General Article

PSYCHOLOGY, IDEATECHNOLOGY,AND IDEOLOGY

By Barry SchwartzSwarthmore College

Scienafic development leads to a technology of ideas—uka technol-ogy—no less than it leads to a technology t^ (Ejects But idea tech-nology can have mstdtous effects that the technology of objects doesnot First, ideas can si^fuse through a culture before people noticethey are there And second, ideas can have prcfound effects even whenthey are false—when they aure nothing more than ideology Theseeffects can arise because sometimes when people act on the basis ofideology, they inadvertently arrange the very conditions that bringreality into correspondence with the ideology This potential effect ofideology IS discussed m connection with the behavioral psychology ofSkinner and the clam by Hermstein and Murray that intelligence is,for all practical purposes, unmodifiable I suggest that, in general,psychologists must be on the lookout for positive feedback loops be-tween theory and practice that contribute to theory confirmaoon andthus midead psychologists into interpreting historically and culturallycontingent truths as universal ones

We live m a culture and an age m which the influence ofscientific technology is obvious and overwhelming As I wwdprocess this document, later to send it via modem to get hardcopy from die laser prmter m my office, my microwave ovenIS ^frostmg tonight's dinner, my video cassette recorder(VCR) IS taping a movie on cabte television for tune-shiftedviewing, and my digital ccanpsKt disc player is deUvenng back-grouiMl music of extraordinary quality All around mt, peopleaie having hi^-tech medical scans, fetuses are being mom-tored, gBoes are bemg spliced, organs are beii^ ttansplanted,atoms aie bemg smasted to provide power, aiKi ctrnifHUers are"sQiaitening up" pec^le's lives. N<me of tins is news. Adjust-ing to ever-»lvancmg t«:hnology is a bnde fact of contenqx)-raiy life. Same of us do it grw^mgly, ami scHne of us do itemfausiastKally, but evoyooe does lL

Tte technology of VCRs, nuclear power, and micro-waves—^what m i ^ be calted thing tedaralt^y—is what mostof us dun^ of wbHi we tiiink abfHit tfie taoc^n mpact ofscmsoe. But scieace {Hodwxs sK^ira- kmd d tedaaology thati m jist ^ big an lB^cA (m us % ftii% teda^^ bat 1$ haidHto mmx. We m^ taaik idea techneiogy In addmoa to

iK^ creates coasxp^, ways of asdasimi-mg the wcH-ld and our pl«» m it, dutt have an OKMUKHIS effecton how we think and act If we muterstaiKl birdi fects as actsof God, we pray If we understand them as acts of choice, wegnt our teedi and loU die (bee If «« undrastend dwm as tbeproduct of prenatal abuse and i»glect, we take better care ofpregnant wonwn.

It hanily needs to be said diat p e q ^ are i»ictfoundly af-fected by die matenal conditions of dwtr livefr—^ die hvn^standards of du societies dwy udiabit Tte availidjility (rf ne-cessities like food and shelter and die mrans by whidi imli-viduals may obtam them make all a&xet mfli^oces on tife seemmsignificanL People widiout food will starve whedi^ IheyacceiA dKir ctrnditions beatifically as God's will, accqpt thenwidi depressed resign^cm as lndicatuHis of dieir own inad-equacy, or respomi to dwm m an^r as socud mjustkx Nomatter what ideas pet^ic q^esd to m o n ^ to explain dieir laskof food, their bellies remam empty

Aad yet u is clear diat ideas dso matter, and diey matt«' ftgreat deal, evrai m the case of an obvuMis mateml cwMliAonhke die availabihty of food. What a squirrel fmagu^ fa- foodm the paik does in toBes of scarcity has m^ui^ to <fa> w ^ iiowthe squtrtel uncterstands dus scarcity. TbB squinel ts tM aixxdto pray fa food, cultivate ttees, m (M'gamze otba sc^irdb tonse up in protest gainst peopte who bave p^trted tbe ean-

and dinunidied the squrrel's food s<Mrces. B ^ whittp ^ <k} xwt dirar lade of food d^nids a i»t deal OR howdiey iHKterstmMl it. Beatific aaxptasee, d^nnaed pu»inty,and angiy apnsing m aU possibte humaa Rsixxises. as are o wm^hods of tximatxm. Ideas have amdb to do wi«b vMim

s s i ^ food shom^es yteU ie^aatKm or wveke^sm.If «« rader^aad the CQDO^ t e < ^ d k ^ bro*fiy, as te

d u ^ e die «Miditioas ^ <teily life, dmi «^ imxfacts (rf tecteokgy tt

w two ^ ^ yAM. Mkm we aot

cm pec^le evea if ii» yieaa are Mse Com-puters, microwaves, anctear powo* {dmtts, :md the Bfce ^mr-ally (k) not affect peqpte's iiv» unless iKy wcHk. CcmvpamescaniKM sell tecfaiKjic^K^ dijects thitt do mM do die job Tedh-irological objects nay do bad dimgs dua people do not wmitdmn to do, bat at least diere is htde leseaa to wtviy aboutdietn unless diey can also do d» things they wore designed todo ut tlw first fhtx In ccmtrast, untrue ideas can affect howpec^le act as tong as people believe them Let us cMl ideateclmok^ that IS based cm untrue ideas ufeo/og}r Because ideatecfanok^, often goes unnc^ced and b«:ause it can have JKO-found effecte eveo when it is «leology, it is m some respectsmwe in need of vigilanl nic»Bt(Hing than is die dung technol-ogy whose dan^rs pec^le are so accustooKd to worrying

SiONNERIAN PSYCHOLOGY

I can lUuslrate dw potentially powerful role of ideology widiffii example, a cntical mterfsetation of the woik of B.F Skuuierdiat I developed with two colleagues several years ago(Schwmz, Schul&snfrei, & Lacey. 1978, see also Schwartz,1986, 19S8, 1990) Skumca-'s central claim was diat virtuallyaD bdiavu»' is co^roQed by its reinforcing ccm^uences Mosterf Skmmr's cntics over die years chrfknged him fra denymgthe aapoxtaace, ct even d» existence, of such dungs as nimd,fineedcHn, and aittUMMny The i»ture of diese cnucisms wasthat, m erne way or airadia-. Skinner's account was lmulequate,if raw Iodc»! wiA any <me ai. human behavior, me would findnum«t)us pbemnnena dutt dd not fit d» Skumenan world-view. Sknmer md his followers would usually respraid to suchcnticisms t^ offmng Skinnenan inter{Hietati<His of these puta-tively (b^^ifirmmg i^unomena.

Chir own af^noach was different We suggested diat just acasual gjffiice at die naoire (tf life m oKxtem uMbistnal soaetyw«Mdd {HYivide anapfc justifioitKm fc«r die Skinnenan world-v»w; dutf is, we agreed widi sadnner tet virturily z3l behaviorwas controlled l^ ccmtingencies of remf(»cement If OIKIcxdced al dK bdiavitH' of inAt^nal wmk^s ai a modem wcnk-lA&x, It would be diffk;^ to dray dua ra& pressii^ levras fOTfood had a greitt deal m cmuncm wtdi, fc» exm^le, huoHmbefa^ pKsmig ^ei^ m a cMmig (m^cay We dum asked«*y das m^ be so. A»i owr aiswer, wiMoe I diHiar's, WSBtba. Ois sino^aity w ^ mM a reflection d \m«:, u m v a ^ factelAoM ha»w »Etf«Be, but Tsdiar a refiectMJB <tf die c«x«iitKHis of}mmm Uixs u^eied m by miaskaH ca^ui^B. We argiMdOM die <H:i ^»akm (rf wcik v»e re^wAued QWH Oe GCMB-ne&m «Aw(di n^MuAo^iffisntdevi^JIiedsoihtt wmkt^aeto iook jmt mst im' tevts pa^^ "Oe hm isa^ffsi Gt Ms

by Ike si^M^ mm^tmtM BWWB-tt irf 7^^^ a911/1967). wen: 4ptiB d t ^

te d) k ^ t ^

rates and sdiedu^ The wca id in whichdeveltqied his own di^wy was one m wluch all arouid

hun, p e c ^ ^>eot much of dieir time behaving just as he saiddwy would

What fcdlowed fnnn our argument was diat human behaviorccwld look more or tess like d» behavKH- of rats ^essu^ leversdepeiKbng <m bow dw hummi wt^i^iacx, and other soaal ln-stituUcHis like schocds, msntal hospitals, aiKl pnsons, werestructured. AM d» mcaB diat these lnsututions were structuredm keeping with Skiniwr's d»ory, die more true diat dieorywould k>ok—no, the more true that dKcwy would be In suppcntof our historical-plausibility argument, we cited laboratory re-search cm d» overjusttfkation effect to slww 1K)W tte mtro-ducticm of ccHttmgencies of reinforcement to tasks diat aremnmally undert^en without them can change bodi pecqde'smotives to engage m die tasks and tl» maniKr m which dietasks are praformed (see Lepper & Gtwne, 1978, heppet,Greene, & Nisbett, 1973, Schwartz, 1982, 1988, 1990)

To summarize, die general structure of our argument aboutSkinner's view of human behavior was diat Skinner's dieoryhad substanual plausibility m the social and eccmcmuc contextm which It arose, though it would not have been plausible mother contexts. Moreover, and more important, as the d^orywas embraced and applied, by mtroducmg behaviond »igi-iKenng teclmiques broadly dirmighout society, it would cometo lcxA mart and TOOK plausible Thus, sonKcme growmg up ma post-Skinnenan world m which ccmtm^iKies of remfrax*-ment were routinely manqwlated by parents, teachers, clergy,{^ysicians, and police would surely come to the view that theamtml of human behavior by external contmgencies of rem-fncement was umvei^ and mevitable Such a person wouldbe ngbt about the umversality, but not about the inevitability

It IS lmpcfftant to understand diat we were not arguing thatSkinner's view of die world was an mvendon It captured asignificant social ptemm^ncMi diat i» saw idl £mmd him Ouraii:unient was diat diat very social ^mmema was itself anmvenbon, atul diat cmce it was m pbux, it miuie Skinner's viewof d» WCHM seem {dausibie Furtib , we wa% IKM argumg thatsimply believmg Skinner's view of die wtnld was suffici«it tomate It true. Radier, our logument was that believii^ Skuii»r'sview of the w(»}d wmild I^d to js^^tices di^ sh^wd social

m a way dutf made it tn»

TWS. B iaX CURVE

die years since am tttgumi»tt first af ieared, psycholo-

poi»Memfiueaceie9iit^vigllaBce My concern w ^ the in-skttms e^cte of M(»fc^ was moused by ^ p ^ ( ^ k m dtHotn^dB 1 ^ Ii9tan^'s The Bell Cmve 0994). Tte book has

B«iy Sk^wactz

K of tiic^ who bcMigJtt it have {mA»Uy R»dIt Any tamy pecf^, I su^ec^ wiM her diey have read thebo<A <x mly read aboat it, »xept its mam ccmcliuion thatmtelhgemx (includsig Afferences b^ween racial wd dhmcgroups) IS for all ^actxal puipcMes uiunodifudjle

Peq)le cnbcize The Bell Curve for lc^cd UKxmsisteiKy, fw

cnticize It for reifyu^ test SCOKS into "utfelligeiKe," itself aIxoblemiAc cwKept They mticize it fw its pohcy recommen-dations, suggestmg tlua it is really otdy racist (or elitist, oreugraucist) pohtics disguised as scieiu^ Skmie of ttese cnti-cisms are hysterical, and some dioughtful (e.g.. Hunt, 1995,Nisbett, 1995, espea^y his focus m flie evidence thitf IQ canbe modified, Stembeig, 1995, mi see Neisser et al, 1996, fora rK«nt Ammaoi Psyclrologicai Associatitm task frace reporton the nature of mtelhgeoce that was inspired by tfie craitro-versy sunoimdn^ ttie book) Many of ttese cnticisms may betrue mi important Yet one wmiid expect that if The BellCurve were just unacceptable pohtics disguised as science—and bid science at that—m dK fullness of tune its lnadequac^sas science would be revealed, and its effects on pohttcal atti-tudes and social policies would subside TTus is not to tmder-estunate how devastatu^ its effects couM be m the sh<Mt nm,but It IS to say that, ultimately, science conects its mistakes

To me the most nous danger posed by the bo<* IS not A MIt IS false, but that, as uteology, it can have effects on tlttculture's self-understaiKhng diat taake it trw I ^nve duscoiKem fiom ideas develcqjed semi stiuiied by I>weck. Dweckand her associates (e.g, Diener & Dweck, 1980, Dweck, 1975,Dweck & Bempechat, 1983, Dweck & Leg^«, 1988, Elhot &Dweck, 1988, Leggett, 1985) have spcait many years sttidymgthe different kmds of goals that govern chJdren's Iemiingthroughout the educatumal iwocess Ttey have uncovered twoAiiuianKntally differrait ^qm>aclKS to teanung that can ofiKailead to {vofouiKl differences m how weU children learn Smtechtl<fa«n have wh^ Dweck calls performmce goals, the «hershave «iiat she calls mastery goals Ooldrai wiA prafwmancegoals are mterested jmmanly m gaming favorable judgnwittsof dKarcc«ip^sice.'niey want to do weU on tests. They wantsooM ^iHOval. Oiibfaen wflh m^i^y goals wx uAaestedIHimanly m moeasing thrar am^^ence lOiiei *ffli demm-siatmg it liiey want to emxmm: Hm^ thitt th^ cannot doand «) tefflB fiom Aeff £aaae& As Dwed: Im {tt tt, pofixmaice-OTirated duldrai want to pove tter rfHlity, whereas ma^«3y-(x^tad cMiasi watt to imfsove ibm nUkty

CJukfaea w ^ v^frnmmac goals a v ^ chdka^ss. TheyI»efo ti^ O^ u s «%a wd^m tte raq^ <rf Aor dsOflies.Ouhfaea wtti Biasttay foids iieek<«iaei%i». liiey prefo tas^

goals uia fuline as a sign that tt»r efiforte, mad not tt<^, u elnadequitte, md often come to vww Mwidi d» kuui of leli^ dutt amies v^am onewwdiy dudlen^. Dwedi mtd her associates tew ^owa tetwhen clas»oom tasks becfKne moden^y d]l&»b,(SHaited dukbea pefmi stdtdaattoriented children {e.g.. Dwaier & Dwedt, 1978, l<»0).

Wm IS It ^ illlife with a pedoaasBCc a a yanswer to this crucial quesbm is not j ^ itt hand, but Dwedkhas shown dwt b«i»di diese two cnK»ttat«He 1» two qudedifferent ctmcepbons of dw nature of mteU^mce. S c ^ dul-dren have eimty Haoms of intelhgNice. limy bdxsvt, fflceHermstem uid Murray, dutt lnteUigrace is esRamaSy vmm-table TiKse are tte childna who toKi to be peiformaiice ori-ented. Wh^ IS d» pomt of sedong challmi^ mi tuS^faAax if one cannot g^ any smarter Mudli more s o m l ^ is toseek aiqnoval and avoid any d u ^ x of faihire In cosatst todiese entity dwcmste, odttr duldcm have mcrmuttud ttoonnsof utfelli^nce They beUeve duA lnteihgrace is mrt a fixedquantity—diat people can get smarter These duhboi ^ id tobe mastery on^Uied, seeku^ m dieir scho^wrak to 6o wtettttey beheve is possible fw evwycme.

It IS not yet known what facttMs detomme which kmd (rfaamcy of mteUi^ice a child will have, tbragb D««ck's le-seiodi sugge^ diat these diffennices ffi tlKor^ of Hitell^moecan a{q>ear early mdiiUhood But it is crartaudy easy to na i^me diiu if d» eMre culture accqAs die ccHKhtaons (rf Henn-stem aiMl Murray and subscribes to m &Aa^ tBiaxy (rf i itt^-geiK», dte cultitfe's chikten wdl also Iwve such a dieofy. Aadif diey do, diey will seek afptjval, avoid c h a t o i ^ ^ve i > mdie htx of failure, and ieam less m sdwol.

Dweck's resc^ttch is craKxmed wuh die mastoy <rf ddlls,mtt with dK owdi of utteUigmce. But stq Kxse, coiKm Ham-stem iHKi Misray, diat latelhgmce COBU be mrae^ed toA ^aata mas^y (Hieittaticn m iteuiut^ wiXimaim was csnaiaSi to tts

ase. If dus were trae, but cbUnm ({MOtly as a teralt (rf dieeffect erf dw Hramstem-Munay diests)dMxmes (rf mtell^mce, di«ithttiniiffitaywieitted As a^ow, ami diey woibl ccmfimi ^ Hmmteln-Maii^^ ^eUigoKe IS fixed, w ^ m ^ of as oaawffiB of thelote dutt Aitt v«y Anas kad ^ ^ m tts own

meat.md^ulemmm^mes,^ijmmceigtm,}mgawAi«e.7be

Psychology and Ideology

m m^bgaac, and latntmtaig pafommux toeSm 18 mM the smne as betevB^ diat mteO^mx can belaraeased, Aese d^a at least sugg^t that m cultnres Oat place

n n ^ ^nhty thai U & oilbse, dK Intern ofmeat <rt»(^ed will be mccmsistent with what

tfae Hanmem-Mmsy diesis inqri^s.My ^gument tixm The Bell Curve and the unmutabdtty of

Kj 18 uttoKied as tn ex»:t paraltel to die a^ument ^XHit Skui-tm. I ma mM suggestu^ duu The Bell Curve is creating a tnidiCMit of ntMhing As with Skiiu^, The Bell Curve macte a casefof a {mqwsitKm diat many pecqile already belwved, aiMl forwtwh ihen was some evid^Ke Hut is, dK argammts in TheBell Curve arose m a ocmtext m which scnne (periuq» social)fact(»shadaii«adya»dediaii|dattsible What I am si^gestuigIS that these sgianents cim now influence the structure andfsac^ce in relevaitt social institutions (e g , by mdiKing policy-taskats to cut siq^xnt fat vanous ennchmait pn^rams tar-^ted at students who aie at ns^ fw pocn* school p^omance)so DM. over mt ttese u^imwtUs bec(Mne IKM n^rely fdausible,iMrt lnesisttbk

OTHER POSSIBLE EXAMPLES

Having been i^ ted to die pc^ittial role diat uteology m i ^{di^ in psychology's ultimate assessmoit of the argmnentsmacte in The Bell Curve, aae can find similar potential in od»erstt»bes of mteltecnial functuming O M possible area axKemschains m utteltecmsd functicHung diat aocampsny aging. It isttB accepted wisdom in our cutane, Iwltiessed by psychok^-cal research, that tA teast scmie types of memory det^imatewith age (eg.. Badcteley, 1986, Ligitt & Burfce, 1988, Ryan,1^2; Schacter, Kaszuuak, & Kihlstrom, 1991) What is lessclear is why dus decline occm& S<HIM pet^e view' it as the

But criers view it as

p gdf(»t to assess d » souice erf menKsy (^lme. Levy mMi Lai^ar(1994) adiiuiB^»«d a t^lety of mmKffy ^its to ok! members(rf dwee (kffinnat gvm^. A I I I » K » I hemu^, Americim deaf,tnd i^mese hessa^. In aikbtKm, Levy mod La^er ai^essedatttt^es toward 1^0% in dK&iee^wiK Hie ratt<Mi^ fw thesetec itffi (tf grou^ was Aat m Amrakan deaf m& Oanese

ate teld m hig^ t^ueem mi n ^ R b d as anot a Iwrden. Levy ^ Li^ra-foiH^ ^rt i iQrK:an

dc»f mid Chmese pamc^Muas had nmew«d agmg Aan (iU

txaos between culture and a poative view of agmga pc»itive view of aging m& good maiK»y poformance

AiK^^- ckHnam m which ideology may play a rok concernsclaims ibwA gender differeiK:es m mathem^cal abihty Thereceived view fot quite stmvt tune has been diat mates arebetter al nurth dian females, and diat dK difference gete largerwtdi age and with UKreasmg selectivity of samples (Benbow &Stanley, \9m; Hdpem, 1986) Recrait data suggest diat al-thou^ males do outperfcMm fonales on some types of nudi-ematical ta^cs, and diat the male-female difference does getlar^r with age aiKl wtdi extremely select samptes, gender dif-ferences are m gei»ral quite small and, over the years, havebeen getbng smaller (Hyde, Fennema, & Lamon, 1990) Husfinding of small (and decreasing) effects is also true of altttudestoward the study of math mid of affect (so-called madi anxiety)triggered by it (Hyde, Feni^ma, Ryan, Frost, & H^^, 19%)Hie (MK substantial gend^ difference m attitudes toward mathIS that males are much mcHe likely dian females to regard madias a male domain This finding may combine with die persis-tent cultural stereoQ^ about madiranatical idnhty and gen(terto mduce male teachers to discourage females from pursumgtrauui^ in high-level mathematics and mathematicaUy relatedcareers, and it may indirce male students to display negativeattitudes toward dieir female peers that are also discouragmgThis negativity may be quite subtle and unmtended, but as Isuggest m die iMxt sectiOT, ideology does not require obviousand drunatic routes to have effects If, as a result of dus genderstereotypmg, OIK generation of females is m fact discouragedfrom pursumg maltematics, the implied lesson will not be loston the iKxt generation

A final example of die possible effects of ideology conc^nsclaims about racial differences m intell^tual p^ormaiK:eSteele and Armson (1995, see also Steeie, 1992) i^cendy ex-plored scwne of the factors diat m&as^ce dK perffflmance ofAfrican Americans (Ml standaidi^d tests of u^eSectual abditySteele aul Aronsmi aigued diat when A f o c » Aimncmis ccm-front a test of mteUa;tual alnlity, dKy are simultaneously fac-mg sa assessmrat of dieir own idiihty as individuals and anassesanent of die cultural sterecMype of black Intellectual m-fenonty. H B S aiUiticnal bm<k»—Ae ttaeat of coaflrmmg am^attw ^ere(«ype—ixits tddeA jHessure <m Mack test \3kst%duft can iitterfcae wiAi ^ » r paff»niance m a v»tety of waysbi mf^on of dus aigume^ Sleete ami Armson stowed diatwhcm Made ^KI white paticipmits took a te^ omsisting ofdifikuk Items frc^ a Gsa&ea^ Sscord £xaminati<m ^luly

test

^ (tf a sbidy (rf "ad fxmxi wrotved m mAvm% w i ) ^ | ^ & » B $ , " Ae raoal

VQl. 8. VO. I. HAIRM&Y

mogr^^uc infOTmatum ttey s i ^ i e d at dw tc^ of d» exami-natum Itius, just makmg race salient had a deletenous effectcm the pafcffmance of \Aack particqKBits. Given dus fimlu^, itIS ttfA b2sd to imagine how, m a culture in which clauns atwutracial differences m utteUectual perf<mnance are pervasive mdsalient, blacks will carry dus bunten mto every ejuunmatumthey take. And the consequence of the extra burden—dunuushed perfcMtnance—^will cmly go to strengdnn claimsabout racial differences m lnteltectual performance. Note thatthe argument here is not diat black test takers will go mto anexam expecUng to do i»dly and dius will do so, thereby (xm-foming dieir expa^taaoas. Ra3i»t, the »gument is diat theywill go mto die exam widi an extra, culturally imposed burdendiat diey must do well, which will have die unfcntuirate effectof confirmmg tte culune's negauve expwaaUons

POSSIBLE MECHANISMS

TTiere are jnobaUy many different mechanisms duou^which false ca: only partly true psychological theimes cmi be-cotm self-fuUiUmg by mfluencmg social msutuuons m a waydiat subsequenfly mfli^ices uKhviduals. Some of dwse mecha-msms may be qmte obvious For example, if certam careerimdis requinng traimng m miUheiOatics were formally aiMl ex-phatly closed to wc»iien because of dwir alleged lnfenonty mmathemaucs, die self-fulffllmg, posiUve feedback loop be-tween dieory and om^imaam would be clear That this wouldconsutute an example of i<teok>gy is of couree less clear HiatIS, It could sunply be uw diat women are less gifted dian menm madKmaUcs DetMmmmg whedier a psycholc^ical claim isldeoli^ OT not often takes real effwt, even if die route bywhich die claun has significant social influence is apparent

But someumes dw mechamsms diat consUUite die positivefeedbmik loop may be extremely subde And when diey are,even bemg attuned to die possitahty diat ideology may beqjeratmg so dm it can be investigated will be i»roblem8rtic Anexample of a suMe nMschanism by which ideology ccnild haveeffects cOT»s fiom dK hterature cm whrt is caJted unphcttleanung, die uMlucUcm of rules or detecuon of reguianties diatoccurs widKHit people trymg to discover dwse regulmUes, orsoDMstintts even reiOtzmg day are {nesent (see Rd>er, 1993, ftwa review) A paiticulariy stnlong jfcanonstraHon <rf lmfrficitleammg was r q x ^ by Lewicki. HiU, mid Sasaki (1989, seUalso Lewida, 1^6; Lewicki, Hill, & Czyzewdca, 1992). Inseveral expetimeatts, eadi mvi^uig diSeteat ^imuhis malen-als, Lewrcki et al expo^dpattcipiMs to o » ^ x stimuli diat

OTje extremdy sibtle ftdiion. Dton« die tramfa^k d i^I^a j q p ^ p q {

^xwt 40 e x e m ^ md t s ^ iMo «taA of two dmm eachexon^ar bekated. They were ^bm ^m m trat trials inwtadi diey saw an exei^ff a d had to damfy tf. I3armgft^ lesttnids, ao feedback m e peovded. Hw key fiato« mthese ^Vemaeitis was liiat ov«r the fii^ 40 test trteis, dasst-

tt diaace. to ^

401UTuprovcnficQt or **l6&rnu^ o c c u r r ^ dcs|iite wsi idd uUKt p ^ *

Uctpms were given no feedback vAatsoevex aixxit A ^ fet-fc»Tn»Ke over die course (rf die t ^ t m l s I^otto", Invmg OeclassdicatfHy categcHi^ was cnlH»l. O&et |MBtidpai^ ^vmdw same stimulus matraials as a percqMual (hactuwiuiticm Wd^widuwt labeled citfe^mes, showed ao evtdoKe <rf le«iM^ diedtscnmmatum s u ^ y oa die bms of d» visual propmi^ (tfdie (hsplays (see RumeUuut & ^ s e r , 1985, to a comiectoiMmodel drnt qierates m ju^ dus fa bKm). Lewtcki a aL ugaeddiat havmg categcn^s infliwnces d» oioodiiig ^ new mfor-maU(Mi m a way dutt is self-papetaiaUog. even wh«a pecq^have absolutely m> awareness of die basis cm wiudi ttdr m-codmg decisions are bemg nHuk These eiKxxluig bias^ Iwve

ff m dw (Kganizatim of utfomHAai. Aad nc«e,to classify m acccnd with previously gt^tn

categc^ies become stroog^ wwi exp^i^^ice c^^i ui tbc mhsence of any feedl»K:k that would eiK;owagt tiwm.

It IS iK>t haid to see tow, if die«; {aocesses qimte in diesocial d(Hnam, dieir effects can be insuUtms. Eac^xUi hu»nabmit gender and madi, age and mem(»y, raw uid uiteltoct, dwlumts of what OIK can ach»ve dirou^ intdtectnal effwt, f*how much of human bduvicv is rewnd <biv«i, can lAect howpeopie mteri»iet new data widwut petite realmi^ thtf diesebiases even exist, amd m die al^eiux of ctear eoqHnad c(»-fmnatUHi. It is not baxA to uiiagu» how biases like diese coMcontnbute to an KJbdogical pcmittve feedback loc^ of dw sortthat IS the concern (^ this article

PSYCHOLOGY AND ID^)LOGY

It IS possible to view my aigument about ideoktgyexmnple of a ccmsteUadcm of ideas diat is vay HHMA mthese days Iliese ufeas, whidi emxNin^ a aUnak stsawfod die hypodKtacoKiedactive medwds of scieacc, ohphasize die role of dMswy ui selccong a ^ evenomstnKting dtta. S ( ^ ^vocMes of dm ai^»d idiat social "fa(^" m gmnal « e c(Histnicted, notand te amstrucbcHi of so-<»illed soentific facts is irt acase of a much more graend process (e.g., G«gm.199<y 1994b) Mmy rescach^ who qiead ibat time

& d Ay fg diem lack tmii i^irace tot this mbcd,stmce They regavd It as dti

, wd they ^ abwt tteir own bffi^ce is iKtesauB cf

f 9 y ^ pp not be « pait of

Wtttai psychology, one m ^ *e eipecidiy U o # todHs atttoie araoi« p^Aobi^sts wfao sbKfy "taaie"l ^ « d peocrasw (e.f., pefcqptien, ec^g^&m, tamm^ ) and « e p«bai» s t q ^ teibaM of

. 8, MQ. i,

Psychology and Ideology

«4M»e woric Oeqsply.

crkuiiie imgjbt ««U be se

m tfus aiticte bears a

diffeilieve dK9« ne q ^tt»t socud OKMrw bcMiii <x»iws lamaoy vanebes, scone ofv^asM n e nmM dwar to my argun^nte d m odiCTs). I^ist, my

BM deny U M d»re are social £u^ ditf can bee c ( ^ ^ (to mM d»iy t t o claims i^ut the

iiBportsmce of rmnftKcement, Ae ummitidnbty erf K , die ef-fects at ^tng, gmdo- mid math, OT race smd mtelfect owid betiue bde^ , cm die ccHttary, dwy a c ( ^ dK»e claims {fmpmpcms d «g«m«it, at least) mi d^n (rffer m account ofdiem dnt is qiote difGrairait fixnn acccw^ bfce SInmer's orHermsti^i and Mianty's. Specifkally, my ar^uaeats offer anahraiuttive to wlmt nugbt be calted the essraitiafasm dmt di^-acfterizes bc^ Skinner said Ifermstem ami Murray bx diesei«^)ects, my tbscussicm is no differoit ftma what occurs moni^tess scKntific disputes, vnA ccmtending i»utKS offoingdiuiKent mtctpp^aib^is of ^ i Fced-up(Hi set of f^ls Wl ttmdces my argianents unusual m ctnnpanstm witb what mightbe called iKHtnal aciaxx is die coitral cansal role played by tteSkmnw «td item^ui-Murray die»s temselves. I am saymgftat diese dieses can he&xas vanabtes diA are causaUy effi-QK UHis m their own ccwfirmation (see Gogen, 1973)

Tbt <bfierence betweoi my view and a social craistrw tuHi-lst view IS i »2<»tt in dtt fact ditt my iogiBiiaiit i^out dKItomstem-Murray thesis relies aaas^d psychological ^ n -erahzattcms {tiom EJweck) dutt a social ccmstructtomst would{ffobddy r^ard as just as preMenuttic asdiey are used to cmMxt My ssgameat is not !uii xwt social facts m gei^ral It is neiAer a metq^ysiad argu-mmt idxwt d» nataat at social reidity m«c aa qnstemologicalugumoit idMut mtM. can be known. It is a miKh tmoe nar-raiwty empncd ugument, dutt certain sooal "facts" me beu^mqHtqserly uidra^ood as reveahag miversal ami eternal dhar-acMutks of hmam mttore atlba Am histonctdly ramtingentaaes. And my ( gimraM does m^ ev&i deny dutt die particidffi'Honts^B-MiBny social fact may be trae It mi»ely sugge^

fMicHs itat mtdce dHtt fact ttue soe net neariy as m-

Hcme ^ my esuraq^ cf pcmMe ideology aie itkalisf indie srase tot I am daiara^ i t enrifly IStt to be. Ibt famai wM pkyed i^ a titecwy m 'm own

scnbed as setf-MfiUn^ {Ko^besies, «4uch have been s&idiedexirasivety m social, devekqaiKnbtl, aiKl echuattumal sitings(e.g., Jussim, 19%). Most ccHmumly, self-fulfil^ pnqri»SKSmvcdve exp«;ti^c»is aa the p ^ of scxne agent wiscMse subject ditt leiKl die agon to behave m a certam waytowiud die sid>^ct durt m twn leads dn sublet to bdiave m awsjr diat conftrms d» expectab<»s of dKs agratt. Typiadly,self-fulftlhng {ntqdiesies are stored at tbs lewl erf mdividualagraits (e g , teachexs) and mdivufaial sublets (e.g, stucteitts)Hiat self-fiiffiUmg im>i^sies operate at die tevel of individu-als majoes d»m scHnewhat easier to dii^inose dian the {mx%s%sI am discussing, because d»re will usually exist (^Kr subj«;ts,aba/at whom d» i^ent has different expectations, to {novide ac(»itrast Whrai expa;taticns, m d» form of thecHies, are heldumversally, and aiqrfied umv»sally, die conbBstmg cases van-ish. As a resuh, die self-fulfiUmg feedback loop is much hanlerto utentify. This is why ldealogy can be so msidious

Does die psychcdogical hterature contain otlwr possible ex-amines of die ideological |mx%sses I am descnbmg*' I do notknow. The ITKMB lMt)«Uy accegted and well entienched a thecnyIS, die more difficult it will be to identify a self-cmifirmmgfeedback loop if It exists Wten evahiating psycholt^ical theo-nes, we can protect ourselves from being influenced by d»sefee^bxk loops only if we are aware diat d^y might be presentIt IS cMily if we are mindful of die possiUe presetKX of tiexA-ogy—even m ccnmection with so-called basic psycholc^calintKesses—that we can root it out and jMcvent it frtmi CMI-tammatmg our seareh for die tiuth

REFERENCES.

Barry Schwwtz

Ger9»,fCJ (1994b) Toward m

Halpon. DP (1^6) Sex d^rences m cognum abdmes »flsdate. SS EcftHeiii««ein.RJ.AM«iay.C (1994) The bell curve New Yodc Free PressHunt, E (199S) The nde of a^l^eoce n aaodan socwly Amencau Scb

3S6-368H ^ I S . Fonema. E^ A Laraon. SJ (1990) Gend« dd&nnces m i

perfoimaoce A metanealysu Psycholopcal BulUtm. 107. 139-lSSHyde.JS.BeiMana.E..Ryan,M.Piost.L.A..A»w.C (1990) Gender

y g y f Q ^Jasma, h (1986) Setf-iiiUiUmg pfO|ibeaes A dwoieucal and mK^ntive y

chological Review 93 429-445L^gett. El . (1^3. Matdi) Children's emty and mcrememd theories of intelligence

itf reward H e NJ

Upper. MR.. Greene. D . A Nidiett. R.E (1973) UBdomimng diddmi's sttraisic inMi^wohexmnsKtewads AteMofthe 'ovrajustification 'hypodiesis Jowmof Personality aad Social Psychology 28 129-137

Levy. B» A L m ^ , & (1994) Agmg iiee from s^Ave stereotyiws Successfid memorm ChBM and among the Am«ican deaf Jowwl of Personabty and Social Psychology 66 989-997

Lewida, P (1*86) Sonconsaous social u^brmmon processing San Diqso AcademiPress

Lewida.P.Hm,T.AGEyzewska.M (1992) NooconscwusacqaisitionofinfonnatioD.Amerwan Psychologist 47.796-«)lk P H B T A S * L ( 1 9 8 9 ) Stf d h f *Lewicki,P.HiB,T,ASas*^L(1989) Setf-fapetn^a« deveh^wem of cBCO*ngtnases Jomnal of Expertmemal Psychology General US 323-337

Ught. L.. A Bute. O (Eds) (1988) Language memory and aging New Yoric Oxfnd

Boochard.TJ.Jr.B<.ykm.AW.Brody.N.Ceci.SJ.lDF Lo««in.JC.PerioffR..Sttn*eig.RJ AUlbB^aS(1996)-KIlowIls and anknowns Amerwan Psychologist 51 77-1

Newman. R S . A Stevenson, HW (1990) Outdrea's aduevemo ations in mathematics and icadmg Journal efE:venmental Education 58 197-212

Nisbelt. R. (1995) Race. HJ. and scuaBism. to S ftaser (Bd). r*e 6e« ciore wara ft)p36-57) New York. Basic BcAs

R(*er A (1993) Implicit learning and taat knowledge New York Oxfi»d Umvorsity

Ryan. EJB (1992) Be l i^ abou iPsychologuMl Sciences. 47,41-47

A.. AKihlilian,J (1991) Mod^ of neMOty and te wder-ity (bsodcfs In T YMwAm A R PMCIHB ©is.), Wcmry

d«>rdie» 8eseanA<M<<c&aca{pRica«(f|> 111-133) New Yoric M m d OtUter

peo|^lDdacoverides./<w»{i)r£J9M/«wM<rff>>yc<k)6«}' G««»««r /H.2J-99Schwartz.B (I9«6) Thebatdeforhummnmme Saence nmrMtytrndmodern^ Hev

Yodc WW Norton.Schwaitz.B (19gg) T1>eeitpenmentidsyniiMMstfbcfaaviarRen«iKceaMot,bebwioi4

stereolypy and protfcm »|VB«. b C H<iiidmo<mBKW(Vol 22. pp 93-138) N

Sdiwanz. B (1990) Hie creaiMn mi7-15

R. A Laeey. H (1978)6 229^254

Steele. C M. (1992. Apnl) Race and Ac schwda^ of Hade fimeaam The ^mitkMonthly. 269 «S~78

Sleele CM AArmsoa.! (1995) SteieoiypedaeatandAeal^eciaat{WfimMaceofAfiicaD Amencans Jomrud ofPersonOtty md Soa^ PtycMogy. 69.797^11

Swnbos. RJ (1995) Fior whom die beO o w e UilU A ICYMW otTkeBdl O v wPsychiOogici^ Saence. 6 257-261

a w . Oicn. C. A Lee. S Y (1993a) Madnaaticsadaevemtalof CImncIq>»eie.andABiencaicM<bai Toi yeas 1 ^ 5ciewr« 259, S3-S8

Stevenson. R W . Chen. C . A Lee, S Y (t993b) Motivatian aad ichiMminEaiitAsuandtheUna - - -16 223-250

Steveiaon, H W. Lee. S Y. A Chen. C (1994)m Maudand Cbma. Taiwan, and Japus..'104-lM)

TiQrlor. F W (1967) PrindpUs tifscuiUtfic mamigemem New Yodc ifcttOB.11)

nmm. 12/2W95)