Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study examines beliefs about the ontological status of social categories, asking whether their members are understood to share fixed, inhering essences or natures. Forty social categories were rated on nine elements of essentialism. These elements formed two independent dimensions, representing the degrees to which categories are understood as natural kinds and as coherent entities with inhering cores ('entitativity' or reification), respectively. Reification was negatively associated with categories' evaluative status, especially among those categories understood to be natural kinds. Essentialism is not a unitary syndrome of social beliefs, and is not monolithically associated with devaluation and prejudice, but it illuminates several aspects of social categorization.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Nick Haslam
The University of Melbourne
Louis Rothschild
University of Phoenix
Donald Ernst
Hillsdale College
British Journal of Social Psychology
New School
Hillsdale College
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Haslam et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69dbde71f7e0c66ced836a44 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164363
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: