Facets of the Fundamental Content Dimensions: Agency with Competence and Assertiveness—Communion with Warmth and Morality

Abele, Andrea E.; Hauke, Nicole; Peters, Kim; Louvet, Eva; Szymków, Aleksandra; Duan, Yanping

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810

Cited by 256 publications

(388 citation statements)

References 79 publications

(161 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

366

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These traits capture the way people perceive and describe both themselves and others in natural language (Hogan, ; Saucier & Goldberg, ; Srivastava, ), and have been used in prior stereotyping research (e.g., Chan et al, ; Löckenhoff et al, ; McCrae & Terracciano, ; Schofield & Butterworth, ). Although other stereotyping frameworks, such as the stereotype content model (Fiske et al, ), capture major stereotype dimensions, recent work has demonstrated benefits of considering additional evaluative dimensions, including those of the Big Five (Abele et al, ; Walker & Vetter, ). The Big Five may be especially suitable for studying the perceptions of unemployed benefit recipients if stereotypes extend beyond low warmth (i.e., primarily low agreeableness) and low competence (i.e., primarily low conscientiousness).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The persistence of welfare stigma: Does the passing of time and subsequent employment moderate the negative perceptions associated with unemployment benefit receipt?

Schofield

Haslam

Butterworth

2019

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People receiving welfare payments are stigmatized. However, previous studies of welfare recipient stereotypes have not examined whether the stigma endures after payments are no longer received and have rarely considered the stigma associated with specific categories of welfare payments. We examined whether welfare stigma endures in three experiments (total N = 873) focused on one category of welfare recipient, people receiving government income support due to their unemployment. To test if this stigmatized identity marked or scarred how people are perceived, we compared evaluations of currently unemployed benefit recipients to currently employed people who either previously received this benefit or who had no stated history of benefit receipt. Across the three experiments, we found that current recipients of unemployment benefits were evaluated as much less conscientious, less human, and poorer workers, but as somewhat more extraverted than currently employed individuals irrespective of their welfare history. Moreover, we found that currently employed individuals were evaluated similarly, regardless of whether they had a prior history of benefit receipt, and the recency of this prior benefit experience. This pattern of results suggests that receiving unemployment benefits does not scar how a person is perceived by others, but only temporarily marks how they are perceived. These findings suggest that welfare stigma may create an evaluative barrier to returning to work, but that if this barrier can be overcome there are no negative evaluations of former recipients’ character. Overall, community members seem accepting of prior benefit receipt once a person returns to work.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The persistence of welfare stigma: Does the passing of time and subsequent employment moderate the negative perceptions associated with unemployment benefit receipt?

Schofield

Haslam

Butterworth

2019

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown that both face judgments of trustworthiness (morality-related) and of sociability (warmth-related) share valence as their latent construct (see table S3 in . At the conceptual level, it was recently proposed that competence, along with assertiveness, can be regarded as two distinct facets of a superordinate dimension called agency (i.e., a dimension encapsulating traits related with goalachievement and task-functioning, akin to Fiske and colleagues' competence dimension; Abele et al, 2016;Abele & Wojciszke, 2014;Carrier, Louvet, Chauvin, & Rohmer, 2014). Thus, with regard to face-driven impressions, we did not expect warmth to be easily discriminated from trustworthiness.…”

Section: Warmth and Trustworthiness Versus Competence And Dominancementioning

confidence: 62%

Dominance and competence face to face: Dissociations obtained with a reverse correlation approach

Oliveira

Garcia‐Marques

Dotsch

et al. 2019

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article explores whether the traits representing the dimensions underlying the structure of facial and non‐facial impressions are similarly mapped in the face space. Two studies examine whether the trustworthiness‐by‐dominance and the warmth‐by‐competence two‐dimensional models overlap in face perception. In Study 1 (N = 200), we used a reverse‐correlation task to obtain classification images (CIs) reflecting how each dimension is mapped onto a face. Results show that the similarity between CIs was higher between warmth and trustworthiness than between competence and dominance. In Study 2 (N = 31) the evaluations of each CI on each social dimension show a higher dissociation between dominance and competence than between trustworthiness and warmth. These results, obtained at both perceptual and judgment levels, suggest that there is only a partial correspondence between the two models that seems to be driven by the relationship that the competence and dominance dimensions establish with valence.

show abstract

“…The selection of communion and agency characteristics was based on Abele et al . () description of the ‘Big two’ person perception dimensions and on the scale of stereotype content (Fiske et al ., ). All materials are in the Appendix S1.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Respondents also received information about both facets of communion and agency of the entrepreneur based on the description of these facets in Abele et al . (). High versus low communion information: ‘…Many people [do not] see the entrepreneur as a well‐intentioned and [or] trustworthy person’ ‘ … They would describe him as a very warm and generous person who likes socializing with others [They would describe him as very cold, selfish, and distant’].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the present contribution, we propose that while these various responses towards offenders often appear closely aligned, they are actually rooted in related but distinct psychological antecedents. Specifically, we argue that people's beliefs about offenders are predominantly driven by their expectations (along the person perception dimension of communion; Abele, ; Abele & Wojciszke, ; Abele & Bruckmüller, ; Abele et al ., ; Wojciszke, ), while punitive behaviours towards offenders are predominantly driven by the offender's observable rule‐breaking behaviour.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reactions to offenders: Psychological differences between beliefs versus punishment

Fousiani

Prooijen

2019

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present research, we examined a discrepancy between people's beliefs about, versus punitive reactions towards, offenders. Particularly, appraisals of offenders along the dimension of communion (i.e., being friendly or trustworthy) should primarily affect people's beliefs about them, as reflected in demonizing and conspiracy theories, and to a lesser extent observers’ punitive reactions. However, actual evidence of transgression should (more strongly than beliefs) influence observers’ punitive reactions. In two studies, we manipulated communion and transgression ambiguity in the context of financial offences. The transgression was presented as either an observable and clear‐cut immoral case (non‐ambiguous transgression) or as a case that involves a grey area between what is legal or illegal (ambiguous transgression). Study 1 revealed that viewing an offender as low (as opposed to high) in communion predominantly influenced demonization and conspiracy beliefs involving the offender. The transgression manipulation, however, mostly influenced observers’ punitive reactions and their underlying punitive motives. Similar findings were obtained in Study 2. We conclude that although beliefs about offenders and punitive reactions are often strongly related, they are actually grounded in different psychological processes.

show abstract

Facets of the Fundamental Content Dimensions: Agency with Competence and Assertiveness—Communion with Warmth and Morality

Cited by 256 publications

References 79 publications

The persistence of welfare stigma: Does the passing of time and subsequent employment moderate the negative perceptions associated with unemployment benefit receipt?

The persistence of welfare stigma: Does the passing of time and subsequent employment moderate the negative perceptions associated with unemployment benefit receipt?

Dominance and competence face to face: Dissociations obtained with a reverse correlation approach

Reactions to offenders: Psychological differences between beliefs versus punishment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About