In three experiments, participants rated how well a number of adjectives described their in-group (e.g. kind-hearted, helpful, intelligent, efficient, etc.). In Experiment 1, females were found to rate their ingroup (females) more favorably when reporting verbally to female (rather than male) experimenters. This finding was further explored in two subsequent experiments where response format (written vs. verbal) was also manipulated. Both experiments revealed an interaction such that ethnic Swedes rated their in-group (Swedes) the most favorably when reporting verbally to an in-group experimenter and the least favorably when reporting verbally to a Middle Eastern experimenter. Results are discussed in relation to correction and contextual activation of social norms.

Correction of judgments of people of different ethnicities and sexes was explored by exposing participants to cues to the risk of making biased judgments (from explicit warnings to subtle hints). In three experiments, a three-way interaction was revealed, where the effect of a cue to bias varied as a function of both the ethnicity and sex of the target person. Some targets (White males) were generally rated less favorably when judges were reminded of bias, whereas other targets (Black males, Middle Eastern males and White females) were generally rated more favorably, indicating bidirectional correction. Finally, a normative account of the results was explored. In a pattern consistent with the experimental results, it was considered more important to avoid overrating White men than all other groups, and more important to avoid underrating all other groups than White men. The results are discussed in relation to theories of correction and intergroup bias.

Correction of judgments of people of different ethnicities and sexes was exploredby exposing participants to cues to the risk of making biased judgments (from explicitwarnings to subtle hints). In three experiments, a three-way interaction was revealed, wherethe effect of a cue to bias varied as a function of both the ethnicity and sex of the targetperson. Some targets (White males) were generally rated less favorably when judges werereminded of bias, whereas other targets (Black males, Middle Eastern males and Whitefemales) were generally rated more favorably, indicating bidirectional correction. Finally, anormative account of the results was explored. In a pattern consistent with the experimentalresults, it was considered more important to avoid overrating White men than all othergroups, and more important to avoid underrating all other groups than White men. Theresults are discussed in relation to theories of correction and intergroup bias.