+Author Affiliations
- 1Tilburg Institute for Behavioral Economics Research, Tilburg University, Post Office Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands.
- 2Interuniversity Center for Social Science Theory and Methodology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Grote Rozenstraat 31, NL-9712 TG Groningen.
- *↵To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: d.a.stapel@uvt.nl (D.A.S.); s.m.lindenberg@rug.nl (S.L.)
Being the victim of discrimination can have serious negative health- and quality-of-life–related consequences. Yet, could being discriminated against depend on such seemingly trivial matters as garbage on the streets? In this study, we show, in two field experiments, that disordered contexts (such as litter or a broken-up sidewalk and an abandoned bicycle) indeed promote stereotyping and discrimination in real-world situations and, in three lab experiments, that it is a heightened need for structure that mediates these effects (number of subjects: between 40 and 70 per experiment). These findings considerably advance our knowledge of the impact of the physical environment on stereotyping and discrimination and have clear policy implications: Diagnose environmental disorder early and intervene immediately.
- Received for publication 30 November 2010.
- Accepted for publication 2 March 2011.
- LETTERS
In their analysis of disorder and discrimination (“Coping with chaos: How disordered contexts promote stereotyping and discrimination,” Reports, 8 April, p. 251), D. A. Stapel and S. Lindenberg find that a disordered environment promotes more discrimination than one that is clean and ordered.
Unfortunately, their design precludes this conclusion. Part of the study involved subjects (all Caucasian) choosing one seat among six, with the first seat occupied by a confederate (either a white person or a black person). In the ordered condition, the distance between the seat chosen and the confederate was unaffected by the race of the confederate, whereas in the disordered condition, the distance was greater if the confederate was black than if he was white.
Although the authors were careful to balance the sexes of the subjects (half female, half male), they did not balance the races of the subjects (all Caucasian). Their conclusion, that disorder affects stereotyping, only holds if results from the neglected populations (e.g., blacks) are irrelevant.
The unexamined conditions are not irrelevant. Suppose blacks sat farther from blacks than whites under the disordered condition (just as the whites did). This would bring the entire conclusion into question. Suppose they sat farther from whites than blacks in the disordered condition. This would support the conclusion, but show that stereotyping is not a white-only phenomenon. Suppose they sat farther from whites in the ordered condition than in the disordered condition. This would suggest disorder increases stereotyping by whites that and that order increases stereotyping by blacks, and therefore vitiate their policy recommendations: “One way to fight unwanted stereotyping and discrimination is to diagnose environmental disorder early and to intervene immediately by cleaning up and creating physical order” (p. 253).
- NEWS & ANALYSIS
A Dutch committee has concluded in a report this week that one of the Netherlands' leading social psychologists made up or manipulated data in dozens of papers over nearly a decade. Diederik Stapel of Tilburg University in the Netherlands was suspended in September after three junior researchers reported that they suspected scientific misconduct in his works. Stapel then reportedly told university officials that some of his papers contained falsified data. The university launched an investigation, as did the University of Groningen and the University of Amsterdam, where Stapel had worked previously. The Tilburg commission released an interim report on 31 October, which includes preliminary results from all three investigations. The investigators found evidence of misconduct on an "astonishing scale," the report says.
博主将对此持续关注，将跟踪后续报导。估计这次要么作者被迫撤回这篇论文，要么<Science>依据荷兰这个委员会调查的结果把论文撤回。
另请关注，不久前注意到<Science>上一篇论文的撤回，其中有华人/中国人被涉及，相信这也是一起确凿的造假事件。
http://bbs.sciencenet.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=525331
