Content uploaded by Srividya Ramasubramanian
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Srividya Ramasubramanian on Sep 22, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Activating and Suppressing Hostile
and Benevolent Racism: Evidence
for Comparative Media Stereotyping
Srividya Ramasubramanian
Texas A&M University
Mary Beth Oliver
Penn State University
This research examines the role of media literacy training and counter-stereotypical
news stories in prejudice reduction. Research participants read either stereotypical or
counter-stereotypical news stories after exposure to a media literacy video or a con-
trol video. After this, they completed a paper-and-pencil questionnaire that included
Likert-type scales and feeling-thermometer ratings about their feelings toward Afri-
can-Americans, Asian-Indians, and Caucasian-Americans. The findings reveal that
hostile prejudice is more likely to be expressed toward African-Americans and be-
nevolent prejudice is more likely to be expressed toward Asian-Indians. As pre-
dicted, counter-stereotypical news stories as compared to stereotypical news stories
decrease prejudice toward Asian-Indians. Contrary to expectations, the media liter-
acy video seems to prime prejudices rather than suppress them. Interestingly, news
stories about Asian-Indians increase hostility toward African-Americans. These
comparative stereotyping are explained using modern racist beliefs and model mi-
nority stereotypes.
Racial portrayals in the media have been studied across a wide variety of media
contexts, including news (Dixon & Linz, 2000a,b; Entman, 1992, 1994a,b; Gilens,
1996), prime-time programming (Mastro & Robinson, 2000; Oliver, 1994), and
advertising (Coltrane & Messineo, 2000; Mastro & Stern, 2003). These analyses
of media content consistently document that racial minorities, if at all represented,
are portrayed in stereotypical ways in a narrow range of peripheral roles. While not
MEDIA PSYCHOLOGY, 9, 623–646
Copyright © 2007, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Correspondence should be sent to Srividya Ramasubramanian, MS 4234 TAMU, College Station,
TX 77843-4234. Email: srivi@tamu.edu
all of these stereotypes are negative, even seemingly benign ones could activate pa-
ternalistic, benevolent prejudicial feelings that are just as problematic.
Although the majority of the research on race and media has emphasized con-
tent analytical studies on media stereotypes, other studies have explored the ways
in which such biased media portrayals influence viewers’ attitudes. Such scholar-
ship on the social psychological effects of stereotypical media content has focused
mainly on Caucasian-Americans’ attitudes toward African-Americans, especially
in the context of crime. Several experiments have manipulated the race of a crimi-
nal suspect in news stories and found that respondents were harsher in evaluating
African-American targets when compared to Caucasian-American targets in sub-
sequent tasks (Ford, 1997; Oliver, 1999; Oliver & Fonash, 2002; Peffley, Shields,
& Williams, 1996). Additionally, many studies have explored the linkages be-
tween exposure to stereotypical media images of African-Americans and attitudes
toward political issues such as affirmative action, welfare programs, and the death
penalty (Domke, 2001; Fujioka, 2005; Gilens, 1996; Peffley & Hurwitz, 2002;
Tan, Fujioka, & Tan, 2000; Valentino, 1999). By concentrating on biased evalua-
tions of African-American targets and on political beliefs, the bulk of this scholar-
ship has examined cognitive responses while neglecting emotional responses to
media stereotypes. The current project acknowledges the multi-dimensionality of
racial prejudice by examining how exposure to stereotypical news stories can in-
fluence both hostile and benevolent racist feelings toward two out-groups – Afri-
can-Americans and Asian-Indians.
Not all viewers are likely to exhibit prejudicial responses to stereotypical media
portrayals. Research on control of automatic stereotyping shows that certain situa-
tional and motivational factors moderate racist responses (Blair, 2002; Dasgupta &
Greenwald,2001;Devine, 1989;Devine& Monteith, 1993;Fazio,Jackson,Dunton,
& Williams, 1995; Kawakami, Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen, & Russin, 2000). For in-
stance, past studies show that participants exposed to stereotype negation training
and counter-stereotypical exemplars are less likely to express racial prejudice to-
ward members of stigmatized racial groups (Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001;
Kawakami, Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen, & Russin, 2000). The current study applies
this idea of suppression of activated prejudicial responses to the context of media
psychology by examining whether media literacy training and exposure to coun-
ter-stereotypical news stories help decrease prejudicial responses.
EFFECT OF RACIAL MEDIA STEREOTYPES ON
ACTIVATION OF PREJUDICIAL RESPONSES
Racist feelings are artifacts of shared cultural norms rather than individual idiosyn-
crasies (Jones, 1972). Socio-cultural forces such as family, friends, opinion leaders
and the mass media help form, activate, maintain, and transmit cultural stereo-
624 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
types. Mediated communication such as news, in particular, plays an important
role in creating and reinforcing cultural stereotypes about people and places when
there is very little contact (Armstrong, Neuendorf, & Brentar, 1992; Fujioka,
1999). Through continual habitual exposure across genres and media types, media
stereotypes become part of symbolic dominant ideologies (Gerbner, 1998;
Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, 2002). Exposure to even a sin-
gle or a few media exemplars can often be powerful enough to create impressions
about issues, peoples and places, especially when little or no first-hand,
non-mediated sources of information are available (Armstrong et al., 1992;
Fujioka, 1999; Zillmann, 2002; Zillmann & Brosius, 2000).
Repeated exposure to stereotypical information makes stereotypes frequently
and readily accessible (Banaji, Hardin, & Rothman, 1993; Bargh, 1994; Devine,
1989; Gilbert & Hixon, 1991; Lepore & Brown, 1997; Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park,
1997). Prejudicial feelings become chronically accessible and automatically acti-
vated, especially when social categories such as race are highly salient (Wyer &
Srull, 1989). Automaticity refers to the idea that stereotypes and prejudice are acti-
vated with little or no strain on the limited processing capacities that people pos-
sess (Bargh, 1994). Culturally shared social stereotypes are so widespread and
deep-rooted that they are immediately, automatically activated (Devine, 1989).
Most often, specific stereotypical attributes need to be primed (stereotype prim-
ing) to have an effect on judgments, but sometimes the mere activation of a social
category (category priming) can increase the accessibility of stereotypical charac-
teristics associated with that category (Banaji et al., 1993; Lepore & Brown, 1997).
The neo-association model of Jo and Berkowitz (1994) explains that the re-
quirement for media priming to occur is an existing associative network of related
concepts in the cognitive structure. With such a network in place, a presentation
stimulus can trigger a chain of related thoughts and feelings through the process of
spreading activation. With such schemata in place, stereotypical media exemplars
can activate racist notions that become highly accessible when audiences make
judgments about racial groups (Ford, 1997; Hansen & Hansen, 1988; Hansen &
Krygowski, 1994; Valentino, 1999). Likewise, the activation-recency hypothesis
put forth by Hansen and Hansen (1988) suggests that prolonged exposure to biased
media content makes these notions highly automatic. Thus, unless conscious ef-
forts rectify recently activated primes, such primes will bias evaluations made im-
mediately after exposure.
SUPPRESSION AND CONTROL
OF PREJUDICIAL RESPONSES
The flip side of activation of racist feelings upon exposure to media stereotypes is
the suppression of such feelings. Recent studies suggest that although frequent ex-
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 625
posure to stereotypes might activate prejudicial responses quite unintentionally
and perhaps unconsciously, such feelings are possibly controllable under certain
situational and motivational circumstances (Blair, 2002; Dasgupta & Greenwald,
2001; Devine, 2001; Devine & Monteith, 1999).
Several factors related to perceivers’ motives, social norms, presence of coun-
ter-stereotypes, focus of attention, cognitive resources, and nature of stimulus cues
might influence the extent to which prejudicial responses can be suppressed (Blair,
2002; Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995; Gilbert & Hixon, 1991;
Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 1997). For instance, according to the Fiske and
Neuberg continuum model (1990), willingness and ability to make accurate judg-
ments play an important role in the suppression of prejudice (Fiske & Neuberg,
1990). That is, motivation for accuracy and the availability of attentional resources
are key factors in determining the use of individuating information as opposed to
stereotypical information (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990). This model distinguishes be-
tween automatic stereotypical processing and deliberate individuating information
processing. While almost the entire basis for stereotypical processing of informa-
tion is social categorization, the individuated processing route involves examining
specific attributes of the individual being evaluated before making a judgment. Ac-
cording to this model, unless motivational reasons to be accurate are present in an
interpersonal situation, people will likely use existing stereotypes rather than at-
tend to individuating information in forming impressions.
Other research has found that the need to avoid the perceptions of being a preju-
diced person or belonging to a group of prejudiced people (Devine & Monteith,
1993), motivation to avoid guilt feelings (Devine, 1989), and exposure to egalitar-
ian beliefs (Macrae, Bodenhausen, & Milne, 1998) can also help in reducing preju-
dicial responses. Adequate training motivates participants to inhibit their preju-
dice, especially in public settings where they adhere to social norms of appearing
nonprejudiced (Devine, 1989; Devine & Monteith, 1993).
EFFECT OF MEDIA LITERACY AND
COUNTER-STEREOTYPICAL EXEMPLARS
ON PREJUDICE REDUCTION
Because the prejudice reduction strategies described thus far occurred mostly
within nonmediated contexts, the effectiveness of such mechanisms for mediated
messages is not clear. Within media psychology, most of the studies on diminish-
ing the harmful effects of media content have focused on media violence. For in-
stance, Cantor and Wilson (2003) describe three distinct intervention strategies
used to counter violent content in media programming. Although their research
synthesis is in the context of media violence, the approaches they outline also ap-
ply to confronting media stereotypes. These strategies include (1) instructions to
626 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
consciously counter negative media content during or prior to such exposure, (2)
exposure to prosocial media content and, (3) large-scale multisession structured
curricular programs. The present research uses the first two approaches to decrease
prejudicial responses to racial media stereotypes by exposing participants to media
literacy instruction and counter-stereotypical media content in a controlled experi-
mental setting.
Media Literacy Instruction
Research shows that instructions from experts to consciously counteract negative
effects of media content can have a positive influence on audiences’ attitudes
(Beentjes, van Oordt, & van der Voort, 2002; Kawakami, Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen,
& Russin, 2000; Nathanson, 1999; Nathanson & Yang, 2003). Social cognitive
theory explains that when authority figures criticize harmful behaviors in the me-
dia, participants view the disapproved media depictions in a less favorable light,
preventing viewers from mimicking media behaviors in real life (Bandura, 1986).
In the context of prejudice reduction, Kawakami and colleagues (2000) trained
participants to negate stereotypical associations by saying “yes” in their minds
when encountering nonstereotypical exemplars and “no” when encountering ste-
reotypical exemplars. Based on their findings, these researchers concluded that
practice and conscious efforts could reduce prejudice.
Typically, live or taped comments from authority figures such as parents and
teachers expressing their disapproval for anti-social (and approval for prosocial)
media behavior have been successfully with school-going children (Beentjes et al.,
2002; Nathanson, 1999). Among older adults, however, efforts to negate harmful
media effects have sometimes led to backlash effects, especially when such train-
ing appeared to be “too preachy” (Nathanson & Yang, 2003). Therefore, a more in-
direct approach, using audio-visual instructional materials with media profession-
als as expert sources, might be effective for such audiences. Because the present
study attempts to reduce the harmful effects of media stereotyping, the central
theme of the instructions involves the need to avoid making generalizations based
on a few media exemplars (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000). Overall, for the purposes of
this study, the definition for media literacy instruction is televised commentary
shown prior to exposure to news stories, where experts on media literacy encour-
age participants to abstain from making biased generalizations based on a few me-
dia exemplars.
Counter-Stereotypical Media Exemplars
Another strategy for prejudice reduction that has been reasonably successful in
some contexts is the presentation of stereotype-disconfirming information
(Bodenhausen, Schwarz, Bless, & Waenke, 1995; Coover, 2001; Dasgupta &
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 627
Greenwald, 2001; Donovan & Leivers, 1993; Fujioka, 1999; Graves, 1999; Power,
Murphy, & Coover, 1996). For example, Caucasian-American participants were
less likely to attribute lack of success to individual rather than societal factors
when exposed to counter-stereotypical exemplars as opposed to stereotypical ex-
emplars of African-Americans (Power, Murphy, & Coover, 1996). Similarly, in a
study conducted by Fujioka (1999), exposure to counter-stereotypical media con-
tent regarding African-Americans increased positive attitudes toward this group,
especially amongst Japanese participants who had little direct contact with Afri-
can-Americans as compared to Caucasian-American participants.
Other research has found that exposure to atypical, admired, out-group mem-
bers (famous celebrities such as Denzel Washington and Michael Jordan in the Af-
rican-American context) can activate positive attitudes toward the out-group
(Bodenhausen et al., 1995; Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001). Dasgupta and Green-
wald (2001) showed that prejudice reduction was possible by exposure to coun-
ter-stereotypical exemplars. Specifically, when participants were simultaneously
exposed to photographs of admirable members of stigmatized groups (such as Af-
rican-Americans and the elderly) and those of disliked members of ingroups (such
as Caucasian-Americans and youth), there appeared to be rather long-lasting ef-
fects on reducing prejudice towards the stigmatized group. In a similar study by
Bodenhausen and colleagues (1995), media images of admired and successful ce-
lebrity African-American role models increased perceptions that discrimination
against African-Americans is unjustified. However, such effects were observed
only if there were positive feelings toward the celebrities and if the participants
were not made consciously aware of the atypicality of the exemplars. To avoid con-
trast effects from the priming of extreme, atypical exemplars, the current study
considers examples from everyday lives of non-celebrities that challenge existing
cultural stereotypes as counter-stereotypical exemplars.
HOSTILE AND BENEVOLENT FORMS
OF PREJUDICIAL FEELINGS
The present research examines Caucasian-Americans’ self-reported feelings to-
ward two out-groups – African-Americans and Asian-Indians (people living in In-
dia). Cultural stereotypes of African-Americans often include criminality, aggres-
sion, poverty, low intelligence, and laziness (Devine, 1989; Devine & Elliot, 2000;
Lepore & Brown, 2000), just as the characteristics of traditionality and passivity
are unidimensional conceptualizations of Asian-Indians (Jones & Ashmore, 1973;
Mitra, 1999; Naidoo, 1988). Postcolonial critiques of Orientalism argue that his-
torically, Western texts portray Eastern cultures as different, inferior, exotic, and
sensual. Dividing the world into “us” versus “them” accomplishes a homogenizing
of the other as unusual, uncivil, and evil while proclaiming the dominant Western
628 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
ideology as normal, civil, and good (Narayan, 1997; Shohat & Stam, 1994; Shome,
1996). Recent news stories on outsourcing of hi-tech jobs to India from the US
might suggest a shift in such stereotypes. Asian –Indians, once perceived as naïve,
helpless subordinates might now be perceived as competent threats to American
resources in the global marketplace. However, at the time of this study, such news
stories were still not quite visible in the U.S. media; participants, therefore, are
quite unlikely to display this shift in cultural stereotypes of Asian-Indians.
According to the realistic conflict theory, differences in cultural stereotypes
and prejudices associated with various groups in society have their origins
largely in real conflicts arising out of competition to win scarcely available tan-
gible resources (LeVine & Campbell, 1972). More recently, application of this
theory extends to include even the mere perception of the presence of conflict
among groups (Esses, Jackson, & Armstrong, 1998). The stereotype content
model proposed by Fiske and colleagues describes how competition and conflict
translate into specific feelings toward out-groups. According to this perspective,
perceptions of warmth and competence of out-groups determine their status and
level of competition, which in turn predict the type of feelings expressed toward
out-groups (Eckes, 2002; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002; Fiske, Xu, Cuddy, &
Glick, 1999). More specifically, the model posits, on the one hand, expressions
of hostile prejudice toward out-groups has its foundation in the perceptions of
troublesomeness and incompetence. On the other hand, benevolent prejudice to-
ward out-groups arises from perceptions of passivity and helplessness. Consis-
tent with the conflict theory and stereotype content model, the expectation in the
current study is that Caucasian-American participants will express hostile feel-
ings toward groups such as African-Americans who are stereotyped as being
troublesome and rebellious. Contrasting feelings will be benevolence toward
Asian-Indians who have the stereotype of being passive and deprived. The tradi-
tional conceptualization of prejudice is of uniform contempt and “antipathy,
based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization” (Allport, 1954, p. 9). Not sur-
prisingly, the majority of the scholarship on media stereotyping has focused on
negative stereotypes such as criminality and violence (Chiricos & Eschholz,
2002; Dixon & Linz, 2002; Domke, 2001; Gilliam & Iyengar, 2000; Oliver &
Fonash, 2002; Valentino, 1999). Contemptuous prejudice typically targets subor-
dinate groups labeled as ungrateful for rebelling against the ruling racial groups
while rightfully demanding more power (Glick & Fiske, 2001). Researchers
such as McConahay (1986) have captured this phenomenon under the term mod-
ern racism that includes perceptions of African-Americans as “overly pushy” for
more resources. The effects of racial media stereotypes on modern racist beliefs
have received some attention recently (Busselle & Crandall, 2002; Entman,
1990; Rada, 2000; Richardson, 2005). The current study conceptualizes hostile
prejudice as negative feelings that stem from such modern racist beliefs toward
out-groups seen as incompetent and rebellious. Such feelings are manifest as
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 629
discomfort, uneasiness, nervousness, disgust, contempt, anger, dislike, and fear,
expressed toward racial out-groups (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Sears, 1988).
Although this body of research has enhanced our understanding of the role of
media in reinforcing hostile prejudice, this restricted focus neglects the growing
evidence from social cognitive literature, which discusses the importance of detri-
mental effects of so-called benevolent forms of prejudice. Research shows that
flattering feelings of sympathy towards noncompetitive out-groups are consistent
with the functions served by traditional hostile feelings (Gaertner & Dovidio,
1986; Glick & Fiske, 2001; Katz, Wackenhut, & Hass, 1986). Historically, both
benevolent and hostile racism played a vital role in sustaining racist ideologies of
slavery in the U.S. and justifying discriminatory privileges given to Europeans
while colonizing “inferior child-like natives” in Third World countries
(Hochschild, 1998; Jackman, 1994; Narayan, 1997). By assuming the role of pro-
tectors of “primitive uncivilized people,” dominant groups rationalize their entitle-
ment for extra responsibilities and power in order to provide for subordinate, help-
less groups. Out-groups who passively accept this asymmetric power relationship
receive benevolent treatment while those that rebel are treated with hostility. In the
current study, benevolent prejudice is the seemingly positive feelings that stem
from perceptions of out-groups as being inferior, incompetent, and passive. Benev-
olent prejudice is manifest as feelings of sympathy, pity, sadness, amusement, and
guilt toward out-groups (Fazio & Hilden, 2001; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002;
Swim & Miller, 1999). Even though such feelings are not blatantly contemptuous,
they can be just as hurtful, offensive, and inappropriate as hostile prejudice (Swim
& Stangor, 1998).
Most of the studies discussed so far have devoted attention to the role of media
in influencing viewers’ perceptions and beliefs about racial out-groups (Brown
Givens & Monahan, 2005; Ford, 1997; Hansen & Hansen, 1988). The few studies
that have investigated emotional responses to racial depictions in the media have
mostly focused on negative feelings, such as fear, primed by crime news stories
(Chiricos, Eschholz, & Gertz, 1997; Gilliam & Iyengar, 2000; Peffley, Shields, &
Williams, 1996; Sotirovic, 2001). The current investigation attempts to expand this
focus by examining the role of media in the activation and inhibition of both hostile
and benevolent prejudicial feelings.
RACIAL HIERARCHIES AND COMPARATIVE
STEREOTYPING
Experimental research on racial media stereotypes has typically examined the ef-
fects on viewers’ attitudes toward the specific racial group depicted in the media
message. Interestingly, the inclusion of more than one out-group in the current ex-
630 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
periment allows for the possibility of studying comparative stereotyping pro-
cesses. Although there is little prior research on this topic because of the limited
number of studies that include more than one racial out-group, one recent study
found that reading news stories about the accomplishments of Asian-Americans is
likely to increase negative stereotypes of Caucasian-American participants toward
Mexican-Americans (Ho, Sanbonmatsu, & Akimoto, 2002).
Such comparative negative stereotyping effects are not surprising considering
thehistoryof “divideandrule”politics ofracial relationsduring theslavery erainthe
U.S and during European imperialism in colonial times. Specifically within the
U.S., model minority stereotypes typically associated with Asian-Americans have
been known to create hierarchies and tensions amongst various racial minorities
(Lee, 1996; Wu, 2002). By associating Asian-Americans with seemingly positive
traits such as hard working, intelligent, and polite, they are categorized as “good mi-
norities” or the “model minorities.”. Such profiling distinguishes them from other
racial minority groups, such as African-Americans, whose characterization, in rela-
tiveterms,is“bad minorities” (Lee, 1996; Wu,2002).Suchdistinctionsoften justify
racial discrimination against African-Americans by creating a myth that Asian
American successes are proof that race does not matter in contemporary American
life. Additionally, the model minority stereotype unnecessarily forces a racial com-
parison between Asian Americans and African-Americans, pitting them against
each other. The preliminary evidence from the Ho, E. A., Sanbonmatsu, D. M., &
Akimoto, S. A. (2002) study suggests the possibility that exposure to media stereo-
types of one racial out-group could influence feelings toward another racial
out-groupbecauseofsuchcontent’s effectonbeliefsabouttheequitableavailability
of resources to racial minorities through the activation of model minority
stereotypes.
PRESENT RESEARCH
In summary, existing research on stereotyping suggests that when cultural stereo-
types are deep-seated, exposure to stereotypical cues will automatically prime
prejudicial responses (Bargh, 1994; Devine, 1989; Lepore & Brown, 1997). How-
ever, even automatically activated prejudicial responses can be suppressed under
appropriate situational and motivational circumstances (Blair, 2002; Devine &
Monteith, 1999) The current study explores the role of media literacy training and
counter-stereotypical media exemplars in decreasing prejudicial responses. Also,
the present study focuses on affective prejudicial responses by considering feel-
ings toward rather than beliefs about out-groups. Conflict theory and the stereo-
type content model predict that hostile feelings are expressed toward defiant, infe-
rior out-groups while benevolent feelings are expressed toward obedient,
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 631
subordinated groups (Eckes, 2002; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002; LeVine &
Campbell, 1972). By examining the feelings of Caucasian-Americans toward two
racial groups (African-Americans and Asian-Indians), a secondary objective of
this study is to look for possible comparative stereotyping effects such that media
content about one out-group influences feelings toward another out-group. Based
on the review of relevant literature, the current study formulates the following re-
search hypotheses:
H1: Participants in a media literacy training condition are less likely than those
in a control condition to report prejudicial responses to news stories
H2: Participants who read counter-stereotypical stories are less likely than
those who read stereotypical stories to report prejudicial feelings
H3: Hostile prejudice is more likely to be expressed toward African-Americans
whereas benevolent prejudice is more likely to be expressed toward
Asian-Indians
Due to a lack of sufficient prior research on the topic of comparative media stereo-
typing, the study poses the question; does exposure to news stories about one racial
out-group influence prejudicial feelings towards another racial out-group?
Method
Overview and Design
Three pretests and a final experiment with undergraduate communication stu-
dents as participants at a large Northeastern U.S. university provided research data.
The pretests helped determine the content and strength of cultural stereotypes
apart from the effectiveness of the manipulated stimuli. The final study was a 2
(Type of Video: literacy or control) × 2 (Stereotypicality of News Stories: stereo-
typical or counter-stereotypical) × 2 (Racial Group Depicted in Stories: Afri-
can-Americans or Asian-Indians) × 3 (Race of Target Group: African-Americans,
Asian-Indians, or Caucasian-Americans) factorial experiment (see Table 1 for the
experimental design). “Race of Target Group” was a within participants independ-
ent variable in the sense that regardless of the experimental condition, all partici-
pants indicated their feelings toward the three racial groups - African-Americans,
Caucasian-Americans, and Asian-Indians. The dependent variables were overall
favorability, hostile feelings, and benevolent feelings expressed toward the three
target groups.
Pretests
In the first pretest, 50 participants completed a free response task in which they
indicated their knowledge about cultural stereotypes typically associated with Af-
632 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
rican-Americans and Asian-Indians. The 40 traits mentioned most frequently as
being associated with African-Americans and Asian-Indians appeared in the sec-
ond pretest. In the second pretest, 47 participants used 7-point Likert-type scales,
ranging from 1 (not at all)to7(very well), to indicate the extent to which the traits
generated in the first pretest are typically associated with African-Americans,
Caucasian-Americans, and Asian-Indians. Attributes for African-Americans and
Asian-Indians that were significantly different from those for Cauca-
sian-Americans were used to represent the identified cultural stereotypes.
Factor analyses of the stereotypical traits from the second pretest indicated that
the cultural stereotypes associated with African-Americans were “troublesome-
ness” (including attributes such as hostile, criminal, lazy, drug users, and aggres-
sive) and “talent” (including attributes such as athletic and musical). Cultural ste-
reotypes associated with Asian-Indians were “communality” (including attributes
such as traditional, religious, and family-oriented) and “passivity” (including traits
such as polite, quiet, hardworking and passive). The stereotype common to both
African-Americans and Asian-Indians was “deprivation” (including attributes
such as uneducated, uncivilized, unemployed, poor, diseased, and dirty).
In the third pretest, 68 undergraduate students participated and evaluated 20
news stories, modified from existing stories identified using Lexis-Nexis Academic
Universe database. A 7-point Likert scale was used to determine the extent to
which news stories reinforced or challenged racial stereotypes. Participants also
completed 7-point semantic differential scales with bipolar adjectives such as tra-
ditional-modern and aggressive-peaceful to indicate the extent to which each news
story exemplified specific stereotypical and counter-stereotypical traits regarding
African-Americans and Asian-Indians. From these 20 stories, two story-pairs that
displayed the greatest significant differences along stereotypical-counter stereo-
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 633
TABLE 1
Experimental Design
Stereotypicality of News Stories
Stereotypical Counter Stereotypical
Racial Group in Stories Racial Group in Stories
African-Americans Asian-Indians African-Americans Asian-Indians
Video seen
Literacy Condition 1 Condition 3 Condition 5 Condition 7
Control Condition 2 Condition 4 Condition 6 Condition 8
Note. Race of Target Group (African-Americans, Asian-Indians, and Caucasian-Americans)
served as a within-participants variable. Dependent variables included overall favorability, hostile feel-
ings, and benevolent feelings.
typical traits were selected for the final experiment. In this third pretest, partici-
pants also noted their perceptions about the video stimuli on 7-point Likert-type
items. The findings showed that the media literacy video was perceived as signifi-
cantly more educative (M= 5.35) than the control video (M= 4.47); t(65) = –2.53,
p< 0.05, and significantly more thought-provoking (M= 4.86) than the control
video (M= 3.42); t(65) = –3.94, p< .001. Participants judged both videos equally
interesting, clear, and easy to understand. Analysis of the qualitative feedback
from participants showed clear comprehension of the central message about ste-
reotype reduction and critical viewing in the literacy video.
Final Experiment
Participants
Participants were students recruited from undergraduate communications
courses. Of the 227 participants, further analysis only considered the responses of
Caucasian-American participants (n= 196; 86.3%). Males and females had almost
equal representation.
Procedure
The final experiment was conducted in a computer laboratory by Caucasian ex-
perimenters. Participants were recruited for a “Media Stimuli” study involving two
“mini-studies” – one study on news and another on social issues.1
The first mini-study, called the news study, lasted for about 30 min. During this
part of the experimental session, participants saw either a media literacy video or a
control video that lasted approximately 12 min. Immediately after the video ended,
participants summarized the main points of the video in the first page of the book-
let. Subsequently, participants analyzed five news stories provided in a news book-
let. The first, third, and fourth stories were non-stereotypical and remained con-
stant across all conditions. The manipulated second and fifth news story in each
condition were stereotypical stories about African-Americans, stereotypical sto-
ries about Asian-Indians, counter-stereotypical stories about African-Americans,
or counter-stereotypical stories about Asian-Indians. Participants were instructed
to keep the key points of the video in mind as they read the news stories and sum-
marized the key points of each news story. All participants had about 3 minutes to
read and respond to each story in the booklet.
In the final portion of the experiment, participants took part in the social issues
mini-study in which they completed a paper-and-pencil “social issues” question-
naire that contained items related to overall favorability, hostile feelings, and be-
nevolent feelings toward Caucasian-Americans, African-Americans, and
Asian-Indians.
634 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
Type of video seen
The video that participants saw at the beginning of the experimental session was
either a media literacy video or a control video. Scenes from existing me-
dia-related video resources and interviews with experts in the field formed the ba-
sis for both videos. The videos interviewed the same people in the same settings,
but the primary message of the media literacy video was very different from that of
the control video. The media literacy video introduced participants to the harmful
effects of media and the tendency of media consumers to make generalizations
based on biased media exemplars. The video further focused on strategies for be-
coming critical and reflective consumers of media messages. In contrast, the con-
trol video focused on various journalistic writing styles such as hard news, feature
writing, etc.
Type of news stories read
A news booklet manipulated the independent variables: stereotypicality of
news stories and racial group depicted in news stories. A pretest was used in the se-
lection of the most stereotypical and counter-stereotypical stories about Afri-
can-Americans and Asian-Indians. The stereotypical stories regarding Afri-
can-Americans were on violence and unemployment. Correspondingly,
counter-stereotypical news stories related to African-Americans were on gentle-
ness and entrepreneurial success. Similarly, stereotypical Asian-Indian news sto-
ries were about tradition and poverty; whereas the counter-stereotypical
Asian-Indian stories were on modernity and wealth. All stories were about half a
page in length and uniform in format.
Dependent variables
The dependent variables for this study were hostile feelings, benevolent feel-
ings, and overall favorability. Self-reported feeling rating scales measured hostile
and benevolent feelings. In the paper-and-pencil social issues questionnaire, par-
ticipants used 7-point Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (not at all)to7(very
much) to indicate the extent to which feelings such as fear, anger, pity, and discom-
fort described their affective reactions towards Asian-Indians, African-Americans,
and Caucasian-Americans (Eckes, 2002; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002; Fiske
et al., 1999). Feeling thermometers measured overall favorability. They have been
used as an indicator of explicit feelings towards groups in previous studies (e.g.,
Hugenberg & Bodenhausen, 2003). In the paper-and-pencil social issues question-
naire, participants rated their overall feelings of favorability toward Cauca-
sian-Americans, African-Americans, and Asian-Indians on a nine-point thermom-
eter scale ranging from 0°(unfavorable) to 100°(very favorable).
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 635
RESULTS
Factor Analysis of Feeling Ratings
An exploratory factor analysis of the feeling ratings using principal components
extraction and oblique rotation allowed extraction of two distinct factors that were
labeled ‘Hostility’ and ‘Benevolence’(see Table 2 for factor loadings). The ‘Hos-
tility’ index included feelings of fear,nervousness,anger,dislike, and discomfort
(Cronbach’s α= 0.90), and the ‘Benevolence’ index included feelings of pity,sad-
ness, and guilt (Cronbach’s α= 0.82).
Hostile feelings
A one-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed that participants reported
higher levels of hostility towards African-Americans (M= 2.29, SE = 0.09) than to-
ward Caucasian-Americans (M= 1.98, SE = 0.08) or Asian-Indians (M= 1.94, SE
= 0.08), Wilks’Λ= 0.90, F(2, 193) = 10.90, p< 0.001, η2= 0.10.2
A 2 (Type of Video Seen) X 2 (Racial Group Depicted in News Stories) X 2
(Stereotypicality of News Stories) X 3 (Race of Target Group) repeated measures
ANOVA showed a significant Type of Video Seen X Racial Group Depicted in
News Stories X Race of Target Group interaction, Wilks’ Λ= 0.96, F(8, 148) =
3.50, p< 0.05, partial η2= 0.05. Specifically, Table 3 illustrates that for participants
who read news stories depicting Asian-Indians, those who saw the literacy video
(M= 2.44, SE = 0.20) were significantly more likely than those who saw the con-
trol video (M= 1.97, SE = 0.19) to report greater hostility towards Afri-
can-Americans. This analysis revealed no other main effects or interaction effects.
636 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
TABLE 2
Factor Loadings for Components Measuring
Feelings Toward Target Groups
Factor Components
Hostility Benevolence
Fear 0.88 –0.02
Nervousness 0.87 –0.01
Discomfort 0.84 0.02
Dislike 0.84 –0.03
Anger 0.77 0.06
Pity –0.07 0.91
Sadness 0.00 0.88
Guilt 0.11 0.76
Eigenvalue 4.62 1.16
% Variance 57.77 14.45
Cronbach’s α0.90 0.82
Benevolent feelings
A one-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed that participants reported
highest degree of benevolent feelings towards Asian-Indians (M= 2.47, SE =
0.10), followed by African-Americans (M= 2.11, SE = 0.08), and least towards
Caucasian-Americans (M= 1.92, SE = 0.08), Wilks’ Λ= .86, F(2, 193) = 15.51, p
< 0.001, η2= 0.13.
A 2 (Type of Video Seen) X 2 (Racial Group Depicted in News Stories) X 2
(Stereotypicality of News Stories) X 3 (Race of Target Group) repeated measures
ANOVA using a multivariate approach yielded a significant Stereotypicality of
News Stories X Race of Target Group interaction, Wilks’ Λ= 0.95, F(2, 148) =
4.32, p< 0.05, partial η2= 0.06. In particular, Table 4 illustrates that, coinciding
with the second research hypothesis, respondents who read counter-stereotypical
news stories (M= 2.21, SE = 0.16) were significantly less likely than those who
read stereotypical news stories (M= 2.82, SE = 0.17) to report feelings of benevo-
lence towards Asian-Indians. This part of the study revealed no other significant
main effects or interactions.
Overall favorability
A one-way repeated measures analysis of variance revealed that participants re-
ported highest favorability towards Caucasian-Americans (M= 78.86, SE = 1.27),
followed by African-Americans (M= 67.84, SE = 1.37), and least toward
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 637
TABLE 3
Type of Video Seen X Racial Group Depicted in News Stories X Race of
Target Group Interaction on Hostility Ratings
Video Seen
Control Literacy
News Stories About African-Americans
Race of Target Group
Caucasian-Americans 2.21a(.18) 2.02a(.18)
African-Americans 2.42a(.19) 2.14a(.20)
Asian-Indians 2.03a(.17) 2.09a(.18)
News Stories About Asian-Indians
Race of Target Group
Caucasian-Americans 1.84a(.18) 1.89a(.18)
African-Americans 1.97a(.19) 2.44b(.20)
Asian-Indians 1.91a(.17) 1.70a(.18)
Note. Numbers in parentheses are standard errors. Means in the same row with no lower case sub-
script in common differ at p< 0.05 using Holm’s sequential bonferroni post hoc comparisons. Wilks’ Λ
= 0.96, F(8, 148) = 3.50, p< 0.05, partial η2= 0.05.
Asian-Indians (M= 63.62, SE = 1.32), Wilks’ Λ= 0.66, F(2, 190) = 49.52, p<
0.001, η2= 0.34.
A 2 (Type of Video Seen) X 2 (Racial Group Depicted in News Stories) X 2
(Stereotypicality of News Stories) X 3 (Race of Target Group) repeated measures
ANOVA employing a multivariate approach revealed a significant Type of Video
Seen X Racial Group Depicted in News Stories X Race of Target Group interac-
tion, Wilks’Λ= 0.96, F(8, 146) = 3.25, p< 0.05, partial η2= 0.04. Specifically, Ta-
ble 5 illustrates that for participants who read news stories depicting
Asian-Indians, those who saw the literacy video (M= 61.87, SE = 2.90) reported
638 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
TABLE 4
Stereotypicality of News Stories X Race of Target Group Interaction
on Benevolence Ratings
Stereotypicality of News Stories
Stereotypical Counter-Stereotypical
Race of Target Group
Caucasian-Americans 1.92a(.12) 1.88a(.12)
African-Americans 2.06a(.13) 2.08a(.13)
Asian-Indians 2.82a(.17) 2.21b(.16)
Note. Numbers in parentheses are standard errors. Means in the same row with no lower case sub-
script in common differ at p< 0.05 using Holm’s sequential bonferroni post hoc comparisons. Wilks’ Λ
= 0.95, F(2, 148) = 4.32, p< 0.05, partial η2= 0.06
TABLE 5
Type of Video Seen X Racial Group Depicted in News Stories X Race
of Target Group Interaction on Overall Favorability Ratings
Video Seen
Control Literacy
News Stories About African-Americans
Race of Target Group
Caucasian-Americans 77.19a(3.04) 78.44a(2.99)
African-Americans 68.77a(3.01) 71.31a(2.97)
Asian-Indians 63.60a(3.05) 63.13a(3.00)
News Stories About Asian-Indians
Race of Target Group
Caucasian-Americans 79.75a(2.91) 78.08a(2.93)
African-Americans 71.25a(2.89) 61.87b(2.90)
Asian-Indians 64.00a(2.92) 65.14a(2.93)
Note. Numbers in parentheses are standard errors. Means in the same row with no lower case sub-
script in common differ at p< 0.05 using Holm’s sequential bonferroni post hoc comparisons. Wilks’ Λ
= 0.96, F(8, 146) = 3.25, p< 0.05, partial η2= 0.04
significantly less favorable feelings towards African-Americans as compared to
those who saw the control video (M= 71.25, SE = 2.89). No other significant main
effects or interactions became apparent.
DISCUSSION
In summary, the analysis of the effects of the independent variables (“Type of
Video Seen,” “Stereotypicality of News Stories,” “Racial Group Depicted in the
News Story,” and “Race of the Target Group”) on overall favorability, hostile feel-
ings, and benevolent feelings provided only partial support for the hypotheses, yet
revealed patterns of responses that have interesting implications for comparative
stereotyping. Contrary to expectations, results related to the first hypothesis re-
vealed that the literacy video seemed to increase prejudicial responses as com-
pared to the control video. The second hypothesis was partially supported. That is,
reading counter-stereotypical news stories as compared to stereotypical news sto-
ries reduced prejudicial responses toward Asian-Indians. However, no similar ob-
servation appeared for feelings toward African-Americans. The third hypothesis
was fully supported. As expected, hostile prejudicial feelings were more strongly
expressed toward African-Americans, and benevolent prejudicial feelings were
expressed toward Asian-Indians. In terms of the research question posed in this
study, evidence of comparative stereotyping received some preliminary support, as
news stories about Asian-Indians appeared to increase hostility toward
African-Americans.
Results related to the first hypothesis revealed that the literacy condition, sur-
prisingly, seemed to activate prejudicial feelings although it was intended to sup-
press such feelings. As such, no main effects for the type of video on the dependent
variables appeared in this study. However, the results relating to comparative ste-
reotyping effects observed in the Type of Video Seen X Racial Group Depicted in
News Stories X Race of Target Group interaction on both overall favorability and
hostile feelings suggest the possibility that the literacy video might have increased
instead of reduced prejudicial responses.
One possible explanation for this surprising result is that, in spite of the special
care taken to not specify any stereotypes in either the media literacy or control
video stimuli, the very mention of generalizations about groups based on specific
media examples in the literacy video could have made participants think about ste-
reotypes. Another possibility is that participants who saw the literacy video were
processing the news stories more carefully and deliberately. Therefore, partici-
pants in this condition might have been able to remember more details about the
news stories as compared to those in the control condition. Also likely is that the
media literacy training was perceived as too “preachy,” leading to back-fire effects
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 639
amongst young college-going adults. Some other scholars (Cantor & Wilson,
2003; Nathanson & Yang, 2003) have noted such a possibility.
The second hypothesis predicted that participants exposed to coun-
ter-stereotypical news stories would be less likely to report prejudicial responses
as compared to participants who read stereotypical news stories. Results from this
study support this hypothesis in terms of Caucasian-American participants’ feel-
ings toward Asian-Indians, but not in their feelings toward African-Americans.
Perhaps anti-Black attitudes are so strongly well entrenched that a brief exposure
to news stories about this out-group could not bring about any noticeable changes
in prejudicial attitudes. In other words, attitudes toward Asian-Indians might be
more malleable than those toward African-Americans.
These findings support prior studies reporting that media stereotypes are more
powerful in influencing viewers’ attitudes when interracial contact is minimal
(Armstrong et al., 1992; Fujioka, 1999). For instance, Fujioka (1999) used the con-
tact hypothesis to explain why Caucasian-American participants compared to Jap-
anese participants reported greater prejudicial feelings toward African-Americans.
Similar to the results from the current study, Fujioka also found that coun-
ter-stereotypical media content improved racial attitudes, especially when partici-
pants had little contact with the target out-group. In the event of less first-hand con-
tact and less familiarity with an out-group, participants are perhaps more likely to
believe the typicality of media exemplars.
The results provided support for the third hypothesis. Although overall
favorability scores were lower for Asian-Indians in comparison to Afri-
can-Americans, the analyses also revealed significantly higher hostility toward Af-
rican-Americans than toward Asian-Indians. These findings should also be consid-
ered in conjunction with the pretest results relating to cultural stereotypes.
Namely, findings from the pretests showed that whereas cultural stereotypes asso-
ciated with African-Americans included troublesomeness and deprivation, those
associated with Asian-Indians included passivity and deprivation. These results
lend support to conflict theory and the stereotype content model. As predicted by
these perspectives, hostility was expressed toward rebellious, inferior out-groups
and benevolence was expressed toward obedient, helpless subordinates. It is im-
portant to note that lower ratings on the feeling thermometer for Asian-Indians
co-existed with seemingly positive feelings of sympathy recorded toward this
out-group. This is not a contradiction but is consistent with the argument that be-
nevolent feelings stem from notions of superiority of dominant groups over subor-
dinate groups seen as incompetent, yet sociable.
In terms of the research question, this study found that participants who read
news stories depicting Asian-Indians, especially those in the literacy as opposed to
the control video condition, reported significantly lower overall favorability and
greater hostility toward African-Americans. These findings are consistent with
those of Ho, Sanbonmatsu, and Akimoto, (2002), who found that reading news
640 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
stories about Asian American successes led to negative attitudes toward Mexican
Americans. Ho and colleagues explained this comparative stereotyping effect in
terms of equal opportunity beliefs amongst the participants.
Applying a similar logic to the present study, stereotypical stories about
Asian-Indians might emphasize a lack of social mobility and openness in India.
Therefore, the failures of Asian-Indians may be attributed to social circumstances
rather than individual incompetence. In comparison, the extent to which the per-
ception of the US is one of a more open society providing greater opportunities for
success than India, failure among African-Americans might be attributed to indi-
vidual incompetence rather than societal injustices. Such an interpretation would
be consistent with modern racist beliefs towards African-Americans that deny the
existence of prejudice by claiming that this out-group is “too pushy” when making
unfair and exorbitant demands for greater allocation of resources without contrib-
uting much to the society in return (McConahay, 1986). Although this interpreta-
tion is clearly speculative at this point, researchers should include multiple target
racial groups in their studies in order to begin exploring why such comparative me-
dia stereotyping takes place.
This research project has several limitations that provide direction for future in-
vestigation. First, with regard to validity, social desirability has been a major prob-
lem associated with the measurement of racial stereotypical attitudes, sufficient to
cloud whether or not self-reports truly reflect participants’ honest feelings. Sec-
ond, in terms of media literacy training, a long-term effort rather than a one-time
video exposure might yield more noticeable changes in prejudicial responses.
Finally, another suggestion for future researchers is to measure the level of preju-
dice among viewers both prior to and after exposure to the experimental stimuli.
Despite these limitations, this study contributes to the understanding of social
psychological effects of media stereotypes by examining the specific types of me-
dia content that activate and suppress hostile and benevolent prejudicial feelings.
Moreover, the study presents the possibility that media literacy training might have
a boomerang effect by activating prejudice instead of decreasing such feelings.
Additionally, the current research provides some preliminary evidence for the
comparative negative stereotyping of one racial out-group after viewing stories
about another racial out-group, which can be explained using model minority ste-
reotypes and modern racist beliefs.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the Penn State Alumni Association for funding
this project. They extend their gratitude to S. Shyam Sundar, Dennis Davis, Janet
Swim, David Roskos-Ewoldsen, Travis Dixon, and Barbara Wilson for their valu-
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 641
able feedback. They appreciate the assistance provided by Carmen Stavrositu,
Amanda Rotondo, and Tom Smee for this research.
NOTES
1The experiment also included computer-based measures of implicit attitudes in a third mini-study
on “judgment and memory” in the final experiment. Participants took part in this mini-study in between
the news study and the social issues study. Since the focus of the current study is on self-reported mea-
sures, the results of the implicit attitudes are not included here.
2A multivariate approach was used in all repeated measures analyses reported in this paper.
REFERENCES
Armstrong, G. B., Neuendorf, K. A., & Brentar, J. E. (1992). TV entertainment, news, and racial per-
ceptions of college students. Journal of Communication, 42, 153–176.
Banaji, M. R., Hardin, C. D., & Rothman, A. (1993). Implicit stereotyping in person judgment. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 272–281.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bargh, J. A. (1994). Automatic and conscious processing of social information. In R. S. Wyer & T. K.
Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 1–43). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Beentjes, J. W. J., van Oordt, M., & van der Voort, T. H. A. (2002). How television commentary affects
children’s judgments on soccer fouls. Communication Research, 29, 31–45.
Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and Social Psy-
chology Review, 6, 242–261.
Bodenhausen, G. V., Schwarz, N., Bless, H., & Waenke, M. (1995). Effects of atypical exemplars on ra-
cial beliefs: Enlightened racism or generalized appraisals? Journal of Experimental Social Psychol-
ogy, 31, 48–63.
Brown Givens, S. M., & Monahan, J. L. (2005). Priming mammies, jezebels, and other controlling im-
ages: An examination of the influence of mediated stereotypes on perceptions of an African Ameri-
can woman. Media Psychology, 7, 87–106.
Busselle, R. W., & Crandall, H. (2002). Television viewing and perceptions about race differences in
socioeconomic success. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 265–282.
Cantor, J., & Wilson, B. J. (2003). Media and violence: Intervention strategies for reducing aggression.
Media Psychology, 5, 363–403.
Chiricos, T., & Eschholz, S. (2002). The racial and ethnic typification of crime and the criminal
typification of race and ethnicity in local television news. Journal of Research in Crime and Delin-
quency, 39, 400–420.
Chiricos, T., Eschholz, S., & Gertz, M. (1997). Crime, news and fear of crime: Toward an identification
of audience effects. Social Problems, 44, 342–357.
Coltrane, S., & Messineo, M. (2000). The perpetuation of subtle prejudice: Race and gender imagery in
1990s television advertising. Sex Roles, 42, 363–389.
Coover, G. (2001). Television and social identity: Race representations as white accommodation. Jour-
nal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 45(3), 413–431.
Dasgupta, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating auto-
matic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 81, 800–814.
642 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.
Devine, P. G. (2001). Implicit prejudice and stereotyping: How automatic are they? Introduction to the
special section. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 757–759.
Devine, P. G., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Are racial stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy revis-
ited. In C. Stangor (Ed.), Stereotypes and prejudice: Essential readings. Key readings in social psy-
chology (pp. 86–99). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Devine, P. G., & Monteith, M. J. (1993). The role of discrepancy-associated affect in prejudice reduc-
tion. In D. M. Mackie (Ed.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group per-
ception (pp. 317–344). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Devine, P. G., & Monteith, M. J. (1999). Automaticity and control in stereotyping. In S. Chaiken &
Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 339–360). New York: Guilford
Press.
Dixon, T. L., & Linz, D. (2000a). Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of African Americans
and Latinos as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of Communication, 50, 131–154.
Dixon, T. L., & Linz, D. (2000b). Race and the misrepresentation of victimization on local television
news. Communication Research, 27, 547–573.
Dixon, T. L., & Linz, D. (2002). Television news, prejudicial pretrial publicity, and the depiction of
race. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 112–136.
Domke, D. (2001). Racial cues and political ideology: An examination of associative priming. Commu-
nication Research, 28, 772–801.
Donovan, R. J., & Leivers, S. (1993). Using paid advertising to modify racial stereotype beliefs. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 57(2), 205–218.
Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype
content model. Sex Roles, 47, 99–114.
Entman, R. M. (1990). Modern racism and the images of Blacks in local television news. Critical
Studies in Mass Communication, 7, 332–345.
Entman, R. M. (1992). Blacks in the news: Television, modern racism and cultural change. Journalism
Quarterly, 69, 341–361.
Entman, R. M. (1994a). African Americans according to TV news. Media Studies Journal, 8, 29–38.
Entman, R. M. (1994b). Representation and reality in the portrayal of Blacks on network television
news. Journalism Quarterly, 71, 509–520.
Esses, V. M., Jackson, L. M., & Armstrong, T. L. (1998). Intergroup competition and attitudes toward
immigrants and immigration: An instrumental model of group conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 54,
699–724.
Fazio, R. H., & Hilden, L. E. (2001). Emotional reactions to a seemingly prejudiced response: The role
of automatically activated racial attitudes and motivation to control prejudiced reactions. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 538–549.
Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation
as an unobtrusive measure of racial-attitudes: A bona-fide pipeline. Journal of Personality and So-
cial Psychology, 69, 1013–1027.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content:
Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to indi-
viduating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Ad-
vances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1–74.
Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and in-
terdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues,
55, 473–489.
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 643
Ford, T. E. (1997). Effects of stereotypical television portrayals of African-Americans on person per-
ception. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60, 266–275.
Fujioka, Y. (1999). Television portrayals and AfricanAmerican stereotypes: Examination of televi-
sion effects when direct contact is lacking. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76,
52–75.
Fujioka, Y. (2005). Black media iImages as a perceived threat to African American ethnic identity:
Coping responses, perceived public perception, and attitudes towards affirmative action. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49, 450–468.
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 61–89). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Gerbner, G. (1998). Cultivation analysis: An overview. Mass Communication & Society, 1, 175–194.
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing up with television:
Cultivation processes. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and re-
search (2nd ed., pp. 43–67). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, J. G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic
beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 509–517.
Gilens, M. (1996). Race and poverty in America: Public misperceptions and the American news media.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 60, 515–541.
Gilliam, F. D., & Iyengar, S. (2000). Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on the view-
ing public. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 560–573.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complemen-
tary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.
Graves, S. B. (1999). Television and prejudice reduction: When does television as a vicarious experi-
ence make a difference? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 707–727.
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1988). How rock music videos can change what is seen when boy
meets girl: Priming stereotypic appraisal of social interactions. Sex Roles, 19, 297–316.
Hansen, C. H., & Krygowski, W. (1994). Arousal-augmented priming effects: Rock music videos and
sex object schemas. Communication Research, 21(1), 24–47.
Ho, E. A., Sanbonmatsu, D. M., & Akimoto, S. A. (2002). The effects of comparative status on social
stereotypes: How the perceived success of some persons affects the stereotypes of others. Social
Cognition, 20, 36–57.
Hochschild, A. (1998). King Leopold’s ghost : a story of greed, terror, and heroism in colonial Africa.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Hugenberg, K., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2003). Facing prejudice: Implicit prejudice and the perception
of facial threat. Psychological Science, 14, 640–643.
Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove : paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jo, E., & Berkowitz, L. (1994). A priming effect analysis of media influences: An update. In J. Bryant &
D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 43–60). Hillsdale, NJ: Law-
rence Erlbaum.
Jones, J. M. (1972). Prejudice and racism. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Jones, R. A., & Ashmore, R. D. (1973). The structure of intergroup perception: Categories and dimen-
sions in views of ethnic groups and adjectives used in stereotype research. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 25, 428–438.
Katz, I., Wackenhut, J., & Hass, R. G. (1986). Racial ambivalence, value duality, and behavior. In J. F.
Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 35–59). San Diego: Ac-
ademic Press.
Kawakami, K., Dovidio, J. F., Moll, J., Hermsen, S., & Russin, A. (2000). Just say no (to stereotyping):
Effects of training in the negation of stereotypic associations on stereotype activation.Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 78, 871–888.
644 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
Lee, S. J. (1996). Unraveling the “model minority” stereotype: Listening to Asian American youth.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Lepore, L., & Brown, R. (1997). Category and stereotype activation: Is prejudice inevitable? Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 275–287.
Lepore, L., & Brown, R. (2000). Category and stereotype activation: Is prejudice inevitable? In C.
Stangor (Ed.), Stereotypes and prejudice: Essential readings. Key readings in social psychology (pp.
119–137). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
LeVine, R. A., & Campbell, D. T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and
group behavior. Oxford, England: John Wiley and Sons.
Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., & Milne, A. B. (1998). Saying no to unwanted thoughts:
Self-focus and the regulation of mental life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3),
578–589.
Mastro, D. E., & Robinson, A. L. (2000). Cops and crooks: Images of minorities on primetime televi-
sion. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 385–396.
Mastro, D. E., & Stern, S. R. (2003). Representations of race in television commercials: A content anal-
ysis of prime-time television. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47, 635–644.
McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the Modern Racism Scale. In J. F. Dovidio
& S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). San Diego, CA: Aca-
demic Press.
Mitra, A. (1999). India through the Western lens: Creating national images in film. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Naidoo, J. C. (1988). Canadian South Asian women in transition: A dualistic view of life. Journal of
Comparative Family Studies, 19, 311–327.
Narayan, U. (1997). Dis-locating cultures: identities, traditions, and Third-World feminism. New York:
Routledge.
Nathanson, A. I. (1999). Identifying and explaining the relationship between parental mediation and
children’s aggression. Communication Research, 26, 124–143.
Nathanson, A. I., & Yang, M. (2003). The effects of mediation content and form on children’s responses
to violent television. Human Communication Research, 29, 111–134.
Oliver, M. B. (1994). Portrayals of crime, race, and aggression in reality-based police shows: A con-
tent-analysis. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38, 179–192.
Oliver, M. B. (1999). Caucasian viewers’ memory of Black and White criminal suspects in the news.
Journal of Communication, 49(3), 46–60.
Oliver, M. B., & Fonash, D. (2002). Race and crime in the news: Whites’ identification and misidentifi-
cation of violent and nonviolent criminal suspects. Media Psychology, 4, 137–156.
Peffley, M., & Hurwitz, J. (2002). The racial components of “race-neutral” crime policy attitudes.
Political Psychology, 23, 59–75.
Peffley, M., Shields, T., & Williams, B. (1996). The intersection of race and crime in television news
stories: An experimental study. Political Communication, 13, 309–327.
Power, J. G., Murphy, S. T., & Coover, G. (1996). Priming prejudice: How stereotypes and coun-
ter-stereotypes influence attribution of responsibility and credibility among ingroups and outgroups.
Human Communication Research, 23, 36–58.
Rada, J. A. (2000). A New Piece to the Puzzle: Examining Effects of Television Portrayals of African
Americans. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44, 704–716.
Richardson,J.D. (2005). SwitchingSocialIdentities: TheInfluenceof Editorial FramingonReader Atti-
tudes Toward Affirmative Action and African Americans. Communication Research, 32, 503–528.
Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In P. Katz & D. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in
controversy (pp. 53–84). New York: Plenum Press.
Shohat, E., & Stam, R. (1994). Unthinking Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism and the media. New York:
Routledge.
COMPERATIVE STEREOTYPING 645
Shome, R. (1996). Race and Popular Cinema: the Rhetorical Strategies of Whiteness in City of Joy.
Communication Quarterly, 44, 502–518.
Sotirovic, M. (2001). Affective and Cognitive Processes As Mediators of Media Influences on
Crime-Policy Preferences. Mass Communication & Society, 4, 311–329.
Swim, J. K., & Miller, D. L. (1999). White guilt: Its antecedents and consequences for attitudes toward
affirmative action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 500–514.
Swim, J. K., & Stangor, C. (Eds.). (1998). Prejudice: The target’s perspective. San Diego, CA: Aca-
demic Press, Inc.
Tan, A. S., Fujioka, Y., & Tan, G. (2000). Television use, stereotypes of African Americans and opin-
ions on affirmative action: An affective model of policy reasoning. Communication Monographs, 67,
362–371.
Valentino, N. A. (1999). Crime news and the priming of racial attitudes during evaluations of the presi-
dent. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 293–320.
Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1997). Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit level and
its relationship with questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72,
262–274.
Wu, F. H. (2002). Yellow: Race in America beyond Black and White. New York: Basic Books.
Wyer, R. S., Jr., & Srull, T. K. (1989). Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: Law-
rence Erlbaum.
Zillmann, D. (2002). Exemplification theory of media influence. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.),
Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 19–41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Zillmann, D., & Brosius, H. B. (2000). Exemplification in communication: The influence of case re-
ports on the perception of issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
646 RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND OLIVER
