primacy of warmth versus competence: a motivated bias

This article was downloaded by: [Universita' Milano Bicocca]On: 29 May 2012, At: 08:29Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

The Journal of SocialPsychologyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

Primacy of Warmth VersusCompetence: A Motivated Bias?Juliette Richetin a , Federica Durante a , Silvia Mari a

, Marco Perugini a & Chiara Volpato aa University of Milan-Bicocca

Available online: 10 Jan 2012

To cite this article: Juliette Richetin, Federica Durante, Silvia Mari, Marco Perugini &Chiara Volpato (2012): Primacy of Warmth Versus Competence: A Motivated Bias?, TheJournal of Social Psychology, 152:4, 417-435

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2011.623735

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up todate. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should beindependently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liablefor any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2011.623735

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith or arising out of the use of this material.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

The Journal of Social Psychology, 2012, 152(4), 417–435

Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Primacy of Warmth Versus Competence:A Motivated Bias?

JULIETTE RICHETINFEDERICA DURANTE

SILVIA MARIMARCO PERUGINICHIARA VOLPATO

University of Milan-Bicocca

ABSTRACT. In line with previous results that challenge the traditional primacy of warmthover competence in outgroup perception, we propose to bridge elements from stereotypecontent model and social identity theory: Perceivers will use the competence and warmthdimensions differentially when interpreting higher or lower status outgroup members’behavior. We test the hypothesis that the dimension that is less favorable for the outgroupand more favorable for the ingroup will be used. In particular, we investigate whetherthe warmth dimension would better predict the interpretation of higher status outgroupmembers’ behavior than the competence dimension, whereas the competence dimensionwould better predict the interpretation of lower status outgroup members’ behavior thanthe warmth dimension. Two studies separately test these effects. Results suggest the exis-tence of a motivated bias in interpreting outgroup members’ behavior, especially whenthere is ingroup identification.

Keywords: competence, ingroup bias, intergroup perception, status, warmth

SEVERAL STUDIES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL research havedocumented the centrality of the two basic dimensions of warmth and com-petence (Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2007). Sometimes with different labels (e.g.,socially vs. intellectually good-bad, Rosenberg, Nelson, & Vivekanathan, 1968;communion vs. agency, Abele & Wojciszke, 2007), these two dimensions havebeen repeatedly shown to be basic dimensions of social judgment (e.g., Cuddy,

Address correspondence to Juliette Richetin or Federica Durante, University of Milan-Bicocca, Faculty of Psychology, Piazza dell’Ateneo Nuovo, 1-20126 Milan, Italy; [email protected] (e-mail), or [email protected] (e-mail).

417

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

418 The Journal of Social Psychology

Fiske, & Glick, 2008), as well as to play an important role in leading intergroupbehavior (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007). According to Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, andXu (2002), the reason why warmth and competence are social judgment’s coredimensions is that they help individuals in their social interactions, providing anindication of how helpful or harmful a target may be. These dimensions, in fact,seem to be constantly involved when people form impressions concerning bothindividuals and social groups (Cuddy et al., 2008).

Since Asch’s (1946) manipulation of warm–cold versus competent in hisperson perception research, several researchers have shown that relative to compe-tence, warmth is a more central dimension when it comes to perceiving others. Forexample, observers interpret behavior more in warmth than in competence terms(Wojciszke, 1994), and the warmth dimension is more relevant than the compe-tence one in interpreting and evaluating others’ behavior (Abele & Wojciszke,2007). This demonstrated primacy of the “Warmth over Competence” dimensionhas been explained mainly as functional: People have to determine the intentionsof other persons and their ability to enact those intentions in order to survive insocial interactions (Fiske et al., 2007), and whether a person is beneficial or harm-ful (warmth) is more important than how much benefit or harm the person maybring about (competence).

Nonetheless, Wojciszke (2005) in his double interest theory assumes that themore the target is close to the self, the more the evaluation of the target on thetwo dimensions will resemble the self-perception in which competence contentis more relevant than warmth content in self-evaluations (Abele & Wojciszke,2007). In other words, the competence aspects of the other person may becomemore important for an individual’s goal achievement and the typical “Warmthover Competence” may be reversed. In fact, Wojciszke and Abele (2008) showedthat this pattern is typical for judging distant persons but is reversed when peo-ple judge the self or interdependent others (see also Abele & Wojciszke, 2007).So it appears that depending on the context, the primacy of warmth over compe-tence in judging someone could be attenuated or even reversed. Another exampleof the effect of context might be provided from research on the compensation(i.e., when one is judged more negatively on one dimension, then is judgedmore positively on the other dimension, cf. Judd, James-Hawkins, Yzerbyt, &Kashima, 2005) versus halo effect (Rosenberg et al., 1968) observed betweenwarmth and competence attributions: The compensation effect occurs only oncompetence and warmth, only in comparative contexts, and when participantshad a group membership (see Kervyn, Yzerbyt, & Judd, 2010, for a review; seealso Durante, Capozza, & Fiske, 2010), otherwise the halo effect is observed.Taken together, these findings underline the importance of considering the con-text in determining which of the two basic dimensions of warmth and competencehave greater influence on social judgment and, more specifically, of taking intoaccount the motivation of the perceiver in social judgment (Smith & Semin,2007).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 419

Motivated Primacy?

The stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske et al., 2002) indicates warmth andcompetence as the two basic dimensions capturing cultural stereotype contents.Because intergroup stereotypes revolve on consciousness of power relations,the authors argue that competence and warmth judgments respectively stemfrom perceived socio-economic status (high-low) and perceived interdependence(cooperative-competitive). Following these principles, groups are perceived aswarm and competent when of high status and cooperative, while as cold andincompetent when of low status and competitive. Ambivalent combinations ofwarmth and competence emerge, instead, for high-status, competitive groups(i.e., competent but lacking warmth), and for low-status, cooperative groups (i.e.,incompetent but warm). The link between relative group status and competenceis supported by considerable evidence (see Cuddy et al., 2008, for a review) andacross cultures (Cuddy et al., 2009). As pointed out by Oldmeadow and Fiske(2010), both warmth and competence are positive dimensions, but high-statusgroups tend to see themselves as more competent than warm, while the oppositeis true for low-status groups.

According to another important theoretical framework, social identity theory(SIT; Tajfel, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1979), ingroup bias systematically emerges inthe context of intergroup relations. Individuals seek to reach or maintain positiveself-esteem through positive social identity that would be achieved by differen-tiating their ingroup from an outgroup on some dimension. Most relevant here,ingroup bias can be functional for both low- and high-status groups (Scheepers,Spears, Doosje, & Manstead, 2006a). Studies in the domain of socio-economicstatus differentials indicated that high-status groups tend to emphasize theirsuperiority on competence or ability dimensions (“we are stronger”), while low-status groups exhibit outgroup favoritism on these dimensions but clear ingroupfavoritism on social dimensions (“we are nicer”; e.g., Mummendey & Schreiber,1983). It appears then that both high- and low- status groups pursue positivedistinctiveness primarily along the two dimensions, but “through differentialdiscrimination in domains related to competence and warmth” (Oldmeadow &Fiske, 2010, p. 4). In fact, putting together the principles of the SCM and SIT,Oldmeadow and Fiske (2010) did find that high- and low-status groups showedingroup favoritism in separate domains, namely, competence stereotypes amongsthigh-status groups, and warmth stereotypes amongst low-status groups.

In the same perspective that consists of putting elements from the two theo-ries, we propose to extend the investigation of the differential primacy of warmthversus competence to its effect on the interpretation of outgroup members’ behav-ior. In fact, most of the work conducted in the domain of SCM has focused ongroups but rarely on their members. Moreover, although Oldmeadow and Fiske(2010) studied how stereotype contents are related to the way high- and low-statusgroups pursue positive distinctiveness through resource allocation, no one has

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


explored the use of stereotype content in social perception. In order to fill thesegaps, we investigate how the two dimensions are used to interpret higher versuslower outgroup members’ behaviors in order to maintain positive social identity.In particular, and in line with the principle that social perceivers are viewed as“motivated tacticians who consider social interaction goals before choosing cog-nitive strategies” (Stevens & Fiske, 1995, p. 189), we propose that people woulduse the dimension (warmth or competence) in such a way that it is less advanta-geous to outgroup members, resulting in an ingroup bias. The ingroup bias can beclassified in different ways, such as ingroup favoritism versus outgroup derogation(e.g., Brewer, 1996), or maximum ingroup profit versus maximum differentia-tion (e.g., Tajfel, Flament, Billig, & Bundy, 1971), or finally, at a more generallevel, material (e.g., resource allocations) versus symbolic forms (e.g., abstractclaims of ingroup superiority and outgroup inferiority; e.g., Scheepers, Spears,Doosje, & Manstead, 2002). In this research, we propose to refer to a symbolicform of ingroup bias that serves either to express the value of one’s group (iden-tity expressive function) or to improve the position of one’s group (instrumentalfunction) (Scheepers, Spears, Doosje, & Manstead, 2006b), and that would takethe form of outgroup derogation, considering that the focus is on the interpretationof outgroup members’ behavior.

Aim of the Contribution and Overview

With this contribution, we aim to provide additional evidence to previouswork that challenges the primacy of warmth in the perception of outgroups (e.g.,Abele & Wojciszke, 2007). Recent research (Oldmeadow & Fiske, 2010) starts tobridge research from two main theories in intergroup relations—SIT and SCM—focusing on resource allocation. This work goes a step further to investigate socialperception and, in particular, the role played by the content of cultural stereotypesin constraining and directing outgroup behaviors’ interpretation. In particular, wepostulate that perceivers would use the information provided by the stereotypecontent about the outgroup to interpret outgroup members’ behavior in such away that it would result in an ingroup bias. We argue that the primacy of warmthor competence in interpreting group members’ behavior should vary accordingto the status of the outgroup compared to the status of the ingroup, using thedimension that is less favorable for the target group. Because high-status groupsare usually judged as competent but not as warm, and low-status groups as warmbut not as competent, we aim at showing that the Warmth dimension, and not theCompetence dimension, would predict the judgment toward higher-status groupmembers on one side, and the Competence dimension, and not the Warmth dimen-sion, would predict the judgment toward lower-status group members on theother side.

For this purpose, three studies were carried out in the Italian context, with realgroups as targets. A preliminary study aimed at individuating two national groups

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 421

differing in terms of perceived status and of their respective cultural stereotypecontents (i.e., warmth and competence), both relative to the ingroup. Then, a firststudy focused on testing that the Warmth dimension would predict the interpre-tation of higher-status group members’ behavior. A second study assessed thehypothesis according to which Competence dimension would predict the inter-pretation of lower-status group members’ behavior. Moreover, because this biaswould be motivated by the preservation of a positive social identity, we hypothe-size a moderating role of ingroup identification. According to the Social IdentityTheory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and to the Self-Categorization Theory (Turner,Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987), ingroup identification plays a role inmany group and intergroup processes. Oldmeadow and Fiske (2010) hypothesizedthat the effect of social identification on ingroup favoritism would be mediatedby stereotype contents, but only obtained mixed evidence. From our point ofview, we also postulate for a role of social identification but as moderator. In fact,ingroup identification has been shown to moderate the relationship between groupthreat and outgroup derogation (Branscombe & Wann, 1994), the relationshipbetween attitude toward the outgroup and outgroup trust (Tausch, Tam, Hewstone,Kenworthy, & Cairns, 2007), and to moderate racial bias in a shoot−no shootdecision task (Kenworthy, Barden, Diamond, & del Carmen, 2011). In the sameperspective, we hypothesize that the role of Warmth versus Competence in pre-dicting the interpretation of the higher- versus lower-status outgroup members’behavior, respectively, would be moderated by identification with the ingroup.Finally, we have also included measures of contact and political orientation inorder to control for their potential effects, although we do not have specifichypotheses concerning their role. In fact, considering that we use real groups astargets, contact (Pettigrew & Troop, 2000) as well as political orientation (e.g.,Bierly, 1985) can potentially influence judgments toward outgroup members.

Preliminary Study

A preliminary study was carried out in order to select appropriate targetgroups. More specifically, we aimed at identifying the national groups perceivedby Italians as higher versus lower in status, with the higher-status group lower inwarmth and higher in competence, and with the lower-status group being judgedas higher in warmth and lower in competence.

Method

Participants and Procedure

Thirty-one students from the University of Milano-Bicocca (16 women,15 men; M age = 22.23, SD = 1.45) voluntarily completed a questionnairemeasuring competence, warmth, and status, with two items each of 14 nationality

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


groups: Australians, Brazilians, Italians, Germans, Jamaicans, Mexicans, Greeks,North Americans, English, French, Irish, Portuguese, Swedish, and Spanish.For all items, a 5-point scale was used, anchored from 1 (not at all) to 5(extremely).

Results

Competence, warmth and status means were calculated across participantsfor each of the 14 groups evaluated. Results showed that participants attributedthe highest status to North Americans (M = 4.16, SD = 0.80), status signifi-cantly higher than the status of Italians (M = 2.79, SD = 0.62), F(1, 30) = 64.78,p < .001, η2 = .68. North Americans were also evaluated as more competent(M = 3.84, SD = 0.83) and less warm (M = 2.74, SD = 0.87) compared to Italians(M = 3.13, SD = 0.73 and M = 3.40, SD = 0.58 respectively), F(1, 30) = 18.09,p < .001, η2 = .38 and F(1, 30) = 25.12, p < .001, η2 = .46, respectively. For thelowest status group, Jamaicans (M = 2.19, SD = 0.70) and Brazilians (M = 2.24,SD = 0.78) appeared to be good candidates, as they were rated lower in statusthan Italians, F(1, 30) = 15.99, p < .001, η2 = .35 and F(1, 30) = 14.58, p < .01,η2 = .33, respectively. Relative to Italians, Jamaicans and Brazilians were similarconsidering that they were both lower in competence (M = 2.53, SD = 0.63 andM = 2.56, SD = 0.54), F(1, 30) = 15.66, p < .001, η2 = .34 and F(1,30) = 23.96, p < .001, η2 = .44, respectively, and higher in warmth (M = 3.52,SD = 0.69 and M = 3.53, SD = 0.51), though not significantly, F(1, 30) = 0.50,p = .49, η2 = .02 and F(1, 30) = 1.19, p = .28, η2 = .04, respectively.Considering that, for historical reasons, Italians are much more familiar withBrazilians as an outgroup than with Jamaicans, we identified North Americansand Brazilians as the most suitable target groups to be used in the subsequentstudies.

Study 1: North Americans as Higher-Status Group

This study was run in order to test the hypothesis of primacy of warmth inthe perception of higher-status group members. Therefore, considering the higherstatus of the North American group compared to the Italian one, we expected thatItalian participants would predominantly use the dimension on which the out-group is stereotypically perceived less positively compared to the ingroup—thatis, the Warmth dimension, to interpret the behavior of North American exemplars.We also predict that this bias would be moderated by the level of identificationwith the ingroup such that this bias would mainly occur for people who identifythemselves with the ingroup.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 423

Method


One hundred and nine Italian psychology students (86 women, 23 men;Mage = 21.76, SD = 3.49) were individually invited via email to participate ina Web study. In the following order, participants completed a measure of explicitattitude toward North Americans, a measure of identification with the Italiangroup, a measure of quality and quantity of contact with the outgroup, a measureof political orientation, a behavioral measure, and finally, a series of demographic-related questions.1 The questionnaire was administered via computer (Inquisit3.0.1.0). After completion, participants were debriefed, thanked, and given coursecredit.

Materials

Attitude toward North Americans was assessed, with 12 items presented ina fixed random order, six concerning Warmth (i.e., good natured, trustworthy,sincere, friendly, warm, well intentioned) and six relative to Competence (com-petent, intelligent, confident, efficient, capable, skillful).2 Participants indicatedto what extent each item was characteristic of North Americans on a 5-step scaleranging from 1 (not at all typical) to 5 (extremely typical). As a general evalua-tion, participants indicated their general attitude toward North Americans with abipolar scale (negative-positive) on a 7-point scale from 1 to 7. The measure ofidentification with Italians (Capozza, Brown, Aharpour, & Falvo, 2006) consistedof 10 statements (e.g., “For me, being Italian is important”) to which partici-pants indicated to what extent they agreed on 7-point scales from 1 (stronglydisagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The measure of quantity and quality of contact(e.g., Brown, Vivian, & Hewstone, 1999) consisted of four and one questionrespectively. Finally, participants indicated their political orientation on a 7-pointscale from 1 (left) to 7 (right).

The key dependent variable was a judgment of an ambiguous story involvingNorth American exemplars.3 The ambiguity of the story resides in the fact thatthe behavior of the North Americans could be viewed as positive or negative.Participants were requested to read carefully the following story:

“A group of Italian researchers tries to organize an international networkfor building a common research project. Some research groups from Canada,Germany and USA are contacted. The group of North Americans accepted tocollaborate. Given their experience and expertise in the domain, they propose thatthe project should be conducted following their specific research methods.”

After reading the story, participants were requested to rate the likelihood oftwo interpretations about the behavior of the North American exemplars (one

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


positive and one negative) on 7-point scales ranging from 1 (very unlikely) to7 (very likely): a) “In your opinion, the group of North American researchersintend to share their knowledge in the research domain with the Italian group” andb) “In your opinion, the group of North American researchers intend to imposetheir research method to the group.”

Results

Competence and Warmth were calculated by averaging the answers to the sixtraits belonging to each dimension. The reliabilities of two indexes were reason-able (α = .67 and .76). For the Quantity of Contact the reliability was satisfactory(α = .79). Considering that the items were on different scales, the mean was cal-culated after standardization of each item. An identification score was calculatedby computing the average of the 10 items (α = .71), with a high score indicatinghigh identification with the Italian group. Finally, the two items (with the nega-tive reversed, r = .20, p = .05) relative to the interpretation of the behavior wereaveraged and subsequently used as the main dependent variable.4 A high scoreimplied a positive interpretation of the behavior produced by North Americanexemplars.

As reported in Table 1, the political orientation was significantly correlatedwith both trait dimensions and with the identification with Italians. Correlationsindicated that the more participants classified themselves on the right wing of thepolitical continuum, the more they attributed competence and warmth to NorthAmericans and the more they identified themselves with Italians. The two traitdimensions were also correlated. Moreover, the general evaluation was correlatedwith Warmth and Competence. More central to our aims, the Warmth dimen-sion was significantly correlated with the interpretation of the North Americansexemplars’ behavior, whereas the Competence dimension was not. Note thatthe political orientation, the quantity and quality of contact, and the ingroupidentification were not correlated with the behavioral measure.

In order to test the robustness of the predictive validity of the Warmthdimension for the interpretation of the North American exemplars’ behavior, aregression analysis was performed in which both trait dimensions were entered.Moreover, the potential effects of identification with Italians, political orientation,and quantity and quality of contact were partialled out by including them in theregression. The full model explained 14% of variance. The Warmth dimensionsignificantly predicted (β = .34, p = .001) whereas the Competence dimension(β = −.09, p = .365), the identification with Italians (β = −.06, p = .534),the quantity of contact (β = .06, p = .629), the quality of contact (β = .001,p = .993), and the political orientation (β = .11, p = .260) did not predict thebehavioral measure. Therefore, the Warmth dimension showed unique predictivevalidity for the interpretation of the North American exemplars’ behavior depictedin the story. In order to formally test the hypothesis according to which the warmth

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 425

TA

BL

E1.

Mea

ns,S

tand

ard

Dev

iati

ons,

Reg

ress

ion

Coe

ffici

ents

,and

Cor

rela

tion

sA

mon

gV

aria

bles

for

Nor

thA

mer

ican

s

Var

iabl

eM

SDβ

Sr2

12

34

56

78

Beh

avio

rin

terp

reta

tion

3.05

1.09

––

–G

ener

alev

alua

tion

4.17

1.11

––

.29∗∗

–Po

litic

alor

ient

atio

n3.

611.

63.1

1.0

11.1

8.5

3∗∗–

Iden

tifica

tion

with

Ital

ians

4.87

0.74

−.06

.003

.01

.14

.22∗

–C

onta

ctqu

antit

y0.

000.

73.0

6.0

02.1

2.1

9∗.0

7−.

19∗

–C

onta

ctqu

ality

2.77

1.85

.001

.000

.09

.21∗

.07

−.02

.56∗∗

–W

arm

th3.

000.

55.3

4∗∗∗

.097

.34∗∗

.48∗∗

.27∗∗

.16

.13

.16

–C

ompe

tenc

e3.

430.

44−.

09.0

07.0

2.3

1∗∗.2

2∗−.

03.0

3.0

4.2

4∗–

Not

e.N

=10

9.∗ p

<.0

5.∗∗

p<

.01.

∗∗∗ p

<.0

01.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


dimension would be a better predictor than the competence dimension, we testedthe difference between the regression coefficients of warmth and competence.We followed the procedure indicated by Cohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken (2003).Results showed that the difference between the contributions from Warmth andCompetence was significant, t(102) = 3.50, p (one-tailed) = .0004.

Finally, we tested for a potential moderation effect of the level of ingroupidentification for the validity of the Warmth dimension in predicting the interpre-tation of the North American exemplars’ behavior. In fact, if one supposes thatthe bias could be explained by social identity management, one would expect thatthe observed bias is stronger for people with a high level of identification with theingroup. We thus performed a moderated regression analysis including Warmth,Identification, and their interaction term. Note that the interaction term was con-structed after both variables were centered to reduce multicollinearity. The modelexplained 14% of variance. Warmth (β = .33, p = .001) was significant whereasIdentification was not (β = −.02, p = .863). The interaction term showed a ten-dency (β = −.15, p = .115) in the predicted direction, although not significant.However, considering that the hypothesis was clearly directional, it is legitimateto consider the p value for one-tailed tests that turned out to be almost significant(p = .057). Therefore, we probed the interaction effect to understand its nature.The Johnson–Neyman technique identifies regions in the range of the modera-tor variable where the effect of the focal predictor on the outcome is statisticallysignificant and not significant (see Hayes and Matthes, 2009, for an extendedexplanation of the technique and for SPSS syntax). The results showed that, asexpected, the Warmth dimension significantly predicted the interpretation of theNorth American exemplars’ behavior only for participants with a score on theIdentification measure superior or equal to 4.30 (M = 4.87, SD = 0.75). Notethat in a parallel model in which Competence and Identification were entered aswell as the appropriate interaction term (R2 = .001), none of the variables weresignificant (all ps > .783).

Discussion

This study aimed at testing the hypothesis according to which the Warmthdimension would predominantly predict the interpretation of an ambiguoushigher-status group members’ behavior. The results support the hypothesis show-ing that this influence was significant and remained so even when consideringother relevant variables. Moreover, the hypothesis of an ingroup bias in the use ofthe trait dimensions for interpreting outgroup members’ behavior is additionallysupported by the tendential moderation effect that shows that this bias occurredonly for participants who moderately to highly identified themselves with theingroup. In addition, the positive correlation between Warmth and Competencesuggests more a halo rather than a compensation effect, probably due to theabsence of an explicit comparative context (Durante et al., 2010; Kervyn et al.,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 427

2010). Finally, results demonstrated an effect of political orientation on theattribution of warmth and competence and on the general evaluation indicat-ing that the more participants were on the right wing, the more they attributedcompetence and warmth to North Americans and the more they evaluated thempositively (see Volpato, Manganelli Rattazzi, Mucchi Faina, Canova, & Durante,2010).

Results from this first study confirm that, when it comes to judging higher-status group members’ behavior, participants predominantly used the dimensionon which the outgroup is judged more negatively, that is, Warmth. However, thisfinding is consistent with a simpler explanation in terms of a primacy of warmthin general. The second study was carried out to test whether the opposite pat-tern was true for low-status outgroup—that is, a predominance of competence forinterpreting lower-status outgroup members’ behavior.

Study 2: Brazilians as Lower-Status Group

This second study aimed at testing the hypothesis of primacy of competencein interpreting behavior produced by lower-status group members. Thus, giventhe lower status of the Brazilian group relative to the Italian one, we expectedthat Italian participants would predominantly use the Competence dimension tointerpret Brazilian exemplars’ behavior.

Method


One hundred and thirteen Italian students (88 women, 25 men, Mage = 22.54, SD = 3.75) took part in a laboratory study. Participants completedmeasures that were identical to the measures used in Study 1 but applied toBrazilians: A measure of explicit attitude toward Brazilians, a measure of identi-fication with the Italian group, a measure of quantity and quality of contact withBrazilians, a measure of political orientation, a behavioral measure, and finallya series of demographic-related questions. The measures were administered indi-vidually via computer (Inquisit 3.0.1.0) in laboratory cubicles. After completion,participants were debriefed, thanked, and given course credit.

Materials

The story involving Brazilian exemplars was constructed to parallel the storyinvolving North American ones although using a different context so to make itplausible:5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


“A corporation of Italian surgeons organizes a training seminar on advancedtechniques in plastic surgery. A team of Brazilian plastic surgeons, known forhaving done surgeries on famous people, is contacted. The Brazilian plastic sur-geons accepted only if they have complete freedom in choosing and modifyingthe techniques that will be taught.”

The 7-point likelihood questions were also very similar: (a) “In your opinion,the group of Brazilian plastic surgeons intend to share their knowledge in theresearch domain with the Italian group” and (b) “In your opinion, the group ofBrazilian plastic surgeons intend to impose their research method.”

Results

For the traits, the reliabilities of Competence and Warmth dimensions werereasonable (α = .71 and .71). For the Quantity of Contact measure (α = .70), themean was calculated after standardization of each of the four items. The reliabilityof the identification score was satisfactory (α = .78). As in the first study, a singlescore of behavioral measure was calculated after having reversed the negativeitem (r = .35, p < .001).6

Results are reported in Table 2. Like in Study 1, the two trait dimensions werealso correlated. Mirroring the results of the previous study, both dimensions weresignificantly correlated with the general evaluation. Crucially, the Competencedimension was significantly correlated with the interpretation of the Brazilianexemplars’ behavior, whereas the Warmth dimension was not. With the exceptionof the political orientation, no other variables were correlated with the behavioralmeasure.

In order to test the robustness of the predictive validity of the Competencedimension for the interpretation of the Brazilian exemplars’ behavior, a regres-sion analysis was performed in which, again, both trait dimensions and the othervariables (i.e., identification with the Italians, political orientation, and quan-tity and quality of contact) were entered. The full model explained 12% of thevariance. The Competence dimension (β = .23, p = .028) and the politicalorientation (β = −.21, p = .026) significantly predicted, whereas the Warmthdimension (β = −.06, p = .586), the identification with Italians (β = .06,p = .488), the quantity (β = .14, p = .309), and the quality of contact (β = −.05,p = .726) did not predict the interpretation of the Brazilian exemplars’ behav-ior. The Competence dimension showed incremental validity for the predictionof the behavioral measure. Moreover, we also tested the statistical superiorityof the Competence dimension in the prediction by formally comparing the twoBetas weights of warmth and competence. The results showed that, as hypothe-sized, Competence was significantly a stronger predictor of the interpretation ofthe behavior produced by the Brazilian exemplars than the Warmth dimension,t(106) = 2.68, p (one-tailed) = .004.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 429

TA

BL

E2.

Mea

ns,S

tand

ard

Dev

iati

ons,

Reg

ress

ion

Coe

ffici

ents

,and

Cor

rela

tion

sA

mon

gV

aria

bles

for

Bra

zilia

ns

Var

iabl

eM

SDβ

Sr2

12

34

56

78

Beh

avio

rin

terp

reta

tion

3.96

1.12

––

Gen

eral

eval

uatio

n5.

090.

89–

.18

–Po

litic

alor

ient

atio

n3.

431.

41−.

29∗

.056

−.24

∗∗−.

07–

Iden

tifica

tion

with

Ital

ians

4.62

0.88

.07

.005

.03

.12

.11

–C

onta

ctqu

antit

y0.

000.

79.1

4.0

09.1

3.2

3∗−.

13−.

04–

Con

tact

qual

ity1.

962.

29−.

06.0

02.0

6.2

5∗∗−.

05−.

01.7

3∗∗–

War

mth

3.76

0.42

−.02

.000

.07

.50∗∗

−.12

−.01

.03

.05

–C

ompe

tenc

e3.

330.

44.2

1∗.0

35.2

3∗.3

7∗∗−.

14−.

03.0

3−.

01.4

5∗∗–

Not

e.N

=11

3.∗ p

<.0

5.∗∗

p<

.01.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


Finally, we tested whether the level of identification with the ingroupmoderates the validity of the Competence dimension in predicting the interpreta-tion of the Brazilian exemplars’ behavior. We thus performed a regression analysisin which Competence, Identification, and the interaction term were entered. Themodel explained 9% of variance. Competence (β = .24, p = .009) was signifi-cant, whereas Identification was not (β = .01, p = .907). The interaction term wassignificant (β = .18, p = .051, p one-tailed = .025). We applied the same proce-dure of Study 1 for probing the interaction, and the results showed that only forparticipants with a score on the Identification measure superior or equal to 4.37(M = 4.62, SD = .88), did the Competence dimension significantly predict theinterpretation of the Brazilian exemplars’ behavior. Note that in a model in whichWarmth and Identification were entered as well as the appropriate interaction term(R2 = .01), none of the variables were significant (all ps > .364).

Discussion

This study aimed to test the hypothesis according to which the competencedimension would predominantly predict the interpretation of lower-status groupmembers’ behaviors. Results showing that the Competence dimension was a bet-ter predictor of behavioral interpretation than the Warmth dimension supportedthe hypothesis. Like in Study 1, the presence of this ingroup bias was rein-forced by the interaction effect that showed that this primacy of competencein the interpretation of the behavior produced by lower-status outgroup mem-bers occurred only for people who identify themselves with the ingroup in amedium or high extent. Also consistent with the results from Study 1, the pos-itive correlation between warmth and competence was supportive of a halo effect.Finally, unlike in Study 1, the political orientation was significantly correlatedwith the interpretation of the behavior, indicating that the more participants wereright-wing oriented, the more negatively they interpreted the Brazilian exemplars’behavior.

General Discussion

In line with previous work demonstrating the role of ingroup bias at thelevel of social perception, with this contribution we wanted to examine whetherperceivers would differentially use Warmth and Competence in interpretinghigher- versus lower-status group members’ behavior. Results from two studiessupport our hypotheses: When it comes to judging the behavior of higher-statusgroup members such as North American exemplars, Italian participants basedtheir judgment more on Warmth than Competence. When it comes to judgingthe behavior of lower-status group members such as Brazilian exemplars, Italianparticipants based their judgment more on Competence than Warmth. In other

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 431

words, for producing their judgments, individuals used the dimension on whichstereotypically the target group is less positive (i.e., competence for lower-statusand warmth for higher-status). These results suggest a strategic use of trait dimen-sions showing that, in certain conditions, a self-serving inversion of the traditionalpattern of “Warmth over Competence” can be observed (e.g., Wojciszke & Abele,2008). They are also in line with the main idea behind this contribution, that isthat when it comes to perceiving outgroup members, individuals produce ingroupbias. Moreover, the moderation effects of identification with the ingroup supportthe hypothesis of a self-serving bias. In fact, the observed bias occurs only forpeople who identify themselves to a medium or high extent with the ingroup.Note that in both studies, the value at which the contribution of the expected traitdimension became significant is almost identical (4.30 in Study 1 and 4.37 inStudy 2). Therefore, while on the one side we acknowledge the presence of onlya tendential effect in Study 1, on the other we wish to note that the overall patternof the moderation effect is remarkably consistent and in line with the hypoth-esized mechanism. Oldmeadow and Fiske (2010) suggested but failed to fullydemonstrate that social identification plays a role in ingroup favoritism from amediation perspective with its effect on ingroup favoritism mediated by stereo-type content. Our results better support its role as a moderator and thus startsto shed some light on the relationship between identification, stereotypes, andingroup favoritism.

Taken together, our findings constitute a first step toward the demonstra-tion of the existence of a “motivated bias” that influences outgroup perceptions.It is worth noticing that this bias was investigated using real groups’ stereotypesand beyond the minimal group paradigm generally used in ingroup bias studies.This confers ecological validity to our work. Results show that participants basedtheir interpretations of the outgroup members’ behavior on cultural stereotypesas assessed in the Preliminary Study. In fact, they used the dimension on whichstereotypically the target group is less positive. Moreover, although a comparisongroup such as the ingroup or such as an opposite status group (i.e., lower-statusgroup members in Study 1 and higher-status group members in Study 2) was notexplicit in the two studies, having to judge the behavior of members of a differ-ent national group probably implicitly activated the comparison with the ingroup,especially when the ingroup is mentioned in the two scenarios. In order to fur-ther confirm the existence of this motivated ingroup bias and to understand itsunderlying mechanisms, future studies should include ingroup ratings or com-parison group ratings (i.e., lower and higher status group members in the samestudy).

Previous research (e.g., Scheepers, Spears, Doosje, & Manstead, 2003)showed that ingroup bias can serve different functions for both low- and high-status groups: The instrumental function operates under conditions of groupthreat, whereas the identity-expressive function operates under conditions ofgroup enhancement. Based on the results of this studies, one could further

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


investigate whether the ingroup bias at work in the perceptions toward higher-status outgroup members’ behavior observed in the first study serves an instru-mental function, whereas the ingroup bias at work in the perceptions towardlower-status outgroup members’ behavior observed in the second study serves anidentity-expressive function. For example, threat could be manipulated in order tosee whether it moderates the predictive validity of warmth in predicting the inter-pretation of higher-status outgroup members’ behavior. In other words, additionalresearch is needed for further understanding the underlying mechanisms of thisingroup bias.

Finally, although our research was primarily focused on the prediction of theinterpretation of outgroup members’ behavior, it is interesting to note that theresults of the two studies showed stronger correlation between the general eval-uation of the outgroup with Warmth than with Competence, confirming previousfindings (e.g., Cislak & Wojciszke, 2008). This fact does not contradict the mainresults, considering that they are situated at different levels of measure (interpre-tation of behavior vs. general evaluation) and at different levels of target (groupexemplars vs. group). It would be interesting to clearly determine which aspectsof intergroup perception are affected by a strict primacy of warmth and which areaffected by differential primacy.

To conclude, we believe that the approach that consists in bridging differentbasic social theories that are SCM and SIT can provide new insights for the studyof outgroup perception always. This approach is also in line with the conceptual-ization of individuals as strategic goal achievers, goals that can be personal (e.g.,Gollwitzer, 1990) or social identity-based (e.g., Ellemers, De Gilder, & Haslam,2004).

NOTES

1. Both studies included some additional measures that will not be considered herein becausethey are not relevant for this contribution.

2. The traits have been extensively pre-tested, both in the United States (Fiske et. al., 2002) andacross the globe (Cuddy et al., 2009), to reflect the dimensions of Warmth and Competence.

3. The story involving North Americans was chosen according to the results of a pretest in which17 participants (9 women, 8 men, M age = 26.44, SD = 3.48) rated seven stories on the ambiguity ofthe scene, and the likelihood of two interpretations about the behavior of the target of the story (positivevs. negative, the same used in this study for elaborated judgments). The choice criteria consisted ofselecting a story rated high in ambiguity and neutral in the overall interpretation.

4. The results are the same if we separately consider these two items.5. Note that in Italy, Brazilians have quite a positive reputation for plastic surgeries and are

generally considered as excelling in that field. We decided to use this story rather than simply substi-tuting the group to the previous story about scientific research, because from a pre-testing, we realizedthat it was not sufficiently credible. Therefore, the two stories differ in some details but are function-ally equivalent and share the same structure. Moreover, the story was rated moderately ambiguousand neutral in the overall interpretation by 16 participants (13 woman and 3 men, M age = 23.87,SD = 1.09).

6. As in the first study, the results are the same when considering separately the two items.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 433

AUTHOR NOTES

Juliette Richetin is affiliated with the University of Milan-Bicocca. FedericaDurante is affiliated with the University of Milan-Bicocca. Silvia Mari is affili-ated with the University of Milan-Bicocca. Marco Perugini is affiliated with theUniversity of Milan-Bicocca. Chiara Volpato is affiliated with the University ofMilan-Bicocca.

REFERENCES

Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of selfversus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 751–763.

Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and SocialPsychology, 41, 1230–1240.

Bierly, M. M. (1985). Prejudice toward contemporary outgroups as a generalized attitude.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 189–199.

Branscombe, N. R., & Wann, D. L. (1994). Collective self-esteem consequences of out-group derogation when a valued social identity is on trial. European Journal of SocialPsychology, 24, 641–657.

Brewer, M. B. (1996). In-group favoritism: The subtle side of inter-group discrimination. InD. Messick & A. Tenbrunsel (Eds.), Codes of conduct: Behavioral research into businessethics (pp. 160–170). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Brown, R., Vivian, J., & Hewstone, M. (1999). Changing attitudes through intergroup con-tact: The effects of group membership salience. European Journal of Social Psychology,29, 741–764.

Capozza, D., Brown, R., Aharpour, S., & Falvo, R. (2006). A comparison of motiva-tional theories of identification. In R. Brown, & D. Capozza (Eds.), Social identities:Motivational, emotional, cultural influences (pp. 51–72). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Cislak, A., & Wojciszke, B. (2008). Agency and communion are inferred from actions serv-ing interests of self or others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1103–1110.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multipleregression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2007). Behaviors from intergroup affectand stereotypes: The BIAS Map. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92,631–648.

Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universaldimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS Map. InM. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 40, pp. 61–149).New York, NY: Academic Press.

Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V. S. Y., Glick, P., Demoulin, S., Leyens, J-P., . . .Ziegler, R. (2009). Is the stereotype content model culture-bound? A cross-culturalcomparison reveals systematic similarities and differences. British Journal of SocialPsychology, 48, 1–33.

Durante, F., Capozza, D., & Fiske, S. T. (2010). The stereotype content model: The roleplayed by competence in inferring group status. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology inApplied Psychology, 17, 1–13.

Ellemers, N., De Gilder, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals and groups atwork: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy ofManagement Review, 29, 459–478.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012


Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social perception:Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83.

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereo-type content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from the perceived status andcompetition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action phases and mind-sets. In E. T. Higgins, & R. M.Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of socialbehaviour (Vol. 2, pp. 53–92). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactionsin OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior ResearchMethods, 41, 924–936.

Inquisit 3.0.1. 0. [Computer software]. (2010). SeattleWA: Millisecond Software LLC.Judd, C. M., James-Hawkins, L. J., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Kashima, Y. (2005). Fundamental

dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments ofcompetence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899–913.

Kenworthy. J. B., Barden, M. A., Diamond, S., & del Carmen, A. (2011). Ingroup identifi-cation as a moderator of racial bias in a shoot-no shoot decision task. Group Processes &Intergroup Relations, 14, 311–318.

Kervyn, N., Yzerbyt, V., & Judd, C. M. (2010). Compensation between warmth andcompetence: Antecedents and consequences of a negative relation between the two fun-damental dimensions of social perception. European Review of Social Psychology, 21,155–187.

Mummendey, A., & Schreiber, H. J. (1983). Better or just different? Positive social identityby discrimination against or by differentiation from outgroups. European Journal ofSocial Psychology, 13, 389–397.

Oldmeadow, J. A., & Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social status and the pursuit of positive socialidentity: Systematic domains of intergroup differentiation and discrimination for high-and low-status groups. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 425–444.

Pettigrew, T. F., & Troop, L. R. (2000). Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Recentmeta-analytic findings. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination(pp. 93–114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Rosenberg, S., Nelson, C., & Vivekananthan, P. (1968). A multidimensional approach tothe structure of personality impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,9, 283–294.

Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2002). Integrating identityand instrumental approaches to intergroup discrimination: Different contexts, differentmotives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1455–1467.

Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2003). Two functions ofverbal inter-group discrimination: Instrumental and identity motives as a result of groupidentification and threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 568–577.

Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006a). Diversity in in-groupbias: Structural factors, situational features, and social functions. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 90, 944–960.

Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2006b). The social functionsof in-group bias: Creating, confirming, or changing social reality. European Review ofSocial Psychology, 18, 359–396.

Smith, E. R., & Semin, G. R. (2007). Situated social cognition. Current Directions inPsychological Science, 16, 132–135.

Stevens, L. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1995). Motivation and cognition in social life: A socialsurvival perspective. Social Cognition, 13, 189–214.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

Richetin et al. 435

Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Tajfel, H., Flament, C., Billig, M. G., & Bundy, R. P. (1971). Social categorization andinter-group behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–177.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G.Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47).Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.

Tausch, N., Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J., & Cairns, E. (2007). Individual-leveland group-level mediators of contact effects in Northern Ireland: The moderating role ofsocial identification. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 541–556.

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987).Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Volpato, C., Manganelli Rattazzi, A. M., Mucchi Faina, A., Canova, L, & Durante, F.(2010). Arroganza, competenza, calore? L’immagine degli Stati Uniti nel contesto ital-iano [Arrogance, competence, and warmth? The perception of the United States in theItalian context]. Psicologia Sociale, 5, 55–76.

Wojciszke, B. (1994). Multiple meanings of behavior: Construing actions in terms ofcompetence and morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 222–232.

Wojciszke, B. (2005). Affective concomitants of information on morality and competence.European Psychologist, 10, 60–70.

Wojciszke, B., & Abele, A. E. (2008). The primacy of communion over agency and itsreversals in evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1139–1147.

Received October 31, 2010Accepted September 8, 2011

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ita' M

ilano

Bic

occa

] at

08:

29 2

9 M

ay 2

012

primacy of warmth versus competence: a motivated bias

Documents