キーワード 問 題 1 163
XIX 2010 164
Hamilton & Gifford, 1976; Wittenbrink & Hilton, 1997 2004 A 1986 3 3 Cohen,C.E. 1981 165
XIX 2010 2 Hastie & Kumar, 1979; Srull, 1981; Belmore, 1987 Hastie & Kumar 1979 3 2004 Devine & 166
Monteith, 1999 1996 1989 Higgins & Stangor, 1988; Higgins, 1989; Bargh, 1984 Higgins, Rholes & Jones 1977 167
XIX 2010 Srull & Wyer, 1979 Bargh & Pietromonaco, 1982 Devine 1989 ex ex Devine 1989 Devine 168
crossed categorization 2 169
XIX 2010 2 予 備 調 査 1 参 加 者 13 25.9 13 24.7 26 170
Table1. 各 職 業 に 就 く 労 働 者 の 推 定 男 女 比 の 平 均 値 (%) 26.73 73.27 46.92 53.08 70.19 29.81 48.08 51.92 46.54 53.46 57.31 42.69 57.69 42.31 57.31 42.69 67.58 32.42 44.69 55.31 65.08 35.27 76.15 23.85 63.85 36.15 25.3 調 査 内 容 13 13 結 果 Table 1 50 50 3 2 171
XIX 2010 予 備 調 査 2 参 加 者 10 28 10 25 20 26.5 調 査 内 容 結 果 145 1 7.25 138 1 6.90 カテゴリー 化 ex 172
Table2.3 人 以 上 が 記 述 した 項 目 を 含 むカテゴリーの 例 1 1 3 3 94% 57 57 1 3 3 Table 2 173
XIX 2010 2005 2006 1990 2002 本 実 験 2 方 法 参 加 者 40 80 22.33 実 験 デザイン 2 2 4 10 174
材 料 プライミング 課 題 2 2 ex 行 動 記 述 文 28 B 1 6 3 3 3 ex Table 3 175
XIX 2010 176 Table3. 行 動 記 述 文 の 全 内 容 B 28 1 B B 30 B B B B B B B B B B B
Table4. 印 象 評 定 で 用 いた 20 特 性 Table 3 B 印 象 評 定 尺 度 8 4 4 20 20 Table 4 行 動 の 解 釈 評 定 尺 度 2 6 6 2 P 177
XIX 2010 N 30 N P P N N P P N 1 N P 178
P N 手 続 き 3 5 3 1 プライミング 課 題 2 1 10 24 10 4 179
XIX 2010 10 15 10 4 20 2 挿 入 課 題 2 1000 997 994 1000 3 2 3 行 動 記 述 文 を 読 ませる B 2 30 180
3 Table 3 4 自 由 再 生 課 題 B B 6 30 5 印 象 評 定 B 20 B 7 1 7 1 Table 4 6 行 動 の 解 釈 評 定 B 6 2 7 1 7 1 6 2 7 実 験 への 気 づきの 確 認 3 3 1 181
XIX 2010 8 デブリーフィング 7 1 7 1 4 8 4 10 1234 04101234 1 2 8 3 結 果 7 73 182
Table5. 各 群 における 4 得 点 の 平 均 値 と SD 39.47 39.41 39.44 35.06 34.74 34.89 37.72 36.94 6.46 5.39 5.89 5.66 5.37 5.44 6.40 5.81 38.63 24.65 32.03 40.61 30.21 35.27 39.59 27.58 4.83 3.72 8.28 5.34 8.65 8.87 5.11 7.26 19.32 21.35 20.28 21.72 17.95 19.78 20.49 19.56 4.35 2.74 3.77 3.69 5.39 4.96 4.17 4.62 12.68 14.06 13.33 13.11 16.21 14.70 12.89 15.19 SD 2.21 2.59 2.46 4.37 4.14 4.14 2.76 3.75 8 56 4 28 ~ 印 象 評 定 について~ ex Table 5 Figure 1 Figure 1 4 4 183
XIX 2010 Figure1. 職 業 群 と 性 別 群 における 職 業 得 点 と 性 別 得 点 の 平 均 値 2 2 2 2 F 1,69 11.40, p.001 F 1,69 7.23, p.01 ~ 自 由 再 生 について~ 0 1 2 3 4 95 184
Table 6. 各 群 における 職 業 項 目 および 性 別 項 目 再 生 得 点 率 の 平 均 値 と SD 41.81 34.31 38.27 28.09 21.93 24.93 35.13 27.78 18.37 16.46 17.66 16.99 8.38 13.46 18.80 14.12 17.84 28.76 22.99 38.27 41.81 40.09 27.78 35.65 11.35 14.06 13.68 12.62 14.51 13.55 15.71 15.57 SD Table7. 各 群 における 男 性 項 目 および 女 性 項 目 再 生 得 点 率 の 平 均 値 と SD 14.03 28.76 20.99 51.85 30.99 41.14 32.43 29.94 14.74 15.25 16.54 31.20 15.96 26.43 30.58 15.45 21.64 28.76 25.00 24.69 52.63 39.04 23.12 41.36 22.97 18.45 20.98 22.08 32.47 30.95 22.28 29.05 SD 3 6 18 3 3 9 4 Table 6 7 4 4 2 2 2 2 Figure 2 Figure 2 F 1,69 12.92, p.01 185
XIX 2010 Figure2. 各 群 における 平 均 職 業 項 目 再 生 率 及 び 平 均 性 別 項 目 再 生 率 F 1,69 29.41, p.001 F 1,69 17.52, p.001 F 1,69 5.40, p.05 ~ 行 動 の 解 釈 評 定 について~ 6 6 Table 8 4 186
Table8. 各 群 におけるポジティブ 解 釈 値 の 平 均 値 と SD 1 1.95 1.47 1.72 1.56 1.47 1.51 1.76 1.47 2.20 2.15 2.16 1.72 1.71 1.69 1.96 1.91 2-0.11 0.18 0.03 0.56 0.68 0.62 0.22 0.44 2.51 2.74 2.59 2.41 2.50 2.42 2.45 2.59 3 1.05 1.24 1.14 0.72 0.16 0.43 0.89 0.67 0.51 2.31 1.90 2.24 1.83 2.04 1.88 2.11 4 2.89 1.29 2.14 1.78 2.26 2.03 2.35 1.81 2.21 2.34 2.38 2.05 2.28 2.15 2.18 2.33 5 1.58 0.59 1.11 1.22 0.42 0.81 1.41 0.50 1.64 2.18 1.95 1.90 2.12 2.03 1.76 2.12 6 2.11 1.65 1.89 0.83 0.37 0.59 1.49 0.97 SD 1.76 1.97 1.85 1.76 1.71 1.72 1.85 1.92 2 2 2 2 F 1,69 4.02, p.05 Figure 3 187
XIX 2010 Figure3. 各 群 における 行 動 4に 対 する 平 均 ポシティブ 解 釈 値 Figure4. 各 群 における 行 動 5に 対 する 平 均 ポシティブ 解 釈 値 1 6 F 1,69 3.79, p.06 Figure 4 188
Figure5. 各 群 における 行 動 6に 対 する 平 均 ポシティブ 解 釈 値 F 1,69 9.18, p.01 Figure 5 30 189
XIX 2010 考 察 ~ 印 象 評 定 について~ 190
~ 記 憶 再 生 について~ 191
XIX 2010 4 ~ 総 合 考 察 ~ 192
193
XIX 2010 1999 1 2004 194
2 20 50 195
XIX 2010 引 用 文 献 2005 46 656 657. Bargh, J. A. 1984. Automatic and conscious processing of social information. In R. S. Wyer, Jr., & T.K. Srull Eds., Handbook of social cognition, Vol.3. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp.1 43. Bargh, J. A., & Pietromonaco, P. 1982. Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 437 449. Belmore, S. M. 1987. Determinants of attention during impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 480 489. Cohen, C. E. 1981. Person categories and social perception : Testing some boundaries of the processing effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 441 452. Devine, P. G. 1989. Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5 18. 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. 2006 14 pp. 105 120. Hamilton, D., & Gifford. R 1976. Illusory correlation in interpersonal perception: A cognitive basis of stereotypic judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 392 407. Hastie, R., & Kumer, P. A. 1979. Person Memory: Personality traits as organizing principles in memory for behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 25 38. Higgins, E. T. 1989. Knowledge accessibility and activation: Subjectivity and suffering from unconscious sources. In J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh Eds., Unintended thought. New York: Guilford Press. pp.75 123. Higgins, E. T., Rholes, W. S., & Jones, C. R. 1977. Category accessibility and impression formation.journal of Experimental Social Psychology,13,141 154. 196
Higgins, E. T., & Stangor, C. 1988. Context-driven social judgment and memory: When behavior engulfs the field in reconstructive memory. In D. Bar-Tal, & A. W. Kruglanski Eds., The social psychology of knowledge. Cambridge University Press. pp.262 298. 1996 2004 pp. 31 48. 1989 60, 38 44. 2004 3 pp. 87 107. 2004 3 pp. 72 86. 1990 11, 18 27 Srull, T. K. 1981. Person memory: Some tests of associative storage and retrieval models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 440 463. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. 1979. The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660 1672. 1986 40, 129 148 2002 Wittenbrink, B., Gist, P. L., & Hilton J. L. 1997. Structural properties of stereotypic knowledge and their influences on the construal of social situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 526 543. 197
XIX 2010 The activation of the stereotype dimension in cross-categorization context SHIMAKAGE, Maya A number of studies have shown that the activation of stereotypes affects subsequent information processing. Moreover, individuals typically belong to multiple categories at the same time and are evaluated differently depending on which category is focus of attention. The present study examined the effect of activation of stereotype dimensions on interpersonal perception and memory in the context of cross categorization. Eighty participated in the experiment. First, participants performed the cognitive tasks to activate either occupation or gender. They were asked to make some combinations between pictures of various vocations and names of the job in occupation-activation condition, and between pictures of boys and girls and male or female names in gender-activation condition. Next, after completing the distraction task, participants read one of the two vignettes. The vignette described one day of a male or female hairdresser. Thus there were four conditions as a whole two kinds of activation by gender of the target. Finally, participants rated the impression of the target and recalled the content of the vignette. When occupation dimension was activated, the impression and memory of the target was largely affected by the prototype of hairdresser, whereas in case of activating gender dimension, the impression and memory of the target was mainly based on the gender stereotype. Thus, the current study demonstrated that the activation of the category dimension influenced following interpersonal cognition even if neither specific stereotypes themselves nor stereotypical traits were activated. The results suggest the cognitive mechanism involved in processing information. Activating the category dimension leads to activation of the specific 198
stereotype that applies to the target person, which in turn, directs perceivers attention to stereotypic traits or attributes and then has impact on their impression and memory. The present study showed that the impressions of the same person s behavior were different according to which category dimension the judgment was based on. 20 199