Accuracy and exaggeration in occupational stereotypes exemplified with clinical psychology

Little is known about the differences between the perceptions of occupations by occupational deciders and by nondeciders who participate in laboratory research on stereotypes. Several types of inaccuracies exist and their relationships may be complex, e.g., judges who can identify a stereotype's most and least salient features may also exaggerate these features. The present study used the results of previous research on stereotypes to prepare judges to perceive the occupation of clinical psychology accurately. Twenty-five practicing clinical psychologists provided criterion data. Profile accuracy, exaggeration, and elevation bias were evaluated with regression measures of profile similarity. Profile accuracy was unusually high, but the judges over-differentiated the stereotype: The clinician's most salient interests were overestimated and their least salient interests underestimated. Such exaggerations may result from an effort to rank scales accurately and may facilitate the comparison of similar occupational profiles. Ln real decision-making stereotypic exaggeration may also index ego-involvement with a specific occupation. (C) 1998 Academic Press.