College sophomores in the laboratory redux

Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice

Pj Henry

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Twenty years have passed since Sears (1986) alerted social psychologists to the many possible dangers faced by relying on a database composed mostly of students, especially with respect to the generalizability of the theoretical conclusions we come to. With a focus this time on the prejudice literature, this article examines how much has changed in our approach to whom we study. Content analyses show that prejudice researchers who publish in social psychology's major journals continue to rely heavily on student samples. Next, data are presented showing that important differences may exist between student and nonstudent participants in terms of how prejudice-related variables are expressed and used. The article concludes by raising metatheoretical concerns about the continued use of student samples both in the conclusions we arrive at as a science and in the very topics we study in the prejudice literature, with various recommendations suggested for decreasing this trend in relying on such a narrow database.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)49-71
    Number of pages23
    JournalPsychological Inquiry
    Volume19
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Apr 1 2008

    Fingerprint

    Dexfenfluramine
    Social Psychology
    Databases
    Students
    Research Personnel
    Psychology

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Psychology(all)

    Cite this

    College sophomores in the laboratory redux : Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice. / Henry, Pj.

    In: Psychological Inquiry, Vol. 19, No. 2, 01.04.2008, p. 49-71.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{d1192a1ef2cf45e29e45652250f36e58,
    title = "College sophomores in the laboratory redux: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice",
    abstract = "Twenty years have passed since Sears (1986) alerted social psychologists to the many possible dangers faced by relying on a database composed mostly of students, especially with respect to the generalizability of the theoretical conclusions we come to. With a focus this time on the prejudice literature, this article examines how much has changed in our approach to whom we study. Content analyses show that prejudice researchers who publish in social psychology's major journals continue to rely heavily on student samples. Next, data are presented showing that important differences may exist between student and nonstudent participants in terms of how prejudice-related variables are expressed and used. The article concludes by raising metatheoretical concerns about the continued use of student samples both in the conclusions we arrive at as a science and in the very topics we study in the prejudice literature, with various recommendations suggested for decreasing this trend in relying on such a narrow database.",
    author = "Pj Henry",
    year = "2008",
    month = "4",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1080/10478400802049936",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "19",
    pages = "49--71",
    journal = "Psychological Inquiry",
    issn = "1047-840X",
    publisher = "Routledge",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - College sophomores in the laboratory redux

    T2 - Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice

    AU - Henry, Pj

    PY - 2008/4/1

    Y1 - 2008/4/1

    N2 - Twenty years have passed since Sears (1986) alerted social psychologists to the many possible dangers faced by relying on a database composed mostly of students, especially with respect to the generalizability of the theoretical conclusions we come to. With a focus this time on the prejudice literature, this article examines how much has changed in our approach to whom we study. Content analyses show that prejudice researchers who publish in social psychology's major journals continue to rely heavily on student samples. Next, data are presented showing that important differences may exist between student and nonstudent participants in terms of how prejudice-related variables are expressed and used. The article concludes by raising metatheoretical concerns about the continued use of student samples both in the conclusions we arrive at as a science and in the very topics we study in the prejudice literature, with various recommendations suggested for decreasing this trend in relying on such a narrow database.

    AB - Twenty years have passed since Sears (1986) alerted social psychologists to the many possible dangers faced by relying on a database composed mostly of students, especially with respect to the generalizability of the theoretical conclusions we come to. With a focus this time on the prejudice literature, this article examines how much has changed in our approach to whom we study. Content analyses show that prejudice researchers who publish in social psychology's major journals continue to rely heavily on student samples. Next, data are presented showing that important differences may exist between student and nonstudent participants in terms of how prejudice-related variables are expressed and used. The article concludes by raising metatheoretical concerns about the continued use of student samples both in the conclusions we arrive at as a science and in the very topics we study in the prejudice literature, with various recommendations suggested for decreasing this trend in relying on such a narrow database.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=48249137429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=48249137429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1080/10478400802049936

    DO - 10.1080/10478400802049936

    M3 - Article

    VL - 19

    SP - 49

    EP - 71

    JO - Psychological Inquiry

    JF - Psychological Inquiry

    SN - 1047-840X

    IS - 2

    ER -