Coalitional Computation and Social Categorization

By: Robert Kurzban, John Tooby and Leda Cosmides

PowerPoint By: Kate & Marla

Can race be erased?

Introduction People encode the race of people they encounter via

both automatic and mandatory computational processes – categorizing them by race as a precondition for differential treatment.

The experiments in this study are aimed at showing the process of encoding by race evolved to detect coalitional alliances and such processes are reversible.

With less than 4 minutes exposure to an alternative social world, subjects not only will reduce their racial encoding but some cease all together

Suggesting that, racism may be a volatile and eradicable construct when linked with parallel systems of social alliance.

Predictions Race will not be equally influential across all

social contexts. People do NOT have to look alike for the

formation of coalitions to occur. Arbitrary cues endowed with the same

appearance of racial cues can infer racial alliances.

The strength of racial encoding can be diminished via social context.

Sex will be more influential than race. Sex will not be an influential factor when forming

coalitions even though it is more influential than race itself.

Methodology – Introduction Test

Memory Confusion Protocol o Recalling Errors

No verbal or visual coalition cues present. 1) Subjects are asked to form impressions of people

who they will see conversing with one another. – Rival Basketball Teams

2) Then are displayed with a sequence of sentences along with a picture of the person who said those sentences.

3) Picture and corresponding sentences are taken away.

4) A surprise recall test is then administered.

Experiment One All speakers were young men, represented by a

photo. They were all dressed completely alike. Only verbal cues could imply coalition.

o “You were the ones that started the fight.” Race and sex are visible but do not imply

coalition in any way.

Why did you all do that?

You were the ones that started it.

Experiment Two Identical to experiment one except visual cues were

added. Members who were “grouped” in experiment one, were

“grouped” in experiment two. Yellow and grey shirts separated coalitions. Could infer coalition status through verbal or visual cues.

Why did you all do that?

You were the ones that started it.

Results Experiment One

o Even though race was a factor, subjects encoded solely on verbal cues for coalition membership. – Confirming Prediction 2

o Subjects also encoded racial information of targets, forming social categories on this basis.

o The effect of race was twice as large as the effect of coalition. Experiment Two

o Visual cues increased encoding accuracy. o Influence of race diminished substantially when visual cues

were added. o Visual cues (shirts) were encoded stronger than race.

Overall o Verbal Cues Only = Race encoded stronger. o Visual Cues & Verbal Cues = Coalition encoded stronger.

Experiment 3 & 4

Methods were identical to experiments 1 & 2 except:

o The sex of the targets were varied instead of their race.

o Sex – unlike race – is a good candidate for a primary

representation that our minds evolved to encode across most if not all dimensions.

Results Subjects in Exp. 3 & 4 were categorized by coalition as in

Exp. 1 & 2.

Coalition Effect size:Cues for racial coalition: Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 1 Exp 2Utterances alone .35 .31Amplified .81 .79SEX .91 .84Amplified .84

These results contrast with Exp. 2 in that in Exp. 2 sex was always encoded more strongly than coalition.

Discussion http://www.youtube.com/watch?

feature=player_embedded&v=yMEXQNvEszA

13

Racial tensions as populations merged

RACE CAN BE ERASED…

Present day…