https://fidelum.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Warmth-Competence-2007.pdf

Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence

Legitimacy is a psychological property of an authority, institution, or social arrangement that leads those connected to it to believe that it is appropriate, proper, and just. Because of legitimacy, people feel that they ought to defer to decisions and rules, following them voluntarily out of obligation rather than out of fear of punishment or anticipation of reward. Being legitimate is important to the success of authorities, institutions, and institutional arrangements since it is difficult to exert influence over others based solely upon the possession and use of power. Being able to gain voluntary acquiescence from most people, most of the time, due to their sense of obligation increases effectiveness during periods of scarcity, crisis, and conflict. The concept of legitimacy has a long history within social thought and social psychology, and it has emerged as increasingly important within recent research on the dynamics of political, legal, and social systems.

Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation.

What is compassion? And how did it evolve? In this review, we integrate 3 evolutionary arguments that converge on the hypothesis that compassion evolved as a distinct affective experience whose primary function is to facilitate cooperation and protection of the weak and those who suffer. Our empirical review reveals compassion to have distinct appraisal processes attuned to undeserved suffering; distinct signaling behavior related to caregiving patterns of touch, posture, and vocalization; and a phenomenological experience and physiological response that orients the individual to social approach. This response profile of compassion differs from those of distress, sadness, and love, suggesting that compassion is indeed a distinct emotion. We conclude by considering how compassion shapes moral judgment and action, how it varies across different cultures, and how it may engage specific patterns of neural activation, as well as emerging directions of research.

/pdf/compassion-an-evolutionary-analysis-and-empirical-review-5cniwqureb.pdf

Compassion: An Evolutionary Analysis and Empirical Review

The stereotype content model (SCM) defines two fundamental dimensions of social perception, warmth and competence, predicted respectively by perceived competition and status. Combinations of warmth and competence generate distinct emotions of admiration, contempt, envy, and pity. From these intergroup emotions and stereotypes, the behavior from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map predicts distinct behaviors: active and passive, facilitative and harmful. After defining warmth/communion and competence/agency, the chapter integrates converging work documenting the centrality of these dimensions in interpersonal as well as intergroup perception. Structural origins of warmth and competence perceptions result from competitors judged as not warm, and allies judged as warm; high status confers competence and low status incompetence. Warmth and competence judgments support systematic patterns of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral reactions, including ambivalent prejudices. Past views of prejudice as a univalent antipathy have obscured the unique responses toward groups stereotyped as competent but not warm or warm but not competent. Finally, the chapter addresses unresolved issues and future research directions.

Warmth and Competence As Universal Dimensions of Social Perception: The Stereotype Content Model and the BIAS Map

According to the perspective developed in this article, widely shared, hegemonic cultural beliefs about gender and their impact in what the authors call “social relational” contexts are among the core components that maintain and change the gender system. When gender is salient in these ubiquitous contexts, cultural beliefs about gender function as part of the rules of the game, biasing the behaviors, performances, and evaluations of otherwise similar men and women in systematic ways that the authors specify. While the biasing impact of gender beliefs may be small in any one instance, the consequences cumulate over individuals’ lives and result in substantially different outcomes for men and women. After describing this perspective, the authors show how it sheds newlight on some defining features of the gender system and illustrate its implications for research into specific questions about gender inequality.

/pdf/unpacking-the-gender-system-a-theoretical-perspective-on-f3wjoo5598.pdf

Unpacking the Gender System A Theoretical Perspective on Gender Beliefs and Social Relations

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.

/pdf/a-model-of-often-mixed-stereotype-content-competence-and-4lnqi6l7zn.pdf

A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition.

A model of (often mixed) stereotype content

Reports an error in "A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition" by Susan T. Fiske, Amy J. C. Cuddy, Peter Glick and Jun Xu (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002[Jun], Vol 82[6], 878-902). In the fourth paragraph of the Status Predicts Competence, and Competition Predicts Warmth section, the results are worded in a confusing way, and some values are wrong. In the fourth paragraph's first sentence, all correlation coefficients mistakenly omitted the negative sign implied in the text ("negatively correlated") and shown in the correct values reported in Table 6. The text should appear instead as follows: Perceived competition negatively correlated with perceived warmth for the student sample, group-level r(21) .68, p < .001; individual-level r(71) .22, p < .1, and the nonstudent sample, group-level r(21) .53, p < .001; individual-level r(36) .11, ns. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2002-02942-002.) 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 (1) 2 primary dimensions are competence and warmth, (2) frequent mixed clusters combine high warmth with low competence (paternalistic) or high competence with low warmth (envious), and (3) distinct emotions (pity, envy, admiration, contempt) differentiate the 4 competence-warmth combinations. Stereotypically, (4) 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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

"A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition": Correction to Fiske et al. (2002).

Jun Xu

Papers

A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition.

A model of (often mixed) stereotype content

"A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition": Correction to Fiske et al. (2002).

Competence and Warmth Scales