Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T11:15:06.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Universal Dimensions of Social Signals: Warmth and Competence

from Part I - Conceptual Models of Social Signals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2017

By
Cydney H. Dupree  and
Susan T. Fiske
Edited by
Judee K. Burgoon ,
Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann ,
Maja Pantic  and
Alessandro Vinciarelli
Cydney H. Dupree
Affiliation:
Princeton University
Susan T. Fiske
Affiliation:
Princeton University
Judee K. Burgoon
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann
Affiliation:
Université de Genève
Maja Pantic
Affiliation:
Imperial College London
Alessandro Vinciarelli
Affiliation:
University of Glasgow
Get access

Summary

Humans have long developed the automatic ability to prioritize social perception. Whether traveling ancient, dusty roads thousands of years past or meandering metropolitan blocks long after midnight, people must immediately answer two critical questions in a sudden encounter with a stranger. First, one must determine if the stranger is a friend or foe (i.e., harbors good or ill intent), and second, one must ask how capable the other is of carrying out those intentions. Since ancestral times, these two questions have been crucial for the survival of humans as social animals. The ability to quickly and accurately categorize others as friend or foe would have profoundly influenced the production and perception of social signals exchanged between agents. In developing computational analyses of human behavior, researchers and technicians alike can benefit from a thorough understanding of social categorization – the automatic process by which humans perceive others as friend or foe. This chapter will describe over a decade of research emerging from social psychological laboratories, cross-cultural research, and surveys that confirm two universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth (friendliness, trustworthiness) and competence (ability, efficacy) (see Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2007, for an earlier review).

Foundational Research

Although appearing under different labels, the warmth and competence dimensions have consistently emerged in classical and contemporary studies of person perception (Asch, 1946; Rosenberg, Nelson, & Vivekananthan, 1968; Wojciszke, Bazinska, & Jaworski, 1998), construal of others’ past actions (Wojciszke, 1994), and voters’ approval of political candidates in both the United States (Abelson et al., 1982; Kinder & Sears, 1981) and Poland (Wojciszke & Klusek, 1996). Developing impressions of leaders also involves the warmth and competence dimensions, including image management (building trust), relationship development (warmth), and resource deployment (competence and efficiency) (Chemers, 1997).

Further examination of past and present research reveals the extent to which humans use warmth and competence dimensions in navigating the social world. Peeters (1983) was one of the first to describe two independent dimensions at the trait level by defining self-profitability (competence, advantageous to the self) and other-profitability (warmth and morality, advantageous to others) in perceivers’ social domain.

Type
Chapter
Information
Social Signal Processing , pp. 23 - 33
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abelson, R. P., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Fiske, S. T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619– 630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, M. G., Brewer, M. B., & Hermann, R. K. (1999). Images and affect: A functional analysis of outgroup stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 78–93.Google Scholar
Alexander, M. G., Brewer, M. B., & Livingston, R. W. (2005). Putting stereotype content in context: Image theory and interethnic stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(6), 781–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Andersen, K. & Clevenger, T., Jr. (1963). A summary of experimental research in ethos. Speech Monographs, 30, 59–78.Google Scholar
Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergsieker, H. B., Leslie, L. M., Constantine, V. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). Stereotyping by omission: Eliminate the negative, accentuate the positive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1214–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K. & Hale, J. L. (1984). The fundamental topoi of relational communication. Communication Monographs, 51, 193–214.Google Scholar
Burgoon, J. K. & Hale, J. L. (1987). Validation and measurement of the fundamental themes of relational communication. Communication Monographs, 54, 19–41.Google Scholar
Burgoon, J. K. & LePoire, B. A. (1993). Effects of communication expectancies, actual communication, and expectancy disconfirmation on evaluations of communicators and their communication behavior. Human Communication Research, 20(1), 67–96.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 3–25.Google Scholar
Chemers, M. M. (1997). An Integrative Theory of Leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cikara, M., Botvinick, M. M., & Fiske, S. T. (2011). Us versus them: Social identity shapes neural responses to intergroup competition and harm. Psychological Science, 22(3), 306–313.Google Scholar
Cikara, M. & Fiske, S. T. (2011). Bounded empathy: Neural responses to outgroup targets' (mis)fortunes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(12), 3791–3803.Google Scholar
Cikara, M. & Fiske, S. T. (2012). Stereotypes and Schadenfreude: Affective and physiological markers of pleasure at outgroup misfortunes. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(1), 63–71.Google Scholar
Clausell, E. & Fiske, S. T. (2005). When do subgroup parts add up to the stereotypic whole? Mixed stereotype content for gay male subgroups explains overall ratings. Social Cognition, 23(2), 161–181.Google Scholar
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2007). The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 631–648.Google Scholar
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V. S. Y., et al. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
Cuddy, A. J. C., Norton, M. I., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). This Old Stereotype: The Pervasiveness and persistence of the elderly stereotype. Journal of Social Issues, 61(2), 267–285.Google Scholar
Dillard, J. P. & Solomon, D. H. (2005). Measuring the relevance of relational frames: A relational framing theory perspective. In V., Manusov(Ed.), The Sourcebook of Nonverbal Measures: Going Beyond Words (pp. 325–334). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Durante, F., Fiske, S. T., Kervyn, N., et al. (2013). Nations' income inequality predicts ambivalence in stereotype content: How societies mind the gap. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(4), 726–746.Google Scholar
Durante, F., Volpato, C., & Fiske, S. (2010). Using the stereotype content model to examine group depictions in fascism: An archival approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(3), 465–483.Google Scholar
Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 47(3–4), 99–114.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T., Gilbert, S. T., Fiske, & G., Lindzey (Eds), Handbook of Social Psychology (4th edn, vol. 2, pp. 357–411). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fiske, S. T. (2011). Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Status Divides Us. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Fiske, S. T., Bergsieker, H. B., Russell, A. M., & Williams, L. (2009). Images of black Americans: Then, “them” and now, “Obama!” DuBois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 6, 83– 101.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T. & Cuddy, A. J. C. (2006). Stereotype content across cultures as a function of group status. In S., Guimond (Ed.), Social Comparison and Social Psychology: Understanding Cognition, Intergroup Relations, and Culture (pp. 249–263). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition:Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T. & Lee, T. L. (2012). Xenophobia and how to fight it: Immigrants as the quintessential “other”. In S., Wiley, G., Philogène, & T. A., Revenson (Eds), Social Categories in Everyday Experience (pp. 151–163). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Fiske, S. T. & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture (2nd edn). London: SAGE.
Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 473–489.Google Scholar
Glick, P. and Fiske, S.T. (2001). Ambivalent sexism. In M. P., Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 33, pp. 115–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Academic Press.
Haiman, F. (1948). An experimental study of the effects of ethos in public speaking. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Northwestern University.
Harris, L. T. & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Dehumanizing the lowest of the low: Neuroimaging responses to extreme outgroups. Psychological Science, 17(10), 847–853.Google Scholar
Harris, L. T. & Fiske, S. T. (2007). Social groups that elicit disgust are differentially processed in mPFC. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2, 45–51.Google Scholar
Harris, L. T., McClure, S. M., Van der Bos, W., Cohen, J. D., & Fiske, S. T. (2007). Regions of the MPFC differentially tuned to social and nonsocial affective evaluation. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 309–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawes, L. C. (1973). Elements of a model for communication processes. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 59(1), 11–21.Google Scholar
Katz, D. & Braly, K. (1933). Racial stereotypes of one hundred college students. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 28(3), 280–290.Google Scholar
Kervyn, N., Fiske, S. T., & Malone, C. (2012). Brands as intentional agents framework: How perceived intentions and ability can map brand perception. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(2), 166–176.Google Scholar
Kervyn, N., Fiske, S., & Yzerbyt, V. (2015). Forecasting the primary dimension of social perception: Symbolic and realistic threats together predict warmth in the stereotype content model. Social Psychology, 46(1), 36–45.Google Scholar
Kervyn, N., Yzerbyt, V., & Judd, C. M. (2010). Compensation between warmth and competence: Antecedents and consequences of a negative relation between the two fundamental dimensions of social perception. European Review of Social Psychology, 21(1), 155–187.Google Scholar
Kervyn, N., Yzerbyt, V. Y., Judd, C. M., & Nunes, A. (2009). A question of compensation: The social life of the fundamental dimensions of social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 828–842.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R. & Sears, D. O. (1981). Prejudice and politics: Symbolic racism versus racial threats to the good life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 414–431.Google Scholar
Leach, C., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(2), 234–249.Google Scholar
Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality: A Functional Theory and Methodology for Personality Evaluation. New York: Ronald Press.
Lee, T. L. & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Not an outgroup, not yet an ingroup: Immigrants in the Stereotype Content Model. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(6), 751–768.Google Scholar
Malone, C. & Fiske, S. T. (2013). The Human Brand: How We Relate to People, Products, and Companies. San Francisco: Wiley/Jossey Bass.
McCroskey, J. C. & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90–103.Google Scholar
McCroskey, J. C. & Young, T. J. (1981). Ethos and credibility: The construct and its measurement after three decades. Central States Speech Journal, 32, 24–34.Google Scholar
North, M. S. & Fiske, S. T. (2012). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 982–997.Google Scholar
North, M. S. & Fiske, S. T. (2013). A prescriptive intergenerational-tension ageism scale: Succession, identity, and consumption (SIC). Psychological Assessment, 25(3), 706– 713.Google Scholar
Peeters, G. (1983). Relational and informational pattern in social cognition. In W., Doise & S., Moscovici (Eds), Current Issues in European Social Psychology (pp. 201–237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Peeters, G. (2001). From good and bad to can and must: Subjective necessity of acts associated with positively and negatively valued stimuli. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 125– 136.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, S., Nelson, C., & Vivekananthan, P. S. (1968). A multidimensional approach to the structure of personality impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 283–294.Google Scholar
Salah, A. A., Pantic, M., & Vinciarelli, A. (2011). Recent developments in social signal processing. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 380–385.
Sattler, W. M. (1947). Conceptions of ethos in ancient rhetoric. Communication Monographs, 14, 55–65.Google Scholar
Sevillano, V. & Fiske, S. T. (2016).Warmth and competence in animals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 46(5), 276–293.Google Scholar
Van den Bos, W., McClure, S. M., Harris, L. T., Fiske, S. T., & Cohen, J. D. (2007). Dissociating affective evaluation and social cognitive processes in the ventral medial prefrontal cortex. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 337–346.Google Scholar
Willis, J. & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592–598.Google Scholar
Wojciszke, B. (1994). Multiple meanings of behavior: Construing actions in terms of competence or morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 222–232.Google Scholar
Wojciszke, B. (2005). Morality and competence in person- and self-perception. European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 155–188.Google Scholar
Wojciszke, B. & Abele, A. E. (2008). The primacy of communion over agency and its reversals in evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(7), 1139–1147.Google Scholar
Wojciszke, B., Bazinska, R., & Jaworski, M. (1998). On the dominance of moral categories in impression formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1245–1257.Google Scholar
Wojciszke, B., Brycz, H., & Borkenau, P. (1993). Effects of information content and evaluative extremity on positivity and negativity biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 327–336.Google Scholar
Wojciszke, B. & Klusek, B. (1996). Moral and competence-related traits in political perception. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 27, 319–324.Google Scholar
Wu, J., Ames, D. L., Swencionis, J. K., & Fiske, S. T. (in press). Blaming the victim: An fMRI study on how perceptions of fault influence empathy for people with disabilities.
Yzerbyt, V., Provost, V., & Corneille, O. (2005). Not competent but warm… really? Compensatory stereotypes in the French-speaking world. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8, 291–308.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×