598

The
British
Psychological
British Journal of Psychology (2011), 102, 598–614

C 2011 The British Psychological Society
Society

www.wileyonlinelibrary.com

The colour of gender stereotyping

Sheila J. Cunningham∗ and C. Neil Macrae
University of Aberdeen, UK

Despite legislative attempts to eliminate gender stereotyping from society, the propen-
sity to evaluate people on the basis of their sex remains a pernicious social problem.
Noting the critical interplay between cultural and cognitive factors in the establishment
of stereotypical beliefs, the current investigation explored the extent to which culturally
transmitted colour–gender associations (i.e., pink is for girls, blue is for boys) set the
stage for the automatic activation and expression of gender stereotypes. Across six
experiments, the results demonstrated that (1) consumer choice for children’s goods is
dominated by gender-stereotyped colours (Experiment 1); (2) colour-based stereotypic
associations guide young children’s behaviour (Experiment 2); (3) colour–gender asso-
ciations automatically activate associated stereotypes in adulthood (Experiments 3–5);
and (4) colour-based stereotypic associations bias impressions of male and female targets
(Experiment 6). These findings indicate that, despite prohibitions against stereotyping,
seemingly innocuous societal practices may continue to promote this mode of thought.

‘Let us resolve and work toward achieving very simple propositions. There are no acceptable
limits, and there are no acceptable prejudices in the 21st century in our country’
Hillary Clinton, Washington, DC, June 7, 2008
A well-worn sentiment in both political and personal declarations is that allowing cultural
stereotypes to influence thoughts and behaviour is completely unacceptable. Whether
the beliefs in question pertain to gender, race, religion, or sexuality, the practice of
judging people on the basis of the groups to which they belong attracts universal
condemnation (see Inglehart & Norris, 2003). It is somewhat perplexing therefore
that stereotyping continues to persist, even in the most visible of arenas. As a case
in point, consider the experiences of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin during the 2008 US
presidential campaign. Rather than media commentary focusing on the quality of their
policies and ideas, attention repeatedly fell instead on their choice of outfit, hairstyle, and
cosmetic product. Despite widespread endorsement of egalitarian values (Devine, 1989;
Monteith, Devine, & Zuwerink, 1993) and the constant threat of legal sanctions (e.g.,
UK’s Sex Discrimination Act, 1975), stereotypic beliefs about the sexes continue to wield
considerable impact in contemporary life (Benokraitis & Feagin, 1995; Glick & Fiske,
1996; Inglehart & Norris, 2003). But why is this the case? In the current investigation,

∗ Correspondence should be addressed to Sheila Cunningham, School of Psychology, William Guild Building, University of
Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3FX, UK (e-mail: sheila.cunningham@abdn.ac.uk).

DOI:10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02023.x
 Gender stereotyping 599

we consider how the interplay of cultural and cognitive factors may ultimately serve to
perpetuate this undesirable mode of thought.

Gender stereotyping in society

While stereotyping remains an insidious societal problem, it is clear that efforts to
promote gender equality have been rewarded with a reduction in people’s tolerance of
sexism (Glick & Fiske, 1996). It is no longer acceptable, for example, to deny a woman
promotion or access to education on the basis of her gender. These advances aside, how-
ever, gender stereotyping continues to pervade public life, albeit in a less explicit form.
Characterized by Glick and Fiske (1996) as benevolent sexism, this more contemporary
form of stereotyping arises from the expectation that men and women should adhere to
conventional sex roles (e.g., Glick & Fiske, 1996; Gowen & Britt, 2006; Rudman & Glick,
1999; Rudman & Kilianski, 2000). For example, although it is illegal to deny a woman
employment on the basis of her gender, a female job candidate who displays counter-
stereotypic qualities (e.g., arrogance or competitiveness) may be viewed less favourably
than a male who exhibits identical characteristics (Branscombe & Smith, 1990; Eagly
& Karau, 2002; Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992; Rudman & Glick, 1999). Operating
in this way, benevolent sexism blocks women from reaching the upper echelons of
government, education, and industry (Equal Opportunities Commission, 2004).
At the level of the individual perceiver, the persistence of gender stereotyping can
be traced to the cognitive operations that support core components of the person
perception process (Brewer, 1988; Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998; Fiske & Neuberg,
1990). Decades of social psychological research have established that people tend to
think about others categorically (i.e., based on their social group memberships), a social-
cognitive tactic that dominates both information processing and response generation
(Allport, 1954; Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998; Brewer, 1988; Fiske & Neuberg, 1990;
Kunda & Spencer, 2003; Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000). Following the perceptual
registration of triggering categorical cues (e.g., hairstyle, item of clothing, sex-typed
object), associated knowledge structures in memory give rise to stereotype-based
responses that are notoriously difficult to control (Banaji & Hardin, 1996; Brewer, 1988;
Devine, 1989; Fiske & Neuberg, 1990; Macrae & Martin, 2007; Martin & Macrae, 2007;
Oakhill, Garnham, & Reynolds, 2005). Only when armed with sufficient attentional
resources, awareness that stereotype activation has occurred and a motivation to
avoid discriminatory thinking can stereotyping seemingly be avoided (Bargh, 1999;
Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998; Fiske & Neuberg, 1990; Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000).
This then raises a potentially troublesome possibility. If the immediate environment is
littered with stereotype-related cues, it may be difficult for perceivers to ameliorate the
impact of discriminatory thinking. As Bargh (1999) has suggested, ‘Once a stereotype is
so entrenched that it becomes activated automatically, there is relatively little that can
be done to control its influence’ (p. 378).

Culture and gender stereotyping

Important parallels can be drawn between the manifestation of categorical thinking at an
individual level and the persistence of gender stereotyping in wider society (Bargh, 1999;
Glick & Fiske, 1996). Indeed, there are notable links between people’s stereotype-related
behaviour and cultural practices that disseminate gender-related beliefs about men
and women (Bigler & Liben, 2007; Diekman & Eagly, 2000; Diekman, Eagly, Mladinic,
& Ferreira, 2005; Guimond et al., 2007). While cognitive processing strategies clearly
600 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

underpin people’s propensity to apply gender stereotypes in their dealings with

others (Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998; Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000), the stereotypes
themselves originate in specific beliefs about the sexes that are culturally specified.
The form these beliefs commonly take is that of an association between a particular
object (e.g., truck, doll), role (e.g., homemaker, financial provider), or behaviour (e.g.,
preparing food, repairing the car) and the concepts of masculinity and femininity. What
is potentially problematic is that cultural practices that propagate links between category-
specifying cues and the sexes may serve to precipitate gender stereotyping by forging
associative pathways through which automatic category (hence stereotype) activation
can influence the process and products of person construal (Bargh, 1999; Macrae &
Bodenhausen, 2000). In this way, category-associated cues may trigger stereotypical
thinking even when the cues in question are seemingly inoffensive (Brebner, Martin, &
Macrae, 2009; Martin & Macrae, 2007).
A notable example of an innocuous gender-related cue is colour. Pink and blue tones
are commonly associated with the sexes, a colour–gender linkage that has been operating
since the middle of the last century (Frassanito & Pettorini, 2008; Huun & Kaiser, 2001;
Paoletti & Kregloh, 1989) and is ubiquitous from infancy (Picariello, Greenberg, &
Pillemer, 1990). Young children’s environments are saturated with gender-typed hues,
with blue items essential for boys and pink items obligatory for girls (Bridges, 1993;
Picariello et al., 1990; Pomerleau, Bolduc, Malcuit, & Cossette, 1990; Shakin, Shakin, &
Sternglanz, 1985). Indeed, such is the potency of these associations, it has been suggested
that ‘young children may identify clothing colour as one of several defining attributes of
sex even before they are knowledgeable about the biological differences between the
sexes’ (Picariello et al., 1990, p. 1459).
Early childhood is a time when developing gender stereotypes are prominent (Albert
& Porter, 1983; Kohlberg, 1966; Slaby & Frey, 1975) as gender awareness is high
(Kohlberg, 1966; Levy, 1999; Warin, 2000) and category-based processing dominates
cognition (Aboud, 1988; Dunham, Baron, & Banaji, 2008; Grace, David, & Ryan,
2008; Martin & Halverson, 1981). If young children’s emerging stereotypes encompass
strong colour–sex associations then these otherwise innocuous linkages may serve to
precipitate gender stereotyping by creating a direct associative pathway through which
stereotypic beliefs can be triggered and expressed (Bargh, 2006; Bodenhausen & Macrae,
1998; Srull & Wyer, 1979, 1989). As a result, cultural practices in childhood may set the
stage for the automatic activation and application of gender stereotypes later in life. We
explored this possibility in the current inquiry.

The current research

To investigate the impact that colour associations exert on gender stereotyping, we first
examined the extent to which contemporary society continues to promote the belief that
pink is for girls and blue is for boys (Experiment 1). Our next experiment then considered
whether children’s actual behaviour is driven by colour stereotypes (Experiment 2).
Shifting the emphasis to adult social cognition, Experiments 3–5 investigated whether
colour cues automatically trigger the activation of associated gender representations.
Finally, Experiment 6 explored the application of colour–gender associations in an
impression formation task. Collectively, these experiments sought to establish how
the interplay of cultural and cognitive forces shapes the emergence, activation, and
application of gender stereotypes.
 Gender stereotyping 601

EXPERIMENT 1: PINK DOLLS AND BLUE TRUCKS

Method
Examination of the contemporary cultural association between colour and sex was
undertaken by exploring the colours in which children’s products are available. Leading
UK mail order catalogues for clothing (‘Kays’, produced by Littlewoods Shop Direct
Group) and toys (‘Argos’, produced by the Home Retail Group) were selected for analysis.
Both catalogues included a section designated for young (0–5 years) children and the
toy catalogue was further divided into sections depicting Girls’ Toys and Boys’ Toys.
The catalogues were coded by assigning every unicoloured item a label denoting colour
category. For items that were available in a variety of colours, each colour option was
coded as a separate item.

Results and discussion

The clothing catalogue listed a total of 258 individual items, of which 203 were
unicoloured (including white). Sex-typed colours were found to be prevalent, with 53.2%
of the unicoloured clothing items being either pink or blue (55 pink, 53 blue) and the
remaining items split among nine other colours. Chi-square analysis confirmed that this
distribution was significantly biased towards pink and blue (␹ 2 (10) = 211.0, p < .001).
In the toy catalogue, a total of 321 unicoloured toys were listed, of which 138 were
classified as boys’ toys and 183 as girls’ toys. Chi-square analysis of the colour distribution
revealed significant gender biases for both male and female items. Boys were offered
more blue toys (23.2%) than any other colour (␹ 2 (7) = 70.5, p < .001) whereas girls’
toys included more pink toys (54.1%) than any other colour (␹ 2 (9) = 424.6, p < .001).
Notably, 97.0% of the pink toys were listed in the ‘Girls’ toys’ section.
These results confirm that young children’s clothing and toys are dominated by
gender-stereotyped colours (i.e., pink and blue). In this respect, the data are consistent
with previous research (e.g., Pomerleau et al., 1990; Shakin et al., 1985) and serve to
validate anecdotal reports that colour stereotypes continue to pervade contemporary
life. Having established the existence of colour–gender associations in the childhood
environment, our next experiment examined the extent to which these stereotypes
impact young children’s behaviour.

EXPERIMENT 2: CHOOSING BEDROOM FURNITURE

To explore the impact of colour–gender associations on behaviour, young children were
asked to choose items that they thought a young male and female target would like to have
in their bedroom. It was expected that children’s exposure to colour stereotypes would
lead them to choose predominantly blue items for the boy and pink items for the girl.

Method
Participants and design
Ten children aged between the ages of three and five (5 males, mean age 4.0 years)
were tested individually. Each child participated with the written consent of a parent or
guardian in accordance with the guidelines and approval of the University of Aberdeen
Psychology Ethics Committee. The experiment had a single factor (target: boy or girl)
repeated-measures design.
602 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

Stimulus materials and procedure

The experiment was described to children as a game in which they could choose the
furniture and toys that would go into two bedrooms, one for a little boy and one for a
little girl. The child was seated at a table alongside the experimenter. On the table was
placed a laminated, A4-sized photographic image of an empty room with white walls
and flooring. Half of the children were first told that the room was for a boy, while the
other half began with a girl’s room. The experimenter presented the child with four
laminated photographic images of an object to go in the room (e.g., bed, chair, teddy
bear). The objects were depicted in different colours (i.e., blue, pink, green, or orange)
and the child was asked to pick the colour the owner of the room would prefer and to
place the picture in the room. The colours orange and green were chosen as additional
options because they are visually distinct from pink and blue, and not strongly associated
with either sex. The experimenter noted the colour option that the child selected. This
procedure was repeated for a total of eight objects (each of which was offered in the
same four colour options). Once all eight objects had been selected, they were removed
from the room and the child repeated the task, this time choosing items for a child of the
opposite sex. Once the child had completed the task for both a girl’s and boy’s room,
he or she was debriefed, thanked, and returned to a parent.

Results and discussion

The proportions of coloured items selected for the boy’s and girl’s room are shown
in Figure 1. The results revealed that there was a clear tendency for children to make
gender-typed colour choices, with 90.0% of the items chosen for the girl’s room being
pink and 48.7% of items in the boy’s room being blue. Paired-samples t-tests confirmed
that if a participant chose a pink item then it was significantly more likely to be for the
girl’s room than the boy’s (t(9) = 16.61, p < .001), while blue items were more likely to
be chosen for the boy’s room than the girl’s (t(9) = 6.64, p < 0.001). One-sample t-tests
showed that, of the eight colour–gender combinations, only ‘pink for girl’ and ‘blue for
boy’ choices occurred significantly more often than the 25% proportion that would be
expected by chance (t(9) = 12.65, p < 0.001 and t(9) = 3.50, p < 0.01, respectively).
These findings suggest that young children’s understanding of male and female
preferences is already under the influence of gender stereotypic notions. Whether

1.0
0.9
Proportion of items selected

0.8
0.7
0.6
Girl's room
0.5
Boy's room
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
Pink Blue Green Orange
Item color

Figure 1. Proportion of items of each colour selected for boy’s and girl’s room.
 Gender stereotyping 603

the children were projecting their personal preferences to hypothetical targets (see
Ames, 2004) or applying explicit, internalized stereotypic beliefs about gender, they
displayed a clear conviction that girls prefer pink and boys prefer blue. Worrisome
though these findings may be, it is conceivable that the influence of colour stereotypes
may be restricted to childhood. After all, surely sophisticated adults must be free from
associations that link colours with the sexes – or are they? Influential accounts of social-
cognitive functioning would tend to suggest otherwise (Bargh, 1999; Devine, 1989;
Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000). Indeed, among unsuspecting adults, the mere detection
of category-specifying colour cues may be sufficient to trigger the automatic activation
of associated representations (i.e., category automaticity, see Bargh, 1999). We explored
this possibility in our next three experiments.

EXPERIMENT 3: PINK AND BLUE FORENAMES

Once stereotypic associations are formed in memory, perceptions of category-specifying
cues, such as a person’s hairstyle, are sufficient to trigger stereotype activation (e.g.,
Bargh, 1999; Brebner et al., 2009; Devine, 1989; Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000; Macrae
& Martin, 2007). But is this also case for colour cues and gender stereotypes? In
our next experiment, we explored the extent to which colour cues (i.e., pink and
blue) automatically activate conceptions of gender during a forename-classification
task (Brebner & Macrae, 2008; Macrae & Martin, 2007). Male and female forenames
were selected as the to-be-categorized stimuli because of their strong and unambiguous
association with the sexes (Macrae, Mitchell, & Pendry, 2002). Of interest was the impact
that the colour of the forenames (i.e., pink or blue) would exert on task performance.
If pink and blue trigger the activation of associated gender-based representations, it was
expected that participants would respond more quickly on trials in which forenames
were presented in gender-matching (e.g., male forenames presented in blue) than gender-
mismatching (e.g., female forenames presented in blue) colours, thereby demonstrating
the automaticity of category activation from colour cues.

Method
Participants and design
Twenty undergraduates (11 females, mean age 20.9 years) participated in the experiment
in return for course credits. The study had a 2 (Forename: male or female) × 2 (Trial
Type: matching or mismatching) repeated-measures design.

Stimulus materials and procedure

Participants were asked to complete a simple colour-naming test to ensure that they
were not colour blind, and were then seated at an Apple Macintosh computer and
keyboard. They were informed that forenames (e.g., John, Angela) would appear on
the screen and their task was simply to classify the items as male or female (indicating
their judgement using keys on the keyboard) as quickly and accurately as possible.
The task was presented using PsyScope experimental software (Cohen, MacWhinney,
Flatt, & Provost, 1993). Forty gender-specific forenames (20 males and 20 females) were
presented individually in Helvetica font (size 48) in the centre of a black background,
in pink or blue lettering. The names were the 20 most popular forenames for boys and
girls in the United Kingdom from the year that a typical 18-year-old participant would
604 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

have been born, after excluding those names associated with both sexes. Each name
remained on the screen until a response was made, then a 1,000-ms interval preceded
the presentation of the next stimulus. Each forename was presented in both pink and
blue font (i.e., 80 trials) and stimulus presentation was randomized for each participant.
On completion of the task, participants were thanked, debriefed, and dismissed.

Results and discussion

The dependent measure of interest was the time taken by participants to sex the
forenames. Trials on which errors were committed (4.3%) were excluded from the
analysis. Median reaction times were submitted to a 2 (Forename: male or female) × 2
(Trial Type: matching or mismatching) repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA).
The analysis yielded a main effect of Forename, such that responses were faster to female
than male items [F(1,19) = 11.16, p < .005, Ms: 608 ms vs. 640 ms). More importantly,
however, a main effect of Trial Type was also observed, with faster responses returned
on gender-matching than gender-mismatching trials, (F(1,19) = 7.79, p < .05, Ms: 616 ms
vs. 632 ms).1
These results confirm that colour cues prompted the automatic activation of gender-
related categorical representations during the forename-classification task. When, for
example, participants responded to male forenames in pink (or female forenames
in blue), competing categorical representations triggered response competition and
impaired task performance (Brebner et al., 2009; Macrae & Martin, 2007). That pink
and blue colour cues influenced performance on the forename-classification task
demonstrates that colour–gender associations are not limited to childhood, but continue
to impact on adult cognition. To examine the generalizability of this effect beyond
lexical stimuli (Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000), in our next experiment we examined the
influence of colour cues on the classification of gender-stereotyped objects.

EXPERIMENT 4: FOOTBALL BOOTS AND BRAS

Numerous objects are associated with one sex more than the other (e.g., hairdryer, cigar),
such that presentation of the item can trigger activation of the associated gender-based
representation in memory (Brebner & Macrae, 2008; Crawford, Leynes, Mayhorn, & Bink,
2004). Exploiting this finding, in Experiment 4 participants were required to classify (i.e.,
masculine or feminine) line drawings of sex-typed objects that were depicted in either
pink or blue. As was the case for forenames (i.e., Experiment 3), it was anticipated that
responses would be furnished more rapidly when gender-typed objects were presented
in a matching than mismatching colour.

Method
Participants and design
Twenty undergraduates (12 females, mean age 22.8 years) participated in the experiment
in return for course credit. The experiment had a 2 (Object: masculine or feminine) ×
2 (Trial Type: matching or mismatching) repeated-measures design.

1 An additional analysis revealed that these effects were not moderated by the sex of participants.
 Gender stereotyping 605

Stimulus materials and procedure

The current study was a replication of Experiment 3, but on this occasion the to-
be-classified stimuli comprised line drawings of gender-typed objects. Following an
initial colour-vision test, participants were seated at an Apple Macintosh computer and
keyboard and asked to indicate (via a key press) whether a series of objects were
stereotypically masculine or feminine. PsyScope experimental software (Cohen et al.,
1993) was used to present line drawings of 20 stereotypically male (e.g., gun, hammer,
jeep) and 20 stereotypically female (e.g., lipstick, pram, cocktail glass) objects (Brebner
& Macrae, 2008; Crawford et al., 2004). A pink and a blue line drawing of each object was
presented as a 250 × 250 pixel image and appeared in the centre of a black background.
Stimulus presentation was randomized for each participant. Each picture remained on
the screen until a response was made, then a 1,000-ms interval preceded the presentation
of the next stimulus. On completion of the task, participants were thanked, debriefed,
and dismissed.

Results and discussion

Trials on which errors were committed (3.4%) were excluded from the analysis. Median
reaction times were then submitted to a 2 (Object: masculine or feminine) × 2
(Trial Type: matching or mismatching) repeated-measures ANOVA. The only effect to
emerge in this analysis was a main effect of Trial Type [F(1,19) = 4.40, p < .05], such
that response latencies were faster on gender-matching than gender-mismatching trials
(respective Ms: 665 ms vs. 708 ms).2 These findings confirm the automaticity of category
activation following the presentation of sex-typed objects in associated colours.

EXPERIMENT 5: BACKGROUND COLOUR CUES

Thus far (i.e., Experiments 3 and 4), the results have demonstrated the automaticity of
category activation when to-be-classified stimuli (i.e., words or objects) are depicted in
gender-related colours (i.e., pink or blue). This then raises an interesting question. Must
colour cues be an inherent part of the target item (i.e., bound to the item – Treisman &
Gelade, 1980) to trigger category activation or would similar effects emerge when the
critical colours comprise irrelevant aspects of a stimulus display? That is, is the mere
presence of gender-typed colours sufficient to trigger category activation? We explored
this issue in our next experiment in a task in which participants had to sex faces (Brown
& Perrett, 1993; Cloutier, Mason, & Macrae, 2005; Ganel & Goshen-Gottstein, 2002)
that appeared on either a pink or blue background. It was anticipated that trials in
which faces were presented on a gender-matching background (e.g., a male face on a
blue background) would elicit faster responses than trials in which the background was
gender mismatching (e.g., a male face on a pink background).

Method
Participants and design
Twenty undergraduates (15 females, mean age 21.3 years) participated in the experiment
in return for course credits. The experiment had a 2 (Face: male or female) × 2 (Trial
Type: matching or mismatching) repeated-measures design.

2 An additional analysis revealed no effect of participant sex on reaction times.

606 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

Stimulus materials and procedure

Following a colour-vision test, participants were seated at an Apple Macintosh computer
and keyboard and asked to indicate (via a key press) the sex of a series of faces (Macrae &
Martin, 2007). PsyScope experimental software (Cohen et al., 1993) was used to present
black and white photographic images of 20 male and 20 female Caucasian faces. The hair
was cropped from the stimuli and each face was depicted in a frontal pose displaying
a neutral expression. The faces were presented on a 250 × 250 pixel pink or blue
background in the centre of a black screen. Each face appeared on both backgrounds
giving a total of 80 trials. The experimental software randomized the order of stimulus
presentation. Each face remained on screen until participants made a response, then a
1,000-ms interval preceded the presentation of the next stimulus. On completion of the
task, participants were thanked, debriefed, and dismissed.

Results and discussion

Trials on which errors were committed (8.8%) were excluded from the analysis. Median
reaction times were then submitted to a 2 (Face: male or female) × 2 (Trial Type:
matching or mismatching) repeated-measures ANOVA. The only effect to emerge in this
analysis was a main effect of Trial Type [F(1,19) = 4.64, p < .05], such that response
latencies were faster on gender-matching than gender-mismatching trials (respective Ms:
682 ms vs. 702 ms).3 These findings confirm that even when comprising an irrelevant
aspect of a stimulus array, gender-typed colour cues trigger the activation of associated
categorical knowledge.

EXPERIMENT 6: APPLYING GENDER STEREOTYPES

The results of Experiments 3–5 confirm that innocuous colour cues are sufficient to
trigger the automatic activation of associated gender-related representations (Bargh,
1999; Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000). What has yet to be demonstrated, however,
is whether this category activation turns into explicit stereotype application (see
Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998; Gilbert & Hixon, 1991). To explore this issue, our final
experiment considered the extent to which pink and blue items of clothing impact
people’s impressions of hypothetical targets.

Method
Participants and design
Sixty undergraduates (51 females, mean age 21.4 years) participated in the experiment
in return for course credits. The experiment had a 2 (Target: male or female) × 2 (Shirt:
pink of blue) between-subjects design.

Stimulus materials and procedure

Participants were shown a photographic image of either a male or female target of
whom they were to form an impression. The photographic images comprised morphed

3 An additional analysis revealed no effect of participant sex on reaction times.

 Gender stereotyping 607

Table 1. Ratings for applicability of masculine and feminine items to targets dressed in pink and blue
shirts

Mean (SD) rating of characteristic applicability

Masculine items Feminine items

T-shirt colour Independent Contact sports Affectionate Romantic films

Blue 3.8 (0.7) 3.7 (0.9) 3.20 (0.7) 2.5 (1.0)

Pink 3.3 (0.9)∗ 3.1 (1.2)∗ 3.7 (0.9)∗ 3.2 (1.1)∗∗

∗
Difference between blue and pink: p ⬍ .05; ∗∗ Difference between blue and pink: p ⬍ .01.

composites of 64 female faces and 32 male faces (Braun, Gruendl, Marberger, & Scherber,
2001, used with permission). These images showed an average face displaying a neutral
expression, along with the visible neckline and top portion of a t-shirt. The hair was
shown in an ambiguous style that could be perceived as very short hair, or long hair tied
back to avoid giving potentially conflicting cues of masculine or feminine preferences.
However, the targets were designed to represent a male and female individual, rather
than looking androgynous. Participants’ impressions of the target were assessed using a
questionnaire that probed (using a 5-point Likert scale) how likely 24 descriptors were
to apply to the target. Embedded in the questionnaire were four items that assessed
gender stereotyping (Bem, 1974; Crawford et al., 2004), notably items pertaining to
personality characteristics (i.e., independent, affectionate) and lifestyle choices (i.e.,
enjoys contact sports, enjoys watching romantic movies). On completion of the task,
participants were thanked, debriefed, and dismissed.

Results and discussion

Participants’ responses to the critical questions revealed a clear pattern of gender
stereotyping. Targets depicted in a pink t-shirt elicited higher ratings on the feminine
than the masculine items, while those depicted in blue produced the opposite pattern
of effects (see Table 1). Participants’ ratings were submitted to a 2 (Target: male or
female) × 2 (Shirt: pink of blue) between-subjects ANOVA. This yielded a main effect of
Shirt on each measure (affectionate, F(3,56) = 5.81, p < .05; dominant, F(3,56) = 4.58,
p < .05; enjoys romantic films, F(3,56) = 7.35, p <. 01; enjoys contact sports, F(3,56) =
4.16, p < .05). No effect of Target or interaction between the factors emerged on the
measures. Thus, regardless of target sex, wearing a blue t-shirt elevated ratings on the
masculine items, whereas possession of a pink t-shirt increased ratings on the feminine
items.
These results confirm that gender-stereotypic beliefs activated by pink and blue
colour cues were applied during the impression formation task. If inferences on a ‘slow’
judgement task can be influenced by the colour of t-shirt a target is wearing, then this
suggests that the colour associations demonstrated in Experiments 3–5 extend beyond
rapid automatic responses to inferential aspects of person construal. While the scope of
the current inquiry did not extend to exploring these effects in real-world environments
(e.g., interviewing job candidates dressed in pink and blue shirts), the findings certainly
suggest that, in such a scenario, colour cues would have the potential to activate gender
stereotypic responses and influence person evaluation.
608 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

Interestingly, participants appeared to be using colour cues as more of an inferential

guide than the target’s actual sex. One reason for this may have been an assumption by
participants that the targets’ t-shirt colour was meaningful as it reflected their personal
choices and tastes, rather than being an incidental factor (as in Experiments 3–5). An
interesting angle for future work might be to explore whether colour cues that are
externally determined (e.g., company uniform) have a similar effect. What is clear from
the current experiment is that when an individual decides to don pink and blue colours,
he or she should do so in the knowledge that the gender-stereotypic associations of these
colours can have an impact on the person perception process.

GENERAL DISCUSSION
The six experiments reported herein highlight the cultural proliferation of colour–gender
associations and demonstrate the impact that these linkages exert on social cognition.
Experiment 1 showed that consumers of children’s goods are offered a predominance of
sex-typed colour options. Goods aimed at girls were largely pink, while blue dominated
boys’ clothes and playthings. Experiment 2 revealed that these associations impact
children’s behaviour. Specifically, while it was believed that a young boy would prefer
to have blue items in his bedroom, pink was the preferred colour for a young girl. This
pattern suggests that young children quickly acquire colour–gender associations and
freely apply them when thinking about other people.
The impact of these early colour–gender associations on adult cognition was
examined in four further experiments. The results of Experiments 3–5 revealed that
pink and blue colour cues were sufficient to trigger the activation of gender-related
knowledge, whether the colours comprised part of the to-be-judged stimuli (i.e.,
forenames or objects) or were simply an irrelevant part of the stimulus display. In
doing so, these findings confirm the automaticity of category activation from colour
cues (Bargh, 1999; Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000). Finally, an impression formation task
(Experiment 6) demonstrated the application of gender stereotypes from associated
colour cues. Unknown men and women depicted in pink clothing were imbued with
more feminine characteristics than those wearing blue, who in turn were ascribed more
masculine qualities and preferences. Taken together, this series of experiments suggests
that the cultural proliferation of colour–gender associations serves as a foundation for
the activation and application of stereotypes in children and adults alike.

What’s in a Cue?
Notwithstanding the inherently benign nature of pink and blue hues, the current findings
suggest that the creation of strong associations between colour and the sexes can
have undesirable consequences. While pink toys and blue shirts are not in themselves
offensive or problematic, the frequent association of a specific colour with each sex is an
unhelpful obstruction to the reduction of adult gender biases. It seems deeply ironic that
a society that does not condone the enforcement of traditional sex roles and applauds
attempts to crack workplace glass ceilings should endorse colour stereotyping. The
cultural acceptability of this practice presumably arises from the apparent unimportance
of colour cues in everyday life. Belying this innocuous assumption, however, the
current inquiry clearly demonstrates the unwanted consequences of perpetuating such
unnecessarily dichotomous gender-based associations.
 Gender stereotyping 609

It has been suggested that there may be an underlying biological basis for colour–
gender associations, with red and blue tones having specific evolutionary advantages
for women and men, respectively (Alexander, 2003; Hulbert & Ling, 2007). However,
cross-cultural experiments and temporal changes in colour–gender associations argue
against such a viewpoint. For instance, a century ago pink was promoted as the colour of
masculinity (see Frassanito & Pettorini, 2008; Huun & Kaiser, 2001; Paoletti & Kregloh,
1989) and, as recently as two generations ago, Eysenck (1941) found no significant
difference between male and female colour preferences (also see Garth, 1922). Only
recent experiments, ensuing from the contemporary stream of colour stereotypes (i.e.,
pink for girls, blue for boys), reveal sex differences that tie in with the proposed
evolutionary advantages. It therefore seems unlikely that there is anything special about
the relation between pink and blue colours and the sexes, other than the association
proliferated by contemporary society.
If there are no adaptive advantages of colour–gender associations, then the activation
of gender stereotypes is surely undesirable. But to what extent can this social-cognitive
outcome be avoided? There are clearly a multitude of cues associated with male
and female categories that can trigger gender stereotyping (see Oakhill et al., 2005);
indeed even labelling targets as male or female or viewing male and female hairstyles
can have this effect (e.g., Branscombe & Smith, 1990; Macrae & Martin, 2007). The
social brain is required to deal with a vast array of complex information, hence relies
on categorical knowledge to function effectively (Bodenhausen & Lichtenstein, 1987;
Bodenhausen & Wyer, 1985; Cloutier et al., 2005; Gilbert & Hixon, 1991; Macrae,
Hewstone, & Griffiths, 1993; Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994; Pendry & Macrae,
1994). It is therefore inconceivable that gender-based categorical processing could be
circumvented completely. However, if there is a societal motivation to reduce levels of
gender stereotyping in adults (see Inglehart & Norris, 2003), then it is logical to minimize
environmental triggers of gender-related processing, rather than promoting such cues to
children. The juxtaposition between society’s abhoration of adult gender inequality and
endorsement of childhood gender divisions brings into sharp focus the need to consider
the impact of cultural factors on social-cognitive functioning.

Reducing gender stereotyping

According to standard social information processing models, categorical cues function
by activating associated stored knowledge and beliefs, increasing the likelihood that
such information will be applied in subsequent cognition and behaviour (e.g., Brewer,
1988; Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1998; Devine, 1989; Fiske & Neuberg, 1990). The
resilience of categorical person perception therefore lies in the strength of category–
cue associations. Accordingly, some of the most successful approaches to stereotype
reduction have focused on breaking down associations by emphasizing intergroup
overlap, blurring the boundaries between categories (see Allport, 1954; Hyde, 2005;
Pettigrew, 1998; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). This strategy has been specifically applied
to gender stereotyping, with some success. For instance, Rosenthal and Crisp (2006)
examined the well-established effect of stereotype threat on female math performance
(i.e., poorer test performance following gender stereotype priming – Brown & Josephs,
1999; Nosek, Banaji, & Greenwald, 2002; Quinn & Spencer, 2001; Spencer, Steele, &
Quinn, 1999). They found that the effect could be eradicated with the simple step
of encouraging women to focus on shared male and female characteristics before the
test.
610 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

Such evidence suggests that if there is a societal goal of reducing gender stereotyping,
then there should be a drive to minimize perceptions of male and female differences.
However, the current inquiry has made clear that cultural forces run counter to this
aim, with children’s environments artificially increasing distance between the sexes
(Experiments 1–2). It is noteworthy that such practices are likely to be particularly
influential at this early stage, when children are seeking to make sense of the world by
compartmentalizing stimuli and experiences into manageable networks of relationships
and categories (Aboud, 1988; Dunham et al., 2008; Grace et al., 2008; Martin &
Halverson, 1981). Given this aspect of young children’s emerging socio-cognitive
abilities, it should be expected that the gender–colour associations flooding their environ-
ment at this stage of development will have a pronounced impact on person perception.
What is perhaps more surprising is the continued influence of colour–gender
association in adulthood, as demonstrated in Experiments 3–6. If the adult social
environment is not coloured by pink and blue gender-related cues, why do they continue
to wield a measurable influence? The answer may lie in the initial strength of encoding of
these cues, especially as counter-stereotypic examples are rarely encountered to diminish
or compete with the established association (see Picariello et al., 1990; Pomerleau et al.,
1990; Shakin et al., 1985). Further, there is little motivation for conscious inhibition, as
explicit endorsement of colour–gender associations does not evoke hostile reactions (cf.
Wyer, Sherman, & Stroessner, 2000). Perhaps as a direct result of their innocuous status,
the early and unchallenged encoding of pink and blue colours in association with gender
has a persistent effect on gender-categorical processing, which persists into adulthood.
The current inquiry highlights the need to acknowledge the importance of categorical
beliefs that are culturally imparted to children, as well as the cognitive processes through
which these beliefs impact on cognition and behaviour. Recent emphasis on the cogni-
tive underpinnings of everyday behaviour has obscured the critical influence that socio-
cultural forces exert on social cognition (see Bigler & Patterson, 2007). The message that
emerges from the current investigation is that gender-dichotomous aspects of children’s
environment can have unwanted social consequences that extend into adult life. The
practice of saturating young children’s environments with gender-specific colours
furnishes categorical knowledge such that the mere presence of these critical colour
cues is then sufficient to trigger the activation and application of gender categorical
beliefs. If artificially and unnecessarily differentiating children’s environment according
to colour produces additional routes to stereotypical thinking, such a practice seems at
odds with the egalitarian goals that feature so prominently in contemporary society.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank David J. Turk for his help with compiling experimental
programs, Julie Lawrence for her help with data collection, and two anonymous reviewers
for their constructive comments.

References
Aboud, F. E. (1988). Children and prejudice. New York: Blackwell.
Alexander, G. M. (2003). An evolutionary perspective on sex-typed toy preferences: Pink, blue,
and the brain. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 7–14.
Albert, A. A., & Porter, J. R. (1983). Patterns in the development of children’s gender-role
stereotypes. Sex Roles, 9, 59–67.
 Gender stereotyping 611

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Ames, D. R. (2004). Inside the mind reader’s tool kit: Projection and stereotyping in mental state
inference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 340–353.
Banaji, M. R., & Hardin, C. D. (1996). Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7, 136–
141.
Bargh, J. A. (1999). The cognitive monster: The case against the controllability of automatic
stereotype effects. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology
(pp. 361–382). New York: Guilford.
Bargh, J. A. (2006). What have we been priming all these years? On the development, mechanisms,
and ecology of nonconscious social behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36,
147–168.
Bem, S. L. (1974). Measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 42, 155–162.
Benokraitis, N. V., & Feagin, J. R. (1995). Modern sexism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2007). Developmental intergroup theory: Explaining and reducing
children’s social stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16,
162–166.
Bigler, R. S., & Patterson, M. M. (2007). When and why social categorization produces inequality
(and vice versa). Human Development, 50, 328–332.
Bodenhausen, G. V., & Lichtenstein, M. (1987). Social stereotypes and information processing
strategies: The impact of task complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,
871–880.
Bodenhausen, G. V., & Macrae, C. N. (1998). Stereotype activation and inhibition. In R. S. Wyer
(Ed.), Advances in social cognition XI: Stereotype activation and inhibition (pp. 1–51).
Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bodenhausen, G. V., & Wyer, R. S. (1985). Effects of stereotypes on decision-making and
information-processing strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 267–
282.
Branscombe, N. R., & Smith, E. R., 1990. Gender and racial stereotypes in impression formation
and social decision-making processes. Sex Roles, 22, 627–647.
Braun, C., Gruendl, M., Marberger, C., & Scherber, C. (2001). Beautycheck – Ursachen und
Folgen von Attraktivitaet (Report). Retrieved from http://www.beautycheck.de/english/
bericht/bericht.htm
Brebner, J. L., & Macrae, C. N. (2008). Faces, flowers and football boots: Capacity limits in distractor
processing. Cognition, 107, 718–728.
Brebner, J. L., Martin, D., & Macrae, C. N. (2009). Dude looks like a lady: Exploring the malleability
of person categorization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1109–1119.
Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In T. Srull & R. Wyer (Eds.),
Advances in Social Cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 1–36). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bridges, J. S. (1993). Pink or blue—Gender-stereotypic perceptions of infants as conveyed by birth
congratulations cards. Psychology of Women, 17, 193–205.
Brown, R. P., & Josephs, R. A. (1999). A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender
differences in math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 246–
257.
Brown, E., & Perrett, D. I. (1993). What gives a face its gender? Perception, 22, 829–840.
Cloutier, J., Mason, M. F., & Macrae, C. N. (2005). The perceptual determinants of person construal:
Reopening the social-cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88,
885–894.
Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). Psyscope: A new graphic
interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods,
Instruments, and Computers, 25, 257–271.
612 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

Crawford, J. I., Leynes, P. A., Mayhorn, C. B., & Bink, M. L. (2004). Champagne, beer, or coffee? A
corpus of gender-related and neutral words. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and
Computers, 36, 444–458.
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men
of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171–
1188.
Diekman, A. B., Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A., & Ferreira, M. C. (2005). Dynamic stereotypes about
women and men in Latin America and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
36, 209–226.
Dunham, Y., Baron, A. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2008). The development of implicit intergroup cognition.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 248–253.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.
Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3–22.
Equal Opportunities Commission (2004). Facts about women and men in Great Britain.
Manchester, UK.
Eysenck, H. J. (1941). A critical and experimental experiment of colour preferences. American
Journal of Psychology, 54, 385–394.
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum model of impression formation, from category
based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and
interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23,
pp. 1–74). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Frassanito, P., & Pettorini, B. (2008). Pink and blue: The colour of gender. Child’s Nervous System,
24, 881–882.
Ganel, T., & Goshen-Gottstein, Y. (2002). Perceptual integrality of sex and identity of faces:
Further evidence for the single-route hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception and Performance, 28, 854–867.
Garth, T. R. (1922). Colour preferences of 559 full-blooded Indians. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 5, 417–422.
Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, J. G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of
stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 509–517.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and
benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
Gowen, C. W., & Britt, T. W. (2006). The interactive effects of homosexual speech and sexual
orientation on the stigmatization of men—Evidence for expectancy violation theory. Journal
of Language and Social Psychology, 25, 437–456.
Grace, D. M., David, B. J., & Ryan, M. K. (2008). Investigating preschoolers’ categorical thinking
about gender through imitation, attention, and the use of self-categories. Child Development,
79, 1928–1941.
Guimond, S., Branscombe, N. R., Brunot, S., Buunk, A. P., Chatard, A., Desert, M. . . . Yzerbyt,
V. (2007). Culture, gender, and the self: Variations and impact of social comparison process.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1118–1134.
Hulbert, A. C., & Ling, Y. (2007). Biological components of sex differences in colour preference.
Current Biology, 17, R623–R625.
Huun, K., & Kaiser, S. B. (2001). The emergence of modern infantwear, 1896–1962: Traditional
white dresses succumb to fashion’s gender association. Clothing and Textiles Research
Journal, 19, 103–119.
Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592.
Inglehart, R. F., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around
the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.
 Gender stereotyping 613

Kohlberg, L. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of children’s sex-role concepts and

attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp. 82–173). Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Kunda, Z., & Spencer, S. J. (2003). When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they
color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application.
Psychological Bulletin, 129, 522–544.
Levy, G. D. (1999). Gender-typed and non-gender-typed category awareness in toddlers. Sex Roles,
41, 851–873.
Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others.
Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93–120.
Macrae, C. N., Hewstone, M., & Griffiths, R. J. (1993). Processing load and memory for stereotype-
based information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 77–87.
Macrae, C. N., & Martin, D. (2007). A boy primed sue: Feature based processing and person
construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 793–805.
Macrae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A
peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 37–47.
Macrae, C. N., Mitchell, J. P., & Pendry, L. F. (2002). What’s in a forename? Cue familiarity and
stereotypical thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 186–193.
Martin, L., & Halverson, C. F. (1981). A schematic processing model of sex typing and stereotyping
in children. Child Development, 52, 1119–1134.
Martin, D., & Macrae, C. N. (2007). A face with a cue: Exploring the inevitability of person
categorization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 806–816.
Monteith, M. J., Devine, P. G., & Zuwerink, J. R. (1993). Self-directed versus other-directed
affect as a consequence of prejudice-related discrepancies. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 64, 198–210.
Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math
= me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 44–59.
Oakhill, J., Garnham, A., & Reynolds, D. (2005). Immediate activation of stereotypical gender
information. Memory & Cognition, 33, 972–83.
Paoletti, J. B., & Kregloh, C. (1989). The children’s department. In C. B. Kidwell & V. Steele (Eds.),
Men and women: Dressing the part (pp. 22–41). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution
Press.
Pendry, L. F., & Macrae, C. N. (1994). Stereotypes and mental life: The case of the motivated but
thwarted tactician. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 303–325.
Pettigrew, T. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85.
Pettigrew, T., & Tropp, L. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
Picariello, M. L., Greenberg, D. N., & Pillemer, D. B. (1990). Children’s sex-related stereotyping of
colours. Child Development, 61, 1453–1460.
Pomerleau, A., Bolduc, D., Malcuit, G., & Cossette, L. (1990). Pink or blue: Environmental gender
stereotypes in the first two years of life. Sex Roles, 22, 359–367.
Quinn, D., & Spencer, S. (2001). The interference of stereotype threat with women’s generation
of mathematical problem-solving strategies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 55–71.
Rosenthal, H. E. S., & Crisp, R. J. (2006). Reducing stereotype threat by blurring intergroup
boundaries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 501–511.
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminised management and backlash toward agentic women:
The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle-managers. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1004–1010.
Rudman, L. A., & Kilianski, S. E. (2000). Implicit and explicit attitudes toward female authority.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1315–1328.
Shakin, M., Shakin, D., & Sternglanz, S. H. (1985). Infant clothing: Sex labelling for strangers. Sex
Roles, 12, 955–964.
614 Sheila J. Cunningham and C. Neil Macrae

Slaby, R. G., & Frey, K. S. (1975). Development of gender constancy and selective attention to
same-sex models. Child Development, 46, 849–856.
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math
performance. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 35, 4–28.
Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of
information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 37, 1660–1672.
Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1989). Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96, 58–83.
Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology,
12, 97–136.
Warin, J. (2000). The attainment of self-consistency through gender in young children. Sex Roles,
42, 209–231.
Wyer, N. A., Sherman, J. W., & Stroessner, S. J. (2000). The roles of motivation and ability in
controlling the consequences of stereotype suppression. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 26, 13–25.

Received 20 May 2010; revised version received 18 January 2011