Talk:Counterstereotype

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy Low‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit]

Given that countersterotypes exist, discussing them is not inherently biased. I have removed material pertaining to nonconformity to a stereotype rather than to counter-stereotypes per se. The list of examples added little value and was frequently vandalized, so I have reworked it. Spacepotato 00:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If this can escape deletion, great, but it seems better suited to the TV Tropes Wiki to me. --DocumentN (talk) 02:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Example that probably can't be inserted, from the Onion: African-Americans Go From Being No Good At Sports To Being Only Good At Sports 71.162.62.78 (talk) 20:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Counterstereotype. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Counterstereotype. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090121190429/http://www.yale.edu/opa/arc-ybc/v29.n21/story3.html to http://www.yale.edu/opa/arc-ybc/v29.n21/story3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in: Social psychology of counterstereotypical people[edit]

Hi fellow Wikipedians,

I'm new to wikipedia so am unsure if this is the correct place to say this, but: In the section titled "Social psychology of counterstereotypical people" it states "Social psychologists have found that people tend to react more negatively to counterstereotypical people than to stereotypical people.", however, the reference links to a single study (a survey conducted online) of which the abstract states: "People liked counterstereotypical individuals more than stereotypical individuals when target individuals were described using adjectives. In contrast, they showed no bias or a negative bias against counterstereotypical individuals who were described using behaviors.". This seems at odds with, and is certainly more complex than, the statement made on the wikipedia page. It also seems erroneous to state "Social psychologists have found...", when the three authors of this single article appear to be undergraduates, as none of them have qualifications or accreditations listed with their names. Should I suggest that the wording of the statement on wikipedia be altered to appropriately reflect the findings of the study? Something like, "A study conducted online found that respondents showed a preference for counterstereotypical people over stereotypical people when they were described by adjectives, however, when counterstereotypical or stereotypical people were described by their behaviours it was unclear if there was any definite preference." ?

As this is my first time commenting on a wiki page, I won't make any alterations myself and will await for someone more experienced to advise of the proper procedure.

Regards, Eugeneobourke (talk) 15:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]