Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2015 Jun;54(2):371-82. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12083. Epub 2014 Sep 17.
Psychological essentialism, the perception that groups possess inherent properties binding them and differentiating them from others, is theoretically relevant to predicting prejudice. Recent developments isolate two key dimensions: essentialistic entitativity (EE; groups as unitary, whole, entity-like) and essentialistic naturalness (EN; groups as fixed and immutable). We introduce a novel question: does tapping the covariance between EE and EN, rather than pitting them against each other, boost prejudice prediction? In Study 1 (re-analysis of Roets & Van Hiel, 2011b, Samples 1-3, in Belgium) and Study 2 (new Canadian data) their common/shared variance, modelled as generalized essentialism, doubles the predictive power relative to regression-based approaches with regard to racism (but not anti-gay or -schizophrenic prejudices). Theoretical implications are discussed.
心理本质主义,即认为群体具有内在属性,将它们与其他群体区分开来的认知,在理论上与预测偏见有关。最近的研究结果分离出两个关键维度:本质主义实体性(EE;群体作为单一、整体、实体般的存在)和本质主义自然性(EN;群体作为固定和不可改变的存在)。我们提出了一个新问题:利用 EE 和 EN 之间的协方差,而不是将它们相互对立,是否能提高偏见预测的准确性?在研究 1(对 Roets 和 Van Hiel,2011b 的重新分析,比利时的样本 1-3)和研究 2(新的加拿大数据)中,它们的共同/共享方差,被建模为广义本质主义,与基于回归的方法相比,在种族主义方面的预测能力提高了一倍(但对反同性恋或反精神分裂症的偏见则没有)。讨论了理论意义。