Issue Of The Week XLV: Quit Stereotyping It May Improve Your Thinking

I have always been taught that it is possible to change how you think, and I usually tend to insist otherwise. More recently, I've learned that we can change our behavior but not our personalities. For me this made sense because my unwillingness to change how I think could root from my stubbornness, but for this particular issue I can see how changing your way of thinking about things could be beneficial to yourself. At first, it was surprising for me to read that creativity was found to be related to some other views on life. The more I thought about it, the more sense it made to me. Generally speaking, people who are not open to differing perspectives can be very close-minded in general. Being set in your ways can hinder many aspects of your life, and I can certainly see how maintaining one strong perspective can be detrimental. For me, this article helps me realize that sometimes it can be worth making a big change in how you think to help better yourself as well as make others more comfortable around you.

It sounds ideal to be able to just adopt a more abstract mindset toward stereotyping individuals. What I am coming to realize is we as people cannot help the way we see the world. We can say we have been enlightened and understand that we need to "think outside the box" when it comes to stereo typing but in all reality, we will still do things that one doesn't even realize to alienate an individual. Such as talking over someone in a meeting. Frances Kendall, author of Understanding White Privilage, has devoted her life to understanding social inequality and racism. In her writing she admits herself that she caught herself speaking over some of the minorities in her group she was working with. She did not intentionally do this. So yes I agree that becoming more in tune with how we stereotype individuals will better a work environment for everyone, but we must first find a way to make people understand their faults, and show them that some things they do that they might think are harmless,can really affect other individuals.

As with many life-lessons, when we project ideas of harm, we only hurt ourselves. How amazing that creativity is inhibited when we hold strong prejudices. I have often heard that if we change our thoughts, we can change the world. With less ethnocentrism and racism, our world can truly become more beautiful individually and collectively. I believe we all hold responsibility in trying to change our individual thoughts so that we may influence our own life more positively as well as the lives of others.

As with many social justice issues, we must ask ourselves why we stereotype in the first place. Have we been socialized to stereotype as a means of power over others? This article brings insight towards the harm we do to ourselves when stereotyping. As with many life-lessons, we only harm ourselves when we harm others. How amazing that we can grow in creativity and self-expression when we limit our prejudices. We truly have the power to change our thoughts and in turn grow our world, like a little seed, into a less harmful,more expressive,beautiful planet.

Very interesting article. I have always wondered why stereotypes are so hard to make go away. Stereotypes are easy to talk about, but hard to solve.

This is a test.

I think the first study was interesting in that it primed for the racism effects on creativity by presenting the racially biased belief system, one way or the other, or the neutral article, prior to testing subjects creativity. The second study then sought to determine whether someone was a concrete or abstract thinker. I would be curious to know how the researchers determined this. Did they use standard measures on whether someone was better at concrete or abstract thinking or did they create their own measure for the purpose of this experiment? Either way, it seems plausible that the more abstractly someone thinks, the more they will examine the whole individual to make judgments about someone.

The need for an individual to stereotype is rooted in the social need to assign labels in order to assign a subject within the power dynamic. This desire to place others within a specific stereotype reinforces the dominant groups power. I do not find it shocking at all that those who held reduced prejudices were creative and that those that held onto stereotypes (prejudice) were less creative. In order for an individual to be creative they need to have an open mind, to be able to look at things through complex layers, thus it is only natural that this same sense of open mindedness leads to reduced prejudices. They are able to see the complexity of society and the role that each person plays within society.

No matter who you are, everyone will have some type of stereotype that they think when they look at someone, whether or not they stick to that stereotype is a different story, but there is always judging going on by everyone. I found it very interesting that the people who were "creative" were the ones who reduced prejudice, and the ones who were "less creative" were the so called prejudice ones. I found this interesting because i never thought of looking at someones creative side to decide if they were prejudice or not. I believe that in order for people to become less prejudice they just need to open their mind, take everything into consideration, and set aside any previous judgement they have on one person.

It is important to remember, I (a white, heterosexual male) believe, that mental shortcuts (aka heuristics) are a necessary part of human functioning. If we had to fully assess every element in our environment, every time we encountered it, our productivity would be nonexistent. The social issue of racial intolerance lies much deeper than the mental shortcuts we use daily - even considering the negative stereotypes that our society upholds. Of course, part of our personal work must be to challenge our own thoughts when they mirror negative stereotypes. However, I don't want the conversation to become too bogged down in stereotypes, which are a symptom of systemic intolerance of disenfranchised groups and not a cause of their disenfranchisement.

Stereotyping is something everyone does whether consciously or unconsciously. It’s part of everyday life. Stereotypes are developed from personal experiences or others experiences that you have learned of. It is normal to make associations; that’s how we learn about our environment. The question is, will you let those stereotypes dictate how you function throughout life? For me the answer is somewhat. I will remember the stereotypes I have put in place, but I will also allow new experiences to contradict them and intern change my views and learn. In the article the author said, “People with a strong racial mindset are less creative.” That was humorous to me because I have often thought the members of white supremacy groups lacked creativity. They often say and do the same things with small amounts of change. In documentaries I have watched about white supremacy groups, they are asked questions and when responding they seem very inarticulate and repetitive.

I was really impressed with this article and the connection between creativity and stereotyping. I would have never put the two together, but it makes perfect sense. I am an artist and find it in my own practice, not necessarily in regards to stereotypes, but close-mindedness that becomes a hindrance in my own practice. The more open minded I am, the more the creative juices flow. This is a significant study in the relationship of people who are less creative and therefor hold prejudices. I have to say that this theory makes a good point, but I don't think it is across the board science. I know plenty of people that are not so "creative" and are not close-minded either. Not every liberal open-minded person I know would I consider "creative". But I can see the limitations of creativeness one could have when they are so closed off to anything new or experiences and linking that to people who are typically prejudice.

I agree with many of the posts that stereotyping is very common throughout American society. I do not personally completely agree with this article as exceptions can be found on both sides. The participants; white Americans, Israelis and Asian Americans do not represent the majority of the world population although the Israelis and Asian Americans have been subjected to oppression they do not represent other races. African-Americans, Hispanics, Middle-Eastern (of Arab decent), so it is not accurate to compare creativity amongst such a small controlled group. I acknowledge this can be true but it can also be untrue.

It would be nice to say that opening your mind about race is an easy thing to do. It is not though, it is life long work that takes a lot of effort and understanding. Not only are these people close minded, and less creative, but they are probably arrogant and not open to that kind of information about themselves. The leaders of our day who have these qualities about them are not going to change very easily, as nice as it would be to tell them how it is and have them understand immediately. These are the people running our country, and this is why we cannot get passed racism as a society. We have a long road to travel before we can put a stop to this problem.

Interesting topic...I have a severely conservative religious background-one I no longer participate in-and I found that there are those who do not like having to 'figure' things out for themselves. Habits and patterns while easier to operate within, creates specific patterned and rhetorical responses and thought. It is my experience that this type of thinking relies on the 'known' and not the possible. Maybe that's why creativity is not enhanced. It takes a certain perspective to see things in a way that allows an artist to be inspired and recreate what is seen and then applied. Is it not the same with our everyday perspective? Is it that we lose the desire to explore what is unusual for us and stick with what is comfortable? I have seen explosive reactions when people's views are challenged...is this because it causes us to redefine who we are in general, the world and how it works and our role we take on? The Power, Privilege and Social Difference class I am currently in is quite an eye-opener. I feel like Neo from "The Matrix" in that I took the red pill and not the blue. I am forever changed in the respect that I see things very differently and no longer have the luxury of going back to my dream state. I see people living from fear and I think fear is crippling. It causes denial which is like a cancer that suffocates those individuals in it and those around them as well. Without identification of the root problem there can be no change and no vision. Stereotypes will continue and if not challenged will remain. No one wins-everyone loses.

To be honest, creativity cannot be pigeonholed. I think there are multiple types of creative genius. While we often utilize the word 'creativity' in an artistic context, creativity lends itself to all disciplines. We cannot discount engineering creativity, architectural creativity, political creativity, mathematical creativity, musical creativity, and a host of other venues that foster original and innovative thinking. Thus, I find it somewhat difficult to link such a diverse range of thought processes with something so specific as racism.

This is an interesting connection that I have honestly never considered, but it actually makes a great deal of sense. Looking at my father as an example, he was raised in the south and is a bit of racist/sexist/homophobic kind of guy. He knows how he feels, and nobody will change his mind. That is to say, he is very closed minded about anything that doesn't pertain to himself. If he doesn't understand, then it's foreign, and it's not worth it to him to attempt to understand. I've accepted this about him. I've also accepted that he doesn't have a creative bone in his body. I never would have attributed his lack of creativity to his close-minded nature, but now that I'm recognizing this possibly connection I can't imagine how I didn't see it before.

Imagination requires an individual to think abstractly and to look at something in a new way. So, I suppose it would be better to say it involves a certain level of innovation. Well, when stereotyping an individual you're looking at that specific trait and applying it to all members of that group. That makes things simply; no innovation required. So because my father can't look at a person and judge them for who they are as an individual, he has made it impossible for himself to look at an idea and think about it in a creative new way.

I suppose this comes down to a matter of privilege. My father is an able, heterosexual, white, middle class man. He is the poster child (so to speak) for privilege. Therefore, he doesn't have to consider his actions or belief system. He was raised in a time when his opinions were the only ones that mattered. It's very frustrating to live with someone that doesn't value your opinion because of your sexual orientation.

I feel like stereotypes should be a thing of the past. I believe that everyone should work on getting rid for stereotypes. It hinders society as a whole from moving forward. How are we suppose to be a nation if we are still judging one another based on their color? But the biggest question I have about this article is what do they mean by creativity? Does the person that stereotypes cannot draw, play music, sing, build, or even fix problems in an abstract way? Maybe I just do not see the connection of stereotyping vs. creativity, I see it more of stereotyping vs. open mind.

I totally agree with the research. A stereotype is a fixed general image or set of characteristics that a lot of people believe represent a particular type of person or thing. No one has a stereotype from the birth, and people gain it during socialization. Therefore, a stereotype is not your creative thinking. Stereotype is a standardized thinking, and it is expectable. So it is quite opposite from creative or abstract thinking. If a person has a stereotype, it would be easier for him/her to settle on the stereotype thinking because he/she already has some idea on the thing either it was their own thinking or not. Hence, people with stereotypes are blocked to see things in fact. Another problem for people with stereotypes is that it is hard to get rid of because stereotyping is generalized. It means many other people also have the same thinking. Therefore, people with stereotypes hardly see things the way they actually are, and it makes it hard for them to make their own opinion. To say, stereotypes press people’s creative thought process.

This article made a lot of sense and really reflected on earlier psychology classes I've had. We use stereotypes because they are a quick reference for our thoughts and frees up our mind to do other tasks. Stereotypes help us form quick conclusions about others, albeit they are not always correct or accurate. I really found it interesting that people were more creative when not primed with typical stereotypical thoughts. It is very interesting to realize that just trying to be creative can lead to less stereotypical thinking, and in turn, less prejudicial thinking. I think this study would be interesting in other variations, such as having people do something creative, like make a painting, and then see if they form stereotypical conclusions about a scenario about a person of a racial minority or ethnic group. Maybe creativity can foster non-prejudicial thinking. Or maybe the study has already been done!

In my social psychology class we discussed stereotyping as an outgrowth of schemas. Schemas are very helpful in freeing up working memory and allowing us to come to conclusions more quickly. There is positive side of schemas and stereotyping IF AND ONLY IF one can be open minded enough to recognize that not everyone in a particular group is exactly the same. We have to be open enough to expand those schemas. So, I guess with that in mind I enjoyed the article, because it showed clearly that there are benefits to thinking more openly and less concretely.