This is basically describing stereotyping. (Several biases overlap to form these, depending which theory you prefer the most.)
The most cited paper that cites Darley & Gross seem to be a 1995 review titled "Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes". It cites D & G for implicit stereotyping (research):
Although research on stereotypes has often used direct or explicit
measures (see Judd & Park, 1993), there are also substantial
research programs on stereotypes that use indirect measures—
ones in which a stigmatizing feature with which a stereotype
is associated (e.g., weight, race, or gender) is peripheral
to the respondent's judgment task (e.g., Darley & Gross, 1983)
or in which the purpose of investigation is otherwise disguised
(e.g., Hamilton & GifFord, 1976). Crosby, Bromley, and Saxe
(1980) were able to locate enough research using indirect measures
of prejudicial stereotypes to conclude that "anti-Black
sentiments are much more prevalent among White Americans
than the survey data [i.e., direct or explicit measures of stereotypes]
lead one to expect." Although the use of indirect measures
in these studies often reflects the researchers' intent to
avoid intrusion of unwanted demand or impression-management
artifacts (which would plausibly suppress accurate expressions
of conscious stereotypes), some of the research that is
summarized just below was designed specifically to investigate
unconscious operation of stereotypes. These studies suggest that
stereotypes are often expressed implicitly in the behavior of persons
who explicitly disavow the stereotype. The next two sections
focus attention on race and gender stereotypes because
these, having been much more heavily investigated than other
stereotypes, have provided the most persuasive evidence for implicit
stereotyping.
Wikipedia also has a more specific article on implicit stereotype, although it seems someone was unhappy with it... The wiki article claims:
Implicit stereotype was first defined by psychologists Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald in 1995
which is probably referring to the above 1995 review, but I'm not sure how correct is the claim that Banaji & Greenwald were the first to define the notion. (They clearly were not the first to study it.)
Greenwald has actually co-authored a more recent (2019) review titled just "Implicit Social Cognition", which (I guess) could be useful to check for research progress on implicit stereotyping. Most of the later research seems to have involved (the veritable explosion of) IAT studies. Greenwald (2019) summarizes several meta-analyses and does some moderator analysis.
For a broader theoretical perspective (and to clarify what Greenwald and
Banaji actually introduced--it's actually the term "implicit cognition", with a specific def), Hahn & Gawronski (2015) write contrasting Greenwald's conception with De Houwer et al.'s:
Drawing on the notion of implicit memory, Greenwald and
Banaji (1995) defined implicit cognition as “introspectively
unidentified (or inaccurately identified) trace of past experience
that mediates responses” (p. 5). Although this definition was
meant to imply unawareness of the sources of mental contents,
it has often been interpreted to imply unawareness of the
mental contents themselves (e.g., unawareness of the source of
an attitude vs. unawareness of the attitude itself). However, the
latter interpretation conflicts with a considerable body of
evidence, suggesting that the psychological constructs captured
by nonreactive, computerized measures are consciously accessible
and thus not unconscious (e.g., Hahn et al., 2014).
More recently, De Houwer et al. (2009) proposed an alternative
conceptualization to overcome the common confusion
regarding the meaning of the term implicit. [...]
Measurement procedures [...] may be
described as direct if their measurement outcomes are based on
participants’ self-assessment of the to-be-measured attribute
(e.g., when participants’ racial attitudes are inferred from their
self-reported liking of Black people). Conversely, measurement procedures may be described as indirect if their outcomes are
not based on a self-assessment (e.g., when participants’ racial
attitudes are inferred from their reaction times to positive and
negative words after being primed with Black faces) or when
it is based on a self-assessment of attributes other than the
to-be-measured attribute (e.g., when participants’ racial attitudes
are inferred from their self-reported liking of a neutral
object after being primed with Black faces).
Applying the latter categorization to D & G (1983) study, they clearly used an indirect measure in De Houwer's categorization. Thus from this methodological perspective (after glancing over De Houwer et al.) D & G (1983) is an affect priming study.