskussion) 15:06, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

That's right, the continuum model contrasts categorical perception with piecemeal integration of personal attributes. You could derive from the model what leads to piecemeal integration (i.e. individualized perception). This would perhaps best fit into the section on "Aktivierung und Anwendung", no? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:27, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Age Stereotypes

I would like to write an article about Age Stereotypes (Altersstereotype), especially about old-age. I couldn't find any articles in Wikipedia about this topic and I think it would be an interesting addition. --Melebo (Diskussion) 14:42, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

That sounds like a very good idea! However, I saw that Wikipedia entries already exist on this topic (Altersdiskriminierung, Ageism). Maybe you can look over there and see if something can be improved or added. Kind regards! --Diodx (Diskussion) 16:38, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

In the class on social psychology we talked about an experiment by Bargh et al. that researched the influence of automatically activated stereotypes on social behavior (the study where people walked slower after being primed with words that are stereotypically associated with elderly people). Maybe it could be useful for your article:

Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230 --Elyfa (Diskussion) 10:46, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

One has to consider through, most stereotypes about old people are not completely wrong. Old people are selfish, they don't care about other people or future generations. Look at the climate crisis. It's the fault of old people who keep voting conservative parties, and don't want to change their lifestyle. Old people are less open for new ideas. They have a fossilized mind. That's why important progress cannot be made anymore. Old people are very aggressive and unfair to young people. I experienced that myself, old people can't remotely understand young people. Look at Markus Lanz what he said about young people. Old people are full of stereotypes themself. The actually more important topic are age stereotypes from old people towards young people. These are far more present and problematic. There may be also stereotypes towards old people, but those are mostly true and important to be spoken out. --Julia Adriana (Diskussion) 11:42, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

If we want to write an objective article about age Stereotpyes we should keep in mind that we can proove our point with empirical evidence. Maybe there is an study which shows that some stereotpyes about older people are true. Its diffuclt to argue with personal experience because not every person has the same context/environment. Personnaly i think we should mention at this point also the theory of social identity (Henri Tajfel and John C. Turner). This theory shows us that people are generally highly motivated to avoid negative perceptions of themselves. They want to be perceived as positively as possible. In this way, older people distance themselves from their own age group because younger people have mostly negative stereotypes about older people. Mabye this will help us to underline that stereotpypes about age work in both directions (old and young). --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 10:18, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I concur that it would be a good idea to double-check if the existing articles touch on the subject and could be expanded. However, there are a lot of psychological sources that you could use to create a new article. One active researcher in this area is Klaus Rothermund. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:36, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes against people with disabilities

I would like to write an article about stereotypes towards people with disabilities. There is already an article in German on "Handicapism" (Handicapism), but the article is very short and relies on few sources. It is essential to write such an article (or improve the existing one) in order to understand the challenges faced by this marginalized group and combatte prejudice. By filling this gap in Wikipedia, we can contribute to a more inclusive and informed society. Diodx (Diskussion) 16:32, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think that is a wonderful idea! Since the article already exists I think that etiquette would suggest you improve the already existing article instead of creating an entirely new one. It also seems like Handicapism is currently not linked to any existing, german page about Stereotypes, which is odd. Linking those two topics might also be a great Idea. --RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 19:07, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Great Idea! I think it would be interesting to look at the differences that people with visible and non-visible disabilities experience. Somebody from the Seminar is writing on Stereotypes about ADHD, so there might be some crossovers and possibilities on linking those together. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 12:50, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

A good next step might be to identify psychological literature on this topic and then see how you can improve the overlapping articles (see the info at the top of the Handicapism article)! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:44, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Paragraph about the role of heuristics

I would like to propose writing a paragraph about the role which heuristics play in the formation of stereotypes in the section "Entstehung und Aufrechterhaltung" on the page we want to create. There are interesting findings about how judgements of specific groups of people are heavily influenced by availability heuristics (because we cannot remember every single individual and their traits of a group we encountered). I would like to base the paragraph on Rothbart et al. (1977). I appreciate suggestions on how to go about when writing the paragraph and/or additional sources to include. RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 18:44, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The paper by Rothbart is relevant for the section on "Entstehung und Aufrechterhaltung". How about you first try to understand the role of this paper in the literature. By looking up papers citing this paper, you will find relevant handbook chapters and review articles which will also include interpretations of this paper and other sources. This way, you could make a good contribution regarding cognitive processes involved in stereotype formation and maintenance! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:56, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stability and Change of Stereotypes

I think that the discussion on whether stereotypes are static or dynamic knowledge structures would be an important aspect to add to our article about stereotypes. In the current german Wikipedia article, stereotypes are described as rather stable and less attention is paid to their dynamic aspects. It would be interesting to differentiate this topic more precisely. Eweime (Diskussion) 19:17, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is a very interesting idea. I have heard of an article that deals with this concept, maybe it helps in your research:

Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as Dynamic Constructs: Women and Men of the Past, Present, and Future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1171–1188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200262001 --Sschraml (Diskussion) 22:50, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

@Eweime

Nice input! I also thought of something in this direction, but narrowed down to cultural stereotypes. Depending on where in the world you are, the stereotypes can differ a lot. So by adapting a new culture, your own stereotypes(of the same group) might change- meaning they could be dynamic?

Maybe these differenced could even be observed by reading the same article on wikipedia to a specific stereotype but in a different language.

Not sure yet how to implement this in this course though.

Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 14:03, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)nikepaulina

This seems more like an empirical project (to be tackled e.g. in a Masters Thesis), but maybe you find sources to substantiate your idea and articulate it even within the seminar! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:11, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think the suggestions you received (role theory, dynamic stereotypes) are helpful and also relevant for "Entstehung und Aufrechterhaltung". Another good source specifically for "Stabilität und Veränderung" is https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000494. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:09, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes about Religion

Maybe I could write an article on Religious Stereotypes. I only found an existing article on Religious Discrimination [[2]] but not all Stereotypes have to lead to discrimination? And I couldn‘t find an Article on Stereotypes about Buddhists for example. And then I could write about Stereotypes about Religion as a whole and maybe find stereotypes about specific religions in the subcategories. --Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 20:44, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

That's a great idea! I think an article about Stereotypes of muslims in Europe could be interesting, especially considering the rise of islamophobia around the world. It would definitely be a great addition to either the German or the English Wikipedia! It would probably also be interesting to write an article about Stereotypes of religious people nowadays. But honestly, any topic concerning religion would be an interesting one to write about. Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 21:26, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

It seems that there are relevant articles which do not mention 'stereotypes' in the title or text. For example, Persecution of Buddhists. Perhaps you want to try some search terms and find more relevant articles in which you could add content based on psychological literature (or related fields). JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:23, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes about ADHD

I noticed that there are no articles in either English or German about stereotypes related to ADHD and their effects on people who have it. I would like to add an article about said topic to the German Wikipedia page, as I feel like that one is lacking more in terms of topics concerning stereotypes. I think it's a topic that should be discussed more, as I noticed that stereotypes about neurodivergent people are as prevalent as ever, especially in the workplace. Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 21:17, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is a very interesting and important topic! Maybe it's useful to also mention how the symptoms of ADHD do change from childhood to adultness. This could have also an impact on how people with ADHD are treated (or whether people are even considered to be affected by ADHD). --AleMeil (Diskussion) 10:34, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This seems like a very important and interesting aspect to add to the current article! Due to gernder Stereotypes, women with ADHD often don't get diagnosed (correctly) (Darby E. Attoe & Emma A. Climie. (2023) Miss. Diagnosis: A Systematic Review of ADHD in Adult Women. Journal of Attention Disorders 27:7, pages 645-657.). Maybe the gender stereotypes in ADHD diagnoses would be an interesting aspect to add. Eweime (Diskussion) 22:53, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

It would seem useful if you could connect with the author of the proposal of an article on stereotypes about people with a mental health diagnosis. The comment I made there regarding the more common use of the term stigma in this literature would also seem to be relevant for you. You could explore options of adding to the article on Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung or Neurodiversität. Please also check out the respective discussion pages! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:32, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Self-Stereotyping and Related Phenomena

I feel like the current article lacks information on self-stereotyping and related phenomena such as stereotype threat or self-fulfilling prophecy. I also want to look in the problems of replicating these findings. Depending on the final version, this might be fit in the "consequences" or "example" sections and, depending on the depth of detail, maybe even for an own article. --Sschraml (Diskussion) 22:45, 1. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is a great idea! There is a German as well as an English wiki article about Stereotype threat which we could link to after a short description of this phenomenon in the consequences section of the main article. However, the German one is quite short and could definitely do with some additional information. There's a very informative review I found that summarizes a lot of findings about stereotype threat which we could definitely use to expand the stereotype threat wiki article:

Spencers, Steven J.; Logel, Christine; Davies, Paul G. (2016). “Stereotype Threat”. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 415-37. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235 --Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 12:10, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think this is a very good idea. In the pathologization of mental disorders, self-stigmatization is a very big part and I think it's important that people also learn more about these processes and not only about the stereotypes that other people have about others. I read that people who suffer schizophrenia have problems with the self stereotyping/self-stigmatization --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 15:11, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes, stereotype threat could be mentioned in the section on consequences. Regarding the term 'self-stereotyping' it may be useful to remind ourselves that it is a central concept in the Self-Categorization Theory by Turner et al., see e.g. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00795.x. In contrast to stereotype threat, self-stereotyping is a more general term without negative connotations. It refers to the fact that when self-categories are salient, the self is perceived more in terms of the characteristics associated with that category. JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:46, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Prescriptive vs. Descriptive Stereotypes

I would propose adding a distinction between descriptive and prescriptive stereotypes (to the German as well as the English article about Stereotypes). Descriptive stereotypes are ideas about how members of a certain group are, and prescriptive stereotypes are about how members of a certain group should be (and if those expectations are violated this leads to negative consequence for the member of that group such as being evaluated negatively). Maybe it would even make sense to create an own article for descriptive vs. prescriptive stereotypes, since those two kinds of stereotypes lead to different consequences for the member of the stereotyped group and require different kinds of interventions? --Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 11:53, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This could be part of the introduction of the article in which some general features of stereotypes are mentioned. However, it is an interesting question if all stereotypes include prescriptive elements. It is certainly true that this distinction has received much attention in the context of gender stereotypes, e.g. see these influential articles here https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00239 and https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498. Perhaps it is worth thinking more deeply about which stereotypes (ambivalent stereotypes?) include prescriptive elements and which stereotypes do not. The article by Jost and Kay (https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498) is also relevant for the section on functions of stereotypes (as these authors suggest that such ambivalent/complementary stereotypes help to justify inequality). JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:56, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes associated with Rap/ Hip-Hop Music

The Stereotypes discussed in [Hip hop music] focus on the Stereotypes that the Artists portray in their music. I would like to add a few lines discussing the Stereotypes caused by Anti-Rap Attitudes. I found an interesting Study regarding my question.

--JPrueb (Diskussion) 12:36, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think it is a very good idea!

Music is an area that involves everyone's life and it is very interesting to see how it can have negative consequences towards discrimination.

Everyone always talks very positively about music so I think the point of view you propose is very interesting.

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 09:33, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think it’s a good idea to include stereotypes in music in our article, and how stereotypes are imbedded and portrayed in cultural/popcultural settings. Maybe we could include a reference to the Echo-Awards and the scandal that occurred in 2018 ([3]https://www.nzz.ch/meinung/der-skandal-und-sein-echo-ld.1380773?reduced=true ), where two rappers won the prize and were publicly criticized for spreading and upholding stereotypes through their lyrics. The awardshow has since been cancelled because of this. It might be interesting to on one hand look at how creators of music get stereotyped based on the genre of music they are making and on the other hand look at the stereotypes that are being reproduced and upheld throughout that music (specifically the lyrics and how those might prime listeners).

I’ve looked for some different studies regarding this, but had difficulty finding studies on how lyrics interact with stereotype activation, does anybody else maybe have a good article on this?

• Creators side: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb02020.x (this is a study were people had to rate lyrics on offensiveness and it was varied whether it was said to be from a country or a rap song)

• How lyrics affect listeners: Neguţ, A., & Sârbescu, P. (2014). Problem music or problem stereotypes? The dynamics of stereotype activation in rock and hip-hop music. Musicae Scientiae, 18(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1029864913499180

Cmariams (Diskussion) 11:37, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

It would be important to avoid words like "cause" when the two variables have only been measured and then correlated. Also, the authors seem to mix the concepts of attitude and stereotype quite a bit. Please try to use the concept of stereotype based on the definition we use in the seminar! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:50, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Understanding the dynamics between music, attitudes, and stereotypes is important to combat existing biases.

ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 11:22, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotype about pandemic kids (covid-19)

I noticed that there are no articles about characteristics of children after the pandemic. I think it's a very interesting subject, because these children developed for almost two years in a different way than normal, which has consequences for their way of being. Every generation is important, therefore, it is important to understand how those kids view their lifes in order to help them to overcome certain obstacles and so that they do not have a negative impact on families and society.In some countries the confinement was much stronger than in others, so it is interesting to study whether this affected these children more strongly. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 14:01, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Would you be looking at the Stereotypes that pandemic kids have compared to other people. Or would you look at the stereotypes other people have about pandemic kids? It's a very interesting subject on how the pandemic affected the children, maybe try to connect it more to the idea of stereotypes. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 14:26, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

What age range of children were you thinking of? Children who lived their first two years of life during the height of the pandemic? Or young children? Or Teenagers? All of the above? And are stereotypes about for instance "pandemic babies" actually stereotypes or just speculations on how the pandemic affected their development? What indicated that stereotypes about children who lived through the pandemic actually exist? I think this could make for a very interesting and current contribution to our page!

• Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 17:00, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

If there exists relevant psychological research on stereotypes about pandemic kids, that seems like a good idea. My impression is that in the last three years researchers have published on almost any topic that could be related to Covid. So there could be studies out there that you could find! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:53, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Devines Dissociation model

I would like to write an article about Patricia Devines study. The dissociation model assumes independence of automatic and controlled processes. Contents of stereotypes are learned before people form personal beliefs that contradict the application of stereotypes. Personal beliefs are automated. She conducted 3 different sub-studies on this. She explains with her model from when stereotypes are controllable and when they run uncontrollably --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 15:04, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I am not sure if one study, even a highly-cited one like this one, should be featured in a special article, but the conclusions drawn from this study would fit into the section "Aktivierung und Anwendung" of our joint article. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:57, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stigma and Stereotypes

Perhaps it could also be initeresting to highlight the difference between a stigma and a stereotype? Then one could describe more specifically what exactly a stereotype is. So in the sense of an initial explanation of the term. --Leoniiie (Diskussion) 15:22, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think that's a great idea! Such a differentiation can be very helpful, especially since we are also writing for people how do not have much prior knowledge about social psychology or the topic of stereotypes. Maybe we could also add the difference between prejudice (Vorurteil) and a stereotype? Ldegio (Diskussion) 21:47, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This could be done by way of referring to the article on Stigmatisierung in the introductory text of the article! As I mentioned above the term is sometimes used interchangeably with stereotypes in the context of mental health stigma, but it has also surplus meaning. A key author is Erving Goffman, and I noticed that this article does not mention his work on stigma. Can you find a good source to help you make a distinction? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:21, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Perpetuation of Stereotypes by movies

I would like to write an article for the section "Entstehung und Aufrecherhaltung" on how representations of certain groups, specifically in movies, perpetuate stereotypes. I would like to focus on racial stereotypes, gender stereotypes and stereotypes of sexuality in this section.

• Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 16:52, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think it's a great idea to write about how movies keep stereotypes "alive" or also cause them in a way. Movies are somewhat a source of information and I think it's important to address how that could also negatively impact certain things such as gender stereotypes for example. I myself was thinking of writing an article about how movies play a role in regards to (negative) stereotypes surrounding psychological disorders (for example the movie "Split" and DID). JessTheodore (Diskussion) 23:07, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Markus Appel is a relevant author here, e.g. see https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-540-46899-8_13.pdf! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:43, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Social media stereotype

I would like to write an article about social media stereotypes. I couldn’t find any Wikipedia article on this topic, and i think this would be an interesting addition since social media plays a huge role in the daily lives of modern people, they become the main source of information and influence. Therefore, it is important to understand how they form stereotype and what stereotypes they promote, as well as to describe stereotypes about people leading an active social life, because when running social networks they receive a lot of criticism and sometimes themselves fall under the “blogger” stereotype, which often has a serious impact on interpersonal relationship and self-esteem. Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) (ohne (gültigen) Zeitstempel signierter Beitrag von Yeliz.proko (Diskussion | Beiträge) 18:11, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST))

Perhaps you want to join Amweiss17 who wants to cover the role of movies. I think the author Markus Appel is also a good starting point for you! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:45, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes about Muslims

I would like to write an article on stereotypes about Muslims around the world since there isn’t a page on it in the English wikipedia, which is surprising considering how pervasive these stereotypes are in our society today. I think someone also wanted to write on stereotypes about religions and I was thinking our articles could be linked together as well.

I would also like to add on to the ‘Role in art and culture’ section under the stereotype article in the English wikipedia, by further developing about the role of stereotypes in sport culture particularly on stereotypes about athletes with disabilities (para athletes). --Hanis Abdan (Diskussion) 18:29, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Perhaps you want to team up with Aaeeiioouu12345 who is also interested in religious stereotypes? The article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia might already include some good information, but you could add to it! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:49, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Example for Consequences of Stereotypes

I think it would be interesting to mention the Police Officer’s Dilemma (Correll et al. 2002) that we discussed in the introductory course of social psychology. Maybe we could include it as an example under “Konsequenzen” and explain how ethnicity/skin colour (and the stereotypes associated with it) effects the reaction of police officers and eventually leads to wrong actions. --Ldegio (Diskussion) 21:36, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes that's definitely something that has been discussed a lot. It would be good to find a source which does not only show the shooter bias against African Americans, but also demonstrates empirically that it is linked to stereotypical beliefs endorsed by the individual. At the same time, the limitations of experimental research need to be acknowledged, see the article by Cesario: Cesario, J. (2022). What can experimental studies of bias tell us about real-world group disparities? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 45, E66. doi:10.1017/S0140525X21000017 --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:54, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Psychological Disorders and Stereotypes

I would like to write an article about stereotypes of psychological disorders. Many disorders are connected to negative stereotypes, which gives many people a false understanding of the person suffering from the disorder and the disorder itself. For example schizophrenia and DID are disorders which I would write about. I also think it would be interesting to connect this topic with media, specifically with movies since I think that the representation of psychological disorders in movies play an important role in regards to stereotypes surrounding them. JessTheodore (Diskussion) 22:53, 2. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

If you would like to look at the representation of schizophrenia in movies specifically, maybe the movies "M" (Fritz Lang, 1931) and "Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari" (Robert Wiene, 1920) would be interesting for you to look at, since they're both quite old and both feature villains with symptoms of schizophrenia.

Also, since we both suggested a similar topic, maybe it would make sense for us to work together, although I'm not sure how that works with the requirements of this course. --Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 11:07, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes, please collaborate, either with others interested in mental health related stereotypes or with others interested in media influence! :) --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:56, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Boomerang Effect

I would like to add a paragraph about stereotypes to the article about the Boomerang effect (Boomerang effect (psychology)) in the section "examples of applications". The paragraph could be based on the study by Macrae et al. Elyfa (Diskussion) 10:28, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

JasminMoor also wanted to cover this study, and I suggested that it would be useful to search for additional studies. I think a careful search conducted with multiple search engines (PsycINFO, scholar.google.com, etc.) and multiple keywords could lead to valuable results, either showing that the study has been successfully replicated or not. So why not team up, considering the amount of work that would need to be done here? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:59, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Intervention

I would like to mention in this section what kind of interventions exist which are trying to reduce implicit biases and if they are useful to reduce stereotypes. for example:

1.Engaging with others’ perspective, consciousness-raising or imagining contact with outgroup – participants either imagine how the outgroup thinks and feels, are made aware of the way the outgroup is marginalised or given new information about the outgroup, or imagine having contact with the outgroup.

2.Identifying the self with the outgroup – participants perform tasks that lessen barriers between themselves and the outgroup.

3.Exposure to counterstereotypical exemplars – participants are exposed to exemplars that contradict the stereotype of the outgroup.

4.Appeals to egalitarian values – participants are encouraged to activate egalitarian goals or think about multiculturalism, co-operation or tolerance.

5.Evaluative conditioning – participants perform tasks to strengthen counterstereotypical associations. 6.Inducing emotion –emotions or moods are induced in participants

7.Intentional strategies to overcome biases – participants are instructed to implement strategies to override or suppress their biases.

8.Drugs – participants take a drugthat many interventions who aim to reduce implicit biases are not --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 14:09, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Another researcher who has produced meta-analyses on the topic is Calvin Lai: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=Nkkrs_YAAAAJ&hl=de&oi=sra

Please be aware though that "implicit bias" can also refer to prejudice (as assessed by the IAT for example, this means associations of social categories with positive vs. negative valence), and this would be less relevant for our work on stereotypes. So you need to carefully determine whether the outcome of a given intervention was a reduction of stereotyping (vs. prejudice). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:08, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Sex and stereotypes

I would like to write an article about stereotypes surrounding sex and how it plays a central role In the discrimination and social injustice towards trans people.

Nowadays the topic of sexuality is still strongly stereotyped and stigmatized even tho it is highly discussed and for this reason I think it would be an interesting argument to explore.

I found an interesting article that I would like to use, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-023-00842-y

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 14:05, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think that's a very interesting idea! Maybe you could also include a paragraph discussing Stereotypes about Sexworkers. I found an interesting article about sex workers in india and their stigmatization (10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.02.052). I think that would be an interesting addition, because sex work has become very discussed in the public for the first time, and with that arise new stereotypes and stigma. --Melebo (Diskussion) 16:07, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The study asked people who identify as trans about stereotypes they encounter, so that's an interesting perspective. Perhaps you want to come up with a proposal to integrate the results into this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender ? Also, as every journalist knows, it is good to have more than one source! :) --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:15, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes in university degrees

I was thinking of focusing on the stereotypes associated with students who study psychology and the potential consequences of that. For example, there is the stereotype that psychology students have a mental illness or that they are constantly analyzing people. This has potential consequences such as: political leaders questioning whether psychology programs should be funded at public universities (Halonen, 2011), detering students from considering psychology etc this website from the APA goes into this in more depth (it is based on a psychology professor's point of view): https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/psychology-teacher-network/introductory-psychology/superpowers-psychology-major#:~:text=The%20general%20stereotype%20is%20that,in%20touch%20with%20their%20feelings. Another option is to be more general and look at the different stereotypes within many university degrees and how this affects the job market. I would love to hear suggestions/improvements *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 14:52, 3. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

As for places where this might be useful, have you looked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Stereotypes ? It is possible that such stereotypes are covered in a Wikipedia page of a different name, e.g. see how they have pulled together stereotypes of different groups in the U.S. here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotypes_of_groups_within_the_United_States.

As for academic sources on the topic - I recall that Michael Wenzel used to work with Psychology and Business students and have them rate each other on a number of dimensions, see here https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167202250913 . But I am sure there are better sources which may just need a little more time to find! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:26, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotype accuracy

To enhance the article it could provide practical examples of how do accurate and inaccurate stereotypes have an impact on individuals and groups in everyday situations. ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 10:52, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

None of the above proposals were targeting the section "Richtigkeit", so I am glad you are interested in this! :) A good starting point would be the work by Lee Jussim, e.g. Jussim, L. (2017). Précis of Social Perception and Social Reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, E1. doi:10.1017/S0140525X1500062X --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:30, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotype accuracy

@ThomasB7: Thomas, where are you? Please for next week put your new ideas here!! Thank you JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:13, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Self-fulfilling prophecies sometimes happen, and the differences between people might be influenced by these prophecies to some extent. So, when we accurately notice these differences, it could be because of past self-fulfilling prophecies.

However, the idea that this makes accuracy research meaningless is not justified. If someone didn't cause the differences among people, we can't blame their expectations for these differences.

„When a perceiver's judgments closely correspond to targets’ attributes, and when that same perceiver's expectations cannot have caused those attributes, how shall we refer to this correspondence? There is only one viable answer: accuracy.“ Lee Jussim, e.g. Jussim, L. (2017). Précis of Social Perception and Social Reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, E1. doi:10.1017/S0140525X1500062X

ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 16:58, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I wonder if self-fulfilling prophecies are necessary for a brief discussion of accuracy. The quote by Jussim is good, but it requires an understanding of the effect of self-fulfilling prophecies, which may be an unnecessary detour. Perhaps you want to simply state that stereotypes can be more or less accurate, and there are scientifically based methods of finding out, perhaps give an example from Jussim. Then you could also draw on Degner (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-60572-1_4, starting on p. 47) to provide an assessment of the value of asking the accuracy question. Would you like to provide a speficic passage in German that we could add to the section on accuracy of the article Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie? JohUllrich (Diskussion) 19:27, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Overcoming Stereotypes

I'd like to improve either the section "Stabilität und Veränderung" or "Intervention" with the following text: Beim Kontinuummodell der Eindrucksbildung (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990) findet nach der Begegnung mit einer Person, der ursprünglichen Kategorisierung, der bejahten Frage nach der Relevanz, einer gescheiterten bestätigenden Kategorisierung und einer ebenfalls gescheiterten Rekategorisierung eine sogenannte «Stück-für-Stück Integration» statt. Dies passiert daher dann, wenn die zu beurteilende Person nicht in eine bereits bestehende Kategorie passt. Erst dann werden persönliche Eigenschaften einer Person genau analysiert und somit eigene stereotypische Denkmuster genauer durchdacht.--AleMeil (Diskussion) 16:31, 4. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

May it then also be interesting to extend the topic to the attribution theory? Although this is more about explaining the behaviour of others, this maybe could also be linked to stereotypes? --Leoniiie (Diskussion) 16:22, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I still think a first exposition of the continuum model of impression formation would fit best into the section on activation and application of stereotypes. Let me rephrase your proposed contribution a little bit to demonstrate the fit:

„Das Kontinuummodell der Eindrucksbildung (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990) geht davon aus, dass die Wahrnehmung von Individuen von Stereotypen beeinflusst werden kann. Laut dem Modell sortieren Menschen eine Person, die sie beurteilen möchten, zunächst in eine bestimmte Kategorie (z.B. Mann oder Frau) ein und prüfen, ob das Wissen über diese Kategorie (d.h. das Stereotyp) mit der Beobachtung stimmig ist. Erst wenn die Kategorie nicht zu passen scheint und auch weitere in Erwägung gezogene Kategorien nicht passen, werden persönliche Eigenschaften einer Person genau analysiert und somit eigene stereotypische Denkmuster genauer durchdacht.“

If you agree with these changes and the fit to the section on activation and application, you could expand the text and explain the role of motivation. You can either cite a general textbook or the original article (which is very long, but not difficult to read, so you might want to have a look! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:54, 5. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

A stage for potentially harmful stereotypes?

I would like to discuss a concern with you. We want to create articles on certain examples of stereotypes (in the media, for mental illness, etc.) and therefore spread knowledge on these topics. I feel like this idea could provide a stage for potentially harmful or dangerous stereotypes to spread (since some people think everything they read on Wikipedia is a fact or just because of the Validity effect or if someone says "well if there even is an article I must be right with this assumption", you get my point.) Do you have ideas on how we can phrase our articles in a way that we do not promote stigmatization etc.? For example a disclaimer in the sense of "These are beliefs people have, study x is evidence for or against it"? Or is it not our problems as we only state the fact that people think something? Looking forward to hearing your opinions! --Sschraml (Diskussion) 13:00, 5. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is a fair point. We should of course not only make sure that what we publish is based on scientific facts, but also consider how these facts are interpreted. I think these goals can be met in various ways, and we should keep your point in mind when evaluating the actual content that you propose to publish! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:58, 5. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hello

I have also thought about this. I think if we only list stereotypes about certain groups, like "stereotypes about people with schizophrenia include x, y and z", that can definitely be harmful. I think we have to be careful to not just showcase what the stereotypes are, but also put them into context, like how they came to be and maybe how they affect the people they are about. It would maybe also be important to show scientific evidence on whether or not these stereotypes are (to some extent) true or false.

Essentially I think if we can make sure that the articles show the respective stereotypes in a realistic context, instead of in a way that makes them look like statements, that would be helpful.

Of course, if someone is specifically looking for stereotypes about a certain group in order to cause harm, they could still find information that is valuable to them in these articles, but if they already have their mind set on that, I think that we unfortunately cannot prevent that.

Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 14:33, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I agree with you. In any case, we should be careful not to reproduce or reinforce stereotypes with a large number of articles about stereotypes. The scientific basis should be present for every article, but it is still worth considering whether this large number of articles about specific stereotypes is necessary. Perhaps a list of areas/themes/topics in which stereotypes exist and a short contextualization would be sufficient. The focus could then be placed on emergence (Entstehung) and maintenance (Aufrechterhaltung), especially in a theoretical context. --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 22:03, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think this is a very important point. It might be more beneficial to state which mechanisms are at play for stereotypes in general and not have a long list of exemplary articles (which could also become outdated very soon). I think the grouping by topic as we did last week is a good first step against this issue. --Sschraml (Diskussion) 23:34, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes and self esteem

Hello! As we have all probably discussed in our previous social psychology classes, the effect of stereotypes on self esteem could prove to be enormous; therefore my proposal lies in interconnecting both a social psychology aspect such as the concept of stereotypes with a more clinical psychology feature such as the malleability of self esteem. For that we would have to explore the terms of schemas, social schemas and script(A script is our knowledge of a particular situation and the way events in that situation unfold (Abelson, 1981). In one way or the other, the effect of this stereotypes is influenced by our use of heuristics, such as the self-fulfilling prophecy. In an experiment conducted by Rosenthal & Jacobson (1968) about Students IQ, the teachers maintained biased attitudes with the students which produce great effects on them. The biggest effects of negative expectancies are in already stigmatized groups and low economic incomes. When we are with “open mind” (mindfulness) and try to be aware of this, it is less probable that we communicate a negative expectancy and change the other's behavior. We would also need to deepen the information available regarding the ideas of the self, social identity, self-concept, ... among many others. For that, we could include information about theories such as the Self-Discrepancy Theory(Higgins, 1987) or the Theory of Social Comparison(L. Festinger, 1954). By: Laurigonzaleez

Can you please edit your post by signing with your Wikipedia username so we know who you are? Thank you! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:47, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The title of your post described very well what I recently thought of and was also inspiring to continue, it was a bit different though from what you¨ve just proposed. Very interesting idea to combine social and clinical psychology! “The biggest effects of negative expectancies are in already stigmatized groups and low economic incomes.” So, then the question appears: how do these people deal with this to not develop bad self esteem because of their social identity? Taking the example of age-stereotypes (incompetent, fragile, unproductive etc.), it is known (Weiss & Lang, 2012) that distancing oneself from one’s age-group is an effective means of coping with negative social identity. This leads me to thinking that this distancing might not only happen with the negative stereotypes lying behind older ages but other stereotypes as well. One explanation for this process of distancing oneself, is to preserve a positive-self-identity = better self esteem?

The Social identity theory by Tajfel and Turner (1986) suggests that individuals define their social identity based on their membership in a group, such as ethnic identity. The identification is only described with the positive aspects of a social group. If one is unfortunate to belong to a group that many people around one has a strong negative stereotype of, I could imagine that one could begin to distance oneself from this social identity due to otherwise the danger of developing a poorer self-esteem? Or maybe follow another, stronger, more salient identification with another social identity? And is this “solution” really effective to protect one¨s self-esteem long term? --Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 16:18, 7. Okt. 2023 (CEST)nikepaulina

Hello! I am thinking about writing a section about self-stereotyping, stereotype threat and self-fulfulling prophecy (OP 1.12) and their effects and distinctions. These phenomena of course have implications on one's self-perception and self-esteem. Some of our ideas sound very similar. Maybe we could talk about our ideas and coordinate in the next session. --Sschraml (Diskussion) 17:10, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

@Sschraml yes, it could indeed be very effective to discuss this a little bit further so that we know more precisely which article to write/improve within this larger topic. --Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 11:24, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes of course, we can discuss it tomorrow and put our ideas in common! --213.55.225.152 13:14, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Also include aaeeiioouu12345 in your discussion - see below the post on religious stereotypes! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:03, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi!

Sorry didn't realize I wasn't logged in

I don't know if it appears now --Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 13:19, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

You can sign by typing four times the following sign ~ which I do only once because otherwise I would sign here! :)

OK, so I understand that you would like to address the effect of a stereotype on the members of the stereotyped group. I assume that would like to do so in the English Wikipedia. Have you checked out the article on stereotypes, specifically the section on effects? See en:stereotypes$effects I think this article already contains some parts of what you're interested in. Could you make a concrete suggestion as to what to add, perhaps with less general references than Higgins / Festinger? We can talk about it in class. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 19:38, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Boomerang / Rebound Effect

I would like to add the following text about stereotypes to the “examples of applications” section of the article about the Boomerang effect (psychology):

“Several studies have researched the effects of sterotype suppression on stereotype apllication, hyperaccessability and behavior. Typically, participants had to write a short text about a person belonging to a certain group (e.g., a skinhead) and were either asked to avoid stereotypical descriptions or not given any instructions concerning stereotypes. In a later task, the participants were asked to write another text about a different preson belonging to the same group (e.g., another skinhead), but this time, none of the particpants were instructed not to use any stereotypes. It was found that people who had to actively suppress the stereotypes in the first task expressed more stereotypical thoughts in the second task than participants who were not asked to suppress their stereotypes in the first place. After the suppression, the stereotypical thoughts “rebounded”, which is why researchers also call this the “rebound effect” (i.e., the boomerang effect).

Stereotypes were not only found to rebound for targets belonging to the same group as the initially suppressed stereotypes (i.e., suppressing stereotypes about skinheads in the first task lead to using more stereotypes about skinheads in the second task) but also for different groups with different stereotypes (i.e., suppressing stereotypes about a male "chav" in the first task lead to using more stereotypes about teenage mothers in the second task).

Furthermore, the rebound effect was also found to influence behavior. In their experiment, Follenfant and Ric asked participants to suppress their stereotypes about elderly people while writing a short text about an elderly woman. After the writing task, the walking speed of the participants was messured and it was found that people who had previously suppressed their stereotypes walked slower than those who didn’t. In other words, the suppression of stereotypes about a certain group (e.g., elderly people) lead to a behavior stereotypically associated with said group (e.g., slow walking).

The rebound effect does not seem to be universal, however. Several studies have shown that the rebound effect is moderated by individual as well as cultural differences.

Monteith et al. studied individual differences in stereotype rebound after suppression and found that people who have a low-prejudice attitude towards a group have a smaller rebound effect after suppressing the stereotypes about said group than high-prejudice individuals. They suggest that low-prejudice individuals are as likely to have a stereotypical reaction as high-prejudice individuals, but that they are more motivated to avoid these reactions at all times, whereas high-prejudice individuals only suppress their stereotypical thoughts if they are situationally or socially pressured to do so. Therefore, as soon as they are not situationally motivated anymore (e.g., because the experimenter doesn’t tell them to suppress the stereotypes anymore), the stereotypical thoughts rebound.

Furthermore, Zhang and Hunt found that the rebound effect only occurs in certain cultures. They compared American and Chinese participants and observed that after the stereotype suppression, the stereotypical thoughts rebounded for American participants but not for Chinese participants. They suggest that this is due to differences between individualist and collectivist cultures but so far there is no evidence to support this claim.”

The article already features some explanations for the boomerang effect, however, neither of those match the ones described in the articles I mentioned above. Therefore I’m a little unsure if I should also add those explanations to my text. I’m also not sure if the text is a little too long and detailed since it’s only supposed to be an example of an application. Elyfa (Diskussion) 11:05, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The Wikipedia article you mention does not deal with the boomerang effect that you have in mind but rather with an effect from the literature on persuasion. I have two questions for you: Have you coordinated your efforts with JasminMoor as we discussed last week? Do you both want to work in the English Wikipedia? I thought your text would also fit nicely into the article on "Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie" that we're jointly creating. JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:58, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

We originally wanted to write about the same/similar topic (rebound effect) but in different wikipedia pages. Elyfa wanted to add it to the already existing page on the boomerang effect in psychology (in English), whereas I wanted to add it to our new page on "Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie" (in German). We only joined our literature research. Since you mentioned that Elyfa's original plan doesn't really work, however her text works for what I also intendend, we decided we could perhaps write a paragraph together. I have now added my proposal for this week (section 2.24), building up on Elyfa's proposal. --JasminMoor (Diskussion) 15:48, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes on Schizophrenia or DID?

I am one of the people who want to write an article about how the portrayal of psychological disorders in media (mainly movies) perpetrates stereotypes about them. Schizophrenia and DID are two of the psychological disorders that are on my mind, but I'm not sure which one to choose (I was thinking of these two as they are some of the most stigmatized psychological disorders and the misrepresentation in movies probably feed a lot into the stereotypes and stigma). I don't know if it's a good idea to write two shorter articles about each or just a long one about one of them. And also in regard to the movies I'm not quite sure how to go about it (how much do I need to know of the movie? Is it enough to just mention certain scenes that show a certain stereotype?). JessTheodore (Diskussion) 12:35, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Edit: The post above was just me wondering how I should write the article specifically about a mental disorder. Below you will see what the general idea of the group is:

We thought it might be interesting to write a bigger article about the perpetuation of stereotypes in media, with a focus on movies, since they have a lot of impact on people's views. This could be explored in an introductory part. Since we're multiple people, we thought it would make sense for each of us to write a subsection on a specific topic (for example mental illnesses, physical disabilities, gender, etc.) JessTheodore (Diskussion) 15:57, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I'm one of the people who would like to participate in this collaboration (perpetuation of stereotyes in media/movies). I was thinking of writing a subsection on racial stereotypes and/or the introduction segment to this articel --2001:8E0:207F:DA00:CDF8:3CFA:88C5:A010 16:31, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

sorry I wasn't logged in --> Amweiss17 --Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 16:33, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Edit: I would also participate here, I thought I could write a subsection about the portrayal of LGBTQ+ people, as I've stated somewhere further down the page. Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 13:01, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

It's good that you seem to be collaborating on stereotypes in the media. When you know the place where to make your contributions, please put the planned changes here with individual signatures, though! It should be clear which text is from which student.

As for the right place, have you had a look at the subsection on Role_in_art_and_culture in the English stereotype article? You could add a paragraph there dedicated to mental health stereotypes in the media. This should not be too long. It should not dominate the subsection. Alternatively, you could consider contributing to articles on specific disorders like schizophrenia or Schizophrenie. In your group, you could aim for changes to different articles (in English or in German) and still collaborate! Last time I also mentioned the possibility of adding to a more general article like Stigmatisierung_psychisch_Kranker. Finally, you could consider creating an entirely new article and then propose a title, structure and argue why it makes sense to put the planned content there rather than on existing pages! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:49, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think your idea is very good. However, I think it is important to create an article about the stigmatizations (public stigmatization, self-stigmatization) beforehand, since it is for the general population. I also think that it would not be necessary to use a specific movie, because then you would set the condition that the average reader has already seen this movie. --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 13:06, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hello! I think it's an important issue to raise awareness. While TV and movies encourage many thoughts and stereotypes, I think the one you are naming is especially important because it has a negative effect on the lives of people who already have enough problems to face. People must be more careful, and a good way is to make the subject known. I think that schizophrenia is a good topic to work on because it is the most used in movies and which people make fun of most without having the necessary knowledge. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 13:16, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I'm not sure if this is what you had in mind for your article but maybe instead of writing an article about the portrayal of either Schizophrenia or DID you could write one about the portrayal of psychological disorders in general and then add the specific disorders as examples. That way you could cover both disorders (or even additional ones) in a less specific article. --Elyfa (Diskussion) 15:01, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Activation and Application of Stereotypes

There are unintentional and intentional processes in thinking. There are automatic processes and controlled processes.

Automatic processes are those that occur without intention or conscious effort and do not interfere with other concurrent mental activities (cognitive processes such as thinking).

Controlled processes are said to occur when it is a deliberate process that is directed by a person's conscious control, requires a lot of effort, and occurs with full awareness.

Humans possess certain schemas, which are cognitive structures that contain pre-processed knowledge about objects or people of certain categories. These schemas shape our expectations about how these objects or groups should be defined. Humans therefore like to use the automatic processes because they take less time. We usually access the controlled processes only when we have the motivation as well as the time (S.109-S.111). Jonas K., Stroebe W., Hewstone M. (2014) Sozialpsychologie (6.Auflage).Springer.--Annina1705 (Diskussion) 12:44, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Maybe you could link this to the 2 phases of stereotyping as stipulated by Patricia Devine (1989).

1. Phase: automatic activation of Stereotypes based on culturally shared beliefs.

2. Phase: activation of personal beliefs that may go against the culturally shared beliefs. Depending on the availability of cognitive ressources these can be made to override the culturally shared beliefs in a controlled process.

You could also discuss that the strength of association between groups and attributed are different from invidivual to individual, meaning the activation of a stereotype is stronger or weaker depending on the individual. --Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 16:12, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Your contribution would be on the page Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie, right? Then it would be good to write your specific proposal what to add in German. Also, please consider that the concepts of stereotypes and schema will already be defined earlier in this article, so you could start directly with the question when and how stereotypes are activated / applied. Your idea to describe Devine's model is good, I think. Another useful source is this: Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, J. G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(4), 509–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.509 JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:55, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

chef´s stereotype

The other day in a family conversation a very interesting topic came up and I immediately remembered this course. Usually, when we talk about famous chefs, the first thing we think about is a manly and aggressive person. I think it might be a good idea to understand why this is happening, where this thought comes from and how it has permeated society so strongly. I did some research and did not find any articles on this subject on wikipedia, however, on other sites I read that chefs are clearly stereotyped. There are historical gender issues that started this stereotype and then television has enhanced it through its programs, affecting our vision of chefs and leading us to have a masculine and aggressive first impression of them.

Raising awareness of this issue can help some women and it can also help all of us in general to reflect on how the world of cooking works and look for ways to make it more open. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 13:02, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is really interesting! I myself never have thought about it, but the first person that came to my mind after reading the title of your post was Gordon Ramsay (which proves your point really well). In general I think this isn't something really talked about nor something you'd think of when the topic stereotypes is mentioned, so I think writing an article about this is a good idea! JessTheodore (Diskussion) 13:39, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This topic is very interesting and contemporary. I get completely that this specific profession is very gender-stereotyped. However, so are (most) other professions. Perhaps it would be interesting to relate the topic of professions in general to general stereotypes about men and women (like typical personality traits)? From this point on you could afterwards draw conclusions about stereotypes in the profession as a chef. --AleMeil (Diskussion) 15:23, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I love cooking so this whole topic is very interesting. I agree that certain professions are strongly-stereotyped. Interestingly enough the job of cooking for the family is typically seen as a womans job, while the profession of being a chef is a male dominated space.

So maybe looking into that dynamic would be interesting.

Also if you want to stay in the realm of food/cooking and stereotypes, maybe it would be interesting to have a cross cultural look at food and possible stereotypes. The eating of insects for instance that is often seen as unimaginable in western societies, while they are an integral part of other cultures diets. Or the controversies on the use of MSG in Asian cooking [4] --JPrueb (Diskussion) 15:55, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi, I agree with your input and i found a study that might be interesting in this regard: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0361684315577383 --Eweime (Diskussion) 10:40, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is an example of gender stereotypes like the ones we have discussed last week (surgeon/nurse), related to the proportion of men/women in certain jobs. It is certainly worth mentioning on a page like the one on Geschlechterrolle#Geschlechterstereotype. Would you like to have a look at this page and make a specific proposal for how to fit it in? JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:50, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I agree that this is really an interesting topic of stereotypes to look at! If you would still like to create an article on this, you can possibly look into and substantiate it with other stereotypes in the cooking profession as well, such as age or as mentioned by JPrueb, the stereotypes in the food itself. From this, you can at least discuss beyond just gender stereotypes. Alternatively, maybe we can work on an article regarding the stereotypes in different professions? Since I thought of creating an article on the stereotypes in sports. --Hanis Abdan (Diskussion) 16:27, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Cultivationhypothesis and mechanisms of action

I am part of the group that wants to write an articel on the perpetuation of stereotypes in movies. I have read the textbook chapter on "Medienvermittelte Stereotype und Vorurteile" by Magnus Appel as suggested by professor Ullrich. I think it would be a good idea to start with an introduction before getting into specific stereotypes perpetuated by movies (eg. gender, race, sexuality, abelism). I propose that we include a critical overview of the cultivation hypothesis by Gerbner et. al. as well as the mechanisms of availability and acessiblity that underlie the influence of stereotypes in media on recipients. I also think it would be important to give an overview how big or small the effects of media on stereotyped beliefs and even stereotyped behaviors are. I'd be grateful for any tips on how to go about the research of this points! Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 15:51, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The cultivation model seems like a relevant model. It would be good to draw on a specific source (it is discussed in many more recent secondary sources, which may be more useful than the original publication which is quite old and focused on television) to propose a concrete passage and a place where to add it! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 19:48, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stigma and Stereotypes

As already discussed under point 1.5 from week 1, I would like to revise the introduction accordingly. Here one could also, as already mentioned, make a more precise distinction between a stigma, a prejudice and a stereotype. I have a paper by Vanessa Poth "Der Umgang mit Stigmatisierung. Die Auswirkung eines Stigmas auf die Identität und den Selbstwert". There she also often quotes Erving Goffmann, although I would also refer to his book "Stigma" here. "Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker" by Georg Schomerus and Matthias C. Angermeyer also deals with this topic. The whole thing could then also be extended to the topic of social discrimination.--Leoniiie (Diskussion) 16:06, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I just saw that we are both working on the introduction part of the article, maybe we could discuss how we want to write it and create a rough outline of what we want to include in the introduction during class tomorrow :)! Since we both work on differentiating the concept of Stereotypes from others (in your case stigma and in my case prejudice)I feel like we already covered the two most important distinctions, but maybe we should/could add something about clichés, as the German wiki page on stereotypes does that? It might also be important to identify the terms that are connected to the topic of stereotypes, such as social discrimination, discrimination and social groups for example, and which of those we should define within our article and which can be mentioned without a definition. --Cmariams (Diskussion) 11:46, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Perfect, let's work together on it! Sorry I could not attend the meeting last week. I think the idea with the social groups may fit as well in the introduction part and may be useful...let's start with the definitions first - ok? :) --Leoniiie (Diskussion) 15:02, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think what you propose is very interesting but most of all useful as it is very easy to get confused between the terminology you mentioned. A careful distinction could lead to more clarity regarding the topic.

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 13:49, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I am glad that you and Cmariams will join forces to work on the Introduction and Definitions. As Degner (https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-60572-1) writes on P. 1 of her book: "In unserer Alltagssprache verwenden wir die Begriffe Vorurteil, Stereotyp, Ressentiment, Klischee, Stigma und Schubladendenken oft synonym." So for next time could you prepare a first specific suggestion in German of what we could add here Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 19:52, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes regarding LGBTQ+ in media

I am also a part of the group that would like to write an article about the perpetuation of stereotypes in movies. Originally, I thought I would write something related to mental illness, but I think two people doing that might be too much and we'd end up not covering enough important areas, so I would like to write about stereotypes about the LGBTQ+ community in movies. My minor is film science, and there is a chapter about the portrayal of LGBTQ+ characters in movies in one of our scripts, along with many examples, so that would maybe be useful additional information. Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 17:45, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think that would be a great Idea! It could also be interesting to see if the stereotyping and the portrayal of the LGBTQ+ community in movies or media in general has changed over the years. I have found a paper, which analyzes the representation of the LGBTQ+ community in media, maybe this analysis could be helpful for your article. https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=bridges_contemporary_connections. --Melebo (Diskussion) 18:28, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hey, that sounds like a great idea! I don't know if you're interested in working with audiovisual sources, but if so, "Disclosure" (2020) by Sam Federer is a good documentary about the representation of trans people in movies and tv series over the last few decades, so it could be a good source for your article. And if it turns out to be a very vast article and you need some help, I would be interested in contributing to it :) --Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 15:33, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

OK, why don't you have a look at this encylopedia entry: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1240. Please make a concrete suggestion of what to add and where (or if you want to create a new article). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 19:58, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Adding the paragraph about the stereotype content model

I would like to work on section 2.2 in our own article about stereotypes (Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie) and explain the stereotype content model. I think it is important to include it, as it is one of the most known models in social psychology regarding stereotypes. Melebo (Diskussion) 18:18, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

@Melebo regarding this i have a question. There is a very good article on wikipedia to this. I compared it to the original paper by Fiske and came to the conclusion that it does not make sense to improve this article on Wikipedia. This leads me to the question: if we just add something into our article "Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie" for example to this model(or another one), that already has a good article on wikipedia, does this really count as an improvement? would it be enough to summarize this article/model/theory into easier words and put it into our article and thats it?

Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 11:32, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)nikepaulina

OK! A first step might be to consult the German textbook on this:

Spears, R., Tausch, N. (2023). Vorurteile und Intergruppenbeziehungen. In: Ullrich, J., Stroebe, W., Hewstone, M. (eds) Sozialpsychologie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-65297-8_14

Then read the article by Koch et al. (2021, see OLAT) where the stereotype content model is discussed in the context of related models!

@Nikepaulina: You are right, there is an article on the English Wikipedia (en:Stereotype_content_model, but the idea would be to add to the German article, right? I think this could be a job for two people each making a "significant improvement"! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:09, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes in Sports

I initially thought of adding to the ‘Role in art and culture’ section under the stereotype article in the English wikipedia, particularly in the ‘Role in sports’ subsection. However, I realised there hasn’t been an article specifically on stereotypes in sports (there has only been an article describing the differential treatment between male and female athletes — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogyny_in_sports) and I think it is worth starting one that would be more encompassing of the sporting scene, since the sports culture is important and expanding in today’s society. The article could look into multiple stereotypes such as gender and disabilities, the different sports with more pronounced stereotypes such as gymnastics and football, as well as the media portrayal of such stereotypes.

Additionally, this could also be added into an overarching article on stereotypes of professions (if anyone wants to work on this), which was suggested by AleMeil, and the section on sports could focus on stereotypes among athletes. --Hanis Abdan (Diskussion) 19:16, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Can you find scientific articles about this that would be consistent with our definition of stereotypes (rather than prejudice or discrimination)? I am certainly open to your suggestion but not sure if you will find much! Perhaps weigh the pros and cons of going further in this direction rather than sticking to your original idea. We could talk about this in class tomorrow! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:14, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The teacher recommends to you to write something or add something in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role. In the third paragraph of the second tile ¨Backgrung¨, the article brings up the theme of sport. When I read it, I felt something was missing, it's just mentioned as an example, but I feel there's a lot more that could be added on this. Maybe to start you can add interesting information to that part of the wikipedia page and then, from there, specify more. I think it has a lot of potential to look better if it fixes up a little bit and it's just about your subject!--Camcar27 (Diskussion) 07:53, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Agency-Beliefs-Communion Model

Although the English Wikipedia article mentioned warmth and competence (Dimensional Compensation Model) I noticed that there wasn't any information about the ABC model (Koch et al., 2016) of spontaneous stereotypes. I thought it would be a nice addition to talk about this model and how it adds to the previous model, particularly in terms of self-identity and perceived similarity. This would most likely be under stereotype content. *81.6.40.224 19:42, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST) *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 11:47, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Can you please edit your post by signing with your Wikipedia username so we know who you are? Thank you! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:35, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes! Sorry about that *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 11:47, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

OK, I thought you might have been Alex Koch trying to promote his model here! :) Perhaps you want to talk to Melebo and Nikepaulina who would like to work on the Stereotype Content Model (see Benutzer_Diskussion:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie#Adding_the_paragraph_about_the_stereotype_content_model) and will also read the article by Koch et al. (2021, OLAT) which talks about all the relevant models in this area. You are welcome to propose a paragraph on the ABC model for the article on en:Stereotypes, and maybe also create a mutual link between this article and the article en:Stereotype_content_model? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:21, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Self-Stigmatization of ADHD

Last week I mentioned that I would like to add an article or a chapter about ADHD stereotypes to the German Wikipedia. I researched a little bit about stereotypes related to ADHD and found an interesting article talking about stigmatization, more specifically self-stigmatization of people with ADHD. I'm aware that Stigma and Stereotype aren't synonymous, but I still feel like this could maybe be an interesting sub-chapter in my proposed article about ADHD stereotypes, as it displays a part of the consequences of the (predominantly negative) stereotypes associated with ADHD. Though it would also be interesting to add a sub-chapter about positive stereotypes related to ADHD. I think a chapter like that would fit well into the article about Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung or Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker This is the article I found: [5]

I felt like this could be an interesting topic to start with. I'm just not sure if it's a close enough topic to stereotypes to be relevant to this seminar. Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 22:15, 9. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think this is a good start, and I think the topic is close enough to fit into our topic.

Additionally, maybe it would be interesting to look into the history of adhd and figure out why these stereotypes exist in the first place. --Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 16:59, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The article you mentioned seems relevant and the places you suggested where some editing could be done make sense (also to add mutual links between these pages, and later on when it's published also to our page Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie. You could also talk to Cmariams and Leoniiie who want to work on the distinction between stigma and stereotypes (see above)! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 07:46, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stability and Change of Stereotypes

In my article on stability and change of stereotypes, I would like to include the results of the Eagaly et. al meta-analysis to show how gender stereotypes change over time. It might be interesting to further underscore the changeability of stereotypes with another study on different stereotypes. What would also be interesting to consider is the degree of change or stability of stereotypes within an individual. In this regard, however, I have a question: Are stereotypes of an individual that are not stable over a period of time stereotypes at all, if they are by definition described as stable over time? --Eweime (Diskussion) 10:03, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

@Eweime in the definition we got, it only says that a stereotype is a "cognitive knowledge structure that links concepts..." and is "associated with social structures". so by gaining more knowledge, this could probably expand the "knowledge-structures" and change the stereotype?

where did you see that they have to be stable over time?

Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 11:51, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)nikepaulina

I think this is interesting! Maybe stereotypes have varying degrees of stability based on the extent to which they believe and see the stereotype (individual experience, media, close friends or family making comments about the stereotypes, school environment etc). I think that with some stereotypes people may acknowledge them and are willing to change them whilst some are too strong to be changed. It would be interesting to see the mechanisms as to why this is the case. What makes a stereotype stronger than others and what makes them more fluid. Below is a link that you may find useful: "It has been shown that the stereotypical categorisation of people into different groups is fluid and dependent on the context of comparisons." https://www.mdpi.com/2504-2289/6/2/50 *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 12:10, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi Eweime. In regard to your question, since we are basing our research and articles on the definitions of stereotypes provided by Hewstone & Stroebe (2020) and Ullrich et al. (2023), as presented in the syllabus, I do not think it implies that stereotypes are rigid (meaning unchangeable) by definition. As pointed out in the study by Eagly and her colleagues, different aspects of gender stereotypes evolve differently over time (a 73-year gap), which should advocate for a dynamic conception of stereotypes (at least on a "phylogenetic" scale).. Furthermore, as I quickly went through the article by Eagly and her colleagues, I discovered the notion of "dynamic stereotypes," which might interest you. In their study, Diekman et al. (2000), from where this concept originates, describe how stereotypes about a group evolve over the years in relation to the assumptions of social role theory (It is still a between-subject design and not a within-subject design, however)..--Gg179 (Diskussion) 12:31, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Although it's not explicitly stated in the definition, you are right that stereotypes are relatively stable. If we had to form new beliefs about a group everyday from scratch, there would be no efficiency gain from stereotypes. However, as Gg179 pointed out, cultural evolution takes place over longer time spans (e.g. generations) so change is possible. Social role theory is helpful for understanding this change, see also this short article https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211013775. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:05, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hewstone & Stroebe (2020): "[A stereotyp is] a specific form of schema that includes characteristics that are associated with social" categories .

Hip Hop Stereotypes and its consequences

I found an interesting study on the correlation of Sexual Stereotypes in Rap Music Videos and the Health of African American Female Adolescents. It shows the very real impact of the Stereotypes. That is why I want to propose its addition to the Hip-Hop Stereotype Wikipage [6]. I want to rewrite the whole Hip-Hop Section, but for now I want to add the study I named beforehand into the existing page. "The mentioned over-sexualization of African-American women in Rap music videos has real life implciations, with Adolescent African-American women, who perceived more sexual stereotypes in music videos are more likely to binge drink, test positive for marijuana and have a negative body image." This would be my proposed addition for the first part.--JPrueb (Diskussion) 10:37, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think it would be also interesting to mention the other predominant stereotypes in rap music for instance materialism, violence, drug use, gang affiliation, lack of intelligence/ low education level etc.

ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 17:17, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I would edit your proposal as follows:"Over-sexualization of African-American women in Rap music videos may have health implications for viewers of such videos. In a survey study, adolescent African-American women watching Rap videos and perceving them to contain more sexual stereotypes were more likely to binge drink, test positive for marijuana and have a negative body image."

In other words, I acknowledge the causal uncertainty associated with correlational studies. Would you like to build on this an suggest how you would edit the whole hip-hop section? Something to keep in mind, though, is that the focus of the current section on Hip-Hop is American mainstream hip-hop. Perhaps you want to have a look into this article, which gives a broader perspective on hip-hop studies: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/jhhs/vol6/iss2/7/. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:33, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Introduction / Definition

My suggestion for this week would be to write some of the introduction, where we define “stereotype” and clearly differentiate stereotypes as a concept from “similar” ones such as stigma, prejudice (or “Klischee” and “Vorurteil” on the german page). Since I’m going to work on the German page I’m going to insert my first draft in German but please feel free to translate it and/or add suggestions in English or in German if you have ideas for improvements! :) In this draft here I focused on the differentiation between prejudice and stereotype, as Juliane Degner defined it in her book, as I saw that someone is researching the differentiation between stigma and stereotypes already. I tried to grasp Degners differentiation of the two constructs as well as I could (she talks about differentiation prejudice and Stereotypes on Page 10 of her book) but feel like my draft could still be improved as I was rather confused myself, so I’d appreciate some help:)

«Nach der Sozialpsychologin Juliane Degner werden Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie und in der Alltagssprache unterschiedlich definiert. Nach der Definition, welche zum Zeitpunkt von Degners Buch (September 2021) auf Wikipedia zu finden war definieren sich Vorurteile dadurch, dass sie leicht veränderbar sind, da sie das Ergebnis einer umfassenden Abwägung und Untersuchung von Informationen sind. Die nachhaltige Veränderung von solchen Wissensstrukturen wird in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung rund um Stereotype und Vorurteile oft untersucht, und Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass diesem Umdenken ein weit komplexeres Vorgehen als nur das Sammeln und Abwägen von Informationen unterliegt. Der bestehende Wikipedia Artikel zu Stereotypen befasst sich also mit einer eher Alltagssprachliche Definition des Begriffs. Dieser Artikel soll eine Definition, welche für die sozialpsychologische Forschung relevant ist, aufzeigen. Vorurteile und Stereotype gelten in der Sozialpsychologie als zwei differenzierbare Aspekte von Einstellungen gegenüber sozialen Gruppen. In der sozialpsychologischen Forschung werden sowohl Vorurteile wie auch Stereotype dadurch definiert, dass das gefällte Urteil ausschliesslich auf der Zugehörigkeit zu sozialen Kategorien beruht, während die individuellen Eigenschaften der Person aussenvor gelassen werden. Der Begriff Stereotyp definiert sich in der Sozialpsychologie als alle Informationen und Überzeugungen, welche eine Person bezogen auf verschiedene soziale Kategorien abgespeichert hat. Dieses Zusammenhängende Wissen über Merkmale und Eigenschaften von sozialen Gruppen und somit ihren Mitgliedern bildet also eine generalisierte Eigenschaftszuschreibung zu den sozialen Kategorien. Dabei spielt es keine Rolle, ob die Information ein äusserliches oder innerliches Merkmal beschreibt. Die Wertung oder Richtigkeit der Information spielt ebenso keine Rolle. Abgrenzen lässt sich der Begriff Stereotyp zum Begriff Vorurteil in der Sozialpsychologie dadurch, dass bei Vorurteilen die emotionale Reaktion auf die Gruppenbewertung gewichtet wird. Diese kann sowohl positiv wie auch negativ ausfallen. »

--Cmariams (Diskussion) 11:34, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi! I love the draft! I would however suggest that you leave out the part concerning the other Wikipedia article since it might be understood as a critique about it's factuality. Maybe go about it differently by just saying what this (our) article's aim is and refer to the other article by saying: "Für eine mehr alltagssprachliche Definition siehe Stereotype". I would also encourage to use paragraphs or headers/titles whenever it feels appropriate. The contents of your text however are excellent in my opinion. I love that you offer information about how we differentiate between prejudice and stereotypes! Kind regards --RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 13:48, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hey! I think this is a very well written excerpt which can also be easily understood by a layperson! The only thing I would probably change is that I'd start of with a concise definition, though I see how this is difficult given the need to make a differentiation between our stereotype article and the current wiki article about stereotypes. Maybe we can discuss this further tomorrow? Also, as discussed, I would follow up the introduction part you delineated with the following excerpt about the prescriptive vs. descriptive stereotypes difference:

"Stereotype können in deskriptive und präskriptive Stereotype unterteilt werden. Deskriptive Stereotype beschreiben welche Eigenschaften und Verhaltensweisen einer Gruppe zugeschrieben werden, präskriptive Stereotype beschreiben Verhaltensweisen, die von einer Gruppe erwartet werden, wobei das Nichtausführen dieser vorgeschriebenen Verhaltensweise negative Konsequenzen mit sich zieht. Wenn Frauen beispielsweise das präskriptive Stereotyp, sich submissiv zu verhalten, nicht einhalten, werden ihnen negative Charakteristika wie Unfreundlichkeit zugeschrieben. Während nicht alle stereotypisierten Gruppen von präskriptiven Stereotypen betroffen sind, konnten präskriptive Stereotype im Zusammenhang mit Geschlechtstereotypen, Altersstereotypen und Ethnische Stereotype nachgewiesen werden."

Unfortunately I couldn't find any articles which specified why some stereotyped groups are affected solely by descriptive stereotypes, while others are also affected by prescriptive stereotypes. I assume it's about the content of the stereotypes, wherein if a group is exclusively affected by a stereotypical characterizations which is seen as negative, there will be no prescriptive stereotypes for that group, whereas groups who are affected by ambivalent or even positive/"benevolent" stereotypes are affected by prescriptive stereotypes. So I'm wondering if we could add this as a hypothetical explanation (something like "Eine mögliche Erklärung wäre...") or if that is not fine by Wikipedia standards? --Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 15:25, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is a good start! I agree with RoKebWiki that you should completely leave out the longish passage about the other article. As for a definition to start off, why don't you go like: "In der Sozialpsychologie wird ein Stereotyp definiert als "ein spezifisches Schema, das die Charakteristika, die mit einer sozialen Kategorie assoziiert werden, umfasst." and cite p. 598 in https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-65297-8. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:51, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Social media stereotypes

In my article on stereotypes on social media, I would like to mention the following points: Identify what stereotypes exist on social media and how they manifest themselves in different forms( foe example “blogger stereotype” - a person who doesn’t work at all, just makes a couple of videos and gets paid for it, it’s very lazy and anyone can do it) ;Discuss common stereotypes associated with various social media platforms (e.g., Instagram, Facebook, TikTok).(I found the following articles interesting and I would be interested in using them : The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly , Andrea M Mesiti, Heather L Yeo; Online Stigma Resistance in the Pro-Ana Community , Daphna Yeshua-Katz) Mention the impact of these stereotypes on the individual and society. But it also seems to me quite important to add a little introduction, for example: In today's digital age, social media platforms have become more than just a means of communication, they have become “mirrors” reflecting the complexities of our society. Social media platforms serve as the canvas on which we paint our personalities, aspirations, and vulnerabilities. However, from this platform of interaction with others, an important and troubling phenomenon emerges: stereotypes on social media that spread and take root, shaping our understanding of ourselves, each other, while simultaneously shaping and reflecting our collective perceptions, attitudes and prejudices. These stereotypes often take many forms, from carefully crafted images of ideal lives to the perpetuation of harmful prejudices, from the portrayal of gender ideals to the reinforcement of cultural and racial biases.It reaches beyond our screens and into our psyches, affecting our self-esteem, mental health and ultimately our society. Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) (ohne (gültigen) Zeitstempel signierter Beitrag von Yeliz.proko (Diskussion | Beiträge) 11:42, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST))

Overall I like this idea a lot. In your introduction paragraph you make several claims about social media, however there are no sources to back them up. It sounds more like a think piece rather than a scientifically researched paragraph. Try to rewrite it with more scientific evidence rather than opinions/thoughts and don't forget to add your sources. --JasminMoor (Diskussion) 16:16, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I agree with JasminMoor that what you write reads well but does not conform to the more factual Wikipedia style (it is more of an essay style). Perhaps you can find more sources like the one you mentioned? Furthermore, instead of creating a new article, consider adding your points here: en:Social_media#Stereotyping. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:00, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The neural basis of stereotyping

I would like to add a paragraph or section (to be defined) to the English and German articles, describing the current state of knowledge regarding cortical structures underlying stereotyping based on David Amodio's work in the field of social neuroscience. I think that adding a neuroscientific perspective to our work is of interest, as it hasn't been addressed yet in our discussion or in the current Wikipedia entries.--Gg179 (Diskussion) 13:29, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Please go ahead and make proposals for how to add insights from Amodio's review articles to the Wikipedia articles on stereotypes. For the German one, I think it could be useful to create a new section (e.g., "Neuropsychologische Grundlagen"), but neurosciene findings could also (briefly) mentioned in the section on activation and application or intervention (saying which networks are involved in the regulation), and even (very briefly) in the Introduction where the concept of stereotypes will be differentiated from the concept of prejudice. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:09, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I have identified two articles that could provide more information on this topic:

• David M. Amodio (2014): The Neuroscience of Prejudice and Stereotyping.
• David M. Amodio & Mina Cikara (2021): The Social Neuroscience of Prejudice.

Hi! I think it is a very interesting topic, however I am not quite sure if it fits best into our artical "Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie" as it rather falls into the field of neuroscience. I also wouldn't know in which section of the index this topic would fit the best. Have you thought of maybe creating a new article that deals with the cortical structures underlying stereotypes? --Ldegio (Diskussion) 14:26, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

While I agree with the person that already answered (that it might be a bit too far from social psychology) on one hand, I do feel like this would be a unique topic that could offer a different perspective to social psychology. I personally feel like this is a very relevant and important part of the science and it would be a great addition to the Stereotypes Wikipedia page. I think it's the perfect mix of social sciences and neuroscience! Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 15:13, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Paragraph about the role of heuristics - Follow-Up

Since the feedback from last week I have now familiarized myself with the scholarly context of heuristics as a process in stereotype formation and maintenance. Based on what I've learned I came up with a rough draft:

"In der Forschung darüber, wie Stereotype entstehen und aufrechterhalten werden, wird grösstenteils davon ausgegangen, dass Urteilsbildung und Verhalten in sozialen Kontexten durch zwei sozial kognitive Prozessarten bestimmt wird: automatische (unbewusste) und kontrollierte (bewusste) Prozesse. Automatische Prozesse sind energieeffizient und finden unbewusst statt. Weitgehend wird davon ausgegangen, dass Stereotypisierung hauptsächlich ein automatischer Prozess ist. Kontrollierte Prozesse sind bewusst, kosten Energie und benötigen Bewusstheit – Aufmerksamkeit. Diese beiden Prozessarten werden in der Forschung gängig in den dualen Verarbeitungstheorien verortet. Menschen tendieren dazu, Heuristiken zu verwenden in sozialen Kontexten . Heuristiken gehören zu den automatischen Prozessen und kommen besonders dann zum Einsatz, wenn Effizienz gefragt ist, die Person kognitiv ausgelastet ist, oder einfach nur ein schnelles Urteil in einem sozialen Kontext gebildet werden soll. Heuristiken sind Faustregeln über unsere Umwelt, welche uns eine schnelle effektive Urteilsbildung erlauben, welche jedoch nicht besonders akkurat sind.

Stereotype können Menschen als Heuristiken dienen, aber auch durch solche entstehen. Ein anschauliches Beispiel ist die Verfügbarkeitsheuristik. Verfügbarkeitsheuristiken sind mentale Abkürzungen, welche Informationen über die Häufigkeit oder Wahrscheinlichkeit eines bestimmten Ereignisses liefern. Verfügbarkeit bedeutet in diesem Kontext, wie leicht es einer Person fällt Informationen über ein Ereignis abzurufen. Die Leichtigkeit mit der Informationen abgerufen werden kann, hängt von verschiedenen Faktoren ab, so zum Beispiel davon wie häufig wir glauben, dass ein Ereignis vorkommt oder davon ob unser Zugang zu relevanten Ereignissen mehr oder weniger Aufwand erfordert (Gefühl leichteren Zugangs zu Beispielen aus unserem Gedächtnis). Forschung zu Stereotypen in den 70er Jahren fand, dass Menschen dazu tendieren, extreme Ereignisse (Individuen, Handlungen, etc.) aus einer Gruppe von Ereignissen besser zu erinnern als weniger extreme – sie sind leichter abzurufen, also «verfügbarer». Wenn wir also einer Gruppe von Individuen begegnen, werden wir im Nachhinein die extremen Beispiele dieser Gruppe als repräsentativ empfinden. So können wiederum Stereotype entstehen und aufrechterhalten werden ."

I would appreciate constructive comments about formulation, citations, clarity etc.! RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 13:32, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This looks quite professional already! :) Good that you already included the citations - others can go to your sourcecode to see how you created these citations for different types of sources.

One thing that you might want to consider is to link a little bit more to other Wikipedia articles. It should not be excessive, but two or three further links would help you to shorten the text. For example, after you link to Verfügbarkeitsheuristik, you do not need to provide a definition. The definition will pop up when you move the mouse on the link. Similarly, the distinction between automatic and controlled processes will probably be mentioned in the Introduction of the article, so you could assume that readers have a basic understanding of these processes when they get to read your text. For the moment (with the Introduction not yet existing) a link would also do.

About the word "verfügbar" - this is the translation of "available", but "leichter abzurufen" I would associate with being "zugänglicher" (more "accessible"). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:24, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Intervention

The systematic review I mentioned last week examined implicit biases in prejudices and stereotypes. In fact, there were only three articles that looked exclusively at interventions for implicit stereotypes. Of these, three interventions were successful. The method of measurement was the IAT or similar procedures. I wonder if it is better to look for interventions on specific stereotypes, for example, gender stereotypes or age stereotypes. In addition, I have noticed interventions for stereotype threat in my research. There is a new meta-analytic review that examines these . The results, for example the practical implications, would also be an addition to the already existing Wikipedia article Bedrohung durch Stereotype. --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 14:24, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

You could improve both articles! For our article, it would still be valuable to learn how implicit stereotyping can be reduced in the section on interventions, even if you have found only few studies on the topic so far. Have you looked up other articles, especially by Lai, as I suggested last week? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:29, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

examples of stereotypes

Last week I proposed to write an article on stereotypes surrounding sex, specifically concerning the role they play in dIscrimination and social injustice toward trans individuals.

It was suggested that I implement an existing article rather than create a new one.

I was wondering whether perhaps it might not be better to include the topic in the subchapter "2.1 Besipiele für Stereotype." Would that work?

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 13:54, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

That would be an option. However, the page Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie is in German. Do you want to work on the German page? We can discuss this today. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:32, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotype suppression / rebound effect

I would like to expand the text written by Elyfa on the boomerang/rebound effect. I want to go into more detail on the behavioral consequences of the effect. Macrae et al. (1994) found that participants who were instructed to suppress their stereotypes on skinhead were more prone to sit further away from a skinhead than the control group. As Elyfa mentioned, Follenfant & Ric (2010) have found that people who suppressed stereotypes on elderly people were walking slower, however they also found that suppression of stereotypes about sportsmen, who were thought to be typically bad at math, resulted in a worse performance on a maths test. Since I want to add this to our German article “Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie” I have come up with the following text:

“Der rebound effect hat jedoch nicht nur einen Einfluss auf die Gedankengänge einer Person, sondern kann sogar ihr Verhalten beeinflussen. So waren Personen, die zuvor die Stereotype über einen Skinhead unterdrücken mussten, weniger dazu bereit, sich diesem zu nähern. In einer anderen Studie fand man heraus, dass Personen, die Stereotype über Sportler unterdrückten, später schlechter in einem Mathematiktest abschnitten. Der Grund dafür war, dass schlechte Mathematikkenntnisse stereotypisch für Sportler seien. In derselben Studie wurde auch untersucht, dass Personen, die Altersstereotype unterdrückten, nach der Aufgabe langsamer liefen, da sie Alter u.a. mit langsamen Gehen assoziierten.

Während sich in der ersten Studie das Verhalten gegenüber der Person, auf die die Stereotype angewandt wurden, veränderte, haben in der zweiten Studie die Teilnehmenden das stereotype Verhalten selbst übernommen.”

I am also considering adding a paragraph to explain why this rebound effect happens. Wegner & Erber (1992) created a model explaining the phenomenon of why suppressed thoughts can rebound. This model was also used as an explanation by Macrae et al. (1994). In simple terms, there are two processes involved: a controlled one and an automatic one. The automatic process is looking for the thought that is supposed to be suppressed. If found, the controlled process then tries to get rid of the thought by finding a distractor. The problem is that since the automatic process is activated, people are sensitive to the thought they are supposed to suppress. A possible wording for this could be:

“Eine mögliche Erklärung für diesen Effekt liefert das Modell der Gedankenkontrolle von Wegner & Erber (1992). Nach diesem Modell sind gleichzeitig zwei Prozesse aktiv, ein automatischer und ein kontrollierter. Der automatische Prozess sucht den zu unterdrückenden Gedanken, während der kontrollierte Prozess diesen dann tatsächlich unterdrückt. Weil jedoch der automatische Prozess immer aktiv nach diesem Gedanken sucht, ist dieser der Person ständig unterbewusst präsent und kann so bei Beendung des kontrollierten Prozesses einfacher hervortreten.”

--JasminMoor (Diskussion) 15:40, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I am a little bit concerned that the effect observed by Follenfant & Ric (2010) might not replicate, as it is similar to the elderly priming study by Bargh et al. (1996), see https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/failed-replication-bargh-psychology-study-doyen. Rather than first mentioning the study and then mentioning the doubts, perhaps it would be better if you focused on the explanation of the rebound effect. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:43, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Consequences of Stereotypes

I mentioned in week 1 (chapter 1.21), that I would like to talk about the shooter bias in the topic "Konsequenzen". I found two sources that seem to link the shooter bias to stereotypes:

• Correll J., Park B., Judd C. M., Wittenbrink B. (2007). The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1102-1117.

• Kahn K. B., Davies P. G. (2011). Differentially dangerous? Phenotypic racial stereotypicality increases implicit bias among ingroup and outgroup members. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14, 569-580.

Furthermore, I think that it could be very interesting and useful to mention the consequences that ethnic and/or gender stereotypes can have in job application situations or in the academic environment. I found two sources on these topics:

• Dahl, M., & Krog, N. (2018). Experimental evidence of discrimination in the labour market: intersections between ethnicity, gender, and socio-economic status. European Sociological Review, 34(4), 402-417.

• Eaton, A. A., Saunders, J. F., Jacobson, R. K., & West, K. (2020). How gender and race stereotypes impact the advancement of scholars in STEM: Professors’ biased evaluations of physics and biology post-doctoral candidates. Sex Roles, 82, 127-141.

--Ldegio (Diskussion) 15:45, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

All of these sources seem relevant. A relevant research in the area of discrimination in job/housing markets is Didier Ruedin. For example, have a look at https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279 and also https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12547. You could create two subsections in the "consequences" section to describe shooter bias and employment discrimination! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:52, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Religious Stereotypes

Last Week I proposed to write an article on religious stereotypes. I stumbled upon a paper which talks about Stereotypes about Christians and how these stereotypes affect the academic success in science for christians. Quoted from the Abstract of said paper: „ Our studies show that stereotypes about Christians being less competent in science than other groups are recognized by both Christians and non-Christians and are openly endorsed by non-Christians (Study 1). Our studies further demonstrate that when these stereotypes become salient, Christians are less interested in and identified with science (Study 2) and underperform on science-relevant tasks (Studies 3–5), compared to non-Christians. Even subtle contextual cues that bear more or less relevance to science are sufficient to compromise Christians’ scientific task performance, particularly among the highly religious (Study 5). When these stereotypes are explicitly removed, however, performance differences between Christians and non-Christians disappear.“ [[7]] I thought this was something that could be mentioned on how religious stereotypes can be internalised and lead to a self fulfilling prophecy.--Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 16:32, 10. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think that's a good idea. It would certainly be exciting to look at other religions as well. One could also examine the consequences of religious stereotypes more closely. Here is an article on this topic that I found very interesting: Impact of Islamic Religion Stereotypes on the Status of Women | East African Journal of Arts and Social Sciences (eanso.org) --Diodx (Diskussion) 10:07, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Here's a suggestion: Why don't you team up with SSchraml and Nikepaulina who want to cover stereotype threat (see above) and include the study you mentioned both in the examples and the consequences section! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:04, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes against people with disabilities

Almost forgot about my update but here it is: As I mentioned last week I would like to work on the German article Handicapism. The article is partially redundant with the Behindertenfeindlichkeit and Ableismus articles, so I've been looking into the discussion to see how to improve the articles and possibly resolve the redundancy. Also a problem seems to me the literature used, as it is a bit older. Therefore, an update on the impact of stereotypes on the lives of people with disabilities would be much needed. I also joined the group that looks more closely at portrayals of stereotypes in films. There I plan to write a part by discussing the problematic way people with disabilities are represented in the media today. Diodx (Diskussion) 09:55, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Good that you have identified places where to add your content. Now you need to come up with good sources! Here's a short chapter to get started: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-476-05738-9_43. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:08, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Overcoming Stereotypes

My proposal to improve the section activation and application would be as follows: „Das Kontinuummodell der Eindrucksbildung (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990) geht davon aus, dass die Wahrnehmung von Individuen von Stereotypen beeinflusst werden kann. Laut dem Modell sortieren Menschen eine Person, die sie beurteilen möchten, zunächst in eine bestimmte Kategorie (z.B. Mann oder Frau) ein und prüfen, ob das Wissen über diese Kategorie (d.h. das Stereotyp) mit der Beobachtung stimmig ist. Erst wenn die Kategorie nicht zu passen scheint und auch weitere in Erwägung gezogene Kategorien nicht passen, werden persönliche Eigenschaften einer Person genau analysiert und somit eigene stereotypische Denkmuster genauer durchdacht. Eine wichtige Rolle in diesem Prozess spielen gemäss Fiske und Neuberg (1990, S. 3-6) motivationale Faktoren . Insbesondere das erwünschte Ziel der Interaktion sowie die Aufmerksamkeit und Interpretationen seitens des Wahrnehmenden gegenüber Eigenschaften der anderen Person, beeinflussen die Eindrucksbildung. Zudem stellt die Relevanz des Gegenübers (oder dessen Handlungen) für die eigene Person ein wichtiger motivationaler Faktor dar, um sich einen genaueren Eindruck zu verschaffen “ --AleMeil (Diskussion) 16:22, 11. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think your paragraph is great because it condenses the relevant information about the model in a comprehensive and concise manner. However, as I recall from the social psychology class, there are more prerequisites that must be met for the shift from a category-based to an individual response to occur: (1) The person needs to be motivated to do so (as you explain in your text). (2) The person needs to possess the necessary resources to go further into impression formation. (3) She needs to pay attention. (4) To a certain extent, she should be aware of her stereotypical thoughts. As in An Introduction to Social Psychology descriebed "[...] movement along the continuum, form category-based to individuated reponses, is a function of interpretational, motivational and attentional factors.". So, it might be interesting to include points 2 to 4 in your text if you find them relevant. --Gg179 (Diskussion) 12:37, 17. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I agree with the proposal to include the points 2-4. I think in your paragraph a concrete example of motivational factors is missing. After the sentence:

"Eine wichtige Rolle in diesem Prozess spielen gemäss Fiske und Neuberg (1990, S. 3-6) motivationale Faktoren".

for the reader is not clear if the following sentence refers to the motivational factors or explains other factors.

"Insbesondere das erwünschte Ziel der Interaktion sowie die Aufmerksamkeit und Interpretationen seitens des Wahrnehmenden gegenüber Eigenschaften der anderen Person, beeinflussen die Eindrucksbildung".

Maybe you could write it more precisely what are the motivational factors and then explain the interpretational and attentional factors. --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 11:33, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I agree with the suggestions made by Gg179 and Joanthan.I2023: You mention that certain factors play a role, but it remains unclear how they influence the individuating process. You can present these factors by saying directly what motivates (or prevents) piecemeal perception. Please talk to Annina1705 who will work in the same section (on Devine's model). After that, your piece should be ready for publication. Finally, consider adding a hyperlink to the Wikipedia article on the main author Susan Fiske. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:52, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Improving the article "Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker"

I have mentioned wanting to write about stereotypes about mental illness, and it has been suggested that I could improve this article, as it is very short. Someone also recommended me the paper by Schomerus (2011), which we looked at in clinical psychology class. I found some information on what can be done against stigma, which is still missing in the Wikipedia article. I suggest the following addition: "In den letzten Jahren sind zunehmend Projekte gegen die Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker aktiv geworden. Initiativen von und mit Betroffenen haben grundsätzlich Vorzüge gegenüber Initiativen von Aussenstehenden, da diese das höchste Mass and Glaubwürdigkeit und Authentizität besitzen. Auch kann die Autonomie der Betroffenen so besser beibehalten bleiben. Die Strategie, die am besten belegt ist, ist persönlicher Kontakt mit Betroffenen. Einem psychisch kranken Menschen zu begegnen und dessen Lebensgeschichte zu hören, kann die Ablehnung und das Bedürfnis nach Abgrenzung reduzieren. Entscheidend ist dabei jedoch, dass diese Kontakte auf Augenhöhe stattfinden." Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 14:58, 16. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi! This is very important topic that you want to write about. I like the content of your Text, but in my opinion the term "psychisch Kranker" would be not the best option to use. It reduces someone to his/her mental illness, instead of the mental illness being just a part of someone. Therefore it would maybe be better to refer to "Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung". --AleMeil (Diskussion) 08:27, 17. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I have actually also thought about that, I just took the term from the title of the article for now. I agree that it should be changed, but I think that the same term should be used every time, so we'd have to change it every time it comes up in the article. --Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 15:41, 17. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

In principle, you could check the discussion page of a Wikipedia article to see what others have thought about the title and also make suggestions. However, there is a more general standard for Wikipedia which regards the generic masculine, see for example this discussion: Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Geschlechtergerechte Sprache#Ergebnis --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:00, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think the text you have written so far is very good! Maybe you could consider supporting it with another source, for example the following meta analysis by Pettigrew and Tropp that we talked about in the social psychology class:

Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751

They researched the intergroup contact theory and found that intergroup contact typically reduces prejudice. They tested the theory for different groups, including mentally ill people, so their results would reinforce what you already wrote in your text. --Elyfa (Diskussion) 09:46, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This would be a valuable addition to the article Stigmatisierung_psychisch_Kranker. As Elyfa suggested, the link to Intergroup Contact and the meta-analysis could be made more explicit. However, I would like you to pay close attention to the question if you're actually addressing stereotyping or prejudice. For example, if a study shows that people who know someone suffering from mental health problems give more positive evaluations of this group, that would be an example of prejudice reduction, not reduction of stereotyping. It would be desirable if you would find sources which explicitly refer to stereotyping according to our definition. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:08, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stability and Change of Stereotypes

My suggestion for the Article on stability and change of stereotypes is as follows:

Stereotypes can help us find orientation in a socially complex environment and they are also capable of giving us a sense of social belonging. If stereotypes were to change over and over again in a short period of time, these useful functions would no longer exist. Thus, one of the defining characteristics of stereotypes is that they are stable over a certain timespan. However, if one looks at stereotypes over a longer period of time, they show themselves to be more changeable than stable. This can be seen, for example, in gender stereotypes: When people in the 1940s were asked whether they would attribute the characteristic "competence" more to men, women, or both equally, most people attributed this characteristic to men. In 2018, however, most people would attribute the trait "competence" equally to both genders . The reason for this change in stereotypes is the change in social roles over time. Stereotypes arise from observing members of social categories behaving according to the social role typical of the category . For example, the social category "competent persons" would be expected to be employed and well-educated. Since the majority of men were employed and had access to education in the 1940s, men were also more likely to be assigned the attribute "competence" at that time. However, as women's employment and access to education has increased over time, the attribute of "competence" is now attributed equally to both genders. Thus, as social roles in a society change over time, stereotypes change over time as well. --Eweime (Diskussion) 14:12, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

In my opinion this is a really good idea, because it's a bit more on the neutral side. I think especially in the article we are writing as a group, it's important that we show that stereotypes aren't necessarily inherently bad. Maybe it would make sense to also talk about the concept of heuristics in this context, since it is often said that stereotypes act as that. If I recall correctly, we looked at simple heuristics (like to always take menu no.2) and how they change if they're no longer useful, in class. Maybe this could help visualize your point and give a broader perspective on the topic of stereotypes. --Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 15:41, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I like your proposal as it very well reflects the malleable nature of stereotypes and its close relationship to the changing values and preferences of society over time. Heuristics are mental shortcuts that could prove to be useful in certain situations, they are simple, efficient thinking strategies for solving problems and processing information. The concept of representativeness heuristic could very much serve your point, which explores the idea that we tend to leap to the conclusion that a person who shares some characteristics with typical members of a group probably belongs to that group. The thing is that with time, these groups have changed and therefore the association of certain individuals to those groups has changed as well(similar to the example you gave on how men used to be associated to the term competent, on a higher proportion than women). --Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 16:55, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The text seems appropriate in content and style, but I'm confused that you're writing in English as it seems that you intend to publish it here: Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie#Stabilität und Veränderung. If so, please provide a German version next time so I can suggest minor edits. Also, for the first sentence, you might want to use an appropriate reference. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:17, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Boomerang effect

We (JasminMoor and Elyfa) wanted to create a new article called “Bumerang-Effekt (Psychologie)”. We have drafted the following text for the article:

(Einleitung)

Der Bumerang-Effekt beschreibt in der Psychologie den Effekt, der auftritt, wenn Personen versuchen, stereotype Gedanken zu unterdrücken. Die Unterdrückung funktioniert für eine bestimmte Zeit. Sobald man diese Unterdrückung jedoch beendet, kehren die Gedanken nicht nur zurück, sondern sie kehren stärker zurück als sie davor waren. Aus diesem Grund wird dieser Effekt Bumerang-Effekt genannt.

Erklärt wird dieser Effekt durch das Modell der Gedankenkontrolle nach Wegner und Erber (1992). Nach diesem Modell sind während der Gedankenunterdrückung gleichzeitig zwei Prozesse aktiv im Gehirn, ein automatischer und ein kontrollierter. Der automatische Prozess sucht den zu unterdrückenden Gedanken, während der kontrollierte Prozess diesen dann tatsächlich unterdrückt. Weil jedoch der automatische Prozess immer aktiv nach diesem Gedanken sucht, ist dieser der Person ständig unterbewusst präsent und kann so bei Beendigung des kontrollierten Prozesses einfacher hervortreten.

Befunde

Der Einfluss von Stereotypenunterdrückung auf die Anwendung und Verfügbarkeit ebendieser Stereotype wurde in verschiedensten Studien untersucht. Typischerweise werden Studienteilnehmende gebeten, einen kurzen Text über ein Mitglied einer bestimmten Gruppe (z.B. ein Skinhead) zu schreiben und werden entweder instruiert, keine stereotypischen Beschreibungen zu verwenden, oder erhalten keine Instruktionen bezüglich der Verwendung von Stereotypen. In einer spätere Aufgabe müssen die Teilnehmenden dann einen weiteren Text über eine andere Person, die derselben Gruppe angehört (z.B. ein anderer Skinhead), schreiben. In der zweiten Aufgabe werden keine der Teilnehmenden gebeten, auf stereotypische Beschreibungen zu verzichten. Solche Studien zeigen, dass Personen, die ihre Stereotypen in der ersten Aufgabe aktiv unterdrücken, in der zweiten Aufgabe mehr stereotypische Beschreibungen nutzen, als Personen, die nicht zur Unterdrückung der Stereotypen instruiert wurden. Nach der Unterdrückung kehren die stereotypischen Gedanken unwillkürlich zurück wie ein Bumerang..

Es konnte nicht nur gezeigt werden, dass Stereotypen für Personen, die der gleichen Gruppe angehören, “zurückkehren” (d.h. dass die Unterdrückung von Stereotypen über Skinheads in der ersten Aufgabe dazu führt, dass in der zweiten Aufgabe mehr Stereotypen über Skinheads benutzt werden), sondern dass die Unterdrückung von Stereotypen einer Gruppe auch zur stärkeren Aktivierung von Stereotypen einer anderen Gruppe führt. So wurde in einer Studie von Geeraert (2013) gezeigt, dass Personen, die in der ersten Aufgabe ihre Stereotypen über “Chavs” (Jugendliche der britischen Unterschicht) unterdrückten, in der zweiten Aufgabe mehr Stereotype bei der Beschreibung von Teenage-Müttern verwendeten.

Generalisierbarkeit

Der Bumerang-Effekt ist allerdings kein universelles Phänomen. In verschiedenen Studien wurde gezeigt, dass der Bumerang-Effekt sowohl von individuellen als auch kulturellen Unterschieden beeinflusst wird.

Monteith und Kolleg:innen haben zum Beispiel den Einfluss von persönlichen Einstellungen auf den Bumerang-Effekt untersucht und herausgefunden, dass bei Personen, die vorurteilsarme Einstellung gegenüber einer Gruppe haben, ein geringer Bumerang-Effekt auftritt, als bei Personen mit einer vorurteilsvollen Einstellung. Ihre Erklärung dafür ist, dass Personen mit einer vorurteilsarmen Einstellung mit der gleichen Wahrscheinlichkeit stereotypische Gedanken haben, dass sie aber motivierter sind, die zu unterdrücken, auch wenn sie nicht explizit darum gebeten werden. Im Gegensatz dazu unterdrücken Personen mit einer vorurteilsvollen Einstellung ihre stereotypischen Gedanken nur, wenn sie durch die Situation oder soziale Normen dazu gedrängt werden, also zum Beispiel, wenn ein:e Versuchsleiter:in sie explizit dazu auffordert. Sobald sie nicht mehr durch die Situation motiviert sind, zum Beispiel weil es keine Instruktionen mehr gibt bezüglich der Stereotypenunterdrückung, kehren die stereotypischen Gedanken zurück.

Des Weiteren tritt der Bumerang-Effekt nicht in allen Kulturen auf. Zhang und Kolleg:innen haben amerikanische und chinesische Versuchspersonen verglichen und konnten beobachten, dass bei den amerikanischen Teilnehmenden nach der Unterdrückung stereotypischer Gedanken ein Bumerang-Effekt auftrat, bei den chinesischen Teilnehmenden allerdings nicht. Dies könnte aufgrund der Unterschiede zwischen individualistischen und kollektivistischen Kulturen sein, bisher kann diese Erklärung aber nicht empirisch gestützt werden.

—

At some point we would also like to add a paragraph about the boomerang effect to this article (Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie) and link our new article to it. We’ll make a concrete suggestion about where to add it / how to phrase once the article is a little more developed so that we can see where it would fit in best.

JasminMoor (Diskussion) 14:39, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST) Elyfa (Diskussion) 20:58, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Ich finde dies eine sehr gute Idee, ich glaube wichtig zu beachten ist einfach, dass es wichtig ist die Ergebnisse zu präsentieren und nicht zu fest auf den Versuchsplan etc einzugehen, da es für die Allgemeinbevölkerung gemeint ist. Dieser Boomerang Effekt könnte gut zu Activation and Application of Stereotypes passen als Unterkapitel, da es ja auch um die automatischen resp. kontrollierten Prozesse des Denkens geht und es sehr gut in dieses Thema passt. --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 15:22, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is already close to publishable. Please be creative and avoid the gender-fair ":", as I explained above it is not Wikipedia standard whether we like or not. You could also consider linking to the author Daniel Wegner. In general, there shouldn't be too many such links, but a few of them will be helpful. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:25, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stigma, Prejudice & Stereotype

Topic: Stigma, Prejudice & Stereotype

Where: Introduction

Sources: "

In der heutigen Alltagssprache werden Begriffe wie Vorurteil, Stigma und Stereotyp oft synonym verwendet, da es grundsätzlich bei all den genannten Begriffen um ein gewisses Schubladendenken geht. Um hier etwas Klarheit zu schaffen, wird im nachfolgenden Text etwas genauer auf die Begriffe eingegangen und inwiefern sie sich vor allem von der Begriffsnutzung eines Stereotyps wie sie in der Sozialpsychologie eingesetzt wird, unterscheiden.

In der Sozialpsychologie wird ein Stereotyp als eine Bezeichnung für Überzeugungen und das Wissen über die Eigenschaften bzw. die Merkmale von sozialen Gruppen und den dazugehörenden Mitgliedern verstanden. Hierzu werden alle Einheiten der Informationen gezählt, welche im Zusammenhang mit sozialen Kategorien in unserem Gedächtnis gespeichert worden sind. In diesem Sprachgebrauch beziehen sich Stereotype also auf generalisierte Eigenschaftszuschreibungen im Zusammenhang mit sozialen Kategorien. Es wird bei diesem Sprachgebrauch des Stereotyps also nicht unterschieden, ob es sich um eine Beschreibung der äusseren oder der inneren Eigenschaften, um positive, negative oder neutrale Informationen handelt oder ob diese richtig oder falsch sind.

Das Wort Stigma ist massgeblich auf den Soziologen Erwin Goffman zurückzuführen, wobei das Wort Stigma aus dem Griechischen stammt und so viel bedeutet wie «Wund- oder Brandmal». Bereits hier wird die Bedeutung klar, dass die Identität eines Menschen dahingehend verändert bzw. gestört wird, dass es damit vergleichbar wird, als hätte folgende Person eine nach aussen hin offensichtliche, allenfalls entstellende Wunde im Gesicht.

Die Stigmatisierung teilt sich auf in das öffentliche Stigma und das sogenannte Selbststigma. Das öffentliche Stigma beschreibt inwiefern Betroffene ihrer sozialen Umwelt ausgesetzt sind, wobei diese Art der Stigmatisierung von aussen auf die Betroffenen wirkt. Unter diesem Begriff wird die Konfrontation mit den Vorurteilen der allgemeinen Bevölkerung, die Benachteiligung beispielsweise am Arbeitsplatz, die Diskriminierung beispielsweise in der eigenen Familie und des Weiteren auch allfälliges abwertendes Verhalten beispielsweise des behandelnden Arztes. Bei der Selbststigmatisierung geht es mehr um die eigenen, persönlichen Überzeugungen der Betroffenen als nur um die äusseren Wirkungen. Auch betroffene Personen wachsen als Teil der Gesellschaft oftmals mit denselben Überzeugungen, Vorurteilen und Haltungen auf, was zur Folge hat, dass man sich selbst mit diesen internalisierenden Vorurteilen auseinandersetzen muss.

Vorurteil: …

Evtl. Beitrag zum Thema soziale Gruppen?

--Leoniiie (Diskussion) 15:46, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hello Leonie! I like the text so far. It was however unclear where you whish to add this text. I assume you mean to add it to Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie as an introductory text. If so, then I agree with your intent of differentiating the three terms of stigma, stereotype and prejudice. You might then want to concentrate more on what differentiates the concepts specifically instead of explaining what they are. My reasoning would be that the main focus of our article is stereotypes and therefore we should mainly keep our information to that topic. By linking to other wiki articles such as Stigmatisierung, Stigma, Vorurteil, etc., instead of explaining the concepts, you could focus on how these concepts are different from the psychological understanding of stereotypes and readers could then go to the already existing articles if they wished to further understand them. In case I am wrong in my assumption or you have any questions/remarks about my comment, please let me know! Kind regards! RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 20:16, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi Leonie:) I really like what you've written for the introduction until now!

As we've previously discussed here's what I'd add for prejudice (I noticed that some information still overlaps with your contribution, as we both defined stereotypes so I just erased what I felt was redundant Information, sadly degner does not really go into depth in her definition of Prejudice so if anybody has any great sources for that I'd be glad) :

As for any other things to add I think we're best discuss that in next weeks class:)

Also, we got the recommendation from Prf. Ullrich to maybe start the Introduction and Definition part off by citing p. 598 in https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-65297-8. . Maybe we could look at that together to finalize the definitions and introduction part by end of next week-ish?

"Vorurteile und Stereotype gelten in der Sozialpsychologie als zwei differenzierbare Aspekte von Einstellungen gegenüber sozialen Gruppen.

In der sozialpsychologischen Forschung werden sowohl Vorurteile wie auch Stereotype dadurch definiert, dass das gefällte Urteil ausschliesslich auf der Zugehörigkeit zu sozialen Kategorien beruht, während die individuellen Eigenschaften der Person aussenvor gelassen werden.

Nach der Definition, welche zum Zeitpunkt von Degners Buch (September 2021) als Alltagssprachlich bekannt gilt, definieren sich Vorurteile dadurch, dass sie leicht veränderbar sind, da sie das Ergebnis einer umfassenden Abwägung und Untersuchung von Informationen sind.

Die nachhaltige Veränderung von solchen Wissensstrukturen wird in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung rund um Stereotype und Vorurteile oft untersucht, und Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass diesem Umdenken ein weit komplexeres Vorgehen als nur das Sammeln und Abwägen von Informationen unterliegt.

Abgrenzen lässt sich der Begriff Stereotyp zum Begriff Vorurteil in der Sozialpsychologie dadurch, dass bei Vorurteilen die emotionale Reaktion auf die Gruppenbewertung gewichtet wird. Diese kann sowohl positiv wie auch negativ ausfallen." " </ref>

Cmariams (Diskussion) 15:39, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST) --Cmariams (Diskussion) 15:39, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Regarding the first paragraph: I would shorten it (drop the "Um hier Klarheit zu schaffen..." as this kind of meta-commentary is not used on Wikipedia) and add "Schubladendenken" to the list of concepts that are often used synonymously, and for that link to Juliane Degners book.

Then, in the second paragaph, define stereotypes as you do, but drop "Wissen" and "Merkmale".

In the third paragraph you should (briefly, as suggested by RoKebWiki, as this is the page on stereotypes) say how these other concepts differ. Build on the last sentence in Cmariams' comment and shorten the part on stigma (for which it is maybe sufficient that it stands in a certain sociological tradition and can be traced back to work by Goffman).

If you then fix the references, it will be probably be publishable as the introductory text! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 18:19, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Expanding the effects of stereotypes

The topic of my first contribution will address the relationship between self esteem and stereotypes, more specifically, I would like to focus on the effects that racial stereotypes can have on the self esteem of the stigmatized group. In the English Wikipedia article regarding stereotypes, the focus on the effects is mainly towards the more general idea of self-stereotyping and discrimination and prejudice, rather than on how can different types of stereotypes(racial in this case) can affect the self esteem of the stereotyped individual. The deployment of negative racial stereotypes has advantages and disadvantages for both the social target and the social perceiver. Nonetheless, it appears that the social perceiver profits the most from racial stereotyping, whereas the stigmatized target bears the most of the costs. During adolescence, the idea and sense of one self starts to develop; higher self esteem is usually associated with a better mental health, which in turn leads to a more resilient approach to adversities. There is a lot of information available on this matter, however the English Wikipedia article doesn't seem to reflect it, that is why my proposal lies in both improving and expanding the effects section by including the effects of racial stereotypes. Here are some references that could be useful to support my points:

- Mandara, J., Richards, M. H., Gaylord-Harden, N. K., & Ragsdale, B. L. (2009). The Effects of Changes in Racial Identity and Self-Esteem on Changes in African American Adolescents’ Mental Health. Child Development, 80(6), 1660–1675. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25592101

-Wheeler, S. C., Jarvis, W. B. G., & Petty, R. E. (2001). Think unto others: The self-destructive impact of negative racial stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(2), 173-180.

-Czopp, A. M. (2010). Studying is lame when he got game: Racial stereotypes and the discouragement of Black student-athletes from schoolwork. Social Psychology of Education, 13(4), 485-498.

-Twenge, J. M., & Crocker, J. (2002). Race and self-esteem: meta-analyses comparing whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians and comment on Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000).

In order to make this contribution accessible for everyone, the contents should be broad in their coverage, hence addressing the main features of the topic and not deviate from the primary line of study, avoiding unnecessary details. It should also be written from a neutral perspective, trying to stay away from biases. It would be important to steer clear of very specific terms that would harden the reading and understanding, and if it were necessary to include any of these terms, then it should be kept in mind that a brief definition or explanation should be given.

--Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 17:10, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The most straightforward way to include your text on the effects on self-esteem would be in the subsection on en:Stereotype#Self-stereotyping, more specifically in the paragraph starting with "Stereotyping can also play a central role in depression,...". Can you make an explicit proposal of how your text would be integrated into that section? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:23, 23. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Paragraph about availability heuristics (V1.1)

Hello since the Feedback on my first suggested text, I have introduced some new crossreferences and removed some text and redundant information. Here is the second draft:

"In der Forschung darüber, wie Stereotype entstehen und aufrechterhalten werden, wird grösstenteils davon ausgegangen, dass Urteilsbildung und Verhalten in sozialen Kontexten durch zwei kognitive Prozessarten bestimmt wird: automatische (unbewusste) und kontrollierte (bewusste) Prozesse. Weitgehend wird davon ausgegangen, dass Stereotypisierung hauptsächlich ein automatischer Prozess ist. Menschen tendieren dazu, Heuristiken zu verwenden in sozialen Kontexten. Heuristiken gehören zu den automatischen Prozessen und kommen besonders dann zum Einsatz, wenn Effizienz gefragt ist, die Person kognitiv ausgelastet ist, oder einfach nur ein schnelles Urteil gebildet werden soll.

Stereotype können Menschen als Heuristiken dienen, aber auch durch solche entstehen. Ein anschauliches Beispiel ist die Verfügbarkeitsheuristik. Verfügbarkeit bedeutet in diesem Kontext, wie leicht es einer Person fällt Informationen über ein Ereignis abzurufen. Die Leichtigkeit mit der Informationen abgerufen werden kann, hängt von verschiedenen Faktoren ab, so zum Beispiel davon, wie häufig wir glauben, dass ein Ereignis vorkommt oder davon ob unser Zugang zu relevanten Ereignissen mehr oder weniger Aufwand erfordert (Gefühl leichteren Zugangs zu Beispielen aus unserem Gedächtnis). Forschung zu Stereotypen in den 70er Jahren fand, dass Menschen dazu tendieren, extreme Ereignisse (Individuen, Handlungen, etc.) aus einer Gruppe von Ereignissen besser zu erinnern als weniger extreme – sie sind leichter abzurufen. Wenn wir also einer Gruppe von Individuen begegnen, werden wir im Nachhinein die extremen Beispiele dieser Gruppe als repräsentativ empfinden. So können wiederum Stereotype entstehen und aufrechterhalten werden ." I'm looking forward to any comments --RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 19:41, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I have two minor language suggestions: "zwei Arten kognitiver Prozesse" instead of "zwei kognitive Prozessarten" and "so zum Beispiel der wahrgenommenen Häufigkeit eines Ereignisse" instead of "wie häufig wir glauben". One article I suggest you have a look at for possible integration is the one by Kutzner and Fiedler (https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2016.1260238). One more idea: In your example, you illustrate how heuristic processing can lead to stereotypes, but you don't illustrate how stereotypes can serve as heuristics. Can you think of a way to do so (because the way you continue from the first sentence suggests that you will illustrate both parts of the first sentence). Otherwise the text is close to publishable. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:39, 23. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The neural basis of stereotyping

Consistent with JohUllrich's proposition (see W2: The neural basis of stereotyping), I would like to add the following passage to the introduction section of the German article. It aims to briefly differentiate the concepts of prejudice and stereotype on a neurobiological level. "Vorurteile und Stereotypen, obwohl konzeptuell nahe verwandt, scheinen auf unterschiedlichen und relativ unabhängigen neurobiologischen Substraten zu beruhen. Die für Vorurteile relevanten Gehirnstrukturen sind eher mit der Verarbeitung von Emotionen und Einstellungen assoziiert, wie zum Beispiel die Amygdala, die an unmittelbaren Reaktionen auf bedrohliche Stimuli oder Affektivität beteiligt ist.Im Gegensatz dazu beruhen Stereotypen eher auf semantischen Netzwerken (Wissensrepräsentation und -anwendung), in denen beispielsweise das anteriore temporale Lappen (ATL) eine Rolle bei der Speicherung sozialen Wissens spielt.."--Gg179 (Diskussion) 15:09, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think that this would be an excellent addition to the introduction, and is really well written! Maybe if you'd like, all of us working on the introduction ( I think there's about three or four of us now), could sit down together to take a look at this next week? Especially since somebody also differentiated stigma from stereotypes and we maybe could also implement the neural basis for that? - Cmariams (Diskussion) 15:50, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I agree - the text is brief (as we discussed, the treatment of the neuroscience of stereotypes must be so in a general article) but very helpful in the introduction. I suggest that you publish it there and feel responsible for making a seamless integration with the other parts of the introduction that will be added. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:43, 23. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Paragraph about Stereotype Threat

I plan on adding a paragraph about stereotype threat (Bedrohung durch Stereotype) in the consequences section of our article. I want to cover a definition, the issues surrounding publication bias and replication and point towards stereotype boost and stereotype lift. I included (X) where I will put references. I am not sure about adding further examples yet. This is my first draft: "Bedrohung durch Stereotype (engl. Stereotype threat) ist ein Phänomen, bei dem Menschen Angst haben, ein negatives Stereotyp über ihre soziale Gruppe zu bestätigen, wodurch sich ihre Leistung in einer Testsituation verschlechtert. Steele und Aronson zeigten 1995 erstmals in einem Experiment, dass Bedrohung durch Stereotype die Leistung in standardisierten Tests mindern kann. Bedrohung durch Stereotype wurde in diversen sozialen Gruppen festgestellt, die etwa anhand von Merkmalen wie Geschlecht (X), ethnischer Abstammung (X) und Sexualität (X) definiert wurden. Bedrohung durch Stereotype wurde in mehreren Metaanalysen untersucht. In einer Metaanalyse von Flore und Witchers (2015) wurden sehr kleine Effektstärken gefunden, die darauf hindeuten, dass es sich um falsch-positive Ergebnisse handeln könnte, die aufgrund von Publikationsbias veröffentlicht wurden. Ebenso fehlt eine theoretische Basis für den Effekt (X). Um den gegensätzlichen Effekt handelt es sich bei Stereotype Boost (X), wonach Personen höhere Leistungen erbringen, wenn ihnen positive Stereotype über ihre soziale Gruppe bewusst gemacht werden. Um Stereotype Lift (X) handelt es sich, wenn Personen höhere Leistung erbringen, wenn ihnen negative Stereotype über andere soziale Gruppen bewusst gemacht werden." --Sschraml (Diskussion) 18:14, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This seems appropriate with regard to length and style! When you add the references, I wonder if you would attribute the claim "lacking a theoretical foundation" also to Flore and Wicherts? Perhaps it would be better to make it clear according to whom the effect lacks a theoretical foundation. Also, perhaps unintentionally, you seem to suggest that small effect sizes imply publication bias, but these are separate things. The meta-analysis revealed the effect to be small overall (please add that this is true for the domain of girl's math performance) and it revealed evidence for publication bias. So this can be easily rectified in your text. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:41, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Influence of Movies on Stereotypes of Schizophrenia

For my contribution I would like to add a paragraph about the influence of movies on negative stereotypes of schizophrenia in the English Wikipedia page of schizophrenia under the section "Society and culture". The main source for my contribution would be the paper "Portrayals of schizophrenia by entertainment media: A content analysis of contemporary movies" by Patricia R. Owen (2012).

This is what I have prepared so far:

Movies are considered to be a valuable source of information in today's society. So it is important that the portrayal of characters with schizophrenia is accurate, as it could lead to negative consequences.

Schizophrenia is a severe psychological disorder which is surrounded by negative stereotypes. These stereotypes include the idea of a split personality, being "crazy" and showing dangerous and/or violent behavior. The stereotype of being crazy results from the symptoms delusion and hallucination. All this is connected to being unpredictable. In her 2012 analyses, Owen has shown that many schizophrenic movie characters have used these negative stereotypes to portray the disorder. Specifically in 41 movies including schizophrenic characters a majority showed the symptoms delusions and visual or auditory hallucinations. Many schizophrenic characters in movies have also showed violent behavior and even committing homicides. This indicates that movies mainly use positive symptoms to portray the disorder. Negative symptoms, such as flattening affect, are not used.

Consequences are that people think, that this is how schizophrenia is. This leads to the perpetration of the negative stereotypes of the disorder. And so it is important to portray people with schizophrenia accurately. If portrayed accurately, the negative stereotypes surrounding schizophrenia would slowly disappear. Thus the consequences of stigmatization would also slowly change."

It definitely needs work, but this is the gist of the paragraph I have in mind. Any feedback is appreciated! JessTheodore (Diskussion) 08:21, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think this is a very interesting topic, and you've done a great job for your first draft! Maybe you could expand the sources you are using. I found an interesting paper that links the portrayal of people with Schizophrenia and attitudes towards people with Schizophrenia: https://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1182&context=jiass. --Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 14:34, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

You would need sources for (1) the portrayal of characters with schizophrenia in the media, (2) the impact of this portrayal, and (3) the accuracy of the portrayal. Let me suggest to you 2 relevant sources, perhaps you can also find more recent ones (look up who's citing these articles with google scholar). In terms of the style of your contribution, you could try to write less essayistically and more according to the encyclopedia style. For example, there should be more emphasis on facts than on your reasoning (as in your "So it is important" at the beginning and the end). Stick to pointing out facts rather than evaluating them or speculating about possible implications!

Angermeyer, Matthias., Matschinger, Herbert. (2004). The Stereotype of Schizophrenia and Its Impact on Discrimination Against People With Schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 1049-1061

Walsh, Elizabeth et al. (2002). Violence and schizophrenia: Examining the evidence. The British Journal of Psychiatry. Volume 180, Issue 6. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:39, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypes in Sports draft

Based on last week’s feedback, I will be adding to the ‘Gender stereotypes’ section in the ‘Gender role’ article in the English Wikipedia. The subsection I will add will be titled ‘In the Sports culture’ and for this week, I will first introduce how gender stereotypes exist in sports (I'll be adding more points in the coming weeks)! The following will be my first draft for this point:

Gender stereotypes often highlight the differences in trait and characteristics between males and females, and this is not uncommon in the sport culture. In the world of sport, gender disparities are formulated, institutionalized, and solidified within the regulatory structures . Sports have evolved into a significant representation of expressions of masculinity and hence, are commonly perceived as a predominantly male domain . However, this does not completely neglect the position and role of women in sports. As the belief in gender stereotypes is continuously upheld in society , sporting events have been divided according to how the sport is characterised, which leads to the conceptualisation of male and female sports . Female sports, expressing the concepts of femininity, are often characterised with flexibility and balance, such as gymnastics or aesthetic sports like dance. Conversely, male sports constitute the idea of masculinity, which is portrayed through strength, speed, aggression and power, such as in football and basketball . While the distinction between male and female sports exist, females participating in male sports is more socially acceptable than the reverse, as questions would arise regarding the masculinity of males competing in the female sports . --Hanis Abdan (Diskussion) 17:37, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes, this would fit e.g. after the subsection "In the workplace"! The part from "As the belief in gender..." to the end is almost fit for publication. Another reference you could work into that text is this:

Klomsten, A.T., Marsh, H.W. & Skaalvik, E.M. Adolescents’ Perceptions of Masculine and Feminine Values in Sport and Physical Education: A Study of Gender Differences. Sex Roles 52, 625–636 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3730-x

As for the beginning of the text, I wonder whether you can shorten/revise it. The first sentence is perhaps not necessary in the context of the overall article. The point about disparities being implicated in regulatory structures is unclear. The next point about the sports=male stereotype is less well articulated than the idea that there are male sports and female sports. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:59, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Attributional Ambiguity

I would like to improve the existing article on attributional ambiguity (consequence of negative stereotypes), in particular the empirical support of this theory. The information I thought of adding, would be based on following experiments:

(1) Mendes, W. B., Major, B., McCoy, S., & Blascovich, J. (2008). How attributional ambiguity shapes physiological and emotional responses to social rejection and acceptance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 278–291.

(2) Hoyt, C. L., Aguilar, L., Kaiser, C. R., Blascovich, J., & Lee, K. (2007). The self-protective and undermining effects of attributional ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(6), 884–893.

(3)Major, B., Quinton, W. J., & Schmader, T. (2003). Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem: Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1031(02)00547-4

Mendes investigated emotional, physiological and behavioural reactions to feedback given by the same race or different-race. The purpose of this, was understand the process of ambiguity better. The participants either experienced social acceptance or social rejection and then had to perform in tasks. Negative feedback in form of social rejection given to the negatively stereotyped members(black) by members not belonging to this group(white), led to more anger than if given by members of the same(in) group. When experiencing social acceptance, the members of the negatively stereotyped group(black) show similar reactions to threat when receiving it from the other group-members(white). Here is where the ambiguity is visible. For these processes to take place, the suspicion that the other-group-members have this negative stereotype must be present. Surprisingly, attributing negative feedback to prejudice and discrimination, not only improves the wellbeing of a negatively stereotyped group (3), but can also enhance performance. (2)

--Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 11:50, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST) nikepaulina

The article by Hoyt is already featured in the "empirical support" section. Currently, the logic of this subsection seems to be that different studies are described which show that the phenomenon occurs for different stereotyped groups. Would you like to demonstrate concretely, how you would add to this section, i.e. show where a new paragraph, single sentences, or citations would fit in? Alternatively, you could consider to produce a German text for our page Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie. I would find that perhaps even a little more valuable given that the English article on attributional ambiguity is already quite developed. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:13, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

stereotyped cooking world, domestic cooking vs. Haute Cuisine

I started writing about chef stereotype last week, however, after doing more research on the subject, I have come to the conclusion that it is better and more informative to talk about Gender roles in the world of cooking.

I would like to do a contribution to the Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role about how stereotyped the cooking world is, comparing the domestic cooking with the Haute Cuisine, showing up the dichotomy of the cooking task. In the above-mentioned article fits this topic as didactic example of all that is explained about gender roles and their effect on different work environments. It is a subject which carries a great historical and social burden, which is associated with biological and cultural factors and is affected by social media.

There is information available on this subject, for example, a very thorough study done for a doctoral thesis, which indicates the difficulty women face when it comes to wanting to be professional chefs and how they should handle the situation not only because of gender roles within the world of cooking, but also managing to cope with gender roles within the family and in the male-dominated society in general. I want to support my article, for the most part, on the studies done in the following reference https://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/98663, since they reflect quantitative results that serve to understand how stereotyped is this area. The stereotype can be seen in:

- ‘Haute Cuisine’ is predominately male. - Among the 50 best worldwide restaurants in 2015, women ran fewer than 4% - In the Michelin Guide classification, out of 110 restaurant chefs awarded three Michelin stars in 2014, there were only six women chefs (5.5%) - The French name for a cook, le cuisinier, has a female counterpart’ but there is no feminine name for the chef. - Women and men chefs are evaluated differently from a culinary and a leadership perspective. - Women professionals and aspiring for the chef’s position face gender barriers because of hegemonic masculinity ideals prevailing in the restaurant kitchen and in the industry coupled to hard kitchen work environment. - Women chefs show resilience by enduring pain and not showing weakness (where does this come from? stereotype because of gender roles, history) - There is a difference between both genders when they cook in the domestic and in the public sphere. - Women chefs are disadvantaged by gender stereotypes such as emotionality, sensitivity and physical weakness and much more...--Camcar27 (Diskussion) 10:15, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think this is a very interesting topic! Maybe you could consider adding a small chapter about the dissonance in women's stereotypes in relation to cooking. Like for example that women are expected to stay home and cook but in the professional field men somehow dominate. Definitely a topic worth exploring! Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 11:19, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The dissertation should be a good resource and may also point you to other sources (from the literature review) that you can cite directly. If the dissertation cites a study to make a point (like "six women chefs in the Michelin guide"), you should retrieve that study, verify the point, and cite the original study (rather than the dissertation). If you refer to points made by the authors of the dissertation (possibly made on the basis of their own empirical data), you would of course cite the dissertation. So you could produce a draft similar to what Hanis Abdan did for sports! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:28, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Social media stereotypes

I would like to write the following text about social media stereotype:

Young people who publish their lives on the Internet, share their thoughts and impressions with an audience (This can include a variety of topics such as fashion, beauty, travel, cooking, politics, technology and much more.) also fall under the stereotype , stereotype words "blogger". A blogger, as a stereotype, is often associated with the idea of ​​a person who is not engaged in physical or traditionally recognized work, but receives significant income from maintaining a personal weblog or video blog on the Internet. This stereotype is mainly based on the perception of blogging as a meaningless activity that does not require significant physical effort or professional skills. In the common perception, bloggers are perceived as individuals who spend a lot of time publishing content about their personal lives or unrelated to important social issues. The stereotype assumes that they receive a significant amount of financial resources through sponsorship deals, advertising contracts and donations from their audience. This makes it seem as if bloggers are making great incomes without putting in much effort or work. This stereotype can cause different reactions in society, including criticism from those who perceive the activity as frivolous and unimportant, as well as reservations about securing a sustainable financial future without real work or vocational training. Some may consider blogging to be an empty and insignificant business, and Internet personalities are considered unreliable sources of information. Some may criticize them for being too self-interested, as well as for a shallow analysis of the issues they discuss. At the same time, there are those who see blogging as a new form of self-expression and a means of generating income in the era of the digital economy. Also, bloggers help to form and popularize new trends, contribute to the development of culture, lifestyle and fashion. They can act as important intermediaries between brands and consumers, helping the latter make informed purchases. Bloggers can also serve an important social function by raising awareness of issues and calling for change in society. Despite the stereotypes, it is important to remember that the reality of blogging can be much more complex and diverse, and achieving success in this area requires certain skills, knowledge and creative potential.Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) (ohne (gültigen) Zeitstempel signierter Beitrag von Yeliz.proko (Diskussion | Beiträge) 10:28, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST))

Hi! I find the text very understandable and easy to read, however I think it would be good to cite at least one source that supports these claims. Maybe you already found one, but just forgot to mention it, otherwise I think you should find what you're looking for with keywords like "influencer", "bloggers", "online content creater" etc. --Ldegio (Diskussion) 14:43, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes, as Ldegio writes, you need good sources to backup the claims that you make. A famous researcher who studies how young people use social media is danah boyd, but I'm not sure if she has written about stereotypes. For your next revision, please indicate WHERE you would like to add your text. Also, try to stick more to the topic "stereotypes of bloggers", describing the stereotype (and possibly its accuracy), but please avoid value statements like "it is important to remember" - this does not fit the encyclopedia style! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:40, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

examples of stereotypes

Last week I proposed to improve the subchapter "2.1 Besipiele für Stereotype." I found a study on stereotypes and the consequent discrimination of trans individuals that interested me, so I thought I would include the study as an example of possible stereotypes. This is the text I prepared:

«In unserer Gesellschaft sind Stereotype in den Alltag eines jeden Menschen eingeflochten, auch wenn wir uns ihrer Präsenz oft nicht bewusst sind. Einige Stereotypen sind sehr verbreitet und jeder kann sie erkennen, während andere subtiler sind. Im Allgemeinen spiegeln Stereotype oft gesellschaftliche Einstellungen und Überzeugungen wider. Einige der gängigsten Stereotypen sind die folgenden: "Asiaten sind gut in Mathematik", "Frauen sind sehr einfühlsam" oder " Frauen wissen nicht, wie man Auto fährt». Die Hauptelemente der Definition des Stereotyps lassen sich in diesen Beispielen deutlich erkennen. Ein sehr aktuelles Beispiel dafür, wie Stereotype Teil der modernen Gesellschaft sind und ihre Dynamik widerspiegeln, betrifft die Sexualität von Trans-Personen. Anzani et al. (2023) wiesen in einer Studie darauf hin, wie die Sexualität von trans Personen als "extrem" oder "abwesend" wahrgenommen wird, eine Vorstellung, die nicht der Realität entspricht. Die Teilnehmer sehen in der Gruppe der Trans-Personen die Extreme der statistischen Normalverteilung. Diesem Stereotyp liegt die gesellschaftliche Wahrnehmung zugrunde, dass Trans-Personen von der Cis-Hetero-Normativität abweichen.

I don't know if I included too little information about the study but I didn't know how specific to be.

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 22:00, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST) --Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 22:00, 18. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hello Valentina! When reading your proposal, I did not fully understand what they meant with the sexuality of trans people being "extrem" or "abwesend". Concerning your question if you included enough information, you could maybe specify a little more what they meant with their scale? --Sschraml (Diskussion) 18:20, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hey Valentina, this is an interesting contribution! I agree with Sschraml that it would maybe make sense to expand on what you mean with "extrem" or "abwesend", and I don't fully understand what you mean by "Die Teilnehmer sehen in der Gruppe der Trans-Person die Extreme der statistischen Normalverteilung", so it might make sense to expand on that. Do you mean that trans people are assigned more "extreme" behaviours in general? Or that people pay more attention to trans people who strongly deviate from heteronormativity? Or something completely different?

--Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 17:23, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

The beginning of your text fits well into the section "Beispiele für Stereotype". I am little bit unsure whether what you write about how trans people are perceived is a good example of stereotypes. If you compare it with the other examples, which include specific traits or behaviors, you'll notice that your example simply mentions that they are perceived as different. It is an example of Othering. A more similar example would be the pernicious and unsubstantiated stereotype that members of sexual minority groups are bad parents. Perhaps you can find studies which assess the actual stereotypical beliefs regarding trans people. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 20:48, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Activation and Application of Stereotypes

Der Mensch nutzt beim Denken sowohl automatische als auch kontrollierte Prozesse. Patricia Devine, eine amerikanische Sozialpsychologin, zeigte in ihren Studien, dass automatische und kontrollierte Prozesse unabhängig voneinander ablaufen können. Stereotype werden erlernt, bevor wir persönliche Ansichten resp. Überzeugungen darüber entwickeln. Sie entwickelte das Dissoziationsmodell und begründete damit, dass automatische und kontrollierte Prozesse unabhängig voneinander stattfinden können. Das bedeutet, dass die Aktivierung eines Stereotyps nicht zwangsläufig zu einer stereotypen Reaktion führen muss.

Jeder Mensch hat ein gewisses Maß an Vorurteilen, wobei einige höhere und andere niedrigere Vorurteile haben. Viele Menschen kennen die kulturellen Stereotypen, wodurch automatisch das entsprechende kulturelle Stereotyp durch Priming aktiviert werden kann. Priming bezieht sich auf die Aktivierung eines Reizes (zum Beispiel Sonnenschein), der die nachfolgende Verarbeitung eines damit verbundenen Reizes (zum Beispiel warme Temperaturen, strahlender Himmel) erleichtert. Bis zu diesem Punkt geschieht alles automatisch. Wenn die Aktivierung des Stereotyps jedoch im Widerspruch zur persönlichen Überzeugung steht, kommen kontrollierte Prozesse ins Spiel, die diese automatische Verarbeitung unterdrücken wollen. Dies erfordert Motivation, Anstrengung und volle Bewusstheit. Falls das Stereotyp nicht im Konflikt mit der persönlichen Überzeugung steht, wird eine stereotypgeleitete Reaktion gezeigt

Auch Allport, ein Sozialpsychologe, stellte fest, dass Menschen dazu neigen, stereotypisch zu denken. Wenn ein Stereotyp als Mittel zur Ressourcenschonung betrachtet wird, greifen Menschen besonders darauf zurück, wenn ihre eigenen Ressourcen knapp sind. Jedes Ereignis hat spezifische Merkmale, die als Anhaltspunkt dienen, um Vorurteile in Aktion zu setzen. Menschen verlassen sich stark auf vorherige Informationen, um die Belastung des fortlaufenden Denkens zu erleichtern --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 15:14, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi! I think what you wrote is very understandable and therefore a good draft! Maybe you could link the Studys from Devine as well. Another thing you may want to consider is splitting the part about Priming into a subparagraph so the text will be more structured, but that's just a formality :) --Melebo (Diskussion) 22:27, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Your text would be published in close proximity to what AleMei (see first entry in Week 4) will write about the continuum model. Please talk to each other and decide which part will appear first so that the other one can be adapted to make sense as a second part. In general, you should try to compress your text a little bit. For example, the first paragraph could be compressed like that without loss of information: "Das Dissoziationsmodell der amerikanischen Sozialpsychologin Patricia Devine geht davon aus, dass kulturell geteilte Stereotype bei allen Personen derselben Kultur automatisch aktiviert werden können, wenn sie mit der stereotypisierten Gruppe konfrontiert werden." In the second paragraph you then explain that the application of these automatically activated stereotypes depends on the level of prejudice and conscious control. Please cite Devine's paper, and if you include Allport, please also include the source! I think it will be nice to see the result of your joint work with AleMei. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:01, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Cultivation Hypothesis

In the following I would like to share my first draft for my contribution to the section "Entstehung und Aufrechterhaltung":

Ein wichtiger Aspekt bei der Betrachtung der Entstehung und Aufrechterhaltung von Stereotypen ist die Medienwelt; Radio, Film, Fernsehen, und seit dem einundzwanzigstem Jahrhundert soziale Medien. Der Mensch hat die einzigartige Möglichkeit sich sein Wissen über unsere Welt, über die eigene Lebenserfahrung hinaus, durch Medienkanäle anzueignen. Die Medienwelt ist daher eine wichtiger Einflussfaktor für das Einführen und das Aufrechterhalten von Stereotypen. In diesem Zusammenhang gibt es einige Forschung, die durch die Kultivationshypothese von George Gerbner ins Rollen gebracht wurde .

Die Kultivationshypothese postuliert, dass Vielseher ein Bild der Welt haben, das sich mehr mit der Welt, wie sie im Fernsehen dargestellt wird, deckt, als es das Weltbild von Wenigsehern tut. Vielseher ganz unterschiedlicher Gruppen würden dementsprechend homogenisierte Ansichten teilen, (auch "mainstreaming" genannt). Besonders relevant wird dieser Einfluss, wenn durch die Wiederholung bestimmter Stereotype durch die Medien deren Zugänglichkeit erhöht wird. So könnte bei der Frage, ob Ausländer kriminell sind, eher auf ein stereotypes Bild von Ausländern zurückgegriffen werden. Das Fernsehen die Zugänglichkeit von Stereotypen erhöht, konnte von Shrum und Kollegen gezeigt werden. Ebenso, dass Zugänglichkeit positiv mit Vielsehen korreliert und den Kultivationseffekt mediiert .

Eine Meta-Analyse aus  2021, die 5 Jahrzehnte von Kultivationsforschung umspannt, fand eine aggregierte Effektstärke der Kultivierung durch das Fernsehen von r= .107. Dies impliziert einen anhaltenden Zusammenhang zwischen dem durch das Fernsehen vermittelte Weltbild und dem Weltbild von Vielsehern .

Ursprünglich war die Kultivationshypothese nur auf das Fernsehen ausgerichtet, wird aber in erweiterter Form auch auf soziale Medien angewendet. Eine Meta-Analyse aus 2023 zeigte eine aggregierte Effektstärke von r= .123 der Kultivierung durch soziale Medien. Es zeigte sich ebenfalls, dass der Kultivierungseffekt auf junge Menschen grösser ist, als auf ältere Menschen, wobei unklar ist, ob dies auf einen Kohorteneffekt oder einen Reifungsprozess zurückzuführen ist .

If you have any suggestions for improvements I'm happy to hear them!

P.S.

I found an entire Wikipedia Page dedicated to the Cultivation Hypothesis in English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultivation_theory and in German https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kultivationshypothese. It seems that the english page has been written and edited mainly by students from the University of Ottawa!

P.P.S

For my final contribution I'd suggest having "Kultivationshypothese" as a Link to the German Wikipedia page and George Gerbner as a Link to his personal Wikipedia page at their first mentions, as I did in this comment. --Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 17:35, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I really like the start of your section, the topic sounds really interesting. However I suggest you avoid using complicated psychological and statistical terms. The average Wikipedia user will not understand words such as "Metaanalyse" and "aggregierte Effektstärke". Try rewriting the results part using simple words and leave out exact statistical outcomes such as "r=.107". (note: I actually already wrote this comment friday afternoon but somehow it's not showing up..? I don't know what happened) --JasminMoor (Diskussion) 12:57, 22. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I think you can introduce the term "Vielseher" indirectly, e.g. by first saying "Menschen, die häufig Medien konsumieren (Vielseher)..." and then using the shorter term "Vielseher". The last part could be integrated and shortened if you talk about "meta-analyses" (plural) and say "Fernsehen und Soziale Medien" (The effects are similar).

I am not sure what you mean by "final contribution" - please talk to me in class whether you intend to place a link somewhere (which might not be a sufficient contribution, but I may be misunderstanding you). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:10, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Paragraph about the stereotype content Model

This is my first draft for the paragraph about the stereotype content model on the wikipedia page "Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie" I wasn't quite sure how deep the paragraph should go, so it may be too surface level. I'll be happy to hear your inputs!

Das Stereotypeninhalts Modell ist ein theoretisches Modell aus der Sozialpsychologie, welches versucht zu beschreiben, wie Stereotypen entstehen. Das vorliegende Modell verbindet die beiden Dimensionen Kompetenz und Wärme. . Das Modell geht davon aus, dass wir andere Menschen aufgrund von diesen Dimensionen einteilen. Je nachdem, wie diese Einteilung aussieht, erfolgen verschiedene emotionale Reaktionen und Vorurteile sowie Stereotypen.

Wärme

Mit der Dimension Wärme ist gemeint, welche Absichten eine Person gegenüber mir selbst oder meiner Gruppe haben könnte. Beispielsweise kann eine Person vertrauenswürdig oder kalt sein.

Kompetenz

Mit der Dimension Kompetenz wird beschrieben, ob die Person in der Lage ist, diese Absichten auszuführen. Eine Person kann beispielsweise inkompetent oder kompetent bewertet werden.

Resultierende Stereotypen

Aus den verschiedenen Kombinationen von hoher bzw. tiefer Wärme resp. Kompetenz resultieren Gruppen, die mit bestimmten Stereotypen in Verbindung gebracht werden.

• Menschen mit hoher Kompetenz und hoher Wärme wird Bewunderung entgegen gebracht. Daraus erfolgen bewundernde Stereotypen.

• Menschen mit niedriger Kompetenz und hoher Wärme wird oftmals Sympathie und Mitleid entgegengebracht und paternalistische Stereotypen. Ein Beispiel dafür sind Frauen, denen wohlwollender Sexismus gezeigt wird.

• Menschen mit niedriger Kompetenz und niedriger Wärme wird Verachtung und verächtliche Stereotypen entgegengebracht. Hier werden als Beispiel meist Obdachlose genannt, die Emotionen wie Ekel auslösen.

• Menschen mit hoher Kompetenz und niedriger Wärme wird Neidvolle Stereotypen entgegengebracht. Beispielweise kann man hier Banker nennen, welche Emotionen von Eifersucht auslösen.

Melebo (Diskussion) 23:03, 19. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hi! I think it's fine that your draft is in the surface level. It's brief but includes only relevant information, which is good.

In regards to the dimensions of warmth and competence I think it would be helpful if you would add more adjectives to describe them. For example Cuddy et al. (2008) (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00002-0) describes warmth as "good-natured, trustworthy, tolerant, friendly, and sincere" and competence as "capable, skillful, intelligent and confident". By adding these adjectives it will be easier for people to understand what exactly is meant by a person being warm or competent. JessTheodore (Diskussion) 10:43, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Your part would be in the section "Inhalte", so it is a little bit misleading that you start off with the question "how stereotypes emerge". (The model has something to say about this, but you don't cover it yet). So a better idea would be to say: "Das Modell des Stereotypinhalts geht davon aus, dass sich die Inhalte von Stereotypen entlang der abstrakten Dimensionen Wärme und Kompetenz sparsam beschreiben lassen." And then it would be more fitting to say that groups (not individuals) are placed in this two-dimensional plane. As for the headers that you use, let's see how it looks on the final page. Perhaps you better do without them because there will be also headers for the other models of stereotype content. Finally, you don't mention an example for high/high groups. There people typically put their ingroups. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:16, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Interventions: Stereotype threat

I would like to expand the existing article on Bedrohung durch Stereotype. Under the section: 3 Aufhebung der Bedrohung durch Stereotype i would like to add the following section with the results of the meta-analytical review i mentioned last week:

Liu et al. unterscheiden in einem metaanalytischen Review aus dem Jahr 2021 drei Interventionsmöglichkeiten, welche bei der Bedrohung durch Stereotype helfen können. Dazu zählen die Überzeugungs-basierten Interventionen, Identitäts-basierten Interventionen und die Resilienz-basierten Interventionen. Zu den Überzeugungsbasierten Intervention gehört beispielsweise die Verringerung der Unterschiede zwischen der In-Group und der Out-Group, dabei werden Gemeinsamkeiten der beiden Gruppen betont. Ein Beispiel für die Identitäts-basierten Intervention ist die Aktivierung von multiplen soziale Identitäten. Dabei werden Teilnehmende der Intervention darauf aufmerksam gemacht, dass es für eine Person nicht nur die eine soziale Identität gibt, welche eventuell durch Stereotype bedroht ist, sondern weitere positiv geprägte Identitäten existieren. Bei der Resilienz-basierten Intervention wird beispielsweise das Vertrauen von den Teilnehmenden, eine Aufgabe erledigen zu können, gestärkt. Insgesamt zeigen die Ergebnisse, dass die genannten Interventionen die Leistung von Gruppenmitgliedern, welche von der Bedrohung durch Stereotype betroffen sind, verbessern können. Alle drei Interventionen konnten den negativen Einfluss durch die Bedrohung durch Stereotype reduzieren. Dabei waren die Überzeugungs-basierte Interventionen die effektivsten. Die Identitätsbezogene Interventionen haben kleinere aber dennoch stabile Effekte und die Resilienz-basierte Interventionen weist die grösste Instabilität bezüglich der Effektivität auf .

Beside I suggest to change the title from "Aufhebung der Bedrohung durch Stereotpye to: "Interventionen bei Bedrohung durch Stereotpye" or just "Interventionen" I also looked up some articels from Lai. I found some interesting articels about interventions to reduce implicit racial preferences . I did not find articles from Lai which focus completely on stereotypes. But his articels could help to write about implicit stereotypes. --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 09:20, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I am not sure what you mean by "stabile Effekte". Does that mean that an effect is observed also after longer intervals after the intervention, or does it mean that the effect is more variable (less reliable) across studies? Also, you should write all adjectives in small letters (e.g., "überzeugungsbasierte"). Otherwise, I think you can go ahead and add it in the indicated place. The change from "Aufhebung" to "Intervention" may provoke a reaction from other users, but I don't think it can do any harm. Would you also feel responsible for adding a link to this page from our jointly created new page Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:23, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stigmatisation of the neurotype autism spectrum or autism spectrum "disorder"

I would like to write about stigmatisation in relation to autism. The reason I refer to autism as a neurotype is because I am in favor of the neurodiversity paradigm, which views autism as a neurological difference, rather than a "disorder". Just for the sake of simplicity, I will use the term autism to refer to this neurotype/diagnosis.

Hence I would like to contribute to the existing article of Autism rights movement, under the section: media portrayels. Also I would like to add to Autism spectrum, under the section: society and culture. Evenmore I think it is worth it to add to the existing wikipedia page on Autism spectrum disorders in the media, to shed light on the effects of this cultural representation.

The way autism is portrayed in media is oftentimes very biased. Usually the symptoms of autism are heavily exaggerated in media, it shows either the more debilitating or the gifted (savant) sides of autism spectrum disorder . Also media usually shows (white) males. For example the movie rain man and the series of atypical, which shows two gifted and (heavily) impaired males with autism.

As said in the name, the symptoms of autism are on a spectrum, so it differs per individual in which way it shows up and affects their life. The way the media portrays autism makes it difficult for people with autism/autistic people with a milder form of autism to be taken seriously or to recognize themselves in the diagnosis. Evenmore the over representation of autistic males makes this even harder for women. There is a much lower percentage (diagnosis) of autistic females, which has to do with a lack of representation, the fact that autism shows up differently in women and usually is camouflaged by them to adhere to social norms. . This misrepresentation not only affects the individual, but also the public, since media shapes people's beliefs and attitudes . This can cause prejudice/stigmatization towards a certain group of people.

This contribution is still a work in progress, especially getting used to/fitting in with the wikipedia style of writing. So definitely hit me up with some (constrcutive) feedback!

Marithalie (Diskussion) 17:59, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Sure, there's nothing wrong with the neurodiversity paradigm. Can you be more specific what you would like to add? Also, please make sure that you're referring to stereotypes. For example, in the first wikipedia article that you mentioned, they cite a paper by Draaisma which is about "Stereotypes of autism". This could be one source, but maybe you find more. This would be informative and helpful! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:32, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stigmatisation of ADHD

I wrote the following text about stigmatisation in relation to ADHD. It's not fully fleshed out, but this is what I have come up with so far. When I'm done I would like to add it to Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung and maybe add a cross reference to Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker.

Stereotype und Stigmas verbunden mit ADHS:

Menschen mit ADHS sind schon lange einer Vielzahl von Stereotypen und Stigmas ausgesetzt. Eine noch bis heute relevante Debatte betrifft beispielsweise bereits die blosse Existenz der Störung. Häufig wird behauptet, dass die Krankheit überdiagnostiziert ist oder sogar, dass sie einfach erfunden ist. Dies impliziert für Menschen mit ADHS, dass mit ihnen nichts falsch ist, was schnell dazu führen kann, dass Betroffene sich selbst Vorwürfe dafür machen, dass sie mit gewissen Dingen mehr Probleme haben als ihre Mitmenschen.[8] Daraus resultiert dann häufig Selbst-Stigmatisierung der ADHS. [9][10]

Jedoch geht die Stigmatisierung über die blosse Hinterfragung der Existenz von ADHS hinaus; Leuten mit der Störung wird häufiger die Tendenz zu antisozialem und gewalttätigem Verhalten zugeschrieben, auch wenn dies nicht in diesem Ausmass der Realität entspricht. Daraus resultiert bereits im Kindheits- und Jugendalter eine Aversion gegen Mitmenschen mit ADHS, weshalb sowohl Kinder und Jugendliche als auch Erwachsene, häufig sozial ausgeschlossen werden. [11][12][13]

Des Weiteren gibt es auch Stigmas zu den kausalen Faktoren der Entstehung von ADHS. Diese reichen von schlechter Erziehung bis zu Drogenkonsum und sagen implizit, dass ADHS das Resultat von mangelnder Disziplin entweder vonseiten der Eltern oder der Betroffenen selbst ist. [14]

This is still a work in progress, so I'm open to any constructive feedback! I also still have to add the proper quotations. Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 11:14, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I really like your contribution on the specific stigma of ADHD. When you talk about the violence and antisocial stigmas resting on people with ADHD. I would find it interesting to maybe refer to the difference between boys and girls and how their ADHD gets diagnosed,stereotyped and perceived. I found an interesting Metaanalysis to this. So that would be an interesting short addition if you find it necessary or important. Other than that a well written and easy to follow text. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 12:43, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

I find the plural of "Stigma" a little bit odd. Being a person with ADHD is a "stigma" (in the Goffmann terminology), and the set of beliefs about this group is a stereotype. Alternatively, you could call each of these beliefs a stereotype (for simplicity), e.g. that this is not a disorder, that people with ADHD are antisocial, etc. Regarding the use of "stereotypes" for the beliefs about causes of ADHD, I wonder if the authors use the word "stereotypes" or something else? In our definition, a stereotype can be true or false, so you should say something about whether e.g education is viewed as a causal factor for ADHD or not.

If you make these minor edits and add proper citations, you can publish it. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:43, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Consequences of Stereotypes

I'm planning to write about the consequences of stereotypes on the basis of the shooter bias and hiring discrimination. So far I have the first draft of the paragraph about hiring discrimination, however I will probably extend it a bit more by including an other study. But for the first draft, this is what I have:

Die in der Gesellschaft verbreiteten Stereotype bringen Konsequenzen mit sich, welche nicht ignoriert werden sollten. So kann es zu einer Ungleichbehandlung von Menschen führen, welche aufgrund gewisser sozialer, kultureller, ethnischer oder rassistischer Aspekte in Gruppen eingeteilt werden, die eine scheinbar ungleiche Behandlung rechtfertigen. Eine solche Ungleichbehandlung lässt sie beispielsweise in Einstellungsentscheidungen beobachten. Um diese Ungleichbehandlung zu untersuchen, wurden zahlreiche Feldexperimente durchgeführt, in denen das Versuchsdesign folgendermassen manipuliert wurde: dem Arbeitgeber wurden zwei praktisch identische Bewerbungen vorgelegt, wobei der einzige Unterschied die ethnische Zugehörigkeit des Bewerbers darstellte. Diese wurde durch den Namen des Bewerbers manipuliert, welcher entweder eine Zugehörigkeit zur Minderheit (minority group) oder Mehrheit (majority group) suggerierte. In einer Metaanalyse von Zschirnt & Ruedin (2016) wurden die Ergebnisse mehrere Studien, in denen solche Feldexperimente auf ähnliche Weise durchgeführt wurden, systematisch zusammengefasst.

Die Ergebnisse der Metaanalyse bestätigen die Annahme, dass Angehörige ethnischer Minderheitsgruppen im Laufe des Einstellungsprozesses diskriminiert werden. Es zeigte sich, dass Minderheitsgruppen 49% weniger Chancen haben zu einem Vorstellungsgespräch eingeladen zu werden als Angehörige der Mehrheitsgruppe. Dieses Diskriminierungsmuster erwies sich als relativ robust über verschieden Länder und wirtschaftliche Situationen hinweg.

--Ldegio (Diskussion) 12:42, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

To me this sounds like a good addition. Also, if you write something more general about the concequences of stereotypes, I‘m sure most of us could link to your article since it applies to all stereotypes.

Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 17:07, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

You should avoid value statements like "welche nicht ignoriert werden sollten.", describe the experiment without "in denen das Versuchsdeisgn folgendermassen manipuliert wurde" (it is unnnecessarily complicated and BTW we manipulate variables, not the design; try to avoid "manipuliert" throughout the text). Starting a new paragraph after "systematisch zusammengefasst" is odd because the next sentence directly continues the idea. If you fix these minor things, you can publish it. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 21:47, 24. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Hip Hop Stereotypes

I have a proposal to add and possibly substitute the existing article to Hip Hop Stereotypes [15] and I came up with this proposal for now.

Negative Stereotypes, that are often associated with African American men being unintelligent, hypersexual and violent have an effect on the perception of rap music and its artists. The writers of violent lyrics are perceived more negatively, when the music is considered rap, compared to the same lyrics in a country or heavy metal song. The listening of misogynistic/violent Hip Hop music has effects on African American Men and their cognitive performance. They perform worse in Graduate Exams, when they have listened to this kind of music compared to white men listening to the same music. Over-sexualization of African American women in Rap music videos may have health implications for viewers of such videos. In a survey study, adolescent African American women watching Rap videos and perceving them to contain more sexual stereotypes were more likely to binge drink, test positive for marijuana and have a negative body image. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 13:10, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

You describe quite different aspects of stereotypes (who is affected by what), and this could be better reflected in the first sentence which only mentions the effect on perceptions of music and artists (later you also talk about the effects on listeners/viewers). Also, it would be good see how you would integrate it with the existing paragraph on hip hop stereotypes. For next time, can you provide an integrated paragraph which preserves what's there and adds what you would like to add. You could add your text in bold, use three ' before and after your own text. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:10, 25. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

This is a really interesting topic. It might be worth considering a bit more information about stereotype threat and how and why African American men perform worse in graduate exams after listening to this type of music compared to white men (is it because the stereotype of African American men being unintelligent in the music is causing black American men to feel threatened and thus perform worse?) It would also be useful to provide a bit more information as to why rap music is perceived more negatively compared to heavy metal songs. *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 17:22, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Adding Section to German Stereotype Threat Article

I would like to add the following section to the Bedrohung durch Stereotype Article. I’m not sure about the title oft the section, I thought about something like “Auftretenswahrscheinlichkeit” or “Moderatoren”, bu I’m open to suggestions. I’m also not sure if I should expand on some of the things I mention (like shortly explaining “internale Kontrollüberzeugung”) or if linking to the respective Wiki Article is enough. Anyways, this would be the content oft he section I would like to add:

Unter gewissen Bedingungen ist das Auftreten von Bedrohung durch Stereotype wahrscheinlicher. Personen, welche einen internale Kontrollüberzeugung, erhöhte Testosteronwerte, eine proaktivere oder besonders ehrgeizige Persönlichkeit haben, weisen ein erhöhtes Risiko auf, aufgrund einer Bedrohung durch Stereotype eine schlechtere Leistung zu zeigen. Hingegen scheinen Menschen mit guten Copingfähigkeiten weniger von Bedrohung durch Stereotype beeinflusst zu werden. Auch zeigt die Bedrohung durch Stereotype vor allem dann ihre Wirkung, wenn sich die stereotypisierte Person besonders stark mit dem auszuführenden Aufgabenberiech oder der stereotypisierten Gruppe identifiziert. Beispielsweise wirkte sich nach einer Studie von Aronson et al. das Stereotyp, dass weisse Menschen schlechter sind in Mathematik als Menschen aus Asien, besonders dann negativ auf die Leistung der stereotypisierten Menschen aus, wenn die weissen Menschen ihre Mathematikfähigkeiten als einen besonders wichtigen Bestandteil ihrer Persönlichkeit ansahen. Ähnlich verhält es sich mit dem Ausmass an Identifikation mit der stereotypisierten Gruppe. In einer Studie von Schmader schnitten beispielsweise nur Frauen, welche sich besonders stark mit ihrem Geschlecht identifizieren, schlechter in einem Mathematiktest ab, bei dem die Bedrohung durch Stereotype aktiviert worden war; hingegen beeinflusste die Bedrohung durch Stereotype die Leistung von Frauen, die sich nicht besonders stark mit dem eigenen Geschlecht identifizierten, nicht. --Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 16:59, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Not all of the references refer to stereotype threat (Seeley & Gardner is about ego depletion; Gupta & Bhawe looks at intentions, not performance). Please double-check the relevance of your references. Social identification and centrality of of the performance domain for the self-concept are more widely accepted moderators. Please talk to Jonathan.l2023 who also wants to work on this article. You could call your section "Begünstigende Faktoren". --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:19, 25. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

ABC model

For some reason my paragraph has disappeared but i would like to propose to put the following information on the English stereotype page under "Content": "An even new model called the Agency-Beliefs-Communion (ABC) model suggests that the previous model is not a spontaneously used dimension. The ABC model suggests that people group social groups depending on three dimensions. Firstly, their agency/socioeconomic success (which is similar to competence) for example, groups perceived as powerless, low status, unconfident were separate from groups perceived as dominant, wealthy, and powerful. Secondly, conservative-progressive beliefs and (which is similar to warmth) for example, groups perceived as "traditional, religious and conservative separate to groups perceived as modern, science-oriented, liberal. Lastly, communion is related to trustworthiness and likability and is not seen as a dimension separate to A and B but moreso as a feature of A and B. This theory suggests that if people have perceived self-group similarity in beliefs there is more cooperation and communion. Overall this theory indicates that spontaneous agency and belief stereotypes may predict behaviour towards groups. "

However, i was wondering if i should add more information about how this model extends on the stereotype content model, mention Koch's studies and maybe some strengths and limitations of the model since there has been some critique on the ABC model.

• Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 17:07, 20. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Yes, please have another look at (and cite) Koch's paper so that you can improve the following phrases:

"previous model is not a ... dimension" -> this is confusing, please clarify how the ABC model is different from the Stereotype Content Model

"people group social groups" -> how does the Koch paper describe what people do, do they really group groups?

Finally, a couple of examples (with references to the samples used in the research in which these groups appeared) would be helpful for illustrating the meaning of these dimensions! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:24, 25. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Religious Stereotypes

It seems as if my contribution from last week has disappeared?

So I‘ll repost it here:

I wanted to maybe write the following in the article about religious stereotypes:

What are Religious Stereotypes?

A stereotype as explained in Stereotype is a generalized belief about a particular category of people. Since theyre generalized, these beliefs most likely will not apply to every person of said group. But stereotypes can help us get a broad idea of a person with only little information.

With this in mind, religious stereotypes are generalized beliefs about a particular religion. Oftentimes however, these stereotypes are oversimplified and inaccurate, which can lead to negative outcomes such as discrimination, prejudice, social isolation and limited oppurtiunities.

Another aspect of religious stereotyping is self stereotyping, in which an individual applies said Stereotypes to oneself. Often this can lead to a self fulfilling prophecy.

Common Stereotypes:

Many Common Stereotypes on religions cover the whole idea of a religion. For example, being more conservative is not a stereotype you will only find for one religion, but for many.

Also many religions have the stereotype attached to them of being oppressive to women.

A common issue with Stereotypes is that groups of whom you yourself are not a part of are seen as more homogonous than groups you are a part of yourself. So when people hear of something that one person of a religion did, they will assume that this action is representative of the whole religion.

Common Stereotypes: Christianity

Religious Zealotry: There is the stereotype that christians are very devoted and will try to convert other people to their religion. In other words: Christians may be pushy. . This can make other people uncomfortable to interact with christians because they have other beliefs and dont want to be talked into someone elses religion.

Anti Science: Since traditional christianity holds itself to writings in the bible, many christians might oppose to modern science if it doesnt allign with the bible. This leads to the stereotype that christians are genrally anti science and dont believe in evolution, climate change or modern medicine, even though this might be completly false.

Hypocricy: There is the stereotype that christian people live hypocritical lives , preaching some aspects of the bible while completly ignoring others. For example many christians preach „thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself“ but will vote against same sex marriages and equal oppurtunities for immigrants.

Judgementality: Theres the stereotype that christians are often intolerant to othere religions . This could be due to many people in europe/north america seeing christianity as the default and every other religion being a deviation of the norm, or abnormal.

--Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 09:43, 25. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

It's good that you have found sources for religious stereotypes, but I don't understand where you would like to add your text. Some of the introductory text may be highly redundant with the existing article depending on where you want to publish it. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:29, 25. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

Stereotypisierung von Menschen mit Behinderung

I want to improve the already existing article Behindertenfeindlichkeit by adding a chapter called «Stereotypisierung von Menschen mit Behinderung» after the chapter «Ursachen behindertenfeindlicher Haltungen und behindernder Strukturen»:

Die Stereotypisierung von Menschen mit Behinderung ist ein gesellschaftliches Phänomen, das weitgehende Auswirkungen auf das Leben der Betroffenen hat. Die soziale Wahrnehmung von Menschen mit Behinderung ist defizitorientiert und von negativen Vorstellungen geprägt. Obwohl Menschen mit Behinderung äusserst vielfältig sind und unterschiedlichste Formen von Behinderungen aufweisen, werden sie oft in einer Weise homogenisiert, die ihre Vielfalt nicht angemessen berücksichtigt. Die Stereotypen können subtil oder offensichtlich sein. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf das vermeintliche Defizit und der eingeschränkten Leistungsfähigkeit. Menschen mit Behinderungen werden oft stereotypisch als abhängig, inkompetent und asexuell wahrgenommen. Gleichzeitig werden ihnen jedoch auch positive Eigenschaften wie Freundlichkeit und Warmherzigkeit zugeschrieben.

Die mediale Darstellung von Menschen mit Behinderung trägt oft zur Stereotypisierung bei. Sie erstreckt sich von klischeehaft bis hin zur emanzipierten Illustration. In vielen Filmen und Berichterstattungen werden Menschen mit Behinderungen entweder als Opfer oder als Helden dargestellt, was ihre Realität nicht angemessen widerspiegelt. Um Behindertenfeindlichkeit entgegenzuwirken, ist es wichtig, nach authentischen Darstellungen zu streben, die die Vielfalt und Komplexität von Menschen mit Behinderungen zeigen.

Es ist daher von grosser Bedeutung, Stereotype gegenüber Menschen mit Behinderung zu hinterfragen und Vorurteile abzubauen. Die Veränderung der stereotypen Bilder, die auf individueller Ebene tief verankert sind, schreitet jedoch nur langsam voran. Positive Erfahrungen im Umgang mit Menschen mit Behinderungen können dabei helfen, auch wenn dies nicht ausreichend ist. Für eine inklusive Gesellschaft ist es notwendig, mehr Bewusstsein für die individuellen Bedürfnisse und Fähigkeiten zu schaffen. Es braucht gesellschaftliche Bemühungen, um Menschen mit Behinderung die gleichen Chancen und Rechte zu gewähren. Die Beseitigung von Stereotypisierungen und die Förderung einer Kultur der Akzeptanz und Unterstützung sind unabdingbar, um die Vielfalt und Stärke von Menschen mit Behinderungen angemessen zu würdigen.

Diodx (Diskussion) 14:50, 31. Okt. 2023 (CET)

I largely agree with the content and the place where you intend to publish it. Some suggestions:

1. Consider deleting all "oft". I think it works without this word.

2. Consider moving the content of the stereotypes (end of first paragraph) to the beginning of the article. It is more logical to first say what are the stereotypes and then talk about the consequences..

3. Change "liegt dabei auf das vermeintliche Defizit " into "auf dem vermeintlichen Defizit"

4. In the expression "von klischeehaft bis hin zur emanzipierten Illustration" I don't understand the latter. What is emanzipierte Illustration. Perhaps you can say it differently.

5. Finally, at the end it is a tiny bit too normative - "es braucht", "sind unabdingbar". Perhaps you can try and more consistently use the wikipedia style (rather than an essay style). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:32, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Soziale Identität und Rückmeldung: gespaltene Interpretation?

oder Attributionsambiguität(-> siehe Attributional ambiguity)?

Last week I got the feedback that the article to attributional ambiguity already contained the information I wrote, but I did not see this. The study I described is not yet in there. It is true though, that this article already contains a lot of empirical support. But maybe I could still publish it there?

Otherwise, I also tried to write a compact definition for the German article.

In Situationen, in denen die soziale Identität von Individuen auf einem Stereotyp basiert, das von vielen negativen Vorurteilen begleitet ist, zeigt sich eine besondere Dynamik in der Interpretation von Rückmeldung. Betroffene Individuen nehmen Feedback anders wahr, wenn sie vermuten, dass es von einer Person stammt, die möglicherweise von diesen negativen Stereotypen beeinflusst ist. Diese Wahrnehmung unterscheidet sich deutlich von der Interpretation, die erfolgt, wenn der Gebende zur gleichen sozialen Gruppe gehört(1).

Kritik wird in solchen Fällen nicht als objektive Einschätzung betrachtet, sondern vielmehr als Resultat von Diskriminierung und Vorurteilen attribuiert.(2) Dieser Mechanismus dient dem Schutz des Selbstwertgefühls, der Vermeidung negativer Emotionen(3) und in manchen Fällen sogar eine Verbesserung der Leistung(4).

Ebenso wird positives Feedback nicht als authentische Anerkennung eigener Leistungen wahrgenommen, sondern eher als Mitleid interpretiert.(5) Diese Wahrnehmung kann nachteilige Auswirkungen auf das Selbstwertgefühl haben.(6)

1) Mendes, W. B., Major, B., McCoy, S., & Blascovich, J. (2008). How attributional ambiguity shapes physiological and emotional responses to social rejection and acceptance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 278–291.

2) Major, B., Quinton, W. J., & Schmader, T. (2003). Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem: Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1031(02)00547-4

3) Hoyt, C. L., Aguilar, L., Kaiser, C. R., Blascovich, J., & Lee, K. (2007). The self-protective and undermining effects of attributional ambiguity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(6), 884–893.

4) Crocker, Jennifer; Voelkl, Kristin; Testa, Maria; Major, Brenda (1991). "Social stigma: The affective consequences of attributional ambiguity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 60 (2): 218–228. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.218

5) Crocker, Jennifer; Major, Brenda; Stelle, Claude (1998). "Social Stigma". In Gilbert, Daniel T.; Fiske, Susan T.; Lindzey, Gardner (eds.). The Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol. Two (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 519–521. ISBN 978-0-19-521376-8.

6) Whiteley, Bernard E.; Kite, Mary E. (2010). The Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. pp. 428–435. ISBN 978-0-495-59964-7

--192.12.247.33 13:11, 31. Okt. 2023 (CET)nikepaulina

I just said that the article by Hoyt was already covered. Anyway, I would welcome it if you would publish your text on our common page under "Konsequenzen". Here are some suggestions to improve your text.

1. In the first paragraph you are being a little bit too indirect, e.g., you say "besondere Dynamik", "anders wahr", "unterscheidet sich deutlich" - you should say more directly what the phenomenon is, I think this can be done in one sentence (compare with the English wikipedia article).

2. I would stick to the concept of "negative stereotype" and not also introduce "prejudice"

3. When you implement these changes, can you also use apporpriate code for citing your articles so that only the small blue numbers appear in your text and the references are shown at the end of the page? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:51, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Expanding the effects section of stereotypes

My proposal would be the following, it would be included, as I previously stated, in the effects(under the self-stereotypes subsection) section of the Stereotypes article in English:

Stereotyping can also play a central role in depression,"the deployment of negative racial stereotypes has advantages and disadvantages for both the social target and the social perceiver. Nonetheless, it appears that the social perceiver profits the most from racial stereotyping, whereas the stigmatized target bears the most of the costs. During adolescence, the idea and sense of one self starts to develop; higher self esteem is usually associated with a better mental health, which in turn leads to a more resilient approach to adversities. It is now commonly known that the existence of pertinent group characteristics can accidentally and subconsciously activate stereotypes. When these two events are taken into account, it is suggested that stereotype activation may lead to the perceiver acting in ways that are compatible with stereotypes. The self-fulfilling prophecy states that our stereotypes influence our behavior and this influences the behavior of the other, in such a way that it becomes more likely that we confirm our stereotypes. In an experiment conducted by Rosenthal & Jacobson (1968) about Students IQ, the teachers maintained biased attitudes with the students, which produced great effects on them. The biggest effects of negative expectancies are in already stigmatized groups and low economic incomes. When we are with “open mind” and try to be aware of this, it is less probable that we communicate a negative expectancy and change the other's behavior." --Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion)10:57, 29. Okt. 2023 (CET)

The paragraph that you would like to link to (beginning with "Stereotyping can also play a central role in depression") refers to the article by Cox et al. in which they draw attention to the basic similarity between a negative self-schema (as is observed in depression) and a negative stereotype. On p. 429 Cox et al. write "We see no compelling reason for the distinction between stereotypes studied by prejudice researchers and schemas studied by depression researchers." So they propose to bridge the theoretical divide between clinical and social psychology and develop some interesting ideas. If I understand you correctly, your interest is specifically in the connection between (self-)stereotyping and depression / low self-esteem, so this article would be a great resource. So let me suggest to you that you read the article by Cox and see what you can add. It doesn't have to be much because your greater contribution would lie in the following: Link the articles on stereotypes and depression. In the article en:Depression_(mood), search for "historical legacy", where they also cite Cox, but it's just one sentence and they don't mention or link the stereotype article. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:40, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

ABC Model

I would like to propose the following to be put in the English Stereotype website in the 'Content' section under the information that is currently there about the Stereotype Content Model:

An even more recent model of stereotype content called the Agency-Beliefs-Communion (ABC) model suggested that methods to study warmth and competence in the Stereotype Content Model (SCM) were missing a crucial element, that being, stereotypes of social groups are often spontaneously generated. Experiments on the SCM usually ask participants to rate traits according to warmth and competence but this doesn't allow participants to use any other stereotype dimensions.

The ABC model, created by Koch and colleagues in 2016, is an estimate of how people spontaneously stereotype groups of people using 16 traits, each trait having two polarities e.g. powerful and powerless. These traits were correlated to U.S social groups in seven studies whereby participants were able to spontaneously employ any dimension they thought was important. An example of a trait being correlated to a group may be that "men are wealthy". The 16 trait pairs were categorized into three dimensions: Agency (A), Beliefs (B) and Communion (C). Agency is associated with reaching goals, standing out and socio-economic status and is related to competence in the SCM, with some examples of traits including poor and wealthy, powerful and powerless, low status and high status. Beliefs is associated with views on the world, morals and conservative-progressive beliefs with some examples of traits including traditional and modern, religious and science-oriented or conventional and alternative. Finally, communion is associated with connecting with others and fitting in and is similar to warmth from the SCM, with some examples of traits including trustworthy and untrustworthy, cold and warm and repellent and likeable. According to research using this model, there is a curvilinear relationship between agency and communion. To put this in an example, if Nicole is high in assertiveness (agency) then she may be seen as mean (communion). Whereas if she had an average to low assertiveness she may be seen as friendly. This model has many implications in predicting behaviour towards stereotyped groups. For example, Koch and colleagues recently proposed that perceived similarity in agency and beliefs increases inter-group cooperation.

• Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 15:17, 31. Okt. 2023 (CET)

I largely agree with your description of the ABC model. Here are some suggestions for improving your contribution, and if they make sense to you you could implement them and publish your text:

1. I would write "proposed by Koch" instead "created by Koch"

2. I would not mention the 16 traits because as you correctly say at the beginning, the novel aspect of the ABC model is that it looked at how people spontaneously stereotype groups. That is, in the development of the model, Koch et al. simply asked participants to list groups and sort them according to their similarity. They used statistical techniques to uncover the dimensions that would explain the similarity ratings. This way, three dimensions emerged (that you describe well). See the pages 34-40 in https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.11.001, which I suggest you also cite in your text.

3. For the curvilinear relation, I wouldn't switch to describing an individual (Nicole) but retain the focus on groups. To understand this curvilinear relation, you could say the groups high or low on agency are seen as rather uncommunal but groups average on the agency dimension are seen as more communal. You could cite https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691616657334 for this. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:20, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Social media stereotypes

I want to improve the already existing article (English version) “Social media” by adding a chapter in section “stereotyping” section :

Young people who publish their lives on the Internet, share their thoughts and impressions with an audience (This can include a variety of topics such as fashion, beauty, travel, cooking, politics, technology and much more.) also fall under the stereotype , stereotype words "blogger". A blogger, as a stereotype, is often associated with the idea of a person who is not engaged in physical or traditionally recognized work, but receives significant income from maintaining a personal weblog or video blog on the Internet. This stereotype is mainly based on the perception of blogging as a meaningless activity that does not require significant physical effort or professional skills. In the common perception, bloggers are perceived as individuals who spend a lot of time publishing content about their personal lives or unrelated to important social issues. The stereotype assumes that they receive a significant amount of financial resources through sponsorship deals, advertising contracts and donations from their audience. This makes it seem as if bloggers are making great incomes without putting in much effort or work. This stereotype can cause different reactions in society, including criticism from those who perceive the activity as frivolous and unimportant, as well as reservations about securing a sustainable financial future without real work or vocational training. Some may consider blogging to be an empty and insignificant business, and Internet personalities are considered unreliable sources of information. Some may criticize them for being too self-interested, as well as for a shallow analysis of the issues they discuss. At the same time, there are those who see blogging as a new form of self-expression and a means of generating income in the era of the digital economy. Also, bloggers help to form and popularize new trends, contribute to the development of culture, lifestyle and fashion. They can act as important intermediaries between brands and consumers, helping the latter make informed purchases. Bloggers can also serve an important social function by raising awareness of issues and calling for change in society. Despite the stereotypes, it is important to remember that the reality of blogging can be much more complex and diverse, and achieving success in this area requires certain skills, knowledie and creative potential.

References : https://www.jstor.org/stable/1048984

https://www.jstor.org/stable/42751114

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1g69xtj.9

--Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) 15:27, 31. Okt. 2023 (CET)

Let me copy the existing text from the section on "stereotyping" in the article on en:Social_media to contextualize my suggestions:

"Recent research has demonstrated that social media, and media in general, have the power to increase the scope of stereotypes not only in children but people of all ages. Both cases of stereotyping of the youth and the elderly are prime examples of ageism. The presumed characteristics of the individual being stereotyped can have both negative and positive connotations but frequently carry an opposing viewpoint. For example, the youth on social media platforms are often depicted as lazy, immature individuals who oftentimes have no drive or passion for other activities. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, much of the youth were accused for the spread of the disease and were blamed for the continuous lockdowns across the world. These misrepresentations make it difficult for the youth to find new efforts and prove others wrong, especially when a large group of individuals believe that the stereotypes are highly accurate. Considering the youthful groups that are present on social media are frequently in a new stage of their lives and preparing to make life-changing decisions, it is essential that the stereotypes are diminished so that they do not feel invalidated. Further, stereotyping often occurs for the elderly as they are presumed to be a group of individuals who are unaware of the proper functions and slang usage on social media. These stereotypes often seek to exclude older generations from participating in trends or engaging them in other activities on digital platforms."

1. It would definitely be a good idea to start a new paragraph because the existing text talks about how social media transport stereotypes, whereas your focus is on the stereotype of social media users. To make the difference clear, I would open with a short sentence like: "Users of social media can also be the target of stereotypes."

2. I like the remainder of your text but at the moment the source of these assertations is unclear. For example, where is the evidence for the following (it must not be only your perception): "A blogger, as a stereotype, is often associated with the idea of a person who is not engaged in physical or traditionally recognized work, but receives significant income from maintaining a personal weblog or video blog on the Internet. This stereotype is mainly based on the perception of blogging as a meaningless activity that does not require significant physical effort or professional skills. In the common perception, bloggers are perceived as individuals who spend a lot of time publishing content about their personal lives or unrelated to important social issues. The stereotype assumes that they receive a significant amount of financial resources through sponsorship deals, advertising contracts and donations from their audience." --- In your references I could not find relevant evidence. So for next time, you should try to link the references (and if the jstor links that you mentioned don't include the relevant evidence, you could search for others sources) to specific claims that you make so that readers can verify what you are writing. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:40, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Accuracy/ Richtigkeit

I would like to add the following passage to the section accuracy/ Richtigkeit of the german article: Es ist eine weitverbreitete alltagspsychologische Grundannahme über Stereotype und Vorurteile, dass diese vor allem deshalb schädlich sind, weil sie nachweisbar falsch sind oder zumindest weil sie unberechtigte Übergeneralisierungen enthalten. Jedoch gibt es in der Realität tatsächlich Gruppenunterschiede welche messbar und nachweisbar sind und sich auch in unseren Überzeugungen und Einstellungen gegenüber der jeweiligen Gruppen wiederspiegeln. Jussim et al. untersuchten vier Studien zu Rassenstereotypen und sieben Studien zu Geschlechterstereotypen in Bezug auf demografische Merkmale, schulische Leistungen, Persönlichkeit und Verhalten. Die Autoren kamen zum Schluss, dass einige Aspekte ethnischer und geschlechtsspezifischer Stereotype zutreffend sind, während Stereotype in Bezug auf politische Zugehörigkeit und Nationalität weit weniger zutreffend sind. Nichtsdestotrotz bleibt es schwierig den objektiven Wahrheitsgehalt von Stereotypen zu bestimmen. Auch sind die echten Unterschiede zwischen den Gruppen oft kleiner als man glauben würde. Ausserdem sind diese Unterschiede zwischen den Gruppen oft kleiner als die Unterschiede zwischen den Personen innerhalb dieser Gruppen. Die Untersuchung der Richtigkeit von Stereotypen ist ein theoretisches, methodisches und politisches Minenfeld.

References: 1) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-60572-1_4)

2) Lee Jussim, e.g. Jussim, L. (2017). Précis of Social Perception and Social Reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, E1. doi:10.1017/S0140525X1500062X

--ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 17:05, 31. Okt. 2023 (CET)ThomasB7

I have some small suggestions for improvement:

1. delete "nachweisbar" and "unberechtigte" (you say the same without these words)

2. add commas before "weil" and "welche"

3. "Jussim untersuchten vier Studien" - this is ambiguous: did they conduct these studies or review these studies (perhaps "fassten .. Studien zusammen").

4. instead of "Rassenstereotypen" I would say "ethnische Stereotype"

5. add comma after "schwierig" and before "als man"

Although much more could be said about accuracy research, I think it's fine for our purposes. After these changes you can publish it on our page. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:47, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotype threat

the following is my revised text for the wikipedia entry Bedrohung durch Stereotype

Liu et al. unterscheiden in einem metaanalytischen Review aus dem Jahr 2021 drei Interventionsmöglichkeiten, welche bei der Bedrohung durch Stereotype helfen können. Dazu zählen die überzeugungsbasierten Interventionen, identitätsbasierten Interventionen und die resilienzbasierten Interventionen. Zu den überzeugungsbasierten Interventionen gehört beispielsweise die Verringerung der Unterschiede zwischen der in-group und der out-group, indem die Gemeinsamkeiten der beiden Gruppen betont werden. Ein Beispiel für die identitätsbasierten Intervention ist die Aktivierung von multiplen soziale Identitäten. Dabei werden Teilnehmende der Intervention darauf aufmerksam gemacht, dass es für eine Person nicht nur eine soziale Identität gibt, welche eventuell durch Stereotype bedroht ist, sondern weitere positiv geprägte Identitäten existieren. Bei der resilienzbasierten Intervention wird beispielsweise das Vertrauen der Teilnehmenden, eine Aufgabe erledigen zu können, gestärkt. Insgesamt zeigen die Ergebnisse, dass die genannten Interventionen die Leistung von Gruppenmitgliedern, welche von der Bedrohung durch Stereotype betroffen sind, verbessern können. Alle drei Interventionen konnten den negativen Einfluss durch die Bedrohung durch Stereotype reduzieren. Dabei waren die überzeugungsbasierte Interventionen die effektivsten. Die identitätsbasierten Interventionen haben kleinere aber stabile Effekte über die verschiedenen Studien hinweg. Die resilienzbasierte Interventionen weisen die grösste Instabilität bezüglich der Effektivität auf. Generell ist zu beachten, dass durch die Beeinflussung der Umwelt die Effekte der Interventionen abgeschwächt werden können. Demzufolge weisen Laborstudien stärkere Effekte auf als Feldstudien .

Can I publish this text now? for the next week I will make a suggestion for our Wikipedia page in the section Intervention --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 15:10, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Yes, you can publish this, but correct the following things first:

1. "bei der Bedrohung .... helfen" -> what's a better expression to avoid the interpretation that the intervention increases threat?

2. "helfen können. Dazu zählen" -> say "Dies sind..." instead of "Dazu zählen" and avoid mentioning "Internventionen" three times in a sentence.

3. "Verringerung der Unterschiede" -> you mean "wahrgenommenen Unterschiede"

4. comma before "aber"

5. again, let me ask what you mean by "Instabilität": is it how stable the effect is (from one day after the intervention to one month after the intervention) or does it refer to the variance of effects obtained across studies - in the latter case I would write that the effectiveness of this intervention is relatively less certain. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:57, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotyped cooking world, domestic cooking vs. Haute Cuisine

I am going to add my idea under the ‘Gender stereotypes’ section in the ‘Gender role’ article of the English Wikipedia. The subsection´s name is going to be ‘In the culinary world’. Draft:

The gender roles are almost everywhere one can imagine, and the culinary world is not an exception. Cooking is a gendered task in all its types, from the domestic sphere, where women are the main characters to the professional sphere, where it is predominately male. There is a dichotomy behind the cooking task so far mainly feminine in the household and masculine in the restaurant kitchen.

The established masculine culture, workplace conditions, and work-life balance are among the main barriers women face. Domestic tasks are unequally distributed in the household, and it disadvantages women especially those who work in the professional kitchen. Women, as a result, find it hard to remain and evolve in the kitchen workplace <Haddaji, M. (2017) Gender barriers and facilitators faced by women chefs in the gastronomy and the ‘Haute Cuisine’ fields. (PhD thesis). Universitat Politèchnica de València>.Those hegemonic masculinity ideals prevailing in the industry coupled to the hard kitchen work environment, make it much more difficult for professional’s women and aspiring chefs to achieve their goals and objectives.

This problem comes from the past, as a result of the traditional gender roles stereotype: Women are the ones who stay at home and men are the professionals who work and support the family. Talking about the culinary world, this stereotype developed in such a way that women are the ones who cook at home and men are masters of Haute Cuisine <Haddaji, M. (2017) Gender barriers and facilitators faced by women chefs in the gastronomy and the ‘Haute Cuisine’ fields. (PhD thesis). Universitat Politèchnica de València>. In addition, as if that were not enough, women chefs are disadvantaged by gender stereotypes such as emotionality, sensitivity and physical weakness <Harris, D. H. and Giuffre, P. (2010b), “Not one of the guys: women chefs redefining gender in the culinary industry”, in Williams, C. L. andDellinger, K. (Ed.), Gender and sexuality in the workplace, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.59-81>. Women and men chefs are evaluated differently from a culinary and a leadership perspective. Men are considered more innovative, stronger leader and enjoy better business acumen rather than women, that are considered caring, homey and have a nurturing role. This also comes from gender roles history.

On the other hand, the dichotomy behind the cooking task and the gender segregation is also reflected in the knowledge that the kitchen restaurants ‘have a reputation for sexism’ and ‘those in the kitchen would, no doubt, remind a female trainee that the French name for a cook, le cuisinier, has a female counterpart’ but there is no feminine name for the chef <Pratten, J. D. (2003a), “What makes a great chef”, British Food Journal, Vol. 105 No. 7, pp. 454-459> <Pratten, J.D. (2003b), “The training and retention of chefs”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 237-242>.

Sexual harassment, gay and female discrimination have been reported in hospitality and, in particular, the restaurant industry <Ineson, E. M., Yap, M. H. and Whiting, G. (2013), Sexual discrimination and harassment in the hospitality industry, International Journal of Hospitality Management,Vol. 35, pp.1-9>. Unfortunately, abuse is an expected part of the culture of a professional kitchen and seems to be supported by both historical and social structures. The cause is attributed to education, training and the socialization process <Bloisi, W. and Hoel, H. (2008), “Abusive work practices and bullying among chefs: A review of the literature”,International Journal of Hospitality Management,Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 649-656>.

Knowing the history of the world of cooking, it is not surprising that, in a global scale and according to recent figures, among the 50 best worldwide restaurants in 2015, women ran fewer than 4% <Day, E. (2015), “Hélène Darroze: life according to the world’s best female chef”, Retrieved from :http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/jun/07/helenedarroze-female-chefs> and that in the Michelin Guide classification, out of 110 restaurant chefs awarded three Michelin stars in 2014, there were only six women chefs (5.5%) <Elite Traveler. (2014). The rise of the female Michelin star chef [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.elitetraveler.com/shopping-lifestyle/stars-grace-red-carpet-inmastoloni- pearls>.

To get to Chef women must be resilient and build their success in the sector. For both genders, it is not easy to become a renowned chef, but for women there is an extra barrier that is gender. It is hoped that over time there will be more awareness on the subject and that this information will help to reduce this phenomenon, causing a balance in the kitchen dichotomy. There have been changes, however, it is a problem that still exists. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 19:45, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

How do you put the numbers to make the references? I couldn't make it. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 19:52, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Your text can be published there after the following changes:

1. Make sure that you only present facts and not commentary. For example, "it is not surprising", or "it is hoped" are good in an essay, but not on Wikipedia.

2. Move the paragraph about the number of women in professional cuisine up because it underscores your point about "predominantly male" (integrate it with the opening paragraph).

3. For the link to stereotypes, you could refer to Eagly's role theory, e.g. the recent article here https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01965/full

4. For the citations, please have a look at this help page: Hilfe:Einzelnachweise. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 18:26, 5. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Thanks for the suggestions. I've already made all the changes and published it. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 10:09, 7. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hip Hop Stereotypes corrected

In this proposal I added my parts to the existing Hip Hop Stereotypes mentioned previously. My added parts will be bold.

Hip hop music has reinforced stereotypes about black men. Exposure to violent, misogynistic rap music performed by African American male rappers has increased negative stereotypes towards black men as hostile, criminal and sexist. Hip hop portrays a stereotypical black masculine aesthetic and has stereotyped Black men as hypersexual thugs and gangsters who hail from an inner city ghetto. The listening of this misogynistic and violent Hip hop has effects on African American Men and their cognitive performance. They perform worse in Graduate Exams, when they have listened to this kind of music compared to white men under the same conditions. African-American women are degraded and referred to as “bitches” and “hoes” in rap music. African-American women are over-sexualized in modern hip hop music videos and are portrayed as sexual objects for rappers. Over-sexualization of African American women in Rap music videos may have health implications for viewers of such videos. In a survey study, adolescent African American women watching Rap videos and perceiving them to contain more sexual stereotypes were more likely to binge drink, test positive for marijuana and have a negative body image. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 10:13, 3. Nov. 2023 (CET)

You can publish this after implementing the following changes:

2nd sentence: Instead of "has increased" (which suggests a historical change) write "has been shown to activate" (i.e. the language in which results of psychological experiments are typically described).

4th sentence: Instead of "The listening of" write "Listening to this..."

5th sentence: instead of "Graduate Exam" write "tests resembling the Graduate Record Exam after listening to..." --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:05, 6. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Boomerang effect

Elyfa and I have finished our article on the boomerang effect: Benutzer:JasminMoor/Bumerang Effekt (Psychologie) --JasminMoor (Diskussion) 11:54, 26. Okt. 2023 (CEST) Elyfa (Diskussion) 15:04, 26. Okt. 2023 (CEST)

In the section "Generalisierbarkeit" there are two minor issues: write "geringerer" instead of "geringer", and when you write "gleich wahrscheinlich" you should mention the second part of the comparison (i.e."Personen mit stärkeren Vorurteilen"). Other than that, it looks good and you can follow the steps described here to move it into the article namespace: Hilfe:Seite verschieben#Artikelentwurf in den Artikelnamensraum verschieben --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:16, 6. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Update: Please don't move it to the article namespace just yet, Lantus will do a quality check. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:07, 7. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Ist jetzt geschehen und wurde von 3. Hand administrativ verschoben nach Bumerangeffekt. ※Lantus 20:00, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes about Religion

I‘ve added a new draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stereotypes_about_Religion --Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 16:46, 31. Okt. 2023 (CET)

I have made a few small edits directly in your code (you can see them if you click "View history"). In the first paragraph on "common stereotypes", I am wondering if you could provide a citation for the first two sentences; also, I would delete the part on outgroup homogeneity (beginning with "A common issue with stereotypes is") because I think this mixes up two things and you have already said that stereotypes can be inaccurate.

You should improve the citations to scientific articles, currently it includes long links which will take some readers nowhere because they don't have access to the database you're using. Here you can find more about how to cite different sources.

At the end of your page's source code, include the following (put it inside these double brackets [[ ]] without the quotation marks): "Category:Stereotypes" - this will include your article in the category of stereotypes.

After that, I think your article would be ready for publication. Please have a close look at this guide for publishing on the English Wikipedia. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:48, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes about people living with a mental illness

I wrote the contribution "Improving the article "Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker" in week 4, where I added a suggestion on what to add to that article. I've expanded my suggestion by adding the additional source that addresses Allport's Intergroup Contact Theory, and a study that shows how the stereotyped perception of people with a mental illness as dangerous was reduced, which I believe is more in line with our definition of stereotypes:

In den letzten Jahren sind zunehmend Projekte gegen die Stigmatisierung von Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung aktiv geworden. Initiativen von und mit Betroffenen haben grundsätzlich Vorzüge gegenüber Initiativen von Aussenstehenden, da diese das höchste Mass and Glaubwürdigkeit und Authentizität besitzen. Auch kann die Autonomie der Betroffenen so besser beibehalten bleiben. Die Strategie, die am besten belegt ist, ist persönlicher Kontakt mit Betroffenen. Einem psychisch kranken Menschen zu begegnen und dessen Lebensgeschichte zu hören, kann die Ablehnung und das Bedürfnis nach Abgrenzung reduzieren. Entscheidend ist dabei jedoch, dass diese Kontakte auf Augenhöhe stattfinden."

Dies entspricht auch der Kontakthypothese des Sozialpsychologen Gordon Allport. Diese besagt, dass persönlicher Kontakt, unter der Bedingung, dass eine freundliche Atmosphäre besteht und sich die beiden Partien auf Augenhöhe begegnen, Stereotypisierung, Vorurteile und Diskrimination zwischen unterschiedlichen Gruppen am effektivsten reduziert. Dies wurde auch spezifisch für Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung belegt."

Es konnte ebenfalls gezeigt werden, dass nicht nur der Kontakt in Person, sondern auch Videos dazu führen können, dass die stereotype Wahrnehmung von Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung als gefährlich reduziert wird."

I've now used the term "Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung" instead of "Psychisch Kranke". If you agree, I could also write into the discussion of that article that using that in the whole article would be worth considering.

I also think that it would make sense to link this article in our article (Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie), under "3.1 Beispiele für Stereotype".

Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 16:11, 1. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Sounds good to me! Minor things: there are some single quotation marks that you should delete. You could link to Gordon Allport and Kontakthypothese when you introduce them. I would improve the sentence "Diese besagt, dass persönlicher Kontakt, unter der Bedingung, dass eine freundliche Atmosphäre besteht und sich die beiden Partien auf Augenhöhe begegnen, Stereotypisierung, Vorurteile und Diskrimination zwischen unterschiedlichen Gruppen am effektivsten reduziert." as follows: "Diese besagt, dass persönlicher Kontakt zwischen Menschen unterschiedlicher Gruppen gegenseitige Stereotypisierung, Vorurteile und Diskriminierung reduziert. Dieser Kontakt sollte unter den folgenden Bedingungen stattfinden: Gleicher Status in der Kontaktsituation, Kooperation im Hinblick auf gemeinsame Ziele, Unterstützung durch Autoritäten." You could cite https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-65297-8_14. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:07, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes of Schizophrenia in Movies

In week 4 I posted a draft for an article about the influence of movies in perpetrating stereotypes of schizophrenia. In this second draft I have added sources about the portrayal of people with schizophrenia in movies, the accuracy of the portrayal as well as the importance of the portrayal.

"In contemporary society movies are considered a significant and valuable source of information. Generally movies have been found to perpetrate stereotypes by misrepresenting and inaccurately portraying characters with mental illnesses like schizophrenia (1).

Schizophrenia is a severe psychological disorder which is surrounded by negative stereotypes. The stereotypes include the idea of a split personality, being "crazy", showing dangerous or violent behavior and committing crimes. The stereotype of being crazy stems from the symptoms delusion and hallucination, which lead to the stereotypes of unpredictability and incompetence (2, 3).

A majority of movies depict characters with schizophrenia as dangerous, violent, unpredictable and homicidal (4, 5). Although people with schizophrenia are more likely to be violent than the general population, only a small proportion of societal violence can be linked to them (6). Movies also use the negative stereotypes of being crazy by using delusions and hallucinations as the main symptoms schizophrenic characters have (5). Though delusions and hallucinations are cardinal symptoms of schizophrenia, in reality other symptoms take precedence, such as apathy and flattening affect (5).

It is important for movies to accurately portray schizophrenia, as it influences how people with schizophrenia are perceived by society. This contributes to the perpetration of stereotypes. A study by Crant (2018) demon-strated that watching a videoclip of a positive portrayal of schizophrenia lead to the participants to view the person with schizophrenia as significantly less dangerous (7). This highlights, how movies can shape public stereotypes."

References:

(1) Wulsin, L. R. (2006). Movies & Mental Illness: Using Films to Understand Psychotherapy, 2nd ed. Prima-ry Care Companion to the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 8(3), 181. PMCID: PMC1540396.

(2) Angermeyer, M., & Matschinger, H. (2004). The Stereotype of Schizophrenia and Its Impact on Discrimi-nation Against People With Schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30(4), 1049-1061.

(3) Katschnig, H. (2018). Psychiatry's contribution to the public stereotype of schizophrenia: Historical con-siderations. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 24(5), 1093-1100. doi: 10.1111/jep.13011. Epub 2018 Aug 15. PMID: 30112785; PMCID: PMC6174929.

(4) Gabbard, G. O. (2007). Schizophrenia on Filmmaker's Canvas. Psychiatry Online. doi.org/10.1176/pn.42.19.0006

(5) Owen, P. R. (2012). Portrayals of schizophrenia by entertainment media: A content analysis of contempo-rary movies. Psychiatric Services, 63, 655–659. doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201100371

(6) 1alsh, E., et al. (2002). Violence and schizophrenia: Examining the evidence. The British Journal of Psy-chiatry, 180(6).

(7) Crant, J. (2018). The Relationship between Media Portrayal of Schizophrenia and Attitudes toward Those with Schizophrenia. Journal of the Indiana Academy of the Social Sciences, 21(1), Article 48. (nicht signierter Beitrag von JessTheodore (Diskussion | Beiträge) 19:21, 1. Nov. 2023 (CET)) JessTheodore (Diskussion) 10:11, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think you want to include your part in the section en:Schizophrenia#Cultural_depictions. Please note that this section already talks about how schizophrenia is portrayed in movies (e.g. the Beautiful Mind). I suggest that you insert your text after the first two paragraphs (i.e., before "Media coverage reinforces..."). If you delete your first sentence (because it would not fit in this context), your text would begin with "Generally movies have been found to perpetrate stereotypes by misrepresenting and inaccurately portraying characters with mental illnesses like schizophrenia." Please include the citations properly by using <ref>...</ref> in source code, Here you can find more about how to cite different sources.

The next sentence ("Schizophrenia is a severe psychological disorder which is surrounded by negative stereotypes.") should be deleted (because you're editing an article about Schizophrenia which already explains it's a disorder) so you would continue with "Stereotypes include...". The existing text mentions the stereotype of violence, so in your next (and probably final) version, could you highlight how your text would be integrated with the last paragraph in en:Schizophrenia#Cultural_depictions (just copy what will be retained). In your last paragraph, change "perpetration" into "perpetuation", remove hyphen in "demon-strated" and the comma before "how".

In summary, please create proper citations (also note that there are a couply superfluous hyphens in your reference and some misspelled names) and show how your text would be integrated with the last paragraph in en:Schizophrenia#Cultural_depictions. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 13:23, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stigmatization of ADHD

I have worked over my text for the German Wikipedia article Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung. I feel like I could add more paragraphs about the prevalence of ADHD in prisoners but for now this is what I've come up with.

Stereotype und Stigmata verbunden mit ADHS:

Menschen mit ADHS sind schon lange einer Vielzahl von Stereotypen und Stigmata ausgesetzt. Eine bis heute relevante Debatte betrifft beispielsweise bereits die blosse Existenz der Störung. Häufig wird behauptet, dass die Krankheit überdiagnostiziert ist oder sogar, dass sie einfach erfunden ist. Dies kann dazu führen, dass Betroffene sich selbst Vorwürfe dafür machen, dass sie mit gewissen Dingen mehr Probleme haben als ihre Mitmenschen. (1) Daraus resultiert dann häufig Selbst-Stigmatisierung. (2) (3)

Jedoch geht die Stereotypisierung über die blosse Hinterfragung der Existenz von ADHS hinaus; Menschen mit der Störung wird häufiger die Tendenz zu antisozialem und gewalttätigem Verhalten zugeschrieben, auch wenn dies nicht in diesem Ausmass der Realität entspricht. Daraus resultiert bereits im Kindheits- und Jugendalter eine Aversion gegen Mitmenschen mit ADHS, weshalb sowohl Kinder und Jugendliche als auch Erwachsene häufig sozial ausgeschlossen werden. (4) (5)

Des Weiteren gibt es auch Stereotype zu den kausalen Faktoren der Entstehung von ADHS. Diese reichen von schlechter Erziehung bis zu Drogenkonsum und sagen Menschen mit der Störung implizit, dass ADHS das Resultat von mangelnder Disziplin entweder vonseiten der Eltern oder der Betroffenen selbst ist. (2)

Folgen der Stereotypisierung:

Viele Stereotype der ADHS beziehen sich auf Geschlechterunterschiede im Erscheinungsbild der Störung. Da Frauen in der Forschung über ADHS für eine lange Zeit vernachlässigt wurden, ist über deren Störungsbild weniger bekannt als dies für Männer der Fall ist. Aufgrund dessen werden Mädchen mit einer ADHS bedeutend seltener diagnostiziert, und wenn sie diagnostiziert werden, ist es wahrscheinlicher, dass bei ihnen ADHS des unaufmerksamen Typs festgestellt wird. (7) Je nach Schweregrad der ADHS kann es einen bedeutenden Einfluss auf die psychische Gesundheit haben, ob man früh oder überhaupt damit diagnostiziert wurde. Bei Frauen mit einer spät oder nicht-diagnostizierten ADHS werden bedeutend häufiger Depressionen und/oder Suchtverhalten beobachtet, sowie stärkere ADHS-Symptome im Erwachsenenalter. (8)

Referenzen:

(1) Pestello, J. L.-B. (2008). Medicating for ADD/ADHD: Personal and Social Issues. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction.

(2) Daniel Coleman, J. S. (2009). Children's beliefs about causes of childhood depression and ADHD. Psychiatry Online.

(3) Ida Kellison, R. B. (2005). Assessment of stigma associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Psychometric evaluation of the ADHD Stigma Questionnaire. ScienceDirect.

(4) J. S. Walker, D. C. (2008). Children's stigmatization of childhood depression and ADHD: magnitude and demographic variation in a national sample. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

(5) G. U. Law, S. S. (2007). Children's attitudes and behavioural intentions towards a peer with symptoms of ADHD: does the addition of a diagnostic label make a difference? Association of British Pediatric Nurses.

(6) J. F. Paulson, C. B.-G. (2005). Social Rejection and ADHD in Young Adults: An Analogue Experiment. The American Professional Society of ADHD and Related Disorders.

(7) Rucklidge, J. J. (2010). Gender Differences in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. ScienceDirect.

(8) E. H. Pinkhardt, J. K. (2009). Intensified testing for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in girls should reduce depression and smoking in adult females and the prevalence of ADHD in the longterm. ScienceDirect.

Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 23:03, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I slightly edited your text directly in the source code (click "Versionsgeschichte" to see the changes). I would add your section between "Geschichte" and "Kontroversen". The one thing that you need to improve is your citations. Please have a look at Hilfe:Einzelnachweise for how to insert the articles as footnotes. Also, I noticed that many of your citations refer to "ScienceDirect", but this is not a journal. Please report the actual journal, volume, pages, and all authors, e.g. for Pinkhardt the reference should be displayed as:

Pinkhardt, E. H., Kassubek, J., Brummer, D., Koelch, M., Ludolph, A. C., Fegert, J. M., & Ludolph, A. G. (2009). Intensified testing for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in girls should reduce depression and smoking in adult females and the prevalence of ADHD in the long-term. Medical Hypotheses, 72, 409–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2008.11.025 --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:15, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes in Sports

Based on the feedback in week 4, I have revised my text, which is to be added into the ‘Gender role’ article in the English Wikipedia under the ‘Gender stereotypes’ section, by adding the suggested article and found additional articles regarding gender stereotypes in sports.

As strength has been strongly associated to masculinity for many years , sports have evolved into a significant representation of expressions of masculinity and hence, are commonly perceived as a predominantly male domain . However, this does not completely neglect the position and role of women in sports. This is evident from the number of females participating in sport increasing in recent years.

As the belief in gender stereotypes is continuously upheld in society , sporting events have been divided according to how the sport is characterised, which leads to the conceptualisation of male and female sports . Certain traits and sporting events in the sport domain have conventionally been attributed to males and the rest to females. Female sports, expressing the concepts of femininity, are often characterised with flexibility and balance, such as gymnastics or aesthetic sports like dance. Conversely, male sports constitute the idea of masculinity, which is portrayed through strength, speed, aggression and power, such as in football and basketball .

The element of beauty in women’s sport seems to play a crucial role in the of the perceived femininity of a sport. This could be due to it being a vital facet in the general concept of femininity itself . The objectification of the female form persists, with women being conditioned to utilize their bodies for the satisfaction of others and to measure their looks against the prevailing feminine standard. . The devaluation of female athleticism due their bodies can be seen in the sport uniforms, where in some sports, such as beach volleyball, gymnastics and figure skating, males and females don different uniforms in competitions. In the aforementioned sports, female uniforms expose more of their bodies than the male uniforms do despite the lack of evidence that such uniforms would significantly improve their skills .

While the distinction between male and female sports exist, females participating in male sports is more socially acceptable than the reverse, as questions would arise regarding the masculinity of males competing in the female sports . In a study conducted by Klomsten et al. (2005), they discovered that a majority of the females believed that certain sports are better suited for girls than for boys. Hence, they inferred that females do not prefer the idea of males, known to be strong and masculine, participating in feminine sports .

Sport media coverage of males and females differ significantly and this could attribute to the perpetuation of stereotypical gender roles as well as adversely influencing perceptions of women’s abilities . Male athletes are often portrayed based on their strength and physical prowess, while female athletes are more frequently depicted in relation to their physical attractiveness and, at times, their sexualized attributes. .

Despite the increasing participation and remarkable achievements of female athletes, media coverage and the marketing of women's sport have yet to catch up with this significant advancement . Female athletes and women's sport receive notably less media attention compared to their male counterparts across various forms of media, and this underrepresentation has worsened over the years, despite the rising levels of female participation and performance .

The depiction of female athletes and women's sport in the media also tends to vary in terms of tone, production quality in a manner that minimises their efforts and performance . One prevalent practice in sport media coverage is the use of “gender marking” . The presentation of male athletes and men's sport is regarded as the standard, while their female counterparts are often considered as the "other" or outside of this norm , as seen in the naming of events, such as “Women’s World Cup” while the men’s event being simply named as the “World Cup”. The use of first names and being referred to as “girls” or “young ladies” for female athletes is also seen as “infantilizing”., which Messner et al. (1993) argues that it reinforces the lower regard for female athletes and perpetuates pre-existing negative perceptions of women's sport. The quality of production and filming of men’s and women’s sport, such as the use of on-screen graphics, shot variations, duration of video frames and camera angles, are also significantly distinct. This influences the audience perceptions by illustrating women’s sport as less significant and engaging . Thus, female athletes not only face a lack of media coverage, but the little amount of coverage tends to reinforce the hegemonic masculinity present in sport .

While online sites that promote and cover female athletes exist, these coverages are primarily only found in “niche” sites, which continues to pose challenges in overcoming the prevailing ideology of hegemonic masculinity deeply rooted in sports . Therefore, despite the growing participation and outstanding athletic achievements of girls and women, female athletes and women's sports still have a long way to go in achieving equal treatment and fair representation in sports media coverage . -- Hanis Abdan (Diskussion) 17:09, 3. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Very impressive! The only thing you could try to improve is to add a few links to other Wikipedia articles on related topics. For example, you could link to the Uniform controversy in Beach Volleyball or to specific sports that you mention. See here for more information. When I included these links, I used "en:" because we're here in the German Wikipedia, so maybe it will be easier to include these Wikilinks when you implement your changes in en:Gender_role. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:39, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

ABC Model

I have implemented the changes suggested in my draft for a paragraph under the English stereotype page in the 'Content' section and have now published it. Below is a copy of what i have added:

An even more recent model of stereotype content called the Agency-Beliefs-Communion (ABC) model suggested that methods to study warmth and competence in the Stereotype Content Model (SCM) were missing a crucial element, that being, stereotypes of social groups are often spontaneously generated . Experiments on the SCM usually ask participants to rate traits according to warmth and competence but this doesn't allow participants to use any other stereotype dimensions .

The ABC model, proposed by Koch and colleagues in 2016 is an estimate of how people spontaneously stereotype U.S social groups of people using traits. Koch et al. conducted several studies asking participants to list groups and sort them according to their similarity . Using statistical techniques, they revealed three dimensions that explained the similarity ratings. These three dimensions were Agency (A), Beliefs (B) and Communion (C). Agency is associated with reaching goals, standing out and socio-economic status and is related to competence in the SCM, with some examples of traits including poor and wealthy, powerful and powerless, low status and high status. Beliefs is associated with views on the world, morals and conservative-progressive beliefs with some examples of traits including traditional and modern, religious and science-oriented or conventional and alternative. Finally, communion is associated with connecting with others and fitting in and is similar to warmth from the SCM, with some examples of traits including trustworthy and untrustworthy, cold and warm and repellent and likeable . According to research using this model, there is a curvilinear relationship between agency and communion . To put this in an example, if a group is high or low in agency then they may be seen as un-communal whereas groups that are average in the agency dimension are seen as more communal . This model has many implications in predicting behaviour towards stereotyped groups. For example, Koch and colleagues recently proposed that perceived similarity in agency and beliefs increases inter-group cooperation . --Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 20:30, 5. Nov. 2023 (CET)

It was fascinating to see how quickly your edit has been corrected, compare the versions here, where you can also thank the user SMcCandlish.

A suggestion also relevant for the others is to use the en:Template:Cite_journal for journal citations. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:08, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Soziale Identität und Interpretation von Rückmeldung

Thank you for the feedback last week! I¨ve tried to correct the points you mentioned, but I might not have succeedeed with the first point(to summarize the introduction into one sentence).

In Situationen, in denen die soziale Identität von Individuen auf einem Stereotyp basiert, das von vielen negativen Stereotypen begleitet ist, zeigt sich eine andere Attribution von Rückmeldung. Betroffene Individuen nehmen Feedback nicht gleich an, wenn sie vermuten, dass es von einer Person stammt, die möglicherweise von diesen negativen Stereotypen beeinflusst ist. Diese Wahrnehmung unterscheidet sich deutlich von der Interpretation, die erfolgt, wenn der Gebende zur gleichen sozialen Gruppe gehört .

Kritik wird in solchen Fällen nicht als objektive Einschätzung betrachtet, sondern vielmehr als Resultat von Diskriminierung und negativen Stereotypen attribuiert. Dieser Mechanismus dient dem Schutz des Selbstwertgefühls, der Vermeidung negativer Emotionen und in manchen Fällen sogar einer Verbesserung der Leistung.

Ebenso wird positives Feedback nicht als authentische Anerkennung eigener Leistungen wahrgenommen, sondern eher als Mitleid interpretiert. Diese Wahrnehmung kann nachteilige Auswirkungen auf das Selbstwertgefühl haben.

Should I describe some experiments/empirical support to this phenomena or would a defintion be enough?

--Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 09:46, 6. Nov. 2023 (CET)nikepaulina

1. I would use "Interpretationen von Rückmeldungen" as a subsection title.

2. Start by saying what attributional ambiguity is: "Negative Rückmeldungen (z.B. wie sympathisch oder kompetent andere Menschen einen finden) sind für Mitglieder stereotypisierter Gruppen oft mehrdeutig: Die Rückmeldung kann sowohl als objektive Einschätzung als auch als Resultat von Diskriminierung und negativen Stereotypen betrachtet werden. Die Attribution auf Diskriminierung dient..."

3. By compressing the first few sentences I have deleted the reference to Wendes et al., I think it's OK to cite them where you cite Major. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:51, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Functions of Stereotypes

I would like to make my second contribution to our Wiki in the section "Funktionen". I will focus on what makes stereotypes useful (ex. cognitive shortcut, maintaining a sense of belonging and group cohesion, manage uncertaintity) as well as harmful (ego-justification, rationalization of prejudice). I have found sources for all the points mentioned in brackets.

If you have any suggestions or source recommendations I would be happy to hear them.

Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 14:13, 6. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hey Amweiss17,I think that's a good idea. However, I am wondering if classifying the functions of stereotypes into harmful and useful categories makes sense. Maybe it could be more relevant to treat them in a more neutral way, considering what they enable us to do and why these functions have persisted throughout our evolution despite their negative effects in today's society.

Regarding the sources you could make use of, I would recommend Hewstone and colleagues' An Introduction to Social Psychology (2016) (the first source listed in the "Einzelnachweise"). It lists the different functions attributed to stereotypes and might provide you with some further useful literature. I hope this helps you.--Gg179 (Diskussion) 16:54, 7. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Here are some suggestions for what to include under functions::

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)39006-5

I agree with Gg179 that a classification into good or bad could be misleading. For example, the fact that stereotypes facilitate quick judgments may be both "good" and "bad".

Finally, it could be useful to use such expressions as "According to AUTHOR, one of the functions of stereotypes is..." because these functions may be more or less consensually agreed upon by different authors. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:04, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

The neural basis of stereotyping

Here I want to suggest a text which could be implemented in a newly created section of the german article "Neuropsychologische Grundlagen von Stereotypen" as suggested by JohUllrich in the week 4:--Gg179 (Diskussion) 13:41, 7. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I suggest deleting sections 1 (do you really need it? I think the basic definition enables readers to understand the following) and 6 (this kind of disclaimer is odd given that all knowledge is fallible and up for revisions).

I suggest merging these two sentences "Dies steht im Einklang mit Ergebnissen wie der selektiven Aktivierung der ATL, die bei Teilnehmern gemessen wurde, wenn sie sich mit stereotypischem Material befassten. Ebenso wurden Ergebnisse erzielt, bei denen die stereotypische Verhaltensweise von Teilnehmern gemindert wurde, wenn die Aktivität der ATL durch transkranielle magnetische Stimulation gestört wurde." as follows: "Dafür spricht, dass die ATL selektiv aktiviert wird, wenn sich Menschen mit stereotypischem Material befassen, und dass stereotypische Urteile reduziert werden, wenn die ATL durch transkranielle magnetische Stimulation gestört wird."

Change "das linke IFG" into "der linke IFG" (2x), and once for "das rechte IFG".

Delete "Wie bereits erwähnt".

Change "das" into "der" when referring to Cortex.

Part 5 could be improved: Try to make the sentences easier to understand ("trägt zur Teilkomponente bei" is perhaps unnecessarily complicated. Also, when you say X can explain Y, say how X can explain Y.

Finally, you could add Wikilinks to some of the concepts you use! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:37, 10. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Neuropsichologische Grundlagen von Stereotypen

1. Erweiterung der Definition:

Bevor wir die neuropsychologischen Grundlagen näher betrachten, ist es notwendig, die Definition des Begriffs "Stereotypen" zu erweitern bzw. zu spezifizieren. Stereotypen sind semantische Strukturen, das heißt, Wissensrepräsentationen im Gedächtnis, die das instrumentelle Verhalten (zielgerichtete Verhaltensweisen) einer Person beeinflussen. In einer Studie von Amodio und Devine wurde beobachtet, dass weiße Teilnehmer dazu neigten, stereotypisches Verhalten, wie Faulheit und Feindseligkeit, afroamerikanischen Personen zuzuschreiben. Dies ist wichtig, da die Kodierung, Speicherung, Auswahl und der Abruf semantischer Strukturen auf spezifischen neuronalen Grundlagen beruhen.

2. Speicherung von Stereotypen:

Stereotypisches Wissen wird in der anterior temporalen Region (ATL) gespeichert, einer Gehirnregion, die mit der Speicherung von sozialem semantischem Wissen in Verbindung gebracht wird, wie Wissen über Mitmenschen oder soziale Gruppen. Dies steht im Einklang mit Ergebnissen wie der selektiven Aktivierung der ATL, die bei Teilnehmern gemessen wurde, wenn sie sich mit stereotypischem Material befassten. Ebenso wurden Ergebnisse erzielt, bei denen die stereotypische Verhaltensweise von Teilnehmern gemindert wurde, wenn die Aktivität der ATL durch transkranielle magnetische Stimulation gestört wurde.

3. Auswahl und Abruf von Stereotypen:

Die ATL, als semantische Wissensspeicherstruktur, ist unter anderem mit zwei weiteren neurologischen Strukturen verbunden: dem dorsalen präfrontalen Kortex (mPFC) und dem inferior frontalen Gyrus (IFG), einer Region des lateralen präfrontalen Kortex (lPFC).

Einerseits wird der mPFC entweder als Speicherstruktur für soziales Wissen betrachtet oder als integrative Struktur, die soziales Wissen, einschließlich Stereotypen, und individuelle Ziele zusammenführt, um das instrumentelle Verhalten einer Person zu koordinieren. Obwohl die Meinungen zur konkreten Funktion des mPFC auseinandergehen, ist es plausibel anzunehmen, dass der mPFC eine zentrale Rolle in der Verarbeitung stereotyper Informationen über soziale Objekte (Menschen) spielt.

Andererseits wird das linke IFG als eine kortikale Struktur beschrieben, deren Funktion darin besteht, Wissensstrukturen im Arbeitsgedächtnis abzurufen, um zielgerichtetes Verhalten zu unterstützen. Auf der anderen Seite könnte das rechte IFG eine Rolle bei der Unterdrückung stereotyper Verhaltensweisen spielen. Das linke IFG ist am Abrufen stereotyper Informationen und deren Integration in instrumentelles Verhalten beteiligt, während das rechte IFG für die willentliche Hemmung stereotyper Manifestationen zuständig ist.

4. Regulation:

Wie bereits erwähnt, kann das rechte IFG als exekutive Struktur angesehen werden, wenn es darum geht, stereotypische äußere Manifestationen zu unterdrücken. Die Kontrolle über das eigene Verhalten erfordert jedoch ein Selbstüberwachungssystem. In Bezug auf Stereotypen erfüllen das anteriore Cingulum-Kortex (ACC) und das präfrontale Kortex (PFC) diese Rolle. Das ACC dient der Entdeckung und Verarbeitung von Konflikten zwischen automatischen stereotypischen Impulsen und individuellen Zielen. Das PFC reguliert das Verhalten im Hinblick auf den aktuellen sozialen Kontext und initiiert die Hemmung unerwünschten Verhaltens durch das rechte IFC.

5. Stereotypen als Teil eines interaktiven Gedächtnissystems:

Die Annahme von Stereotypen als semantischen Strukturen und ihrer neuropsychologischen Grundlagen trägt zur Teilkomponente eines umfassenderen Konzepts des Gedächtnisses und des Lernens bei, dem interaktiven Gedächtnissystem. Dieses Modell soll erklären, wie wir über unsere Mitmenschen lernen, indem wir multiple, simultane und bis zu einem gewissen Grad unabhängige neurokognitive Systeme oder Netzwerke nutzen, sowie wie gespeicherte Informationen integriert werden, um Urteile, Entscheidungen oder Handlungen zu bilden.

Das interaktive Gedächtnissystem, basierend auf der Annahme, dass soziale Kognition das Ergebnis der Interaktion mehrerer neurokognitiver Netzwerke ist, kann erklären, warum und wie beispielsweise Stereotypen die visuelle Wahrnehmung von Gesichtern afroamerikanischer Personen bei weißen Teilnehmern beeinflussen oder warum implizite Stereotypen und Vorurteilsmasse nicht korreliert sind.

6. Limitationen:

Es ist wichtig zu beachten, dass die zuvor beschriebenen Befunde nicht in jedem Fall absolut sind und die Möglichkeit von methodisch bedingten Ungenauigkeiten oder Artefakten nicht ausgeschlossen werden kann. Es ist zum Beispiel wichtig, dass ein Grossteil der Stichproben zur Untersuchung der neuropsychologischen Grundlagen von Stereotypen aus der nordamerikanischen Bevölkerung gewonnen wurde oder dass bei der Anwendung von Methoden wie der transkraniellen Magnetstimulation nur von einer bedingten Genauigkeit ausgegangen werden darf.

Hip Hop Stereotypes Final Version

I couldn't directly change the Article on the Wikipedia page [16] since it is protected. I wrote an Application to be able to change it, that needs approving first. In the mean time I will post the Final Version here.

Hip hop music has reinforced stereotypes about black men. Exposure to violent, misogynistic rap music performed by African American male rappers has been shown to activate negative stereotypes towards black men as hostile, criminal and sexist. Hip hop portrays a stereotypical black masculine aesthetic and has stereotyped Black men as hypersexual thugs and gangsters who hail from an inner city ghetto. Listening to this misogynistic and violent Hip hop has effects on African American Men and their cognitive performance. They perform worse in tests resembling the Graduate Record Exam, after listening to this kind of music compared to white men under the same conditions. African-American women are degraded and referred to as “bitches” and “hoes” in rap music. African-American women are over-sexualized in modern hip hop music videos and are portrayed as sexual objects for rappers. Over-sexualization of African American women in Rap music videos may have health implications for viewers of such videos. In a survey study, adolescent African American women watching Rap videos and perceiving them to contain more sexual stereotypes were more likely to binge drink, test positive for marijuana and have a negative body image.--JPrueb (Diskussion) 10:31, 9. Nov. 2023 (CET)

We discussed last week that you have to have a certain number of edits to be able to edit the article on Stereotypes of African Americans because it is protected against vandalism. Now, although it's not necessary to get the credit for the seminar, you could do some easy edits on articles that you find interesting. As you're interested in Hip-Hop, you could for example go to en:Moses_Pelham and add the category Hip hop so that it is categorized here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Hip_hop. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:24, 18. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypisierung von Menschen mit Behinderung (improved version)

Thank you very much for the feedback. I have tried to implement this in the best possible way. This is my suggestion:

Menschen mit Behinderungen werden stereotypisch als abhängig, inkompetent und asexuell wahrgenommen. Gleichzeitig werden ihnen jedoch auch positive Eigenschaften wie Freundlichkeit und Warmherzigkeit zugeschrieben. Die Stereotypisierung von Menschen mit Behinderung ist ein gesellschaftliches Phänomen, das weitgehende Auswirkungen auf das Leben der Betroffenen hat. Die soziale Wahrnehmung von Menschen mit Behinderung ist defizitorientiert und von negativen Vorstellungen geprägt. Obwohl Menschen mit Behinderung äusserst vielfältig sind und unterschiedlichste Formen von Behinderungen aufweisen, werden sie in einer Weise homogenisiert, die ihre Vielfalt nicht angemessen berücksichtigt. Die Stereotype können subtil oder offensichtlich sein. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf dem vermeintlichen Defizit und der eingeschränkten Leistungsfähigkeit.

Die mediale Darstellung von Menschen mit Behinderung trägt zur Stereotypisierung bei. Sie variiert von stereotypen, vorurteilsbeladenen Abbildungen bis zu Darstellungen, die den Fokus auf Emanzipation und Selbstbestimmung legen. In vielen Filmen und Berichterstattungen werden Menschen mit Behinderungen entweder als Opfer oder als Helden dargestellt, was ihre Realität nicht angemessen widerspiegelt. Um Behindertenfeindlichkeit entgegenzuwirken, ist es wichtig, nach authentischen Darstellungen zu streben, die die Vielfalt und Komplexität von Menschen mit Behinderungen zeigen.

Es erweist sich als bedeutsam, bestehende Stereotype gegenüber Menschen mit Behinderungen zu hinterfragen und Vorurteile schrittweise abzubauen. Die Veränderung der stereotypen Bilder, die auf individueller Ebene tief verankert sind, schreitet jedoch nur langsam voran. Positive Begegnungen mit Menschen mit Behinderungen können dabei unterstützen, wenngleich sie allein nicht ausreichend sind. Für eine inklusive Gesellschaft gilt es, ein breiteres Bewusstsein für die individuellen Bedürfnisse und Fähigkeiten zu schaffen. Gesellschaftliche Anstrengungen sind erforderlich, um gleiche Chancen und Rechte für Menschen mit Behinderungen zu gewährleisten. Die Reduzierung von Stereotype und die Förderung einer Kultur der Akzeptanz und Unterstützung sind dabei wesentliche Elemente, um die Vielfalt und Stärke von Menschen mit Behinderungen angemessen zu würdigen. Diodx (Diskussion) 18:59, 12. Nov. 2023 (CET)

OK, I think you can publish this now. Please just correct the plural of "stereotypes". In German, it is "das Stereotyp" and "die Stereotype" (Plural). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:42, 18. Nov. 2023 (CET)

New article on David Hamilton

I would like to propose my second idea as being a new article in English about David Hamilton, a researcher in the field of stereotypes. It would start off with information about his life, then his research in social psychology and specifically stereotypes (illusory correlation, stereotype formation and stereotype use). I have noticed that many social psychology researchers have their own Wikipedia article but David Hamilton does not so I thought it may improve the English article to provide a new article about him and his work if people are interested. I would love to hear any thoughts about this...

• Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 15:51, 14. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Good idea, you can refer to his website for some main facts about him. This address gives a permanent link to his current website: https://web.archive.org/web/20230127204429/https://psych.ucsb.edu/people/emeriti/david-hamilton. Perhaps you can search for other information as well, for example, if you google his awards you might find some further information. Sometimes, biographical information is also included in an author's books. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:45, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes of Schizophrenia in Movies

Here is the correcetd and integrated version of my contribution on stereotypes of schizophrenia in movies. The first two paragraphs are just copy pasted from en:Schizophrenia#Cultural_depictions. (My text starts from "Movies have generally...")

The book A Beautiful Mind chronicled the life of John Forbes Nash who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. The book was made into a film with the same name; an earlier documentary film was A Brilliant Madness.

In 1964 a case study of three males diagnosed with schizophrenia who each had the delusional belief that they were Jesus Christ was published as The Three Christs of Ypsilanti; a film with the title Three Christs was released in 2020.[277][278]

Movies have generally been found to perpetuate stereotypes by misrepresenting and inaccurately portraying characters with mental illnesses like schizophrenia.

Stereotypes of schizophrenia include the idea of a split personality, being "crazy", showing dangerous or violent behavior and committing crimes. The stereotype of being crazy stems from the symptoms delusion and hallucination, which lead to the stereotypes of unpredictability and incompetence.

Media coverage, especially movies, reinforce the public perception of an association between schizophrenia and violence [279]. A majority of movies depict characters with schizophrenia as dangerous, violent, unpredictable and homicidal. Although people with schizophrenia are more likely to be violent than the general population, only a small proportion of societal violence can be linked to them and the increased risk of violence may entirely be due to substance abuse comorbidity. Movies also use the negative stereotypes of being crazy by using delusions and hallucinations as the main symptoms schizophrenic characters have. Though delusions and hallucinations are cardinal symptoms of schizophrenia, in reality other symptoms take precedence, such as apathy and flattening affect. In the UK guidelines for reporting conditions and award campaigns have shown a reduction in negative reporting since 2013.[281]

Movies should accurately portray schizophrenia, as they influences how people with schizophrenia are perceived by society. This contributes to the perpetuation of stereotypes. A study by Crant (2018) demonstrated that watching a videoclip of a positive portrayal of schizophrenia lead to the participants to view the person with schizophrenia as significantly less dangerous . This highlights how movies can shape public stereotypes.

The fifth paragrapph includes the integration of my text to one existing paragraph (the first and last sentence of the fifth paragraph are taken from the existing article, with slight changes done in the first sentence (so that it fits the rest better).) I was also wondering if the very last sentance ("This highlights...") is needed or not. JessTheodore (Diskussion) 16:42, 16. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I found it very interesting to read through your text. I just noticed something small. Hallucination, delusion and affect are marked in red, although there are articles about them. This is probably due to the capitalization. I will edit the source text directly so that the terms are linked to the existing articles. --Diodx (Diskussion) 20:01, 17. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I have also edited your text directly, see "Versionsgeschichte" or "View History" to compare the changes. I added the wikilink to the stereotype article without the "en:" because you will implement the changes in the English Wikipedia. For the other wikilinks, it would probably be good to remove the "en:" as well. Finally, I suggest that you delete the last paragraph, mainly because a statement like "Movies should" is not ideal on Wikipedia whose mission is to present facts. Perhaps you can use the study by Crant as another source for the claim that movies perpetuate stereotypes (your first sentence). After all, it seems to be an experiment and is thus very valuable as evidence of causality. Let's publish it now! JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:19, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Test

Verweisung auf englischen Artikel: Social identity theory. Referenzbeispiel: Lunkob (Diskussion) (ohne (gültigen) Zeitstempel signierter Beitrag von Lunkob (Diskussion | Beiträge) 10:21, 2. Nov. 2023 (CET))

Geschichte vom Begriff

We are planing to write an article about the history of the term for our wikipedia page (Stereotype der Sozialpsychologie). We're still looking for sources and will update this as soon as we have draft or so. JessTheodore (Diskussion) 16:07, 15. Nov. 2023 (CET) Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 16:23, 15. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Good that you're working on this (so far) empty section! It need not be very long. Many sources attribute the origin of the term as it is used today to Walter Lippmann (1922, see PDF on OLAT). Perhaps you want to have a look at this paper: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0015230. The author's point is that Lippmann's book was not a book on stereotypes, but he did in fact use the term in ways that come close to our definition. I also recommend this chapter for a (brief) treatment of the history of the concept: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.307. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:02, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Expanding the effects section of the English article

As we discussed today in class, I read the article about Cox and added some valuable information that might help with the understanding of the piece already written, when you tell me that it is publishable, then I'll link the Wikipedia article about depression and the Wikipedia article about stereotypes, but I would first want to know if it is publishable. All the new information I've added is from Cox's paper:

Stereotyping can also play a central role in depression, when people have negative self-stereotypes about themselves, according to Cox, Abramson, Devine, and Hollon (2012). “Negative stereotypes are set in motion within the Source, who conveys the prejudice towards the Target, which in turn will lead the Target to suffer from depression. On ocassions, the Target and Source coincide, is somewhat of “anger turned inwards”; these people are expressing prejudice aimed to the Self which causes their depression.”</ref>This depression that is caused by prejudice (i.e., "deprejudice") can be related to group membership (e.g., Me–Gay–Bad) or not (e.g., Me–Bad). If someone holds prejudicial beliefs about a stigmatized group and then becomes a member of that group, they may internalize their prejudice and develop depression. People may also show prejudice internalization through self-stereotyping because of negative childhood experiences such as verbal and physical abuse. Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 16:51, 15. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I would not publish this exactly like that. First of all, the existing text on the English wikipedia needs some improvement. "negative self-stereotypes about themselves", that's too many self/selves in one sentence. I would cut the first sentence after "role in depression". Then you should say, in your own words, what is the the central idea of the Cox paper. I don't think the quote you're using will be understandable out of context. Instead, say why Cox believe that stereotyping and depression are related and why these fields of research can inform each other. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:15, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

A German version of the police officer's dilemma

Hi, I've considered different possible second contributions, but I'm not sure which one would be more valuable. I'm presenting them according to my own preferences:

1. I would like to create a German version of the police officer's dilemma, explaining how this experimental paradigm shows the influence of stereotypes on instrumental behavior. For now, there is only a general English Wikipedia article on shooting biases.

2. I would like to complete or improve the German article describing D. Wegner's Ironic Process Model, since it is relatively succinct.

3. I'm considering an article presenting the different methods used to measure or operationalize stereotypes in research. --Gg179 (Diskussion) 18:08, 15. Nov. 2023 (CET)

HI! :-) In my opinion, a german version of the police officer's dilemma would be a very interesting thing to do, but also very complex. I found a source from the University of hamburg with a lot of references, maybe this gives you an orientation: https://www.psy.uni-hamburg.de/arbeitsbereiche/sozialpsychologie/personen/degner-juliane/bilder/singh2017.pdf --AleMeil (Diskussion) 11:18, 17. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I also think that writing a german article about the shooting bias could be a good idea! Since I am also writing about it in the paragraph "Konsequenzen" in our article (Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie), I could then directly but a link to your german article about the shooting bias. I am using this source, maybe it will help you too: Zschirnt, E., & Ruedin, D. (2016). Ethnic discrimination in hiring decisions: A meta-analysis of correspondence tests 1990–2015. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(7), 1115–1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015.1133279 --Ldegio (Diskussion) 15:00, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

All of these suggestions would be valuable contributions. 1 and 2 would link to what others in the seminar have done, and 3 would fill a gap in our joint article. Technically, you have already made two contributions (helping with the Introduction and adding a longer section on the neuroscience of stereotypes). I would be glad, though, if you would make another (small) contribution. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:23, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Improvements to the Einführung Section

Here are some improvements to the Einführung-Section as discussed in the class today:

Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie werden im Gegensatz zu der heutigen Sprachverwendung, wo Vorurteile, Stigma, Stereotyp oder Schubladendenken oft synonym verwendet werden, als Überzeugungen über soziale Gruppen und ihre Mitglieder verstanden. Hierzu werden alle Einheiten der Informationen gezählt, welche im Zusammenhang mit sozialen Kategorien in unserem Gedächtnis gespeichert worden sind. In diesem Sprachgebrauch beziehen sich Stereotype also auf generalisierte Eigenschaftszuschreibungen im Zusammenhang mit sozialen Kategorien. Es wird bei diesem Sprachgebrauch des Stereotyps also nicht unterschieden, ob es sich um eine Beschreibung der äusseren oder der inneren Eigenschaften, um positive, negative oder neutrale Informationen handelt oder ob diese richtig oder falsch sind.

Das Wort Stigma ist massgeblich auf den Soziologen Erwin Goffman zurückzuführen, wobei das Wort Stigma aus dem Griechischen stammt und so viel bedeutet wie «Wund- oder Brandmal». Bereits hier wird die Bedeutung klar, dass die Identität eines Menschen dahingehend verändert bzw. gestört wird, dass es damit vergleichbar wird, als hätte folgende Person eine nach aussen hin offensichtliche, allenfalls entstellende Wunde im Gesicht.

Abgrenzen lässt sich der Begriff Stereotyp in der Sozialpsychologie Stigma dahingehend, dass ein Stigma immer negativ ist und erst aufgrund eines Stereotypes entsteht. Ein Stereotyp andererseits muss nicht immer negativ sein – es kann auch positiv sein..

Vorurteile und Stereotype gelten in der Sozialpsychologie als zwei differenzierbare Aspekte von Einstellungen gegenüber sozialen Gruppen. In der sozialpsychologischen Forschung werden sowohl Vorurteile wie auch Stereotype dadurch definiert, dass das gefällte Urteil ausschliesslich auf der Zugehörigkeit zu sozialen Kategorien beruht, während die individuellen Eigenschaften der Person aussenvor gelassen werden. Nach Degner gilt jede Menge von Menschen, die durch geteilte Eigenschaften als Einheit oder Kategorie wahrgenommen werden, als soziale Gruppe. Es ist dabei weder wichtig, ob es sich um eine Mehr- oder Minderheit handelt, noch dass sich die Mitglieder der sozialen Gruppe selbst als solche identifizieren oder nicht.

Der Begriff Stereotyp lässt sich in der Sozialpsychologie von dem Begriff Vorurteil dadurch abgrenzen, dass bei Vorurteilen die emotionale Reaktion auf die Gruppenbewertung gewichtet wird. Dies steht im Einklang mit den neueren Erkenntnissen, wonach Vorurteile und Stereotypen auf unterschiedlichen und relativ unabhängigen neurobiologischen Substraten zu beruhen. Die für Vorurteile relevanten Gehirnstrukturen sind eher mit der Verarbeitung von Emotionen und Einstellungen assoziiert, wie zum Beispiel die Amygdala, die an unmittelbaren Reaktionen auf bedrohliche Stimuli oder Affektivität beteiligt ist.Im Gegensatz dazu beruhen Stereotypen eher auf semantischen Netzwerken (Wissensrepräsentation und -anwendung), in denen beispielsweise das anteriore temporale Lappen (ATL) eine Rolle bei der Speicherung sozialen Wissens spielt..

Stereotype können des Weitern in deskriptive und präskriptive Stereotype unterteilt werden. Deskriptive Stereotype beschreiben welche Eigenschaften und Verhaltensweisen einer Gruppe zugeschrieben werden, präskriptive Stereotype beschreiben Verhaltensweisen, die von einer Gruppe erwartet werden, wobei das Nichtausführen dieser vorgeschriebenen Verhaltensweise negative Konsequenzen mit sich zieht . Wenn Frauen beispielsweise das präskriptive Stereotyp, sich submissiv zu verhalten, nicht einhalten, werden sie als weniger sympathisch eingestuft. Während nicht alle stereotypisierten Gruppen von präskriptiven Stereotypen betroffen sind, konnten präskriptive Stereotype im Zusammenhang mit Geschlechtstereotypen, Altersstereotypen und Ethnische Stereotype nachgewiesen werden.--Gg179 (Diskussion) 18:42, 15. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Thank you! Can you make the changes here Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie and move it to the top of the page (prior to the table of contents)? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:42, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypen im Lehr- und Lernkontext

In week 6 you can find my improved version for «Stereotypisierung von Menschen mit Behinderung». As for my second contribution I would like to improve the already existing article Lehrer. The article does not address how teacher expectations affect learner performance. That’s the reason why I would like to add a chapter called “Stereotypen im Lehr- und Lernkontext” (or something like that). I'm also not sure if the placement is fitting, as it goes beyond being a teacher and is more about the consequences of stereotyping students. So, it would also be possible to extend the article Schüler with this chapter. There is also an article on Lehrer-Schüler-Verhältnis, which also could be an option. As you may notice, I am very undecided about the right placement and open to your suggestions and opinions. Interesting literature on the subject that I have found are the following:

Hermann, J.M. (2022). Interventionen gegen Stereotype Threat: Ein Überblick. In: Glock, S. (eds) Stereotype in der Schule II. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-37262-0_7

E. Wild und J. Möller (Hrsg.), Pädagogische Psychologie, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61403-7_11

Diodx (Diskussion) 17:14, 16. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I find your proposal quite interesting. I think we all, at some point, have suffered from the stigmatization of a teacher which in turn has lead to it affecting both our academic results and our self-esteem. Maybe a good place to position your idea, would be in the section of "Rollenprobleme" of the article on "Lehrer-Schüler-Verhältnis", or maybe create a new subsection under the "Probleme" section. --Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 17:23, 18. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I agree with Laurigonzaleez that you could create a new subsection under "Probleme" in the article "Lehrer-Schüler-Verhältnis". Maybe you could also consider including the Pygmalion-Effekt in your text. If I remember correctly, teachers' stereotypes about their students / groups they belong to influence the occurrence of the effect. --Elyfa (Diskussion) 11:06, 20. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think this is a super interesting topic. I am writing an article about stereotypes associated with ADHD, and I feel like it would be fitting to your contribution to incorporate something about teacher's stereotypes regarding students with ADHD and/or other mental illnesses/learning disabilities. Of course there's also other very interesting topics regarding that, like for example racial stereotypes or stereotypes related to ethnicity, but either way it should be very interesting to write and read about. Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 23:07, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

In general, how teacher expectations affect performance is described by the article on the Pygmalion-Effekt, but this can happen without stereotypes (i.e. beliefs about a group). Your references seem to deal with stereotype threat, so perhaps you would like to link to Bedrohung_durch_Stereotype and combine it with a few sentences about how teacher's stereotypes could influence their grading. See e.g. this work https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218791804. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:54, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Emotionale Stabilität

For our second contribution, @ValentinaLU1 and I would like to improve the existing Wikipedia article “Emotionale Stabiliät”. We want to add gender stereotypes about this specific personality trait. Therefore, we’d like to reference to an older Study (Williams & Best (1982)) and a newer study (Löckenhoff et al. (2014)). They both are saying that, when people are just being asked, men are believed to be emotionally more stable than women are. We are currently searching for a recent study, which tells how it really is. --AleMeil (Diskussion) 11:09, 17. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I like this idea. For recent studies that show how it really is I have found the following articles that may be useful:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3149680/pdf/fpsyg-02-00178.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11825676_Gender_Differences_in_Personality_Traits_Across_Cultures_Robust_and_Surprising_Findings

https://mpsi.umm.ac.id/files/file/Asean%20Conference%202016/723%20-%20728%20Djudiyah%20Dahlan-1.pdf

I noticed that it's easier to find results when searching for "neuroticism" (which is the negative pole of emotional stability) - or even broader "big five"- gender differences... --Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 00:09, 19. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think this is a very interesting contribution. Maybe you could also add the evolutionary psychology view compared to the modern view. In personality psychology it was once discussed that the better the equality, the stronger the gender differences. It might be interesting to see whether women are less emotionally stable in countries where there is greater equality, for example, than in countries where equality is not yet so advanced --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 15:09, 20. Nov. 2023 (CET)

That sounds very interesting! This article might give you some information about what gender stereotypes concerning emotional stability look like today: https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000494. And this Study's topic is how stereotypes are formed through social roles, which might interest you as well: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037215 ~~~ --Eweime (Diskussion) 21:17, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Have you considered adding to Big_Five_(Psychologie) instead? The article by Löckenhoff et al. refers to all Big 5 traits. And I think it already contains the information about "how it really is". For N, there are gender differences, and they seem to be larger than what people believe (gender stereotypes). Both articles, on emotionale Stabilität and Big 5, do not contain information about gender differences or gender stereotypes, so if you would add that, it would be valuable. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 18:03, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Adjustment of the subsection "Interpretationen von Rückmeldung"

Negative Rückmeldungen, z.B. wie unsympathisch oder inkompetent andere Menschen einen finden, sind für Mitglieder stereotypisierter Gruppen oft mehrdeutig: Die Rückmeldung kann sowohl als objektive Einschätzung als auch Resultat von Diskriminierung und negativen Stereotypen betrachtet werden. Betroffene Individuen nehmen Feedback nicht gleich an, wenn sie vermuten, dass es von einer Person stammt, die möglicherweise von diesen negativen Stereotypen beeinflusst ist. Die Attribution unterscheidet sich deutlich von der, die erfolgt, wenn der Gebende zur gleichen sozialen Gruppe gehört .

Die Attribution von negativen Rückmeldungen auf Diskriminierung dient dem Schutz des Selbstwertgefühls, der Vermeidung negativer Emotionen und in manchen Fällen einer Verbesserung der Leistung.

Ebenso wird positives Feedback nicht authentischer Anerkennung eigener Leistungen zugeschrieben, sondern eher dem Mitleid. Diese Attribution hat nachteilige Auswirkungen auf das Selbstwertgefühl.

Is it ready to be published in our German article yet? If so, I would begin with the next contribution.

--Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 13:46, 17. Nov. 2023 (CET)nikepaulina

Yes, please put it on our common page, perhaps just delete "Die Attribution unterscheidet sich deutlich von der, die erfolgt, wenn der Gebende zur gleichen sozialen Gruppe gehört" because it does not add much to what has already been said. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 18:08, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Boomerang Effect

As proposed a couple of weeks ago, I would like to add the following paragraph about the Boomerang Effect to the activation and application section of our article and link it to the article that JasminMoor and I have created:

"→ Hauptseite: Bumerangeffekt

Ein Beispiel für die unkontrollierte Aktivierung von Stereotypen ist der Bumerangeffekt. Dieser Effekt beschreibt, dass stereotype Gedanken unwillkürlich aktiviert werden, nachdem diese zuvor aktiv unterdrückt wurden. Wenn eine Person also versucht, ihre Stereotype über ein Mitglied einer bestimmten Gruppe zu unterdrücken, funktioniert dies normalerweise für eine Weile. Sobald die stereotypen Gedanken aber nicht mehr aktiv unterdrückt werden, kehren sie stärker zurück als zuvor und es werden mehr Stereotype benutzt, als von Personen, die ihre stereotypen Gedanken davor nicht unterdrückt haben. In einer Studie von Neil Macrae et al. (2003) wurden die Versuchspersonen beispielsweise gebeten, einen kurzen Text über einen Skinhead zu schreiben und wurden entweder instruiert, keine stereotypen Beschreibungen zu verwenden, oder erhielten keine Anweisungen über die Verwendung von Stereotypen. In einer späteren Aufgabe mussten die Versuchspersonen einen weiteren Text über einen anderen Skinhead schreiben, allerdings wurden in der zweiten Aufgabe keine der Teilnehmenden instruiert, auf stereotype Beschreibungen zu verzichten. Es konnte gezeigt werden, dass die Personen, die ihre stereotypen Gedanken in der ersten Aufgabe unterdrücken mussten, in der zweiten Aufgaben mehr Stereotypen benutzten, als Personen, die nicht zur Stereotpyenunterdrückung angewiesen wurden.

Erklärt wird der Bumerangeffekt mit dem Modell der Gedankenkontrolle von Daniel Wegner und Ralph Erber (1992). Demnach braucht es zur Gedankenunterdrückung gleichzeitig einen automatischen und einen kontrollierten Prozess im Gehirn. Der automatische Prozess sucht nach den Gedanken, die unterdrückt werden sollen, und der kontrollierte Prozess unterdrückt diese. Dadurch dass der automatische Prozess konstant nach dem zu unterdrückenden Gedanken sucht, wird dieser aber unterbewusst präsent und somit aktiviert, sobald der kontrollierte Prozess der Gedankenunterdrückung beendet wird."

I'm a little unsure, though, if the text is a little too long and if I should delete the example of the study with stereotypes about skinheads (from "In einer Studie von Neil Macrae et al. (...)" until the end of the first paragraph). Because of the link to the main article about the Boomerang Effect, the example might not be relevant, since people could just go to the main article for more information. Elyfa (Diskussion) 15:37, 19. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think this paragraph is a really great addition to our article. I agree that if you feel it is too long, you could easily just link to your other article for people to find more information, as the effect is explained there very well.

In my opinion, it's just a matter of whether or not you'd like to clarify the effect on our page further. You explain the concept of the effect really well with or without the explicit example of the study. Maybe if you leave it in, you could explain Wegner and Erbers Modell based on Macraes Study as well. You could add information about the automatic and controlled processes, perhaps in brackets, based on the example study mentioned earlier? (Illustrating what exactly what was being suppressed and how etc.) All in all, I feel like all of these edits are more optional than necessary, as I really like the proposal as is :). Cmariams (Diskussion) 10:34, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think that's fine and you can move this to our common page. I'm just wondering if the effect is an example of uncontrolled activation. Isn't it more an example of uncontrolled application? When people are not actively suppressing the stereotype, they apply it. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 18:16, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Emotionale Stabilität

As @AleMeil has already proposed, we are interested in writing an article on gender stereotypes related to emotional stability .

We have already found the German Wikipedia page on emotional stability, we thought we would add a chapter here pertaining to stereotypes of this personality trait.

We have already found two studies on this topic, however, we are looking for more recent ones.

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 08:19, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Please see my response above! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 18:18, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Figure about Stereotype-Content Model

For my second contribution, I thought about adding a figure to our article to make it more visually compelling. I find that a figure about the stereotype content model would be a nice contribution and I would like to ask you for your opinion (especially @Melebo since I think you were the author of the article) about my idea. Since I made my first contribution about stereotype threat I would also have some ideas for figures on that topic but I thought the stereotype content model might be more interesting. --Sschraml (Diskussion) 11:05, 20. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hi :) My first comment somehow got deleted so here was what i wrote: I was thinking the same thing, when I wrote the paragraph. I think a picture would be helpful to understand what the Model is about and how to understand it, so I think it's a great Idea. If there is anything I would have to change or add to maybe understand the included picture more after you added it, you can tell me --Melebo (Diskussion) 14:14, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Good idea. On wikimedia commons, there seems to be only an English diagram of the stereotype content model: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mixed_stereotype_content_model_(Fiske_et_al.).png. Your contribution could be similar, and here's a step-by-step guide for creating it: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Trage_deine_eigene_Arbeit_bei. Asbrock (2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05738-9_43) mentions the following examples of groups for each quadrant: "...die Forschung zeigt, dass es über viele Kulturen hinweg typische Gruppen für diese Kategorien gibt (Fiske/Durante 2016): warm und inkompetent (z. B. Personen mit Behinderung, alte Menschen), kalt und inkompetent (z. B. Obdachlose, Arme), kalt und kompetent (z. B. Karrierefrauen, Reiche) sowie warm und kompetent (gesellschaftliche Mehrheit, Ärzte)." --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:44, 24. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Thank you for the suggestions! I made a similar grid to the one on Wikimedia Commons and will present it next time. --Sschraml (Diskussion) 19:26, 24. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes about mental health

There are many people who have strong prejudices against mental illness. I would like to write something about how much stronger the stereotypes are when people think that the person affected is to blame for the mental illness. A person who has a substance use disorder suffers more from the stereotypes than a person who has autism, for example. --Annina1705 (Diskussion) 15:02, 20. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think that is a great idea! Maybe it is helpful for you to look at the article from Schomerus & Angermeyer "Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker" - The text is about Stigmas but there are a lot of inetresting informations about how people "blame" different mental illnesses and why this happens. Furthermore there are as well some interesting figures where for example negative stereotypes about different mental illnesses are mentioned. --Leoniiie (Diskussion) 14:36, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think this is a good idea. Maybe you want to make a link to the topic of stigmatization and especially destigmatization. In that case the „Arbeitspapier Entstigmatisierung“ https://public-health.ch/documents/232/Entstigmatisierung_Arbeitspapier_DEF.pdf

could be helpful.

ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 02:48, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I was going to ask what would be the reference that you would refer to, but there you go, there are already some suggestions! I don't know if these articles will support what you would like to write about, so please check it and perform additional literature searches if necessary. At the same time, please be more concrete about where you would like to add your text (which article you would improve).

One concern I have is that what you have in mind is prejudice rather than stereotypes, as in "I don't like these people because they are the ones to blame". Please stick to the seminar topic of stereotypes. Maybe you want to talk to Elinoe3 who has written something about the stigmatization of people with a mental illness! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:06, 24. Nov. 2023 (CET)

The neural basis of stereotyping

Here is the corrected version of my contribution from last week. --Gg179 (Diskussion) 11:22, 14. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I have only four minor suggestions (and a major question):

1. In the title, change "neuropsichologische" into "neuropsychologische"

2. Change "4. Stereotypen" into "4. Stereotype" (plural of "das Stereotyp")

3. link to the English wikipedia article on Amodio

4. Instead of the numbering system, would it perhaps work to go down another level in the hierarchy of headings?

My major question is: Don't you think that your text is rather long? It would probably dominate the article and present many details that readers of this article are perhaps not looking for there. I appreciate your work, but let's think about some constructive solutions. Could it be a stand-alone article, and if so, what would be its title? Or could be placed somewhere else on the German wikipedia? Or could you maybe try to shorten it by around 1/3, for example in section #2 where the knowledge seems a little bit more speculative? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 19:00, 19. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Regarding your question, I could use this text and the definition of stereotyps suggested in my comment 'Week 6: The neural basis of stereotyping' to creat a new article which could be called 'Stereotype in den Neurowissenschaften' and reference it in the 'Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie' Article. Plus i could, as you suggested, summeraize what i have written so far focusing on the section 1 to 3 and leaving aside the 'interaktives Gedächtnissystems'. This i could than feed into the second section of 'Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie'. --Gg179 (Diskussion) 20:56, 20. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Sounds good to me! Please wait for the feedback from Lantus, though, before you implement your plan. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:47, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Yes, same to me. Please go ahead! ※Lantus 11:53, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Neuropsychologische Grundlagen von Stereotypen

Speicherung von Stereotypen:

Stereotypisches Wissen wird in der anterior temporalen Region (ATL) gespeichert, einer Gehirnregion, die mit der Speicherung von sozialem semantischem Wissen in Verbindung gebracht wird, wie Wissen über Mitmenschen oder soziale Gruppen. Dafür spricht, dass die ATL selektiv aktiviert wird, wenn sich Menschen mit stereotypischem Material befassen, und dass stereotypische Urteile reduziert werden, wenn die ATL durch transkranielle magnetische Stimulation gestört wird..

Auswahl und Abruf von Stereotypen:

Die ATL, als semantische Wissensspeicherstruktur, ist unter anderem mit zwei weiteren neurologischen Strukturen verbunden: dem dorsalen präfrontalen Kortex (mPFC) und dem Gyrus frontalis inferior (IFG), einer Region des lateralen präfrontalen Kortex (lPFC).

Einerseits wird der mPFC entweder als Speicherstruktur für soziales Wissen betrachtet oder als integrative Struktur, die soziales Wissen, einschließlich Stereotypen, und individuelle Ziele zusammenführt, um das instrumentelle Verhalten einer Person zu koordinieren. Obwohl die Meinungen zur konkreten Funktion des mPFC auseinandergehen, ist es plausibel anzunehmen, dass der mPFC eine zentrale Rolle in der Verarbeitung stereotyper Informationen über soziale Objekte (Menschen) spielt.

Andererseits wird der linke IFG als eine kortikale Struktur beschrieben, deren Funktion darin besteht, Wissensstrukturen im Arbeitsgedächtnis abzurufen, um zielgerichtetes Verhalten zu unterstützen. Auf der anderen Seite könnte der rechte IFG eine Rolle bei der Unterdrückung stereotyper Verhaltensweisen spielen. Der linke IFG ist am Abrufen stereotyper Informationen und deren Integration in instrumentelles Verhalten beteiligt, während der rechte IFG für die willentliche Hemmung stereotyper Manifestationen zuständig ist.

Regulation:

Der rechte IFG kann als exekutive Struktur angesehen werden, wenn es darum geht, stereotypische äußere Manifestationen zu unterdrücken. Die Kontrolle über das eigene Verhalten erfordert jedoch ein Selbstüberwachungssystem. In Bezug auf Stereotypen erfüllen der anteriore Cingulum-Kortex (ACC) und der präfrontale Kortex (PFC) diese Rolle. Das ACC dient der Entdeckung und Verarbeitung von Konflikten zwischen automatischen stereotypischen Impulsen und individuellen Zielen. Das PFC reguliert das Verhalten im Hinblick auf den aktuellen sozialen Kontext und initiiert die Hemmung unerwünschten Verhaltens durch das rechte IFC.

Stereotype als Teil eines interaktiven Gedächtnissystems:

Die Annahme, dass Stereotypen semantische Strukturen sind und dass deren Speicherung, Bearbeitung und Regulation einem spezifischen neuropsychologischen Netzwerk entspricht, wurde von Amodio und Kollegen in ihrer umfassenden Konzeption des Gedächtnisses und des Lernens übernommen, dem interaktiven Gedächtnissystem. Dieses Modell soll erklären, wie wir über unsere Mitmenschen lernen, indem wir multiple, gleichzeitige und bis zu einem gewissen Grad unabhängige neurokognitive Systeme oder Netzwerke nutzen. Es soll auch erklären, wie gespeicherte Informationen integriert werden, um Urteile zu bilden, Entscheidungen zu treffen oder Handlungen auszuführen.

Im Allgemeinen geht das interaktive Gedächtnissystem davon aus, dass die soziale Kognition das Ergebnis der Interaktion mehrerer neurokognitiver Netzwerke ist. Im Gegensatz zu früheren Modellen der Einstellungsbildung (Dual process Model) stellt das interaktive Gedächtnissystem ein Paradigma dar, mit dem die Zusammenhänge zwischen Einstellungsbildung, Emotionen, Verhalten und Wahrnehmung erklärt werden können. Zum Beispiel erklärt das interaktive Gedächtnissystem aufgrund der Verbindungen zwischen der ATL und dem Gyrus fusiformis (Hirnregion assoziiert mit der konfiguralen visuellen Verarbeitung), wie die visuelle Wahrnehmung von Gesichtern afroamerikanischer Personen bei weissen Teilnehmern durch stereotypisches Wissen beeinflusst werden könnte und folglich auch das Verhalten. Die Idee ist, dass das in der ATL gespeicherte Wissen das konfigurale System auf die Verarbeitung von Reizen vorbereitet. Wenn beispielsweise weisse Teilnehmer mit afroamerikanischen Gesichtern konfrontiert werden, erwarten sie stereotypische Gesichtausdrücke (z.B. Feindseligkeit) zu erkennen. Dies führt zu einer verzerrten Wahrnehmung dieser sozialen Stimuli. Weiterhin könnte das Modell von Amodio erklären, dass aufgrund unterschiedlicher neurologischer Substrate Vorurteils- und Stereotypmasse unkorreliert sind und daher unterschiedliche Verhaltensweisen in verschiedenen Situationen vorhersagen könnten. Zum Beispiel wurden in sozial angstauslösenden Situationen die vorurteilsbedingten Reaktionen der Teilnehmer beeinflusst, aber nicht stereotypische Reaktionen .

Functions of Stereotypes

As suggested under week 6 I will be writing a contribution on the function of stereotypes. I've started working on a couple of sections like the following, which is more or less finished:

Kognitive Abkürzungen

Durch die Stereotypisierung von sozialen Gruppen werden diese auf (vermeintlich) typische Eigenschaften reduziert, die ein heuristisches und damit vereinfachtes Denken erlauben. Stereotypisierung funktioniert demnach auf adaptive Weise als mentale Abkürzung ("mental shortcut") um unsere komplexe soziale Umwelt ökonomischer verarbeiten zu können.

I'm currently working on a paragraph on system justification, however I couldn't access the paper you recommended me professor JohUllrich (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x). Would you be able to share the pdf with me?

Thanks in advance for any suggestions! (nicht signierter Beitrag von Amweiss17 (Diskussion | Beiträge) 22:25, 20. Nov. 2023 (CET))

Hi, I think what you have an already well-written and well-condensed paragraph. However, you could eventually make reference to the concepts of heuristics and automatic processes. For example, explaining how these concepts are linked and detailing the necessary conditions for a process to be automatic (without intention or awareness, effortless, as well as not interfering with competitive cognitive processes). --Gg179 (Diskussion) 12:02, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hello, I slightly disagree with that comment. In my Understanding, points about conditions for processes to be automatic would belong into a chapter/section about stereotype activation or stereotype formation/maintenance. The section "Functions of Stereotypes" should in my oppinion only talk about what stereotypes actually do for a "user" when they are used (i.e. what functions they serve). Negative aspects however should also be included. RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 14:14, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I made some small corrections in your original text. As a compromise between the two suggestions you received, you could replace "kategorisiertes" with "heuristisches" and add a link to Heuristik. Finally, please format your references as Lantus explained, with the first names written out, see e.g. this reference:

Steven J. Spencer, Christine Logel und Paul G. Davies: Stereotype threat. In: Annual Review of Psychology. Nr. 67(1), 2016, S. 415-437. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235

Regarding the access to journal articles, you need to be connected to the UZH network, here's how you can do that from your home:

https://www.zi.uzh.ch/en/students/workplace-collaboration/vpn.html Then, if you search for the article on scholar.google.com, just click on "Full View" next to the search result. It would be nice if you could add a few functions and briefly describe them, just like you did it for the shortcuts. JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:52, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

German Article on John Turner

My Proposal for this week would be to translate/add a new wikipedia article on John Turner, who worked with Tajfel on the social identity theory. I saw that his wikipedia article does not exist in German yet (John Turner) and hence his name is only properly linked in the English version of the wikipedia article of Social identity theory (that's where I got the idea to translate/add a German article on him in the first place). If adding this new article, do I need to exactly translate all of the parts added to the English article or can I disregard parts like personal life? I also think I'd rather work with the Social Psychology book by Jonas et al. as a source as John Turner is mentioned in a paragraph "Persönlichkeiten" on Page 538. --Cmariams (Diskussion) 10:02, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think aspects like personal life can be left out since the important aspect of him as a person, and also what interests us in this course, is his work on the social identity theory (or in the field of psychology in general). I also generally wouldn't just copy the English wikipedia article, rather decide what you think is relevant and write that, hence I think the book by Jonas et al. could be a good source. --JasminMoor (Diskussion) 15:08, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Good that you have identified another source on Turner's life (from the Jonas book) that you can use in addition to the sources mentioned on the English Wikipedia entry. No, you should not translate the English article. Adding some basic data about his life and research would be a good contribution. Here is some general information on adding biographical articles: Wikipedia:Biografie. I think it would be useful if you would create a draft of the article as a subpage of your userpage and link to it on our discussion page for next time. See here: Hilfe:Artikelentwurf: "Du erstellst den Artikel auf einer Unterseite deiner Benutzerseite im Benutzernamensraum." --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:16, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Geschichte des Begriffs

Earlier this week we said that we want to write an article about the history of the term for our wikipedia page (Week 7. 3.3). Here is our first draft for it:

Der Begriff “Stereotyp” stammt ursprünglich aus dem Griechischen (stereos – starr, hart, fest und typos – feste Norm, charakteristisches Gepräge) und wurde erstmals von Firmin Didot im Jahre 1798 eingeführt. Didot benutzt den Begriff, um ein Druckverfahren zu beschreiben.

In den Sozialwissenschaften lässt sich der Begriff auf den Journalisten Walter Lippmann zurückführen. 1922 wurde der Begriff von Lippmann in seinem Buch “Public Opinion” verwendet, um die Bilder in unseren Köpfen zu beschreiben, die sich als schablonisierte und schematisierte Vorstellungsinhalte zwischen unsere Aussenwelt und unser Bewusstsein schieben. In den folgenden zehn Jahren etablierte sich der Begriff in der Sozialpsychologie. Die Studie von Katz und Braly aus dem Jahr 1933 gilt als Beginn der sozialpsychologischen Erforschung von Stereotypen. In ihrer Studie untersuchten sie die stereotypen Einstellungen von Amerikanern gegenüber verschiedenen Ethnien. Darin wird der Begriff Stereotyp als „einen starren Eindruck, der nur in geringem Masse mit der Realität übereinstimmt, und dadurch zustande kommt, dass wir zuerst urteilen und dann hinschauen“ definiert.

Die heutige sozialpsychologische Definition lautet: “Eine kognitive Struktur, die unser Wissen, unsere Überzeugungen und Erwartungen über eine soziale Gruppe von Menschen enthält.”

JessTheodore (Diskussion) 11:15, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET) Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 11:16, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think thats a good start for the history section of our article. You could mention later in the article that stereotypes are not a modern phenomenon but were already formed in antiquity and the Middle Ages and still exist today, for example stereotypes about jews which we discussed in our first seminar lesson.

I also have found a research direction called "historische Stereotypenforschung" which may help you with your entry: http://www.stereotyp-und-geschichte.de/stereotypenforschung/stereotype-und-geschichte/ --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 16:03, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Have you seen my comment to your previous post? The content you propose here looks good, however, please make sure that everything not quoted is in your own words. The sentence with "schablonisierte und schematisierte Vorstellungsinhalte" is from this website: https://www.spektrum.de/lexikon/psychologie/stereotype/14836, and because it contains a longer phrase it should be cited with quotation marks. However, you could also try to avoid such literal quotations and use your own words instead. Overall, I think it is good to mention what stereotype means literally (the etymology), where it was first used, and then mention Lippmann. However, I would delete the last sentence with the definition because we already define it in the introductory text of Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:26, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stigmatisierung von Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung

I have adjusted the minor things that have been pointed out about my contribution and added the suggested improvement with the added citation:

"In den letzten Jahren sind zunehmend Projekte gegen die Stigmatisierung von Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung aktiv geworden. Initiativen von und mit Betroffenen haben grundsätzlich Vorzüge gegenüber Initiativen von Aussenstehenden, da diese das höchste Mass and Glaubwürdigkeit und Authentizität besitzen. Auch kann die Autonomie der Betroffenen so besser beibehalten bleiben. Die Strategie, die am besten belegt ist, ist persönlicher Kontakt mit Betroffenen. Einem psychisch kranken Menschen zu begegnen und dessen Lebensgeschichte zu hören, kann die Ablehnung und das Bedürfnis nach Abgrenzung reduzieren. Entscheidend ist dabei jedoch, dass diese Kontakte auf Augenhöhe stattfinden.

Dies entspricht auch der Kontakthypothese des Sozialpsychologen Gordon Allport. Diese besagt, dass persönlicher Kontakt zwischen Menschen unterschiedlicher Gruppen gegenseitige Stereotypisierung, Vorurteile und Diskriminierung reduziert. Dieser Kontakt sollte unter den folgenden Bedingungen stattfinden: Gleicher Status in der Kontaktsituation, Kooperation im Hinblick auf gemeinsame Ziele, Unterstützung durch Autoritäten. Dies wurde auch spezifisch für Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung belegt.

Es konnte ebenfalls gezeigt werden, dass nicht nur der Kontakt in Person, sondern auch Videos dazu führen können, dass die stereotype Wahrnehmung von Menschen mit einer psychischen Erkrankung als gefährlich reduziert wird."

Regarding the wording of Stigmatisierung psychisch Kranker there is already a discussion, that came to the conclusion that there is no scientific evidence for person-first language being less stigmatizing. However, it was last edited in 2012. I've submitted the suggestion of changing it and added a study that supports that suggestion. So far, no one has replied. (nicht signierter Beitrag von Elinoe3 (Diskussion | Beiträge) 13:50, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET))

OK, I think you just need a subsection title and then you can publish it on Stigmatisierung_psychisch_Kranker. Let's see if anyone responds to your comment. Perhaps you can also categorize the article Stigmatisierung_psychisch_Kranker under "psychische Gesundheit" to increase the traffic! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 14:57, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypes as attributions

May it be an idea to mention attributions as well in the context of stereotypes? I found an article from Mark J. Brandt and Christine Reyna where it is discussed how stereotypes can work as attributions. Here the focus is on different groups and the impact of stereotypes on intergroup behavior. --Leoniiie (Diskussion) 14:29, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think that understanding the concept of attributions and attributional networks could help make it more clear what stereotypes are. If you can incorporate that study in a way that is coherent with the article and makes sense, I think that could definitely be a valuable addition --Elinoe3 (Diskussion) 16:25, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I suggest that you coordinate with Amweiss17 who is working on the "functions" section and reference the chapter by Brandt & Reyna (2011) there. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:06, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Article about Alex Koch

Hi. I did some research into the ABC-Model of Stereotypes. While doing that, I stumbled across one of the leading researchers' CV and some biographical info. So my proposal for my final contribution, is to create an article summarizing Alex Koch's academic development and achievemts in a biographical article. RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 14:41, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think this is a good idea! You may want to refer to these sources for some help: https://www.chicagobooth.edu/faculty/directory/k/alex-koch and https://c-seb.de/en/people/alex-koch/ (this one is more about his publications) *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 21:39, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Thank you! The first source I found as well, the other one I haven't yet, this is very helpful! --RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 12:37, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

That's fine. Do you want to create this page on the English wikipedia? Then this would be important resources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biography and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons. Alternatively, you could publish it on the German wikipedia, it doesn't matter. To get inspiration, just view a couple of biographical articles that are rather short (like 2 paragraphs). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:13, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Consequences: Linking the shooting bias to stereotypes

I would like to add, as a previously suggested, a paragraph in the part about consequences of stereotypes, which shows the influence of stereotypes for the shooting bias. I haven't finished the whole paragraphe yet, but this is what I have so far:

Im Bereich der Strafjustiz können kategoriebasierte Urteile beispielsweise durch die spontane, blitzschnelle Reaktion eines Polizeibeamten schwerwiegende Konsequenzen haben. In der Sozialpsychologie gibt es in diesem Zusammenhang den Begriff des «shooting bias», welche die scheinbare Tendenz bei Polizist:innen beschreibt, häufiger auf Schwarze als auf Weisse zu schiessen, selbst wenn diese unbewaffnet sind. Inwiefern Stereotype über Schwarze bzw. ethnische Minderheiten für diesen «racial bias» eine Rolle spielen, wurde in einer Studie von Correll et al. (2007) untersucht. In dieser Studie spielten Versuchspersonen ein Videospiel, in dem sie bewaffnete und unbewaffnete Menschen sowie Weisse und Schwarze begegneten. Die Versuchspersonen hatten die Aufgabe auf Bewaffnete zu schiessen nicht aber auf die unbewaffneten, egal ob es sich dabei um schwarze oder weisse Menschen handelte (sog. shoot/don’t shoot task). Es zeigte sich, dass Versuchspersonen schnell und genau reagierten, wenn die Zielperson den kulturellen Stereotypen entsprach (bewaffnete Schwarze, unbewaffnete Weisse), aber langsam und ungenau reagierten, wenn die Zielperson diese Stereotype verletze (unbewaffneter Schwarze, bewaffneter Weisse). Die Autoren haben in Bezug auf diese Ergebnisse die Vermutung geäussert, dass Stereotype die Reaktionen in shoot/don’t shoot tasks systematisch verzerren und dass dabei vor allem die Idee von Gefahr als eine Komponente des Stereotyps über Schwarze eine grosse Rolle spielt. --Ldegio (Diskussion) 14:46, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hey Ldegio, I like your draft! I would just change two little things:

- I looked it up and apparently Wikipedia does not use colons for gender-neutral language, so maybe instead of using the colon in Polizist:innen you could just write "bei der Polizei" or something like that (so you could still keep it gender-neutral without the colon)?

- The sentence "[...] in dem sie bewaffneten und unbewaffneten Menschen sowie Weisse und Schwarze begegneten" sounds to me like the categories are not connected and they just met people with weapons and without weapons and separately also met black and white people (presumably without a weapon), so maybe you could change that part of the sentence into something like "[...] in dem sie weissen und schwarzen Menschen begegneten, die jeweils bewaffnet oder unbewaffnet waren" or the like.

Anyways, all in all a very well written addition! :)

--Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 16:19, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I agree with Spaghettimcfly's suggestions and add the following: add a comma before "nicht aber" and change "Idee von Gefahr" into "Eigenschaft 'gefährlich'". Perhaps you can add one more wikilink, e.g. Polizeibeamter. For references please follow Lantus' advice to use first names as in the following:

Steven J. Spencer, Christine Logel und Paul G. Davies: Stereotype threat. In: Annual Review of Psychology. Nr. 67(1), 2016, S. 415-437. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235 --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:22, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Re: Adding Section to German Stereotype Threat article

I have reviewed my proposition from week 3 (“Adding Section to German Stereotype Threat Article») which was about adding a “Begünstigende Faktoren” section to the Bedrohung durch Stereotype Wikipedia article. I’ve updated the sources and added some further Information, and now the addition would look like this:

"Unter gewissen Bedingungen ist das Auftreten von Bedrohung durch Stereotype wahrscheinlicher. Personen mit einer internalen Kontrollüberzeugung oder erhöhte Testosteronwerte weisen ein erhöhtes Risiko auf, aufgrund einer Bedrohung durch Stereotype eine schlechtere Leistung zu zeigen. Allerdings können bei Stereotype Lift erhöhte Testosteronwerte den gegenteiligen Effekt auslösen und die Leistung von Personen, die den Stereotype Lift erleben, weiter verbessern . Bei Stereotype Lift zeigen Leute bessere Leistungen, wenn ihnen negative Stereotype über eine andere Gruppe bewusst gemacht werden, da dies im Umkehrschluss als positive Stereotypisierung der Eigengruppe gedeutet wird.. Ausserdem zeigt die Bedrohung durch Stereotype vor allem dann ihre Wirkung, wenn sich die stereotypisierte Person besonders stark mit dem auszuführenden Aufgabenberiech oder der stereotypisierten Gruppe identifiziert. Beispielsweise wirkte sich nach einer Studie von Aronson et al. das Stereotyp, dass weisse Menschen schlechter sind in Mathematik als Menschen aus Asien, besonders dann negativ auf die Leistung der stereotypisierten Menschen aus, wenn die weissen Menschen ihre Mathematikfähigkeiten als einen besonders wichtigen Bestandteil ihrer Persönlichkeit ansahen. Ähnlich verhält es sich mit dem Ausmass an Identifikation mit der stereotypisierten Gruppe. In einer Studie von Schmader schnitten beispielsweise in einem Mathematiktest, bei dem Bedrohung durch Stereotype aktiviert worden war, nur Frauen schlechter ab, welche sich besonders stark mit ihrem Geschlecht identifizieren; hingegen beeinflusste die Bedrohung durch Stereotype die Leistung von Frauen, welche sich nicht besonders stark mit dem eigenen Geschlecht identifizierten, nicht. Des weiteren können gewisse Copingmechanismen die durch Bedrohung durch Stereotype ausgelösten negativen Auswirkungen auf die Leistung milder. Ford et al. konnten in ihrer Studie nachweisen, dass die Leistungen von Frauen, welche Humor als Bewältigungsmechanismus nutzen, weniger durch Bedrohung durch Stereotype beeinflusst werden als die Leistungen von Frauen, die diesen Bewältigungsmechanismus nicht aufweisen ."

--Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 15:50, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hello there! I find your proposal quite interesting so far. Do you plan on splitting it into several paragraphs for the final article? Maybe that would help with distinguishing which part belongs to which. I would advise you to check for small spelling mistakes and the way you cited the authors since Lantus informed us that there are different conventions for the German Wikipedia than what we are used to in APA, for example including the authors' first names. --Sschraml (Diskussion) 12:44, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Here are a couple of suggestions of how you can improve this text before you include in our common article:

1. Start with the most general conclusion about facilitating conditions, which is the part about identification with the domain (the Aronson article).

2. From there, you can continue with the article by Joseph, which corroborates the point that individuals who identify with a particular domain (for which there exists a negative stereotype about their group) are particularly susceptible to stereotype threat, especially when their high testosterone levels indicate concern about status. Then say that the same is true for stereotype lift.

3. Then you could talk about locus of control and coping.

4. Please do check the spelling, including superfluous "." and blanks before the references.

5. Please check the references. For example, in the first reference for Joseph, the doi-link does not work. Use the same reference for all occurences of Joseph so that it does not appear twice. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:27, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotypinhalte / Student

For my second contribution I would like to add either to the article "Stereotypinhalte" some examples of stereotypes about students or directly to the article "Student". I want to mention examples like "students are lazy, partying and socializing, procrastinating and desorganized, financially struggling, arrogant, idealistic etc."

ThomasB7 (Diskussion) 17:01, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I did a quick search of student stereotypes and hardly found anything that directly applies to students in and of itself. The examples that you mentioned could probably be applied to young people in general. Maybe you found more literature than me. You might find more literature to the effects stereotypes have on students and rather go that route, instead of just mentioning examples of student stereotypes. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 17:36, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think it's a subject that could be very interesting. The first thing I thought was that while there are general stereotypes about youth, there are more specific stereotypes about what college youth are like in certain countries and cultures, for example in the U.S., where most of the movies promote one kind of idea about student life in this country: parties, fraternities and drama.

Maybe it might help your idea to focus on something more cultural! --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 01:11, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

If you find a source, I would suggest that you rather add to Student because the examples on our page should be more widely known. But it might turn out to be a difficult search, as JPrueb has already indicated. I also did a quick search and it seems there is only some research on stereotypes of student subgroups, student athletes, for example, see here in Study 2: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205285556. However, you could also briefly summarize the work presented in this article and add it to the "functions" section in our common article as your second contribution. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:10, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Fashion Stereotypes

For my second contribution, I intend to write about fashion stereotypes. As a start, I have found some papers discussing fashion stereotypes, especially related to gender, so a potential focus could be about the existence of gendered clothing. Additionally, I could also look into the type of clothing associated with certain groups of people. However, I am still unsure whether this could be made into an entirely new article or be added as an improvement to an existing article, possibly somewhere in en:Fashion? I’d be happy to hear any thoughts or feedback about this! --Hanis Abdan (Diskussion) 20:05, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I don't fully understand what you mean by fashion stereotypes. Do you mean stereotypes about fashion (which would not be fully in line with our definition of stereotypes as beliefs about social groups)? Or stereotypes about people who sport certain types of fashion? Or do you mean fashion as a facet of stereotypes about certain groups (like people from the canton Aargau who are said to wear white socks, https://www.aargauerzeitung.ch/aargau/kanton-aargau/mit-diesen-klischees-kampft-der-aargau-dabei-hat-er-stil-mit-oder-ohne-weisse-socken-ld.1450448 or https://www.tagblatt.ch/leben/glosse-der-aargauer-als-stilikone-dieser-trend-haut-alle-aus-den-socken-ld.2302558)? Please elaborate and tell us about the references you intend to use!

Would you also like to publish your text on stereotypes in sports now? It will be interesting to see what happens, as we have already experienced that someone rejected a contribution to this article from our seminar (for dubious reasons). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:26, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Physical impact of Stereotypes

I would like to write a contribution on how stereotypes affect the physical health of people being stereotyped, and health outcomes. I mostly found studies looking at old-age stereotypes and how those affect the health outcomes. So I am wondering if I should focus on just "old-age stereotypes" or if I should try to have a more broad approach towards the Idea of health outcomes and stereotypes.I have two references talking about the effects or mediated effects of Age Stereotypes on Physical Health

--JPrueb (Diskussion) 17:24, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hi! I think you can just focus on old-age stereotypes, as it isn't easy to find research about younger age groups. (Tried to find articles as well with no luck.) The articles you found on the mediating effects look really interesting!

Once you're done with the article you could post it in the English or German Wikipedia page for stereotype threat. If I looked correctly, both of them do not have articles on this topic. I know it's pretty early, but I struggled a bit with this for my first contribution and thought it might help :) JessTheodore (Diskussion) 19:27, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

The references seem useful for making a focused contribution in this area. There does not seem to exist a Wikipedia article on "Altersstereotype" (in the introduction to our common article, the wikilink is to the English wikipedia). So it would generally be a good idea to create one, but that could be much more work. So perhaps you look for other places to add it. Sometimes a non-obvious place works, like here Altern#Alternspsychologie. But you could also add it to the "Konsequenzen" section of our common article. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:38, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Social media stereotype

Thank you very much for the feedback, I tried to implement it in the best way, but unfortunately I could not find a scientific article that seemed to confirm my words, so I decided to change the topic a little, for which I have clear confirmations of my words in the article. So, I want to write my article in the same section (of the English version of Wikipedia about social media in the stereotypes section), but now it will be about “Instagram vs reality”. I want to write the following: Young people who publish their lives on the Internet, share their thoughts and impressions with an audience (This can include a variety of topics such as fashion, beauty, travel, cooking, politics, technology and much more.) can also serve an important social function by raising awareness of issues and calling for change in society ,and one of the changes which they can do is - make people fall under the stereotypes about bloggers life/instagram life. "Instagram vs. Reality" - it is one of the phenomenon of vividly reflects the stark contrasts between the polished and considered images shared on social media platforms and the raw, unfiltered realities of everyday life. In the era of modern digital self-presentation, users not only strategically select, but also actively project idealized versions of themselves, emphasizing aesthetically pleasing moments and relegating the less well-groomed and imperfect aspects of their everyday life to the shadows. This prevailing stereotype not only points to the potential impact of social media on mental health, but also highlights the unknown and unintended consequences of holding oneself to unrealistic standards.In an era where the digital landscape is increasingly defining in shaping our perceptions and behaviors, addressing and addressing the implications of this stereotype becomes critical to fostering a healthier and more authentic culture in the online environment.

Reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819888720

--Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) 19:25, 13. Nov. 2023 (CET)

The three elements (the target article, what you write, and the reference) are not yet coherent. The article by Tiggemann presents the results of an experiment with women who view idealized instagram pictures, real pictures, and idealized and real pictures side by side. The link to stereotypes could be made by saying that instagram has a role in contributing to the stereotype of young women as immaculate beauties. The problem addressed by Tiggemann is that because many women feel they do not fit the stereotype (are unprototypical) they suffer from body dissatisfaction. The solution is to post more real pictures or draw attention to the idealization. Regarding the "where to publish", I first thought that it could be published on the Instagram article, but this article already contains material on health and also (other) work by Tiggemann. So I suggest that you revise your text for the social media article as follows:

1. Given that you only have a reference which talks about Instagram, you should make your text less general. From the very first sentence, you should write about "young people who publish photos of themselves on the internet (for example, on Instagram)", delete "thoughts and impressions", all the examples and everything else which is not covered by your reference.

2. Say how their activity may contribute to a specific stereotype (i.e. say which beliefs are created about which target group), similar to what I proposed.

3. Describe in two or three sentences what Tiggemann examined and found.

Please try to do so as quickly as possible (ideally by Wednesday) so that you can also start working on your second contribution! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 17:03, 18. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Young people who share carefully curated images of their lives on social media platforms, particularly on Instagram, play a significant role in shaping perceptions of other users. In the era of digital self-presentation, users strategically select and project idealized versions of themselves, emphasizing aesthetically pleasing moments while concealing less groomed and imperfect aspects of their daily experiences. This prevalent trend not only influences mental health but also perpetuates stereotypes about bloggers' and influencers' lives. In an experiment by Tiggemann and colleagues, women who were presented with real pictures (relative to idealized pictures) reported decreased body dissatisfaction. Tiggemann's work suggests that promoting authenticity and challenging idealized portrayals could mitigate the negative effects of these stereotypes on mental health. Therefore, young individuals posting on social media, especially Instagram, can actively participate in challenging stereotypes by presenting a more realistic and authentic depiction of their lives. This approach not only promotes mental well-being but also contributes to a more genuine and inclusive online environment. --Yeliz.proko (Diskussion) 16:44, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I have edited your text so that it is more focused on the topic. Please include the reference to Tiggemann before publishing it in the article on social media! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 16:09, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotype in the world of cooking

The article´s name will be “In the culinary world” and it´s going to be in the "gender role" page under the subtitle "gender stereotypes".

Article:

Gender roles are almost everywhere one can imagine, and the culinary world is not an exception. Cooking is a gendered task in all its types, from the domestic sphere, where women are the main characters to the professional sphere, where it is predominately male. There is a dichotomy in how the task of cooking is organized, attributing a feminine connotation to the tasks of home cooking and a masculine connotation to the tasks of a restaurant kitchen. Looking at recent global figures, less than 4% of the world’s top 50 restaurants in 2015 are owned by women and in the 2014 Michelin Guide ranking, 6 of 110 restaurant chefs awarded three Michelin stars were women, less than 6% of the total.

Some of the main obstacles women face in their working life as chefs are the already established masculine culture, workplace conditions and work-life balance. Domestic tasks are not equally distributed within the home, which is detrimental to many women, especially those engaged in professional cooking. To women, consequently, it becomes excessively complicated to remain, emerge and evolve in the kitchen workplace. The hegemonic ideals of masculinity that strongly prevail in the industry, added to the demanding and complicated work environment in the kitchen, transform the goals and objectives of aspiring women chefs into a very tough challenge, for many something almost unattainable and unimaginable.

This problem comes from the past, as a result of the traditional gender roles stereotype: Women are the ones who stay at home and men are the professionals who work and support the family. Over the years, different expectations of each gender have been developed. There is an idea that women are communal, unlike men, who are idealized as agentic people. Given this, the idea of female gender is not consistent with leadership roles due to social expectations, whereas men are considered agents, which is seen as a positive attribute when it comes to being a leader. Consequently, women may suffer discrimination in relation to leadership roles because many people do not believe them to be sufficiently agentic. This phenomenon explains the origin of the kitchen dichotomy.

Talking about the culinary world, this stereotype developed in such a way that women are the ones who cook at home and men are the ones who dedicate themselves to professional cooking, also called Haute Cuisine. In addition, sensitivity, emotionality and the supposed physical weakness are other gender stereotypes that put female chefs at a disadvantage. Both genders are evaluated differently from a culinary perspective. The male gender is considered to be more innovative and better in the business field involving a restaurant work, and women are considered affectionate and homey. This also comes from gender roles history.

On the other hand, the dichotomy behind the cooking task and the gender segregation is also reflected in the fact that the kitchens of restaurants have a reputation for being sexist and that more than one chef would not mind to point out that in French the term cook does have a word for the feminine version, le cuisinier, but there is no female counterpart to refer to a chef.

Different types of abuse have been reported in the restaurant industry, specifically, gay and female discrimination and sexual harassment. The way of education and the processes of socialization in the culinary culture prior to professionalism are the main reasons why this type of abuse continues to be perpetuated and continues to be, in theory, supported by social and historical structures.

To become a Chef, women must build their own success in the industry, being very resilient. For both genders it is not easy to become a renowned chef, but for women there is an additional barrier that is the historical and social weight that comes with being a woman in this field. (nicht signierter Beitrag von Camcar27 (Diskussion | Beiträge) 22:36, 19. Nov. 2023 (CET))

There is nothing wrong with your text. Perhaps just remove the blanks before each reference. We could try to publish it again on the gender role page with a comment that explains you are not an AI. However, looking at the gender stereotypes subsection of that article, there is already a long text on stereotypes in the workplace. So it might be a little bit odd to extensively highlight one particular workplace there. What do you think, would it be an option to publish your text on en:Haute_cuisine or en::Cook_(profession)? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:05, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

You are right, I think this article fits much better on the "cooking" as a profession page, I finally decided to publish it there in a new section. It is published and with the whitespaces corrected. Thank you! --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 12:55, 29. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stereotype accuracy

I have expanded the current paragraph on stereotype accuracy written by ThomasB7. I have come up with the following text:

Es ist eine weitverbreitete alltagspsychologische Grundannahme über Stereotype und Vorurteile, dass diese vor allem deshalb schädlich sind, weil sie falsch sind oder zumindest weil sie Übergeneralisierungen enthalten. Auch viele Sozialwissenschaftler erklären Stereotype für falsch, ohne empirische Evidenz für diese Behauptung zu liefern. Jedoch gibt es in der Realität tatsächlich Gruppenunterschiede, welche messbar und nachweisbar sind. Es wird argumentiert, dass es unmöglich sei, dass es keine Gruppenunterschiede gibt, denn sonst gäbe es gar keine Gruppen. Ein wissenschaftlicher Streitpunkt liegt in der Frage, welche Attribute denn überhaupt Stereotypen sind. Einige definieren Stereotype als die Gruppenmerkmale, die falsch sind, allerdings wäre nach dieser Definition Forschung zur Richtigkeit von Stereotypen sinnlos, wenn diese schon in der Definition widerlegt wird. Die Mehrheit der modernen Definitionen geht jedoch davon aus, dass Stereotype Überzeugungen über die Eigenschaften von Gruppen und ihren Mitgliedern sind, die mehr oder weniger richtig oder falsch sein können.

In diesem Sinne gibt es empirische Evidenz, dass sich Gruppenunterschiede in unseren Überzeugungen und Einstellungen gegenüber der jeweiligen Gruppen widerspiegeln. Jussim et al. (2017) fassten vier Studien zu ethnischen Stereotypen und sieben Studien zu Geschlechterstereotypen in Bezug auf demografische Merkmale, schulische Leistungen, Persönlichkeit und Verhalten zusammen. Die Autoren kamen zum Schluss, dass einige Aspekte ethnischer und geschlechtsspezifischer Stereotype zutreffend sind, während Stereotype in Bezug auf politische Zugehörigkeit und Nationalität weit weniger zutreffend sind. Andersson et al. (2008) prüften, ob Personen das Geschlecht des Verfassers oder der Verfasserin eines persönlichen medizinischen Berichts erkennen können. Bei 62% der Berichte wurde das Geschlecht akkurat identifiziert. Berichte, die kürzer und informativer bzw. sachlicher waren, wurden eher als männlich eingestuft, während längere und von Emotionen geprägte Berichte eher als weiblich gelesen wurden. Ebenfalls interessant zu beobachten war, dass Personen dieselben Aussagen unterschiedlich einordneten, je nachdem, ob sie dachten, sie wurden von einem Mann oder einer Frau verfasst. Nichtsdestotrotz bleibt es schwierig, den objektiven Wahrheitsgehalt von Stereotypen zu bestimmen. Auch sind die echten Unterschiede zwischen den Gruppen oft kleiner, als man glauben würde. Ausserdem sind die Unterschiede zwischen den Gruppen oft kleiner als die Unterschiede zwischen den Personen innerhalb dieser Gruppen. Die Untersuchung der Richtigkeit von Stereotypen ist ein theoretisches, methodisches und politisches Minenfeld. Obwohl sich in der Forschung mittlere bis starke Effekte bezüglich Richtigkeit von Stereotypen zeigen, meiden viele Autoren dieses Thema und gehen nicht darauf ein. Weiter untersuchen manche die Akkuratheit von Stereotypen nur auf Individuen bezogen, während sich andere ganze Gruppen anschauen. Da eine angehörige Person einer bestimmten Gruppe so gut wie nie alle Stereotype dieser erfüllen wird, ist es fraglich, inwiefern man denn die Richtigkeit von Stereotypen nur anhand von Individuen messen kann. Ergebnisse sind ebenfalls abhängig davon, welche Hinweise (stereotypische Merkmale) in der Untersuchung verwendet werden und wie diese von den Versuchspersonen interpretiert werden.

--JasminMoor (Diskussion) 21:47, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I have made some small edits in the original text. I suggest the following changes to the structure of the text:

1. After "von einem Mann oder einer Frau verfasst", continue with "Die Untersuchung der Richtigkeit... nicht darauf ein."

2. Then continue with "Nichtsdestotrotz..." and add one sentence why it is difficult. It may be one thing to determine the truth or falsity of the belief that women are emotionally expressive than men by looking at norm data from a psychological test. However, many stereotypical beliefs are rather value-laden and difficult to verify. Brown (2010) argues that if a landlord regards Black people as "troublemakers", establishing the accuracy of this belief would not be an easy task because it would be unclear which data would be appropriate. Brown (2010) further argues that even there were some kind of evidence for this belief, discrimination resulting from the landlord's belief would still be a societal problem.

3. Assuming that you will add something like that to explain the difficulty of assessing the accuracy of most relevant stereotypical beliefs, you could then continue with "Auch sind die echten Unterschiede...innerhalb dieser Gruppen."

4. Regarding the last part, "auf Individuen bezogen", I would rather leave this out. Stereotypes are beliefs about groups, so I don't understand why people would accuracy based on one individual, and I don't think Wikipedia readers need to be bothered with finding out! :)

Brown, R. (2010). Prejudice: Its social psychology (2nd ed.). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 14:38, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Stability and Change of Sterotypes

I added a picture to my article on stability and change of stereotypes. However, I'm not sure how necessary a picture is in my article, or if maybe there might be options that are more representative for the topic (I'm happy for any inspiration). I also thought it could be interesting To add another example for stability or change in stereotypes than gender roles (If that could be considered as a second contribution). --Eweime (Diskussion) 21:50, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I noticed this and was rather enthusiastic about seeing a picture on our page! However, the picture just shows a man and woman (though in formal dress), so it is unclear what it has to do with "stability and change". I guess you could expand the text underneath the Figure to explain the relation, but it would be even better if you would look for (or create) a figure that speaks for itself and requires little explanatory text. So if you would find a picture of a business woman that would help to illustrate the change of social roles, that would work. In your text or perhaps in the section on stability and change, you could link to Geschlechterrolle. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 14:50, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Addition to "Stereotyp" Wikipedia page

I thought about adding a small section about the study about perception of stereotypes in relation to the priming effect (Krieglmeyer, R., & Sherman, J. W. (2012). Disentangling stereotype activation and stereotype application in the stereotype misperception task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 205–224.) to the Stereotyp wikipedia page. I'm not sure which subcategory it would fit in though. I thought about something like this:

Der Effekt von Stereotypen kann auch subliminal auftreten, was beispielsweise schon in Studien zum Priming (Psychologie) gezeigt werden konnte. Werden für eine kurze Zeit Reize eingeblendet, die mit negativen Stereotypen verbunden sind, wirkt sich diese Beurteilung auf den daraufhin länger dargebotenen Reiz aus. Dies zeigt auf, dass Stereotype nicht aktiv durchdacht werden müssen, sondern auch unterbewusst auftreten.

I'm open to suggestions on where to add it exactly and also for wording. Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 22:53, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET) --Shin Saibou (Diskussion) 22:53, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think it would be a valuable contribution to write a few introductory words to the section Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie#Aktivierung_und_Anwendung. You could explain the difference between activation and application based on the Introduction in Krieglmeyer & Sherman (2012). Although what you wrote so far is not wrong, I would encourage you to rewrite it with the goal in mind that readers of our common wikipedia article (having read everything above) are prepared for what comes next (Continuum model and dissociation model). Let me know if you would rather work on the existing article Stereotyp. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:02, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Gender-based stereotypes about food

For my second article/contribution I would like to write about gender-based stereotypes about food. There is food with gender connotations, associated with masculinity or femininity, that affects many people's eating behavior, often unconsciously. It is believed that the role of food type, portion size, and dish presentation are potential factors which constituting this gender-based stereotype about food.

I would like to find out more about the topic because I find it interesting and important to understand. At the moment I'm looking for what page I could add it to, I accept any suggestions about it! --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 00:58, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

The theme you propose is very interesting. Gender stereotypes related to food are part of our society and greatly affect our eating behaviors.

These food-related stereotypes can play a central role in eating disorders, maybe you could add some information about that.

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 08:27, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

This sounds like a good idea.

Maybe you could add something about the environmetal impacts these stereotypes have, since men eat almost twice as much meat in switzerland than women do. Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 09:52, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Were you thinking of studies like this one: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.068? Perhaps it would be useful to add something here: en:food. Can you propose a concrete text and exact place (perhaps also the title of a new subsection, if necessary)? --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:08, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Self Fulfilling Prophecy

Maybe I could write something on the „self fulfilling prophecy“ aspect of stereotypes that we learned about in the first year. So somethung like:

In einer Studie von Snyder et al. sollten Männer mit einer Frau ein Telefonat führen. Eine gruppe dachte dass sie mit einer „Attraktiven“ Frau redeten, und die andere mit einer weniger Attraktiven. Es stellte sich heraus, dass die Männer, die dachten, dass sie mit einer attraktiveren Frau redeten, als u.a. Wärmer und Kontaktfreudiger eingestuft wurden. Dies hatte zur folge, dass sich auch die Frau am anderen Ende freundlicher verhielt. Dies ist ein Beispiel davon, wie sich ein Stereotyp selbsterfüllen kann. Diese erkenntnis hat wiederum implikationen für die aufrechterhaltung von Stereotypen.

Maybe this could go somewhere in a section about how Stereotypes evolve and persist.

--Aaeeiioouu12345 (Diskussion) 02:57, 22. Nov. 2023 (CET)

You could add a short text on "Selbsterfüllende Prophezeiungen" in the subsection Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie#Konsequenzen. Your proposal could be checked for typos and expanded with another reference, perhaps have a look at this paper: https://sites.rutgers.edu/lee-jussim/wp-content/uploads/sites/135/2019/05/Madon-et-al-2018-accumulation.pdf. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:15, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Agency Beliefs Communion Model

For my first contribution I wrote the paragraph on our Wikipedia Page about the SCM. This was my "improvement". For my second contribution I am torn between 2 ideas:

1. I was thinking to write about the Agency Beliefs Model and the Beliefs Communion model as well on our Wikipedia page, but I'm not quite sure if this would fit with the requirements to pass this course. If I remember correctly we have to create a whole new article in addition to the improvement of an already existing article. My question is, if thats still the case or if it would be also acceptable to improve our page by writing more about the models instead of creating a new one?

2. My very first proposal was to write about age stereotypes in the german Wikipedia (Altersstereotype). However there already exists an article called "Altersdiskriminierung". My Question (Proposal) would be if I could still write a german wikipedia Article about Altersstereotype? The german Article "Altersdiskriminierung" talks more about how people get discriminated in society because of their age. In my article i would rather write about which Stereotypes, regarding the age, exist while discussing empirical studies and how these stereotypes may have developed.

Either way, I'm happy for you feedback :) --Melebo (Diskussion) 14:13, 23. Nov. 2023 (CET)

There is no requirement to create a new article. You can make another improvement of an existing article or add to our common article. You can also find/create and embed a figure that would make our common article more pleasant to read. All of this would qualify as your second contribution.

Having said this, perhaps you would like to join JPrueb in writing something about age stereotypes. If I understand it correctly, he wants to explain how endorsing stereotypes about older people (or about aging) may have negative health implications (see above: Benutzer_Diskussion:JohUllrich/Stereotype_in_der_Sozialpsychologie#Physical_impact_of_Stereotypes). Perhaps you could complement this by describing age stereotypes in the first place. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:28, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

The neural basis of stereotyping

Hi Lantus! As discussed with JohUllrich in Week 7, there is a condensed version of my contribution on the neural basis of stereotyping. We thought to implement it in the second section of "Stereotypen in der Sozialpsychologie." There is also the new article, "Stereotype in den Neurowissenschaften," that I would like to create using the texts I wrote in the last few weeks. What do you think?

Thank you in advance. --Gg179 (Diskussion) 15:05, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Lantus agrees this would be a good idea! (see above) --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:30, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Neuropsychologische Grundlagen von Stereotypen

Speicherung & Abruf:

Die Speicherung von sozialem semantischem Wissen erfolgt in der anterior temporalen Lappen (ATL). Die dabei gespeicherten Informationen werden zum dorsalen präfrontalen Kortex (mPFC) und zum linken Gyrus frontalis inferior (IFG) übermittelt. Der mPFC integriert stereotypisches Wissen mit persönlichen Zielen, während der linke IFG Wissensstrukturen im Arbeitsgedächtnis abruft. Das Zusammenspiel des mPFC und des linken IFG unterstützt die Koordination von instrumentellem Verhalten. Zusammen bilden ATL, mPFC und linker IFG das stereotypierende Netzwerk.

Regulation:

Die Unterdrückung von stereotypem Verhalten erfolgt über ein regulatorisches Netzwerk, das aus dem rechten IFG, dem anteriore Cingulum-Kortex (ACC) und dem präfrontalen Kortex (PFC) besteht. Der ACC kann als ein Selbstüberwachungssystem beschrieben werden, dessen Funktion die Entdeckung von Konflikten zwischen automatischen stereotypischen Impulsen und aktuellen Zielen ist. Weiterhin dient der PFC, zusammen mit dem rechten IFG, der Hemmung von sozial unangemessenem Verhalten.

Stereotype in den Neurowissenschaften

Stereotype in den Neurowissenschaften werden als semantische Strukturen betrachtet, das heisst, als Wissensrepräsentationen im Gedächtnis. Diese Strukturen spielen zusammen mit Zielen eine wichtige Rolle bei der Bestimmung des instrumentellen Verhaltens (zielgerichtete Verhaltensweisen) einer Person. Diese Anpassung der in der Sozialpsychologie gängigen Definition von Stereotypen ist notwendig, denn die Kodierung, Speicherung, Auswahl und der Abruf semantischer Strukturen beruhen auf spezifischen neuronalen Grundlagen. Diese Spezifizierung dient beispielsweise der Unterscheidung von Stereotypen und Vorurteilen auf einer neuronalen Ebene.

Speicherung von Stereotypen:

Stereotypisches Wissen wird in der anterior temporalen Region (ATL) gespeichert, einer Gehirnregion, die mit der Speicherung von sozialem semantischem Wissen in Verbindung gebracht wird, wie Wissen über Mitmenschen oder soziale Gruppen. Dafür spricht, dass die ATL selektiv aktiviert wird, wenn sich Menschen mit stereotypischem Material befassen, und dass stereotypische Urteile reduziert werden, wenn die ATL durch transkranielle magnetische Stimulation gestört wird..

Auswahl und Abruf von Stereotypen:

Die ATL, als semantische Wissensspeicherstruktur, ist unter anderem mit zwei weiteren neurologischen Strukturen verbunden: dem dorsalen präfrontalen Kortex (mPFC) und dem Gyrus frontalis inferior (IFG), einer Region des lateralen präfrontalen Kortex (lPFC).

Einerseits wird der mPFC entweder als Speicherstruktur für soziales Wissen betrachtet oder als integrative Struktur, die soziales Wissen, einschließlich Stereotypen, und individuelle Ziele zusammenführt, um das instrumentelle Verhalten einer Person zu koordinieren. Obwohl die Meinungen zur konkreten Funktion des mPFC auseinandergehen, ist es plausibel anzunehmen, dass der mPFC eine zentrale Rolle in der Verarbeitung stereotyper Informationen über soziale Objekte (Menschen) spielt.

Andererseits wird der linke IFG als eine kortikale Struktur beschrieben, deren Funktion darin besteht, Wissensstrukturen im Arbeitsgedächtnis abzurufen, um zielgerichtetes Verhalten zu unterstützen. Auf der anderen Seite könnte der rechte IFG eine Rolle bei der Unterdrückung stereotyper Verhaltensweisen spielen. Der linke IFG ist am Abrufen stereotyper Informationen und deren Integration in instrumentelles Verhalten beteiligt, während der rechte IFG für die willentliche Hemmung stereotyper Manifestationen zuständig ist.

Regulation:

Der rechte IFG kann als exekutive Struktur angesehen werden, wenn es darum geht, stereotypische äußere Manifestationen zu unterdrücken. Die Kontrolle über das eigene Verhalten erfordert jedoch ein Selbstüberwachungssystem. In Bezug auf Stereotypen erfüllen der anteriore Cingulum-Kortex (ACC) und der präfrontale Kortex (PFC) diese Rolle. Das ACC dient der Entdeckung und Verarbeitung von Konflikten zwischen automatischen stereotypischen Impulsen und individuellen Zielen. Das PFC reguliert das Verhalten im Hinblick auf den aktuellen sozialen Kontext und initiiert die Hemmung unerwünschten Verhaltens durch das rechte IFC.

Stereotype als Teil eines interaktiven Gedächtnissystems:

Die Annahme, dass Stereotypen semantische Strukturen sind und dass deren Speicherung, Bearbeitung und Regulation einem spezifischen neuropsychologischen Netzwerk entspricht, wurde von Amodio und Kollegen in ihrer umfassenden Konzeption des Gedächtnisses und des Lernens übernommen, dem interaktiven Gedächtnissystem. Dieses Modell soll erklären, wie wir über unsere Mitmenschen lernen, indem wir multiple, gleichzeitige und bis zu einem gewissen Grad unabhängige neurokognitive Systeme oder Netzwerke nutzen. Es soll auch erklären, wie gespeicherte Informationen integriert werden, um Urteile zu bilden, Entscheidungen zu treffen oder Handlungen auszuführen.

Im Allgemeinen geht das interaktive Gedächtnissystem davon aus, dass die soziale Kognition das Ergebnis der Interaktion mehrerer neurokognitiver Netzwerke ist. Im Gegensatz zu früheren Modellen der Einstellungsbildung (Dual process Model) stellt das interaktive Gedächtnissystem ein Paradigma dar, mit dem die Zusammenhänge zwischen Einstellungsbildung, Emotionen, Verhalten und Wahrnehmung erklärt werden können. Zum Beispiel erklärt das interaktive Gedächtnissystem aufgrund der Verbindungen zwischen der ATL und dem Gyrus fusiformis (Hirnregion assoziiert mit der konfiguralen visuellen Verarbeitung), wie die visuelle Wahrnehmung von Gesichtern afroamerikanischer Personen bei weissen Teilnehmern durch stereotypisches Wissen beeinflusst werden könnte und folglich auch das Verhalten. Die Idee ist, dass das in der ATL gespeicherte Wissen das konfigurale System auf die Verarbeitung von Reizen vorbereitet. Wenn beispielsweise weisse Teilnehmer mit afroamerikanischen Gesichtern konfrontiert werden, erwarten sie stereotypische Gesichtausdrücke (z.B. Feindseligkeit) zu erkennen. Dies führt zu einer verzerrten Wahrnehmung dieser sozialen Stimuli. Weiterhin könnte das Modell von Amodio erklären, dass aufgrund unterschiedlicher neurologischer Substrate Vorurteils- und Stereotypmasse unkorreliert sind und daher unterschiedliche Verhaltensweisen in verschiedenen Situationen vorhersagen könnten. Zum Beispiel wurden in sozial angstauslösenden Situationen die vorurteilsbedingten Reaktionen der Teilnehmer beeinflusst, aber nicht stereotypische Reaktionen .

Expanding the effects section of stereotypes

This would be my contribution to the effects section of stereotypes(English version): Stereotyping can also play a central role in depression, which is characterized by negative self-schemas. According to Cox, Abramson, Devine, and Hollon (2012), stereotypes and self-schemas are the same type of cognitive structure Therefore, they suggest that an integrated perspective of prejudice and depression provides useful insight on how stereotypes are acquired. Negative stereotypes are set in motion within the Source, who conveys the prejudice towards the Target, which in turn will lead the Target to suffer from depression. Members of stigmatized groups may internalize the negative evaluation of their group and develop depression. People may also show prejudice internalization through self-stereotyping because of negative childhood experiences such as verbal and physical abuse.

My second contribution would consist in improving the Intergroup Relations section(inside the formation section of the English article) by adding information about the concept of "in-group favoritism" basing my ideas on Tajfel and Turner's Social Identity Theory. From my point of view, this section would highly benefit of including this idea as it would allow for a better understanding of what's already written. Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 18:14, 25. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Yes, that's fine, please just include a "." after "cognitive structure".

As for the second contribution, this seems possible, but I'm a little bit worried that by writing about ingroup favoritism you would not write about stereotypes. We can certainly discuss this further! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 15:40, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Models of stereotype-change

Here comes a draft of my the second contribution. I thought it could fit into the existing English article to Stereotypes under the subcategory "formation". There I could add a sub-sub category and name it : «Models of stereotype change» or «Cognitive models of stereotype change». The title has yet to be decided.

The Bookkeeping Model by Rothbarth(1981) describes a gradual modification of an existing stereotype in response to disconfirming information. It suggests there is an additive influence of each new stereotype-discrepant information . . Each new piece of disconfirming evidence only evokes a minor change. The substantial transformation of the stereotype occur with the accumulation of evidence that contradict the existing one.

The Conversion Model by Rothbart states that a threshold amount of disconfirming information has to be gathered, in order for an existing stereotype to change. There has to be a sudden, catastrophic change for a transformation of a stereotype and not gradual- as in the bookkeeping model. .

The Subtyping Model by Brewer (1981) holds that stereotypes are very stable and if encountering disconfirming information within a few inividuals, a process of subtyping occurs. A separate subcategory of the stereotype is created. When instances are so incongruent that they cant be assimilated to the exisiting stereotype, they are simply seen as exceptions and unrepresentatives of the overall group. This model predicts more change when incongruent information is dispersed across individuals than when it is concentrated in a few. . . --Nikepaulina (Diskussion) 11:14, 27. Nov. 2023 (CET)nikepaulina

Can I suggest the following changes: First, put the models and author names into the background (i.e. references) and instead talk about the processes. Second, the text may not fit very well into the formation section of the English wikipedia, but it would fit extremely well into Benutzer:JohUllrich/Stereotype in der Sozialpsychologie#Stabilität und Veränderung. We currently have a text in this section which explains how the cultural stereotype (i.e. the stereotype shared by members of a society) changes in response to changes in social roles. You could add a new paragraph (perhaps at the beginning of this section) providing answers to the question how an individual's stereotype might change in response to disconfirming evidence. In this regard, the three models are all relevant, but the reader most likely wants to know that new information can lead to changes in stereotypes (rather than that there exists a bookkeeping model or a conversion model) and that subtyping and subgrouping can also happen (rather than there's a subtyping model by Brewer). You can also have a brief look into this paper which suggests that stereotype change is most likely when disconfirming exemplars are neither too similar nor too dissimilar to the group (p. 1289). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 11:27, 3. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Hi Paulina! This is a good draft! All I have to add are a few syntax corrections:

• corrected a space between the period and "information" at the end of the sentence as well as the space between the footnote and the period: The Bookkeeping Model by Rothbarth(1981) describes a gradual modification of an existing stereotype in response to disconfirming information. It suggests there is an additive influence of each new stereotype-discrepant information.
• Corrected a space between the period and footnote and corected syntax ("the substantial transformation" to "a substantial transformation" and "occur" to "occurs" and "that contradict" to "which contradicts"): A substantial transformation of the stereotype occurs with the accumulation of evidence which contradicts the existing one.
• Got rid of space after period and footnote as well as an extra period, minor syntax correction ("for the transformation of a stereotype" to "for the transformation of a stereotype to occur" and "and not gradual- as in..." to "and not a gradual one – as in..."): The Conversion Model by Rothbart states that a threshold amount of disconfirming information has to be gathered, in order for an existing stereotype to change. There has to be a sudden, catastrophic change for a transformation of a stereotype to occur and not a gradual one – as in the bookkeeping model.
• Got rid of spaces and periods at the end of the paragraph between, before and after footnotes, minor correction ("unrepresentatives" to "unrepresentative"): The Subtyping Model by Brewer (1981) holds that stereotypes are very stable and if encountering disconfirming information within a few inividuals, a process of subtyping occurs. A separate subcategory of the stereotype is created. When instances are so incongruent that they cant be assimilated to the exisiting stereotype, they are simply seen as exceptions and unrepresentative of the overall group. This model predicts more change when incongruent information is dispersed across individuals than when it is concentrated in a few.

--Hope this helped! RoKebWiki (Diskussion) 21:54, 27. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hello Paulina, I think your draft is very interesting and I agree with all the things that RoKebWiki has said. The only other improvement i can think of is to maybe make each model bold or in italics to make it more distinct and easier to read. Apart from that, i think it is great. *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 16:58, 28. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Functions of Stereotypes

I have implemented the corrections from the previous week and added a section on the desire for a positive social identity. The section on system justification is still not ready, since I've had issues accessing the paper. As always I'm happy to hear suggestions!

Kognitive Abkürzungen

Durch die Stereotypisierung von sozialen Gruppen werden diese auf (vermeintlich) typische Eigenschaften reduziert, die ein heuristisches und damit vereinfachtes Denken erlauben. Stereotypisierung funktioniert demnach auf adaptive Weise als mentale Abkürzung ("mental shortcut") um unsere komplexe soziale Umwelt ökonomischer verarbeiten zu können.

Das Bedürfnis nach positiver sozialer Identität

Gemäss der Theorie der sozialen Identität von Tajfel und Turner streben Individuen nach einer positiven Selbsteinschätzung. Teil dieser Selbsteinschätzung ist die soziale Identität, die wiederum aus der Bewertung der eigenen Mitgliedschaft zu bestimmten sozialen Gruppen zustande kommt. Die Bewertung der Gruppenmitgliedschaft geschieht durch Vergleiche zu anderen relevanten Gruppen. Geleitet von diesem Bedürfnis nach einer positiven Selbsteinschätzung wird folglich die Eigengruppe aufgewertet und die Fremdgruppe durch negative Stereotype abgewertet.

Tajfel postulierte zudem 3 weitere soziale Funktionen, die durch Stereotypisierung miterklärt werden:

• Stereotype helfen gross angelegtes Vorgehen, wie Krieg gegen eine Gruppe, Verfolgung einer Gruppe, oder Benachteiligung einer Gruppe, zu erklären.
• Stereotype rechtfertigen die Aktivitäten von Gruppe in Verbindung zu diesem gross angelegten Vorgehen.
• Stereotype tragen zu einem Prozess von positiver Intergruppendifferenzierung bei, indem die Fremdgruppe durch Stereotype von der Eigengruppe negativ abgesetzt wird. --Amweiss17 (Diskussion) 14:01, 28. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Here are some suggestions for finishing your text:

1. Change "Das Bedürfnis nach positive sozialer Identität" into "Positive Differenzierung der Eigengruppe" - to name the function. In this subsection, you are basically describing the third bullet point further below, so this can be deleted (and the reference added above).

2. The first two bullet points could be added (though perhaps not as bullet points) to a subsection entitled "Erklärung und Rechtfertigung" in which you would also briefly talk about complementary stereotypes and system justification as discussed previously. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:20, 3. Dez. 2023 (CET)

David Hamilton article

Hello, this is my rough draft of an article of David Hamilton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:David_Hamilton . I have struggled to find information about him and his life prior to academia. What do you think of the type of information i have included ? I am planning on adding more references and more links to other articles and also fix the categories section at the bottom of the article. *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 16:47, 28. Nov. 2023 (CET)

OK, sometimes there's not much info there, but what you have will probably be sufficient to create the article. Perhaps you want to (1) include a few wikilinks (e.g. for the awards you can link to en:International_Social_Cognition_Network and en:European_Association_of_Social_Psychology), (2) and also check out (although you have probably done that) how other social psychologists are presented in the intro texts, e.g. en:John_Bargh, "social psychologist" vs. "social psychology professor".

Sometimes biographical info is included in book publications, here's another source: https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/author/david-l-hamilton. It would be great to know his birthdate or at least year. If you look the author up in a library, you will typically find at least the birthyear, see here: https://catalog.loc.gov/vwebv/search?searchType=7&searchId=339228&maxResultsPerPage=25&recCount=25&recPointer=0&resultPointer=1&headingId=26084090. I will also edit your article directly. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 13:06, 3. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Interventionen

For my entry in the Interventions section, I would like to explain that, from a social psychology perspective, there are only a few successful and long-term interventions. I would like to show that strategies such as: not thinking about stereotypes at all, relearning stereotypes, activating contrast stereotypes, empathy and perspective taking, colorblindness, multiculturalism and diversity training have no or only short-term effects or lead to boomerang effects. There is a gap between research and practice. To explain the proof of concept in research, the findings of Lai et al regarding interventions for implicit stereotypes should be mentioned. . Finally, the intervention of intergroup contact as a sustainable way to reduce stereotypes, but also the problems and challenges that this entails, should be mentioned. (nicht signierter Beitrag von Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion | Beiträge) 15:32, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)) --Jonathan.l2023 (Diskussion) 16:03, 21. Nov. 2023 (CET)

That's fine, but please be a little bit careful with the first part. Chapter 11 in Degner (2022) does talk about all of these strategies, but she has more space to do them justice. If you summarize them as "all ineffective", it could be misleading. However, it is a good idea to cite Degner (2022), perhaps specifically for the gap between research and practice ("Laut der Sozialpsychologin Juliane Degner" or similar), and more generally for Chapter 12. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 10:41, 26. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Hello!

I was thinking we could maybe do something similar, only I would be doing it on the Spanish Wikipedia.

My email is lauralavin152@Gmail.com, reach out to me whenever you can! --Laurigonzaleez (Diskussion) 19:49, 4. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Erhebung von Stereotype

Here, as discussed in Week 7 with JohUllrich, a quick draft of what could be an addition to our German article. It roughly discusses the different methods used to measure stereotypes. --Gg179 (Diskussion) 23:14, 28. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I think it would be useful to begin this section with a distinction between measures of culturally shared stereotypes and individual endorsement of stereotypes because only the latter is plagued with the reactivity problem.

As for culturally shared stereotypes, there have been two main approaches. One is to allow free responses to the question which qualities society associates with a specific group. In this approach, people are told that what they think personally is not important, they are told to report what members of their society in general think about that group. Devine (1989) showed that people high and low in prejudice report similar components of the stereotype of African Americans. The second approach is provide respondents with a list of adjectives which they are then asked to rate with regard to how most people in society would view a specific group. This approach was taken by the pioneering study by Katz and Braly (1933) and is still used in the context of the stereotype content model (Fiske et al., 2002).

Feel free to adopt/rephrase what I wrote above; then you could continue with what you wrote about measures of individual beliefs about social groups and mention the Modern Sexism Scale as an example of an explicit measure and IAT/Priming as examples of implicit measures!

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content:

Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878-902. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 12:13, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Erhebung von Stereotype

Wie oft in der Sozialpsychologie der Fall ist, kann die Erhebung von Stereotypen durch Reaktivität erschwert werden. Der Begriff der Reaktivität beschreibt die Tatsache, dass das Verhalten der Studienteilnehmer durch ihr Wissen, beobachtet zu werden, beeinflusst wird. Dies gilt insbesondere bei sozial unerwünschten Konstrukten, was Forscher dazu zwingt, nicht-reaktive bzw. implizite Erhebungsmethoden anzuwenden.

Eine nicht-reaktive Methode misst Variablen, die nicht direkt durch die Teilnehmer beeinflussbar sind, wie zum Beispiel die von Patricia Devine angewendete Modern Racism Scale . Andere nicht-reaktive Methoden erfassen biopsychologische bzw. neuropsychologische Marker wie fRMI (Durchblutung des Gehirns).

Auf der anderen Seite sind implizite Messungen Methoden, bei denen das Ziel für die Versuchsperson schwer erschliessbar ist. Ein besonders prominentes Beispiel in Studien zu Stereotypen ist der Implicit Association Test (IAT), der im Rahmen des Project Implicit von Anthony Greenwald entwickelt wurde. Hierbei wird die Reaktionszeit bei der Assoziation von Adjektiven mit einer Kategorie gemessen. Zum Beispiel werden Teilnehmer bei den ersten gefragt, das Adjektiv "sportlich" mit den Kategorien "schwarz" oder "weiß" zu assoziieren. später teilnehmer werden gefregt dies erneut zu machen, denoch die kategorien sind mit "black & positiv" und "weisse & negativ" labeliert. Die unterschied in der Reaktionszeit zwieschen diese zwei kritische durchgänge soll Rückschlüsse auf das Ausmass von Stereotypen ermöglichen.

Weitere Methoden, die in der Stereotypenforschung angewendet werden können:

• Stereotype Content Model

• Indirect Priming Measure of Racism

• Modern Sexism Scale

Gender-based stereotypes about food

Continuing with my idea of last week, I´d like to write an article named “Gender connotations in food” and I would like to publish it in en:food, in a new section in the last part of the page, after the “Digestion” topic.

I want to base my new article in this study: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.068 and also use information of:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214799320300448 that has very good specific examples, for example, about the difference in alcohol and protein consumption and how this "stereotype within the food world" changes according to culture.--Camcar27 (Diskussion) 13:50, 29. Nov. 2023 (CET)

FYI, I have responded to the more recent post below! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 13:05, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Lehrererwartungen

I want to improve the already existing article Lehrer-Schüler-Verhältnis by adding a chapter called «Lehrererwartungen» after the chapter «Nähe- und Distanzfehler in der pädagogischen Beziehung» in the category «Probleme». However, a question arose while I was writing: Is it not allowed to gender in Wikipedia articles? I wasn't sure, as only the masculine is used in this article. For my first version, I did gender, but if this is not allowed, I will adapt it.

Lehrererwartungen

Lehrpersonen tragen eine entscheidende Verantwortung für die Bildung ihrer Schüler*innen. Allerdings sind sie auch anfällig für Stereotype, die sich in verschiedenen Bereichen des schulischen Umfelds manifestieren. Der Erwartungseffekt bezieht sich auf die Überzeugungen von Lehrpersonen bezüglich bestimmte*r Schüler*innen und deren Potenzial. Allein diese Erwartungen trägt dazu bei, dass das Verhalten und die Leistung der Schüler*innen entsprechend beeinflusst wird. Dabei können Erwartungseffekte in positiver sowie negativer Wirkrichtung gehen. In der Studie von Robert Rosenthal und Lenore F. Jacobson wurde 1968 zum ersten Mal, dass Phänomen des Erwartungseffekt unter dem Begriff des Pygmalioneffekt aufgezeigt. Die Untersuchung zeigte, dass sich die Leistung der Lernenden unterschiedlich entwickelte, je nachdem, welche Erwartungen die Lehrkraft an die Lernenden hatte. Neuere Forschungsergebnisse weissen jedoch eher auf einen begrenzten Effekt hin. Nur etwa bei 5-10 % der Schüler*innen beeinflusst die Erwartung der Lehrkraft die tatsächliche Leistung. Besonders bei Schüler*innen aus stigmatisierten Gruppen, wie etwa Kindern mit sozial schwachem familiärem Hintergrund oder aus ethnischen Minderheiten, sind jedoch Erwartungseffekte wahrscheinlicher. Ein positiver Erwartungseffekt ist dagegen bei Schüler*innen mit hoher physischer Attraktivität zu finden.

Erwartungseffekte sind nicht zu unterschätzen und gerade bei wichtigen Bildungsentscheidungen von immenser Bedeutung. Die Sensibilisierung von Lehrern für ihre eigenen Erwartungen und die Vermeidung von Stereotypen spielen daher eine entscheidende Rolle, um eine chancengerechte Bildungsumgebung zu schaffen. Die Etablierung von Prozeduren wäre sinnvoll, um das Risiko von Fehlentscheidungen aufgrund von Erwartungseffekten zu minimieren. Durch die Förderung von positiven Erwartungen und den Glauben an das Potenzial aller Schüler*innen können Lehrpersonen dazu beitragen, den Einfluss von Stereotypen im Klassenzimmer zu reduzieren und eine unterstützende Lernumgebung zu schaffen.

Diodx (Diskussion) 14:28, 2. Dez. 2023 (CET)

The gender star is not used on Wikipedia, but you can use neutralizing forms like "Lehrpersonen" to avoid the generic masculine.

Some suggestions for improving your text:

1. Delete the first sentence - look at how other subsections in "Probleme" start, they jump directly to the specific problem without some general introduction - and change the beginning of the second sentence, for example, to "Lehrpersonen sind wie alle anderen Menschen auch anfällig...".

2. Given that you start your text talking about stereotypes, I would add in the second sentence that these expectations are often related to stereotypes. For example: "...bezieht sich auf die Überzeugungen bezüglich des Potenzials von Schülern. Solche Erwartungen, die oft im Zusammenhang mit Stereotypen stehen, beeinflussen das Verhalten und die Leistung..."

3. "Forschungsergebnisse weissen" -> "weisen"

4. "Besonders bei Schüler..." -> "Bei Schüler..." (highlighting is already done by the word "wahrscheinlicher"

5. The second to last sentence I would delete. "Wäre sinnvoll" is a value judgment that does not fit the factual style of Wikipedia.

6. In the references, use a First Name Last Name formatting, see the other references in the article Lehrer-Schüler-Verhältnis. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 13:27, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Schizophrenia and Movies

I published my first contribution about stereotypes of schizophrenia in movies on the the following section of the English Wikipedia article: en:Schizophrenia#Cultural_depictions.JessTheodore (Diskussion) 17:28, 29. Nov. 2023 (CET)

Edit: I just checked it and seems like someone has already made some major changes the section ^^'

Well, this happens. One thing I took away from the change the other user made is the following: We should check the citation style used in an existing article and then follow it (instead of imposing our own citation style on the article). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 13:42, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Emotionale Stabilität

Based on the recent feedback, we'd propose adding the following text to the wikipedia page Big_Five_(Psychologie) with the title "Geschlechtsstereotype und Geschlechtsunterschiede": Löckenhoff et al. (2014) untersuchte anhand 30 persönlichkeitsbezogenen Adjektiven, wie eine «typische Frau» oder ein «typischer Mann» eingeschätzt wird. Daraus resultierte, dass Neurotizismus eher Frauen zugeschrieben wird, da die Emotionale Stabilität bei Männern als höher bewertet wird. Extraversion, Verträglichkeit, Gewissenhaftigkeit und Offenheit für neue Erfahrungen wird dagegen beim weiblichen Geschlecht als ausgeprägter beurteilt. --AleMeil (Diskussion) 15:30, 30. Nov. 2023 (CET)

I'll respond below ValentinaLU1's post! --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 14:05, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Emtionale Stabilität

Based on the recent feedback, we'd propose adding the following text to the wikipedia page Big_Five_(Psychologie) with the title "Geschlechtsstereotype und Geschlechtsunterschiede": Löckenhoff et al. (2014) untersuchte anhand 30 persönlichkeitsbezogenen Adjektiven, wie eine «typische Frau» oder ein «typischer Mann» eingeschätzt wird. Daraus resultierte, dass Neurotizismus eher Frauen zugeschrieben wird, da die Emotionale Stabilität bei Männern als höher bewertet wird. Extraversion, Verträglichkeit, Gewissenhaftigkeit und Offenheit für neue Erfahrungen wird dagegen beim weiblichen Geschlecht als ausgeprägter beurteilt. --AleMeil (Diskussion) 15:30, 30. Nov. 2023 (CET)

my contribution ties in with the one previously posted by @AleMeil.

this is the part of the text I prepared:

Löckenhoff et al. (2014) führten im Anschluss an ihre Ergebnisse eine weitere Analyse durch, um die Konvergenz von stereotypisierten Geschlechtsunterschieden und tatsächlich bewerteten Geschlechtsunterschieden zu untersuchen. Die Daten zu geschlechtsstereotypen Unterschieden wurden mit Selbst- und Beobachterberichtsdaten verglichen. Die Analyse zeigte, dass die sterotypisierten geschlechtsspezifischen Unterschiede sehr ähnlich zu den bewerteten geschlechtsspezifischen Unterschieden sind, die in den Selbst- und Beobachterberichtsdaten gefunden wurden.In Bezug auf die persönlichkeitsbezogenen Adjektive besteht also eine Analogie zwischen den Geschlechtsunterschieden, die stereotypisiert werden, und den bewerteten Geschlechtsunterschieden.

Valentina.LU1 (Diskussion) 11:12, 5. Dez. 2023 (CET)

You could describe both the study and its results a little bot more accurately. As for the study, it is useful to know that (1) the data were obtained from respondents in many different countries and (2) that respondents rated the typical man/woman from three different age groups. I would mention that and also comment on whether the results were similar across nations and age groups or not. You could also mention the fact the 30 items correspond to the facets of the Big Five (6 facets per factor, as explained in Big Five (Psychologie)#Diagnostik (so your text should probably be published below the section on "Diagnostik". Finally, for the results, please double-check the results section in Löckenhoff, especially the interpretations she offers for Table 2. For the higher order factors, there does not seem to be a gender stereotype about E, and for N it was also not very strong. You could then mention the facets on which gender stereotypes were strongest. --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 14:21, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Gender connotations in food

Continuing with my idea of last week, I´d like to write an article named “Gender connotations in food” and I would like to publish it in [17], in a new section in the last part of the page, after the “Digestion” topic.

Please let me know what do you think and if there's anything missing to be ready.

Draft:

Each species of the animal kingdom eats what is necessary to stay alive, whether males, females or baby animals. Food has no classifications, conditions or gender, it is eaten solely for survival instinct. However, in the human world, a gender-based stereotype about food has been developing over the years, where certain types of food have gender connotations.

Strong genders stereotypes throughout history caused people to categorize man as agentic and woman as communal. All these stereotypes have meant that, within the world of food, people have cultural expectations about what a masculine man or feminine woman should eat and in what quantity. Moreover, these ideas are so ingrained in our day to day that the food intake and people ́s food choices can be influenced by the physical appearance of someone or the mere presence of others.

Unlike animals, humans tend to regulate the type of food they eat and the amount they consume as a method of expressing their gender identity. This human-distinct phenomenon leads people to engage in behaviors and eating patterns that are influenced, often unconsciously, by these supposed feminine or masculine ideas of food, for example, the classic thought that meat is for men and salads are for women.

For meat supply and processing, powerful actions are needed, such as hunting, which represents strength, aggressiveness and virility. Due to the patriarchal tradition, these characteristics have been associated with men, so meat is a product with a masculine connotation that serves as a symbolic marker. On the other hand, femininity is more associated to the quantity of food, that is, to what women do not eat. For this reason, dieting or eating light has a feminine connotation, and is often mocked in the world of men. Foods such as vegetables, fish and fruits carry a more feminine tradition, with softer characteristics, more delicate care and easier supply.

By living in a social environment, individuals acquire and learn a masculine or feminine eating style, congrunt to their gender. This eating style has an impact on their food-related practices and preferences, and also has social consequences. For example, on a global scale, it has been confirmed that both men and women who eat feminine foods are classified as more feminine than people who choose food with a masculine connotation. The above demonstrates the power that food gender-stereotypes have in affecting personal gender identity, which is why people tend to avoid food associated with a dissociative reference group, because this does not follow the supposedly appropriate behavioral patterns of its gender.

To understand the effect of gender on eating and drinking behaviours, it is very important to consider culture, since the same phenomena do not occur everywhere. For example, in countries like the USA, spicy food is gender-stereotyped, where it is associated with masculinity. However, in countries like Mexico, there is a spicy and chili culinary culture where everyone eats this type of food without being gender dependent. Space and time play an important role in classifying foods as masculine or feminine. --Camcar27 (Diskussion) 00:20, 5. Dez. 2023 (CET)

I was curious, searched and found at least one article in which sex-based preferences for different types of food were observed in storks, see here: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-017-1457-5. Maybe you want to hedge your claim appropriately by citing this and still use this effective contrast between animals and humans for your introduction.

Some corrections:

"Strong genders stereotypes... world of food" -> "Based on gender stereotypes depicting men as agentic and women as communal, people have cultural..."

"All these stereotypes have meant" ->

"ingrained in our day to day"

"human distinct" -> "distinctly human"

"supposed feminine or masculine ideas of food" -> "stereotypes of feminine or masculine food"

"congrunt to their gender" -> "congruEnt with their gender"

"food gender-stereotypes" -> "food-related gender stereotypes"

"food associated with a dissociative reference group ... its gender" -> "food that is incongruent with their reference group ... their gender"

You should add a few wikilinks for important concepts when they appear for the first time in the article on food, e.g. for gender stereotypes.

Please also fix the references so that they are formatted in the same way as other references on the food page (e.g., the reference for Rodrigues et al. does not mention the journal...). --JohUllrich (Diskussion) 13:04, 6. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Hello! I think this is a super interesting topic and i enjoyed reading your idea. I thought maybe you could add some information about this history of how these stereotypes developed. There is an interesting article on how a hunter and gathering tribe in Africa show these stereotypes based on roles that gender plays in gathering food e.g women typically searched for berries and men tended to hunt for meat:

Berbesque, J. C., & Marlowe, F. W. (2009). Sex differences in food preferences of Hadza hunter gatherers. Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 601–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490900700409.

I hope this helps *Jessicatorgler (Diskussion) 17:40, 7. Dez. 2023 (CET)

I find this topic extremely interesting and I really like how you pulled the comparison to the animals. I found the concept of Dude food which you could maybe tie into your text, just to give an extra layer of information. Its probably too much for the time now, but I think the media plays a big role with upholding the "masculine" and "feminine" food dichotomy. I think of the Pizzaburger that was clearly advertised towards men with the Slogan "Fingerfood für Fäuste". So just wanted to add this as a possible branch out or addition. --JPrueb (Diskussion) 08:45, 8. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Hey, this is a very interesting topic! Some minor thing I would change:

"Each species of the animal kingdom eats what is necessary to stay alive, whether males, females or baby animals. Food has no classifications, conditions or gender, it is eaten solely for survival instinct"

→ I would not mention the children because they're not a gender identity/gender role or the like; the reason they're fed differently is moreso because of age, which is not the topic you're focusing on

→The first sentence sounds like each species will eat males, females and children, but I don't think that's what you're trying to say, so maybe you could write "Each member of each gender/sex (sex would be more fitting here I think) of the animal kingdom eats what is necessary to stay alive, regardless of whether the consumed food is categorized as feminine or masculine." or something like that

"On the other hand, femininity is more associated to the quantity of food, that is, to what women do not eat"

→ write something like this instead: "On the other hand, femininity is moreso measured by the quantity of food women (do not) consume" (otherwise it sounds like femininity is associated with quantity of food in general, but it is only associated with a low quantity of food)

Anyways, looking forward to how this keeps developing! --Spaghettimcfly (Diskussion) 09:52, 8. Dez. 2023 (CET)

Stigmatization of the Neurotype Autism Spectrum or Autism Spectrum "Disorder"

Note from the author

This article refers to autism as a neurotype because it approaches autism spectrum disorder from the perspective of the neurodiversity paradigm. The neurodiversity paradigm views autism as a neurological difference, rather than a "disorder". Besides that it recognizes and respects that the people on the spectrum have different wishes in how they are referred to, either autistic people or people with autism/on the spectrum. Just for the sake of simplicity, the article will use the term autism and people with autism to refer to this neurotype/diagnosis.

Stereotypes and Stigma related to Autism

The way autism is portrayed in media is oftentimes very biased. Usually the symptoms of autism are heavily exaggerated in media, it shows either the more debilitating or the gifted (savant) sides of autism spectrum disorder [69]. Also media usually shows (white) males. For example the movie rain man and the series of atypical, which shows two gifted and (heavily) impaired males with autism.

Effects of stereotypes

As said in the name, the symptoms of autism are on a spectrum, so it differs per individual in which way it shows up and affects their life. The way the media portrays autism makes it difficult for people with autism/autistic people with a milder form of autism to be taken seriously or to recognize themselves in the diagnosis. Evenmore the over representation of autistic males makes this even harder for women. There is a much lower percentage (diagnosis) of autistic females, which has to do with a lack of representation, the fact that autism shows up differently in women and usually is camouflaged by them to adhere to social norms. [70]. This misrepresentation not only affects the individual,