CHAPTER 3

PROTOTYPE THEORY, SCHEMA THEORY, SOCIAL SCHEMATA AND

STEREOTYPES
3. 0. Introduction
Men in Trunks’
prototypeMen in Trunks’ Zest, schemaschemata
schema-reinforcement’schema-refreshment’
3.1. The importance of concepts and categories

3.2. Against classical categorization: the ‘prototype’ approach

degree of membershiprank of typicality

prototypical features
Men inTrunkstypicalinternal structurerepresentativeness
appealingdisgusting
3.2.1. Variants of Rosch’s prototype theory
typical properties
specific exemplars
‘a cue validity’Men in Trunks’narcissisticblue-eyed’narcissisticblue-eyed
‘Men in Trunks’
Men in Trunks’
3.2.2. Context-dependence and goal-directed categories

‘Men in Trunks’
goal-directed categories
Men in Trunks’
3.2.3. Concluding remarks on categorisation

vague‘fuzzy’
Men in Trunks’Bashful Boxers’fuzzy’ attractivedisgusting
experientially-grounded
Men in Trunks’
anchored in conceptually salient prototypes. Men in Trunks’
goodness-of-fittypicality gradient
3.3. Schema theory

complex spatio-temporal structures

3.3.1. Adopted definitions and terms designating germane concepts
schemaschemata

schemaframescriptFrameScript
encyclopaedic entries’blueprints

3.3.1.2. Schemata as higher-order cognitive structures: Rumelhart’s “building blocks

of cognition”

variablesvariable constraints default variables values realise variable

constraintsdefault values’
3.3.1.3. Rumelhart’s Parallel Distributed Processing
3.3.1.4. Schank and Abelson’s scripts
, Plans, Goals and UnderstandingscriptscriptheadersHeaderstriggers
‘header’
3.3.2. Relevance of schema theory for my own research: linguistic input, background
knowledge and schema activation

Zest
When Romanian undergraduate female readers are presented with a multimodal text on
the male body published in the British magazine Zest, is there any evidence that the textual
input either (a) reinforces or (b) clashes with the readers’ schematic representations of
masculinity?
Men in Trunks’
Men in Trunks’
E2: Do readers’ responses contain linguistic clues indicating that textual representations
of different types of masculinities are consistent or inconsistent with the readers’ existing
schemata?
M2: Does the designed tasksheet elicit readers’ responses which indicate the respective
readers' accommodation of schema-inconsistent masculinities?
M3: Do readers’ acknowledged changes in attitudes during their interaction with the text
constitute evidence as to their (lack of) accommodation of schema-inconsistent
masculinities?
3.3.3. Suspending schemata, building expectations and drawing inferences
 inference drawing’gap filling’
suspends
3.3.4. ‘Schema-refreshment’ versus ‘schema-reinforcement’

consistent
‘
because ofschematic expectations’
automatic cognitiondeliberative cognition
Men in Trunks’
3.3.5. Schemata and affect
M3: Do readers’ acknowledged changes in attitudes during their interaction with the text
constitute evidence as to their (lack of) accommodation of schema-inconsistent
masculinities?
3.3.6. Attitudes and schemata
E3: What are the implications of the multimodality of the text on the types of schemata
activated by readers when gradually exposed to visual, written and combined visual and
written input?

M3: Do readers’ acknowledged changes in attitudes during their interaction with the text
constitute evidence as to their (lack of) accommodation of schema-inconsistent
masculinities?
3.3.7. Operationalising the concept of ‘schema-refreshment’ in my own research.
Zest
E1: Do readers’ responses to comprehension tasks suggest potential schema-refreshment
in relation to their likely schematic representations of masculinity?
Zest
Men in TrunksZest
3.3.8. Anticipated limitations of operationalising the concept of ‘schema-refreshment’
Men in Trunks’hypothesise

3.4. Social cognition: on the interaction of intrapersonal cognition and extrapersonal

culturally shared knowledge
3.4.1. Schematic representation, socially shared knowledge and ideology
falsedistorted
needare
intrapersonal extrapersonal
3.4.2. The role of social schemata

expectationshypotheses

3.4.2.2. A typology of social schemata

Men in Trunks’
Men in Trunks’

3.4.3. Category-based versus person-based processings of social information

category-basedpiecemeal approaches
Category-based
Person-basedattribute-based
appealingdisgusting
3.5. Stereotypes
et al
role schemata
et alknowledge, beliefs and expectations
Men in Trunks’
3.5.1. Mechanisms of stereotype formation
et al
Cognitive mechanismscategorisation
self-categorisationet al
correspondence bias’et al
correspondence bias’
‘Illusory correlation’et alet al
affective mechanismset al
et alcultural mechanisms
et al
et al
et al

3.5.2. Stereotypes in relation to schema-reinforcement and schema-refreshment

et al
3.6. Schema theory and gender
3.6.1. Bem’s Gender schema theory and gender-schemating processing: a critical
review

Signsgender schema theory

gender schema theory
contentsocial context
a)b)
3.6.1.1. Some critical remarks on Bem’s gender schema theory

Signs.
Defending <The Lenses of Gender>
3.6.1.2. Gender-schematic processing and ‘the lenses of gender’
lenses of gender’
gender polarisation
androcentrism
biological essentialism
3.7. Concluding remarks
Men in Trunks’
red, furniture woman, occupationdemocracyodd number
-
-
-
-
-
Psychoanalytic theory
Social learning theory
Cognitive-developmental theory