Research Overview
Manuscript reprints and data are available at my page on the Open Science Framework.
My vita is available here.
For a brief overview about implicit bias, see this brief article at The Conversation.
People constantly evaluate the world around them. Do I like that person? Do I prefer this product or that one? Do I support this candidate? What do I think about that group? Although we make such judgements continually, we don’t always admit what it is that we think. One reason is that we are unwilling. For example, someone might not report that they dislike members of a particular group because it is not socially acceptable to do so. Another reason is that we are unable. For example, someone might truly believe that they are fair-minded but not realize that they harbor negative stereotypes.
My research investigates these implicit attitudes that people are unwilling or unable to report. Much of my research is in the general area of prejudice, stereotyping, and social hierarchy, but I am also working with my students to understand the role of attitudes in a wide variety of domains such as romantic relationships, identification with feminism, health decision-making, environmental concern, and morality. Below, I provide an overview of the primary lines within my research program.
My vita is available here.
For a brief overview about implicit bias, see this brief article at The Conversation.
People constantly evaluate the world around them. Do I like that person? Do I prefer this product or that one? Do I support this candidate? What do I think about that group? Although we make such judgements continually, we don’t always admit what it is that we think. One reason is that we are unwilling. For example, someone might not report that they dislike members of a particular group because it is not socially acceptable to do so. Another reason is that we are unable. For example, someone might truly believe that they are fair-minded but not realize that they harbor negative stereotypes.
My research investigates these implicit attitudes that people are unwilling or unable to report. Much of my research is in the general area of prejudice, stereotyping, and social hierarchy, but I am also working with my students to understand the role of attitudes in a wide variety of domains such as romantic relationships, identification with feminism, health decision-making, environmental concern, and morality. Below, I provide an overview of the primary lines within my research program.
Incomplete List of Ongoing Projects
Attitude Transfer Effects in Impression Formation
In this research on attitude transfer, I investigate how people’s attitude toward one stimulus (e.g., an individual group member) influences their implicit and explicit attitudes toward other stimuli that are related (e.g., others from the same group). The most general finding from my lab is that implicit attitudes toward group members readily generalize to others in the same group (via associative links), but that explicit attitudes do not generalize because people deliberately avoid using information about one group member to judge another group member (Ratliff & Nosek, 2008, Psychological Science; Ratliff & Nosek, 2011, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin; Ratliff et al., 2012, Psychology & Marketing). I have also investigated the mechanisms, boundary conditions, and real world application of these attitude generalization effects (Chen & Ratliff, 2016, Social Psychological and Personality Science; Ratliff & Nosek, 2011, PSPB; Hawkins & Ratliff, 2015, Basic and Applied Social Psychology). Currently, I am working with my graduate students to explore: (a) individual difference moderators (e.g., political orientation, Social Dominance Orientation) of attitude transfer, and (b) the nature of the relationship between attitude transfer and stereotyping.
Implicit Prototypes and Behavior
Take a moment to think about the typical environmentalist… who comes to mind? My lab examines the role implicit prototype favorability in predicting important, real-world behaviors. Prototypes are mental images of the kind of person who engages in a particular behavior or class of behaviors (e.g., the “typical environmentalist”). Previous research has demonstrated that self-reported evaluations of prototypes predict relevant behavior. Our research extends this work by demonstrating that prototype favorability influences behavior outside of conscious awareness and control. For example: (1) women with more positive implicit evaluations of the “typical person who has tan skin” are more likely to engage in risky sun behavior than are women with less positive evaluations (Howell & Ratliff, 2015), (2) women with more positive implicit evaluations of the “typical feminist” are more likely to identify with feminism than are women with less positive evaluations (Redford, Howell, Meijs, & Ratliff, 2016), and (3) people with more positive implicit evaluations of the “typical environmentalist” are more likely to engage in environmentally-friendly behavior than are people with less positive evaluations (Ratliff, Howell, & Redford, 2017).
Defensive Responding to Feedback about Implicit Attitudes
Because egalitarianism is a cherished self-view for most Americans, learning that one harbors implicit biases is threatening to the self, prompting defensive responding. My lab has investigated people’s lay beliefs about culpability for implicit bias (Redford & Ratliff, 2016, Social Justice Research) and the role of implicit-explicit attitude discrepancy in defensive reactions to feedback about implicit bias. In the latter work (Howell, Redford, Pogge, & Ratliff, 2017, Social Cognition), we find that people respond most defensively to feedback about implicit bias when: (a) implicit and explicit attitudes are more discrepant than congruent, and (b) implicit attitudes align with societal bias (e.g., a preference for Straight People relative to Gay People rather than the reverse). Greater defensiveness, in turn, predicts lower intentions to engage in future egalitarian behavior. This initial finding has led to several further tests of boundary conditions and moderators of the feedback-defensiveness link (Howell & Ratliff, 2017, British Journal of Social Psychology) and an investigation into whether majority and minority group members similarly respond to feedback about bias (Howell, Gaither, & Ratliff, 2016, Social Psychological and Personality Science).
Other Topics
Other ongoing research in my lab concerns: (a) people’s judgments about others’ moral responsibility for implicit attitudes, (b) attitudes toward transgender people, (c) attitudes toward white privilege, (d) factors predicting feminist identity, and (d) best scientific practices for producing robust, replicable research.
In this research on attitude transfer, I investigate how people’s attitude toward one stimulus (e.g., an individual group member) influences their implicit and explicit attitudes toward other stimuli that are related (e.g., others from the same group). The most general finding from my lab is that implicit attitudes toward group members readily generalize to others in the same group (via associative links), but that explicit attitudes do not generalize because people deliberately avoid using information about one group member to judge another group member (Ratliff & Nosek, 2008, Psychological Science; Ratliff & Nosek, 2011, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin; Ratliff et al., 2012, Psychology & Marketing). I have also investigated the mechanisms, boundary conditions, and real world application of these attitude generalization effects (Chen & Ratliff, 2016, Social Psychological and Personality Science; Ratliff & Nosek, 2011, PSPB; Hawkins & Ratliff, 2015, Basic and Applied Social Psychology). Currently, I am working with my graduate students to explore: (a) individual difference moderators (e.g., political orientation, Social Dominance Orientation) of attitude transfer, and (b) the nature of the relationship between attitude transfer and stereotyping.
Implicit Prototypes and Behavior
Take a moment to think about the typical environmentalist… who comes to mind? My lab examines the role implicit prototype favorability in predicting important, real-world behaviors. Prototypes are mental images of the kind of person who engages in a particular behavior or class of behaviors (e.g., the “typical environmentalist”). Previous research has demonstrated that self-reported evaluations of prototypes predict relevant behavior. Our research extends this work by demonstrating that prototype favorability influences behavior outside of conscious awareness and control. For example: (1) women with more positive implicit evaluations of the “typical person who has tan skin” are more likely to engage in risky sun behavior than are women with less positive evaluations (Howell & Ratliff, 2015), (2) women with more positive implicit evaluations of the “typical feminist” are more likely to identify with feminism than are women with less positive evaluations (Redford, Howell, Meijs, & Ratliff, 2016), and (3) people with more positive implicit evaluations of the “typical environmentalist” are more likely to engage in environmentally-friendly behavior than are people with less positive evaluations (Ratliff, Howell, & Redford, 2017).
Defensive Responding to Feedback about Implicit Attitudes
Because egalitarianism is a cherished self-view for most Americans, learning that one harbors implicit biases is threatening to the self, prompting defensive responding. My lab has investigated people’s lay beliefs about culpability for implicit bias (Redford & Ratliff, 2016, Social Justice Research) and the role of implicit-explicit attitude discrepancy in defensive reactions to feedback about implicit bias. In the latter work (Howell, Redford, Pogge, & Ratliff, 2017, Social Cognition), we find that people respond most defensively to feedback about implicit bias when: (a) implicit and explicit attitudes are more discrepant than congruent, and (b) implicit attitudes align with societal bias (e.g., a preference for Straight People relative to Gay People rather than the reverse). Greater defensiveness, in turn, predicts lower intentions to engage in future egalitarian behavior. This initial finding has led to several further tests of boundary conditions and moderators of the feedback-defensiveness link (Howell & Ratliff, 2017, British Journal of Social Psychology) and an investigation into whether majority and minority group members similarly respond to feedback about bias (Howell, Gaither, & Ratliff, 2016, Social Psychological and Personality Science).
Other Topics
Other ongoing research in my lab concerns: (a) people’s judgments about others’ moral responsibility for implicit attitudes, (b) attitudes toward transgender people, (c) attitudes toward white privilege, (d) factors predicting feminist identity, and (d) best scientific practices for producing robust, replicable research.