Content deleted Content added
m Typo fixing, replaced: Fourndations → Foundations using AWB |
m + Link(s) |
||
Line 67:
===Meta-theoretical debate===
The social identity approach explicitly rejects the metatheory of research that regards limited information processing as the cause of social stereotyping.<ref name="Oakes et al. (1994)."/><ref name="McGarty (2002)">{{cite journal |last= McGarty|first= C. |year= 2002|title= Stereotype formation as category formation |journal= Stereotypes as explanations |pages= 16–37 |___location= Cambridge |publisher= University Press |editor1-first= C.|editor1-last= McGarty |editor2-first= V.Y. |editor2-last= Yzerbyt |editor3-first= R. |editor3-last= Spears }}</ref><ref name="Oakes & Turner (1996)">{{cite journal | last1 = Oakes | first1 = Penny | last2 = Turner | first2 = John | editor-last = Stroebe | editor-first = Wolfgang | editor-link1= Wolfgang Stroebe|editor2-last = Hewstone | editor2-first = Miles | year = 1990 | title = Is limited information processing capacity the cause of social stereotyping? | journal = European review of Social Psychology | volume = 1 | pages = 111–135 | ___location = Chichester | publisher = Wiley | doi=10.1080/14792779108401859}}</ref> Specifically, where other researchers adopt the position that stereotyping is second best to other information processing techniques (e.g., individuation), social identity theorists argue that in many contexts a stereotypical perspective is entirely appropriate. Moreover, it is argued that in many intergroup contexts to take an individualistic view would be decidedly maladaptive and demonstrate ignorance of important social realities.<ref name="Haslam et al. (1996)."/><ref name="Haslam & Turner (1992)."/>
===Category hierarchies===
| |||