Devine's 1989 study, Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components, received the prestigious Scientific Impact Award from the Society of Experimental Social Psychology, recognizing her paper's lasting impact that fundamentally altered the landscape of prejudice and stereotyping research. Her paper demonstrated that stereotypes and prejudicial emotions can be activated automatically, in opposition to one's explicit, controlled beliefs. This insight has spurred four decades of research on the automaticity and control of prejudice. In 2012, she developed a prejudice intervention that taught participants cognitive techniques to overcome non-intentional race bias, which was able to reduce implicit bias up to two months after the intervention.
The Role of Discrepancy-Associated Affect in Prejudice Reduction Co-Author: Margo J. Monteith
Intuitive versus Rational Judgment and the Role of Stereotyping in the Human Condition: Kirk or Spock? Co-Author: Steven J. Sherman
Stereotypes and Prejudice: Their Automatic and Controlled Components
Overattribution Effect: The Role of Confidence and Attributional Complexity
Prejudice and Outgroup Perception
Getting Hooked on Research in Social Psychology: Examples from Eyewitness Identification and Prejudice
Diagnostic and Confirmation Strategies in Trait Hypothesis Testing Co-Authors: Edward R. Hirt and Elizabeth M. Gehrke
Prejudice With and Without Compunction Co-Authors: Margo J. Monteith, Julia R. Zuwerink and Andre J. Elliot
Goals in Social Information Processing: The Case of Anticipated Interaction Co-Authors: Constantine Sedikides and Robert W. Fuhrman
Recent Publications
Devine, together with William T. L. Cox, Lyn Abramson and Steven Hollon, recently proposed the integrated perspective on prejudice and depression, which unites cognitive theories of depression with theories of prejudice, casting them in a common terminology and identifying ways that depression research can inform prejudice research and vice versa. Devine, along with William T. L. Cox, Alyssa Bischmann, and Janet Hyde at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, have suggested that “gaydar” is an alternate label for using stereotypes to infer orientation . These studies have revealed that orientation is not visible from the face—participants did, however, readily infer orientation from stereotypic attributes. Compared to a control group, people stereotyped more when led to believe ingaydar, whereas people stereotyped less when told gaydar is an alternate label for stereotyping. It was concluded that “gaydar” serves as a legitimizing myth that disguises and perpetuates stereotyping.
