Neural Correlates of Stereotype Application

Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (Impact Factor: 4.09). 07/2008; 21(3):594-604. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21033
Source: PubMed


Recent research has focused on the disparate mechanisms that support the human ability to "mentalize" about the thoughts and feelings of others. One such process may rely on precompiled, semantic beliefs about the characteristics common to members of a social group, that is, on stereotypes; for example, judging that a woman may be more likely than a man to have certain interests or opinions. In the current study, we identified a pattern of neural activity associated with the use of stereotypes to judge another person's psychological characteristics. During fMRI scanning, participants mentalized about the likely responses of a female and male target to a series of questions, some of which were related to gender stereotypes (e.g., "enjoys shopping for new clothes"). Trials on which participants applied a stereotype were segregated from those on which participants avoided stereotype use. The BOLD response in an extensive region of the right frontal cortex differentiated stereotype-applied from -unapplied trials. Moreover, this neural difference was correlated with a behavioral index of gender associations-the Implicit Association Test-administered after scanning. Results suggest that stereotype application may draw on cognitive processes that more generally subserve semantic knowledge about categories.

Download full-text


Available from: Adrianna C. Jenkins, Aug 26, 2014
  • Source
    • "either typical or atypical of their party ( e . g . , " wants a smaller government " or " wants liberal supreme court judges " ) and asked to form impressions of the targets . As hypothesized , brain regions associated with mentalizing—including the medial prefrontal cortex and temporopari - etal junction ( Adolphs , 2009 ; Amodio & Frith , 2006 ; Mitchell et al . , 2006 ; Saxe & Wexler , 2005 ; Spreng , Mar , & Kim , 2009 ) —were more active when participants viewed nonstereotypical targets , such as a Democrat who preferred smaller government or a Republican who supported liberal supreme court judges . The authors speculated that exposure to expectancy - violating politicians caused partici - pants to individuate them and , in so doing , to recruit brai"
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The emergence of political neuroscience—an interdisciplinary venture involving political science, psychology, and cognitive neuroscience—has piqued the interests of scholars as well as the mass public. In this chapter, we review evidence pertaining to four areas of inquiry that have generated most of the research in political neuroscience to date: (1) racial prejudice and intergroup relations; (2) the existence of partisan bias and motivated political cognition; (3) the nature of left‐right differences in political orientation; and (4) the dimensional structure of political attitudes. Although these topics are well‐known to political psychologists, the application of models and methods from neuroscience has renewed interest in each of them and yielded novel insights. There is reason to believe that many other areas of political psychology await similarly promising renewals and that innovative methods will continue to advance our understanding of the physiological processes involved in political cognition, evaluation, judgment, and behavior. We address limitations, criticisms, and potential pitfalls of existing work—including the “chicken‐and‐egg problem”—and propose an ambitious agenda for the next generation of research in political neuroscience.
    Political Psychology 02/2014; 35(S1). DOI:10.1111/pops.12162 · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Bekkering, Hagoort, & Rueschemeyer, 2012; Mitchell, Ames, Jenkins, & Banaji, 2009; Willems et al., 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the ambiguity inherent in human communication, people are remarkably efficient in establishing mutual understanding. Studying how people communicate in novel settings provides a window into the mechanisms supporting the human competence to rapidly generate and understand novel shared symbols, a fundamental property of human communication. Previous work indicates that the right posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS) is involved when people understand the intended meaning of novel communicative actions. Here, we set out to test whether normal functioning of this cerebral structure is required for understanding novel communicative actions using inhibitory low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). A factorial experimental design contrasted two tightly matched stimulation sites (right pSTS vs left MTþ, i.e., a contiguous homotopic task-relevant region) and tasks (a communicative task vs a visual tracking task that used the same sequences of stimuli). Overall task performance was not affected by rTMS, whereas changes in task performance over time were disrupted according to TMS site and task combinations. Namely, rTMS over pSTS led to a diminished ability to improve action understanding on the basis of recent communicative history, while rTMS over MTþ perturbed improvement in visual tracking over trials. These findings qualify the contributions of the right pSTS to human communicative abilities, showing that this region might be necessary for incorporating previous knowledge, accumulated during interactions with a communicative partner, to constrain the inferential process that leads to action understanding.
    Cortex 11/2013; 51(1). DOI:10.1016/j.cortex.2013.10.005 · 5.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In a similar vein, one way to interpret Mitchell's stereotype data is to note that using stereotypes may involve relational reasoning. Although stereotypes are often activated automatically upon encountering a social group member, stereotyping may also arise following deliberative processes (Mitchell et al., 2009). For instance, one must consider how an individual may relate to a specific social group and how that group relates to certain values and preferences. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Activation in frontopolar cortex (FPC; BA 10) has been associated both with attending to mental states and with integrating multiple mental relations. However, few previous studies have manipulated both of these cognitive processes, precluding a clear functional distinction among regions within FPC. To address this issue, we developed an fMRI task that combined mentalizing and relational integration processes. Participants saw blocks of single words and performed one of three judgments: how pleasant or unpleasant they found each word (Self condition), how a specific friend would evaluate the pleasantness of the word (Other condition), or the difference between their own pleasantness judgment and that of their friend (Relational condition). We found that medial FPC was modulated by Other relative to Self judgments, consistent with a role in mentalizing. Lateral FPC was significantly activated during Relational compared to Self judgements, suggesting that this region is particularly involved in relational integration. The results point to a strong functional dissociation between medial and lateral FPC. In addition, the data demonstrate a role for lateral FPC in the social domain, provided that the task requires the integration of one's preferences with those of others.
    Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 06/2011; 6(3):260-9. DOI:10.1093/scan/nsq033 · 7.37 Impact Factor
Show more