A buffalo of a guy is sitting in the crowded S-Bahn. Upper body and arms are pumped up, on the bald back of the head there is a tattoo above the bull’s neck. It’s impossible to tell exactly what’s written there without staring – and with this guy, staring might be a stupid idea. He crouches with his legs apart between the other passengers, takes up a lot of space and clicks on his mobile phone. An old woman walks on a crutch. The ox immediately stands up and offers the lady his place. When the S-Bahn pulls up and the lady has sat down, he gives her a quick nod again, then takes a seat near the door and goes back to his mobile phone.
What will shape the opinion of the other passengers present about the man more in this situation: his helpful behavior or his appearance, which corresponds to the stereotype of a bully?
The psychologists Jana Mangels and Juliane Dreger from the University of Hamburg have dealt with the question under which conditions stereotypes play an important role in the assessment of people. The result of their study they in the journal Journal of Experimental Social Psychology have publishedcan be interpreted positively: If people show clear behavior, this obviously influences the evaluation by others more than the stereotypical ideas about the person.
Ambiguous scenes may leave more room for prejudice than unambiguous behavior
“If we get an impression of other people,” the psychologists write, “then people have a variety of different, sometimes contradictory information at their disposal.” For example, the fact that behavior serves as a point of reference for a judgment about the basic characteristics of a person is well documented and known in the research literature as spontaneous trait inference (STI) – roughly translated: spontaneous personality attribution. For example, when people observe strangers greeting others in a friendly way or taking a quiz, they almost automatically conclude that the person in question is friendly or smart. The formative effect of stereotypes has also been well researched. So that observers make an immediate judgment because a man, a woman, a person with light or dark skin or other identities are supposed to be one way or the other.
“We wanted to know under what conditions stereotypes influence the judgment of others,” says Mangels. She was particularly interested when behavior contradicted a stereotype about the person, such as when a supposed bully behaves in a helpful manner. The scientists had their slightly more than 1000 subjects evaluate similar scenarios. In three experiments there was no effect of stereotypes, in a fourth a small effect. The behavior described therefore had a stronger effect than the stereotypical ideas that were aroused in the scenarios. “The decisive factor here is that the behavior is clear,” says Mangels. On the other hand, unclear, ambivalent processes presumably left more room for the impact of prejudices.
“So stereotypes may not be as dominant as is often assumed,” says Degner. According to the psychologists, it is unclear how long a judgment about another person based on their behavior will last. But at least one piece of good news remains: People are judged by their deeds, less by their appearance, probably at least a little bit.