Premium
Cognitive load and person memory: the role of perceived group variability
Author(s) -
Pendry Louise F.,
Macrae C. Neil
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
european journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.609
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1099-0992
pISSN - 0046-2772
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199911)29:7<925::aid-ejsp973>3.0.co;2-o
Subject(s) - psychology , recall , stereotype (uml) , homogeneous , social psychology , cognition , group (periodic table) , impression formation , information processing , cognitive psychology , social perception , developmental psychology , perception , chemistry , physics , organic chemistry , neuroscience , thermodynamics
Two studies investigated the effects of cognitive busyness and group variability on participants' memory for stereotype‐related information. In Study 1, participants formed an impression of an experimentally created group that was either homogeneous or heterogeneous in composition. While learning about the group, half of the participants were made cognitively busy, the others were not. The results supported our prediction that stereotypical efforts on memory are moderated by both the availability of processing resources and the variability of the target group under consideration. Under optimal processing circumstances, participants' recollections were dominated by the perceived variability of the group in question. That is, participants displayed preferential recall for stereotype‐consistent information when they believed the group to be homogeneous in composition, but a tendency to recall more stereotype‐inconsistent information when they considered the group to be heterogeneous in nature. Under sub‐optimal processing conditions, however, a different pattern emerged. Now, participants preferentially recalled stereotype‐consistent information regardless of the perceived variability of the group. These results were largely replicated in Study 2 when the perceived variability of a real social group was manipulated. We consider the implications of these findings for contemporary theories of stereotyping. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.