ArticleScientific reports2024
Facial misfits accelerate stereotype-based associative learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Stereotypic beliefs dominate reversal learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Counterstereotypes challenge the deleterious effects that gender-typed beliefs exert on people's occupational aspirations and lifestyle choices. Surprisingly, however, the critical issue of how readily unexpected person-related knowledge can be acquired remains poorly understood. Accordingly, in two experiments in which the facial appearance of targets was varied to manipulate goodness-of-stereotype-fit (i.e., high vs. low femininity/masculinity), here we used a probabilistic selection task to probe the rate at which counter-stereotypic and stereotypic individuals can be learned. Whether occupational (Expt. 1) or trait-related (Expt. 2) gender stereotypes were explored, a computational analysis yielded consistent results. Underscoring the potency of surprising information (i.e., facial misfits), knowledge acquisition was accelerated for unexpected compared to expected persons, both in counter-stereotypic and stereotypic learning contexts. These findings affirm predictive accounts of social perception and speak to the optimal characteristics of interventions designed to reduce stereotyping outside the laboratory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.