Chapter 6.<\/p>\n
The Less Than Extraordinary Power of Self-Fulfilling Prophecies:
\nConsiderations Based on Common Sense, Daily Life, and
\na Critical Evaluation of the Early Classic Experiments<\/p>\n
Abstract<\/p>\n
This chapter is the first of four that critically evaluates the conclusion that the biases and self-fulfilling prophecies created by interpersonal expectations constitute major ways in which people create and construct social reality. \u00a0This chapter specifically argues that there is abundant evidence from the real world that strongly suggests such effects, though real, and occasionally powerful, are, in fact, most of the time weak, fragile, and fleeting.\u00a0 Furthermore, it shows that even the early and classic work demonstrating self-fulfilling prophecies<\/em><\/strong> provided no evidence that such effects were either powerful or pervasive.<\/p>\n EXCERPT: Table 6.1<\/p>\n WHERE’S THE BEEF?<\/p>\n AVERAGE EXPECTANCY EFFECT SIZES TYPICALLY RANGE FROM SMALL TO MODERATE<\/p>\n Meta-Analysis<\/td>\n <\/p>\n Topic\/Research Question<\/td>\n Number<\/p>\n of Studies<\/td>\n Expectancy<\/p>\n Effect<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n Rosenthal & Rubin (1978)<\/p>\n Raudenbush (1984)<\/p>\n McNatt (2000)<\/p>\n McNatt (2000)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <>BIAS IN JUDGMENT, MEMORY AND PERCEPTION:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n Swim, et al. (1989)<\/p>\n Stangor & McMillan (1992)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Mazella & Feingold (1994)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Kunda & Thagard (1996)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Kunda & Thagard (1996)<\/td>\n Do interpersonal expectations create self-fulfilling prophecies?<\/p>\n Do teacher expectations have self-fulfilling effects on student IQ?<\/p>\n Do manager’s expectations have self-fulfilling effects on employees’ performance?<\/p>\n Do military officers’ expectations have self-fulfilling effects on trainees?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Do sex stereotypes bias evaluations of men’s and women’s work?<\/p>\n Do expectations bias memory?<\/p>\n Does defendant social category affect mock juror’s verdicts?<\/p>\n Defendants’:<\/u><\/p>\n Attractiveness\u00a0\u00a0 Race (African-American or White)<\/p>\n Social class<\/p>\n Sex<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Do stereotypes bias judgments of targets in the absence of any<\/u> individuating information?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Do stereotypes bias judgments of targets in the presence of individuating information?<\/td>\n 330<\/p>\n 18<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 6<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n 11<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 119<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 65<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n 25<\/p>\n 29<\/p>\n 4<\/p>\n 21<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 7<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n 40<\/td>\n .29<\/p>\n <\/p>\n .06<\/p>\n <\/p>\n .23<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n .52<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n -.04<\/p>\n .03<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n .10<\/p>\n .01<\/p>\n .08<\/p>\n .04<\/p>\n <\/p>\n .25<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n .19<\/p>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\n<\/i><\/b>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/i>The next four chapters constitute a sort of intellectual forced march through several aspects of interpersonal expectancy research, all of which points to the same conclusion: The early emphasis on the power of interpersonal expectancies was unjustified.\u00a0 It was not justified by the classic early studies that remain highly cited today; it was not justified by other, less well-known research on expectancy effects; and it was not justified by the subsequent research on the same topics<\/i><\/p>\n\n\n
\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Average<\/p>\n \n SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n