Showing papers by "Amy J. C. Cuddy published in 2002"
TL;DR: Contrary to antipathy models, 2 dimensions mattered, and many stereotypes were mixed, either pitying (low competence, high warmth subordinates) or envying (high competence, low warmth competitors).
Abstract: Stereotype research emphasizes systematic processes over seemingly arbitrary contents, but content also may prove systematic. On the basis of stereotypes' intergroup functions, the stereotype content model hypothesizes that (a) 2 primary dimensions are competence and warmth, (b) frequent mixed clusters combine high warmth with low competence (paternalistic) or high competence with low warmth (envious), and (c) distinct emotions (pity, envy, admiration, contempt) differentiate the 4 competence-warmth combinations. Stereotypically, (d) status predicts high competence, and competition predicts low warmth. Nine varied samples rated gender, ethnicity, race, class, age, and disability out-groups. Contrary to antipathy models, 2 dimensions mattered, and many stereotypes were mixed, either pitying (low competence, high warmth subordinates) or envying (high competence, low warmth competitors). Stereotypically, status predicted competence, and competition predicted low warmth.
5,411 citations
01 Sep 2002
TL;DR: Cuddy and Fiske as discussed by the authors pointed out that age is far from the only social marker that shapes our attitudes toward other people, but it is what we do with that information that can be destructive.
Abstract: about other people (Fiske 1998; Kite, Deaux, and Miele 1991). Conscious or not, noticing age drives our interactions with others. Age seems to answer: How should I address them? What are their political views? What do they know about popular culture? Will they be competent? Socially aware? How slowly should I talk? How loudly? From an individual’s perceived age, we infer social and cognitive competencies, political and religious beliefs, and physical abilities. These inferences guide how we behave and what information we seek, heed, and remember. Age is far from the only social marker that shapes our attitudes toward other people. We form opinions based on sex, race, and religion, among other social categories. But unlike these other categories, old age is one that most of us eventually join. For the most part, people do not move from one gender, racial, ethnic, or religious category to another. Moreover, stereotyping people based on their age, unlike these other groupings, goes largely unchallenged and even unnoticed in the United States. We disparage elderly people without fear of censure. Indeed, noticing a person’s age early in a social encounter is not surprising or inherently offensive. It is what we do with that information that can be destructive. As Butler (1980) notes in an edition of the Journal of Social Issues devoted to the topic, ageism, like racism and sexism, becomes institutionalized, affecting hiring decisions, medical care, and social policy. Many people approach old age with dread. What was once viewed as a natural process is now seen as a social problem. Television portrays only 1.5 percent of its characters as elderly, and most of them in minor roles (Zebrowitz and Montepare 2000). Older adults are also more likely than any other age group to appear in television and film as conduits for comic relief, exploiting stereotypes of physical, cognitive, and sexual ineffectiveness (Zebrowitz and Montepare 2000). Today in America, we no 1 Doddering but Dear: Process, Content, and Function in Stereotyping of Older Persons Amy J. C. Cuddy and Susan T. Fiske
404 citations