The Privileged Position of Person Categories: A Comment on Sedikides and Ostrom

Abstract

Two problems are identified with Sedikides and Ostrom's (1988) meta-analytic integration of research examining the use of person categories for unfamiliar persons. First, this previous effort made minimal use of meta-analytic model testing procedures, which might have more fully illuminated the basic phenomenon of person categorization. Second, several instances of inappropriate application of meta-analytic statistics to the hypothesis tests included in their meta-analytic database precludes the clear interpretation of the patterns reported in that metaanalysis. Accordingly, the meta-analytic database examined by Sedikides and Ostrom was reexamined, with an eye toward a more appropriate, and a more fine-grained, meta-analytic examination of the use of person categories for unfamiliar persons. Several of the statistical results contradict the patterns reported by Sedikides and Ostrom. Moreover, the patterns revealed by these analyses suggest that person categories do indeed seem to hold a privileged position in the organization of social information. However, the apparent privileged position of person categories may derive less from the special ontological status of person “gestalts” than from the tangibility and ease of use of person categories as compared to other types of categories.