Stereotypes in Context: How and When Do Street‐Level Bureaucrats Use Class Stereotypes?

• Date: 01 January 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12952
• Published date: 01 January 2019
• Author: Gitte Sommer Harrits

Stereotypes in Context: How and When Do Street-Level Bureaucrats Use Class Stereotypes? 93

Gitte Sommer Harrits

Aarhus University

Stereotypes in Context: How and When Do Street-Level

Bureaucrats Use Class Stereotypes?

Abstract: Stereotype use in street-level work and discretionary judgments is important because of the possible

introduction of bias. This article contributes to the study of stereotypes in street-level work by suggesting that stereotypes

are related to both cognitive and social uncertainties. A distinction between uncontrolled stereotype activation in

the interpretation of information and controlled stereotype application in decision making is made to allow for a

more nuanced study. A unique design combining semistructured interviews and a vignette experiment is presented to

accommodate this theoretical framework. Results show that stereotype activation is conditioned by class difference and

involves both categorization and simplified assumptions. Stereotype application is conditioned by class as well as by the

homogeneity of the social contexts of street-level institutions. These results suggest that in order to decrease stereotypical

bias in frontline encounters, one solution may be to increase social heterogeneity.

Evidence for Practice

• Street-level work can benefit from becoming more reflective about the use of stereotypes.

• To understand how stereotypes work, it is helpful to distinguish between stereotype activation,

an uncontrolled reaction attributable to deep-seated social and cultural learning, and stereotype

application, a more controlled use of stereotypes when weighing different types of information in

decision making.

• Stereotype activation and application are both conditioned by class differences between street-level

bureaucrats and clients. Stereotype application is also conditioned by the homogeneity of the social contexts

of frontline institutions.

• Efforts to decrease the impact of stereotypes should focus on stereotype activation and involve increasing

social heterogeneity in frontline encounters. This could be done by organizing work to increase interactions

between street-level bureaucrats and citizens of different classes. Emphasizing the collection of different types

of information and perspectives may also help reduce stereotype application.

The literature on street-level bureaucracy has

consistently demonstrated that discretionary

judgments are shaped not only by political,

administrative, and organizational structures but also

by frontline social relations, identities, and citizen

encounters (Brodkin 2012; Dubois 2010, 2014;

Epp, Maynard-Moody, and Haider-Markel 2014;

Lipsky 2010; Maynard-Moody and Musheno 2003;

Soss, Fording, and Schram 2011). As pointed out by

Lipsky (2010) and Maynard-Moody and Musheno

(2003), for example, one important mechanism

shaping street-level judgments is the use of social

stereotypes. However, not many studies have tried

to disentangle more precisely how and when street-

level bureaucrats (SLBs) use stereotypes. The lack of

specific studies of stereotype use at the street level

is unfortunate, as stereotypes involve the possible

introduction of bias in encounters between the state

and citizens.

In light of this, this article makes three contributions.

First, a theoretical framework for studying stereotypes,

drawing on sociological and psychological theory, is

presented. It is suggested that stereotypes be seen as

reducing both cognitive and social uncertainty, as they

function as a frame for the interpretation of information.

Further, the distinction between stereotype activation

and application is suggested as key to studying how and

when street-level bureaucrats use stereotypes. Second, a

methodological framework using vignette experiments

that allows for interpretive analysis of reasoning and

systematic assessment of final decisions is presented.

Third, empirical results show how stereotype use is

linked to class differences between SLBs and citizen-

clients and to the social contexts of street-level work.

Discretion and Stereotypes: What Do We Know?

The literature typically includes stereotypes as one of

several mechanisms linked to frontline discretion, and

Gitte Sommer Harrits is associate

professor in the Department of

Political Science, Aarhus University. Her

research focuses on social class, social

categories, street-level bureaucracy, and

professionalism. She has recently published

work on the use of class categories in

Denmark in British Journal of Sociology,

and on professionals’ claims to authority

in Journal of Professions and

Organizations.

E-mail: gitte@ps.au.dk

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 79, Iss. 1, pp. 93–103. © 2018 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.12952.

Research Article