Social science research on trial: Use of sex stereotyping research in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins..

TLDR

The APA submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court affirming the validity of stereotyping research, marking the first use of such evidence in a sex discrimination case after its longstanding role in race discrimination cases. The study aims to derive lessons for psychological research on stereotyping from its legal application. The literature demonstrates that stereotypes are pervasive, are promoted by many conditions, and are resistant to new information.

Abstract

The American Psychological Association filed an amicus curiae brief supporting the validity of the field of stereotyping and the general methods used by the expert. Such legal application provides further lessons for psychological research on stereotyping. The American Psychological Association (APA) submitted to the Supreme Court amicus curiae brief. The relevant psychological literature was heavily cited in Judge Gesell's original decision, and the testimony about the psychology of stereotyping was cited at all levels of the appeal and review process, including the Supreme Court's decision and the subsequent remand. Social science evidence has played a significant role in race discrimination cases in the Supreme Court since Brown v. Board of Education, but such evidence had not before been used in sex discrimination cases. The psychological literature is strong in showing how per vasive stereotypes are, in demonstrating the myriad conditions that promote them, and in showing how resistant they can be to new information.