In a groundbreaking new study published in Communications Psychology, researchers have embarked on a meticulous exploration of the mental imagery that White Americans spontaneously generate when they envision individuals who have had abortions. This research unveils the deep-seated racialized and sexist stereotypes embedded in these mental representations and their consequential influence on attitudes toward abortion policies. Employing advanced psychological techniques, the study unpacks the nuanced differences in how abortions for medical versus non-medical reasons are mentally visualized and perceived, shedding critical light on the intersection of race, gender, and reproductive rights in contemporary American society.
The investigation hinges on a cutting-edge method known as reverse correlation, a data-driven and indirect procedure that captures rich, detailed visual representations derived from participants’ spontaneous choices rather than predetermined categories. Unlike conventional survey methods sensitive to social desirability bias or predefined stereotypes, reverse correlation offers an unfiltered glimpse into subconscious biases by allowing participants to select facial images that best represent specific social categories. Participants were tasked with generating mental images of three distinct groups: women who never had an abortion, women who terminated pregnancies for medical reasons, and women who chose abortion for non-medical reasons. This nuanced approach revealed startling divergences in how these groups are mentally depicted by White Americans.
The study’s findings indicate a marked gradient in perceptions: images of women who never had an abortion were rated as most representative of White Americans, wealth, femininity, and positive stereotypes. In stark contrast, images of women who had an abortion for non-medical reasons were perceived as least representative of these qualities and more closely associated with negative stereotypes. Those representing abortion for medical reasons consistently occupied a middle ground in these ratings. This pattern underscores the racialized and sexist underpinnings not only of abortion stigma itself but also of the differentiated moral judgments and social representations based on the perceived justification for seeking an abortion.
Further adding to the complexity, a second phase of the research delved into the role of the image generators’ own biases. Incorporating a nationally representative sample of White Americans, researchers demonstrated that negative attitudes toward Black and Latinx communities predicted the production of images portraying abortion seekers for non-medical reasons as less representative of White identity. This suggests that underlying racial prejudices inform even the subconscious construction of abortion narratives and mental images, potentially perpetuating harmful stereotypes and exacerbating social divides.
Crucially, the study moves beyond identifying these biases to explore their causal consequences on policy attitudes. When participants in a third study were exposed to images generated to represent abortion seekers for non-medical reasons, they rated the depicted women as less responsible and the pregnancies as less planned or desired compared to images of women who never had abortions. These perceptions then mediated increased endorsement of restrictive abortion policies and harsher punitive attitudes toward women who might seek abortions illegally, illustrating how visual stereotypes can influence public opinion on contentious policy matters.
This research pushes the boundaries of cognitive and social psychology by integrating mental imagery studies with policy attitude formation, providing empirical evidence for how subtle, spontaneous visualizations shape broader social and political dynamics. Previous investigations hinted at a connection between racist and sexist stereotypes and abortion attitudes, but this work offers a definitive analysis of how such mental representations causally influence judgments about abortion seekers and support for policy restrictions, illuminating a pathway from subconscious imagery to societal outcomes.
The implications of these findings pervade political communication strategies. Policymakers and interest groups who deploy messaging underscoring traditional femininity, motherhood, and moral responsibility—while casting abortion seekers as irresponsible or immoral—may unwittingly or deliberately invoke racialized stereotypes rooted in the public’s mental imagery. This dynamic enriches the palette of techniques used to sway public opinion without overtly engaging in explicit racial or gender prejudice, instead operating through subconscious visual and emotional cues that shape support for more restrictive reproductive laws.
From a methodological standpoint, the use of reverse correlation represents a significant advancement over traditional approaches to stereotype research. By removing experimenters’ assumptions about which attributes are relevant and allowing participants’ own perceptual biases to surface, the researchers have captured an authentic snapshot of prevailing societal representations. This approach avoids the pitfalls of forcing participants into predetermined evaluative categories, thereby revealing the full complexity of stereotypes attached to abortion seekers, including intertwined dimensions of race, social class, femininity, and morality.
Nevertheless, the research acknowledges important limitations. The focus on White Americans leaves open questions about the mental representations held by Hispanic, Black, Asian, and other racial or ethnic groups whose experiences and cultural contexts differ markedly. Future studies are called to extend these findings into broader, more diverse populations to understand fully how abortion stigma operates across America’s pluralistic society.
Another caveat concerns the nature of the reverse correlation method itself. While it excels at eliciting spontaneous mental imagery, it cannot isolate which specific facial features or stereotyping elements most strongly drive viewer responses and policy attitudes. The intertwining of perceived race, femininity, and morality complicates attribution, inviting the use of complementary experimental designs or psychometric modeling to disaggregate these effects in future work.
Moreover, the research did not explore the potential influence of participants’ personal exposure to abortion—either through having had one themselves or knowing someone who did—due to ethical and legal sensitivities. Such firsthand experience might profoundly alter mental representations, attenuating or reshaping stereotypes. This unexplored area presents a rich frontier for subsequent inquiry.
The study also highlights a gap regarding the mental images of women embodying non-traditional gender markers or seeking abortion for reasons beyond the categories of medical or non-medical currently examined. Expanding the scope to include transgender or non-binary individuals, and the diverse motivations behind abortion decisions, would contribute valuable nuance to our understanding of reproductive stigma in future research.
By spotlighting the automatic, visualized assumptions held by White Americans and linking these stereotypes directly to attitudes about abortion laws, this work offers a crucial lens for activists, policymakers, and scholars alike. Recognizing and challenging these unconscious mental images is essential to fostering more equitable and informed public discourses surrounding reproductive rights, cutting through the covert biases that often underpin legislative and social resistance.
In sum, this pioneering research untangles the racialized and gendered undercurrents in Americans’ spontaneous mental imagery of abortion seekers, revealing a potent mechanism through which stereotypes perpetuate restrictive policies and social stigma. As abortion access remains a volatile and politically charged terrain in the United States, understanding and addressing these subconscious dynamics represents an urgent task for crafting justice-centered reproductive policies.
By integrating innovative reverse correlation techniques with comprehensive attitudinal analyses, this study inaugurates a powerful methodology for uncovering the unconscious visual biases shaping public opinion. The insights gleaned here should galvanize further multidisciplinary investigations aimed at dismantling the insidious stereotypes that jeopardize reproductive freedom and social equity.
Ultimately, confronting the implicit racialized sexist stereotypes embedded in the public imagination is a necessary step toward ensuring that abortion seekers are perceived with dignity and humanity, not through the distorting lens of prejudice. This research not only elucidates the mental imagery at the heart of reproductive stigma but also charts a course for transforming these subconscious narratives into catalysts for positive social change.
Subject of Research: The study investigates White Americans’ spontaneous mental representations of women who have had abortions, distinguishing between medical and non-medical reasons, and explores how these representations influence stereotypes and attitudes toward abortion policies.
Article Title: Investigating White Americans’ Mental Images of Who Has Abortions and Its Impact on Attitudes Toward Abortion Policies.
Article References:
Brown-Iannuzzi, J.L., Cooley, E., Espinel, S. et al. Investigating White Americans’ Mental Images of Who Has Abortions and Its Impact on Attitudes Toward Abortion Policies. Commun Psychol 3, 164 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-025-00335-1
Image Credits: AI Generated
