Your quote refers to idividuating information that is, in the mind of the interviewer, unambiguous and certain. To take the example from the paper, "the person

Your quote refers to idividuating information that is, in the mind of the interviewer, unambiguous and certain. To take the example from the paper, "the person was seen punching an adult". I don't know if you've ever interviewed someone for a job, but I wish the information I gather from interviews were at the same time unambiguous, relevant, and certain. The very same paper is littered with examples of cases in which stereotypes affect the judgement of people when your clause ("only applies to people that you are completely unconnected to and have never interacted with") doesn't apply. So I'm not sure if you're being intellectually honest, or cherry-picking the most extreme circumstances examined in the paper and generalizing them. Just one of a multitude of examples cited: > a child from a high socioeconomic background who displayed a mixed performance on an ability test was rated as higher in ability than a child from a low socioeconomic background with the same performance (p. 293, citing two different studies) So if you honestly believe that the stereotypes associated with gipsies cannot impact their lifetime opportunities in a harmful way, please do read in detail the Kunda & Thagard paper. And by all means believe the paper.