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-55f67697df-zh294 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-11T07:25:33.367Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Stereotype content across cultures as a function of group status

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

By
Susan T. Fiske  and
Amy J. C. Cuddy
Edited by
Serge Guimond
Susan T. Fiske
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology Princeton University USA
Amy J. C. Cuddy
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology Princeton University USA
Serge Guimond
Affiliation:
Université de Clermont-Ferrand II (Université Blaise Pascal), France
Get access

Summary

People want to know where they stand. Groups care deeply about where other groups stand. When a new group immigrates in significant numbers, people first ask whether they come with friendly or hostile intent. Do they come to cooperate, participate, and assimilate, or do they come to exploit, compete, and steal? Naturally, people want to know who may help or harm them. However, immediately after determining who is friend and who is foe, people want to know whether the other is capable of enacting those intentions. A fundamental question is the group's perceived status and from it follows their perceived capability to enact their intent, for good or ill.

To an extraordinary degree, people assume that groups of high status deserve it. As we will see, people all over the world agree that rich people, professionals, employers, and entrepreneurial immigrants achieve their high status with traits reflecting intelligence, competence, capability, and skill. Conversely, people all agree that others who are poor, homeless, drug addicted, or unemployed likewise deserve it because they are stupid, incompetent, incapable, and unskilled.

As our data will indicate, the strength of this effect is huge. In the senior author's career spanning decades, she has never observed correlations of these magnitudes. Why should people be so convinced that those with high status are endowed with superior competence and those of lower status are denied the same traits? This chapter explores the evidence and the reasons for this status endowment effect.

Type
Chapter
Information
Social Comparison and Social Psychology
Understanding Cognition, Intergroup Relations, and Culture
 , pp. 249 - 263
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., and Zelditch, M. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 479–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., and Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. and Nisbett, R. E. (1994). Self-protection and the culture of honor: Explaining Southern violence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 551–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crandall, C. S., D'Anello, S., Sakalli, N., Lazarus, E., Wieczorkowska, G., and Feather, N. T. (2001). An attribution-value model of prejudice: Anti-fat attitudes in six nations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 30–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., and Glick, P. (2005). The BIAS map: behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Manuscript under review.
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V., Glick, P., Demoulin, S., Leyens, J.-Ph., Bond, M. H., et al. (2004). Is stereotyping culture-bound? A cross-cultural comparison of stereotyping principles reveals systematic similarities and differences. Manuscript under review.
Dion, K. K., Pak, A. W., and Dion, K. L. (1990). Stereotyping physical attractiveness: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 21, 158–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagly, A. H. and Kite, M. E. (1987). Are stereotypes of nationalities applied to both women and men?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 451–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P. S., and 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, 878–902.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. J. C., and Glick, P. S. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaertner, S. L. and Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In Dovidio, J. F. and Gaertner, S. L. (eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, D. T. and Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 21–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glick, P. and Fiske, S. T. (2001). Ambivalent stereotypes as legitimizing ideologies: Differentiating paternalistic and envious prejudice. In Jost, J. T. (ed.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 278–306). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J. L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glick, P., Lameiras, M., Fiske, S. T., Eckes, T., Masser, B., Volpato, C., and Manganelli, A. M.et al. (2004). Men are bad but bold (and women are wonderful but weak): hostile as well as benevolent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 713–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordijin, E. H., Koomen, W. and Stapel, D. A. (2001). Level of prejudice in relation to knowledge of cultural stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 150–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, M. (1991). Cultural anthropology (3rd edn.). New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Hui, C. H. and Triandis, H. C. (1985). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: A review and comparison of strategies. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 16, 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphrey, R. (1985). How work roles influence perception: Structural-cognitive processes and organizational behavior. American Sociological Review, 50, 242–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, E. E. (1979). The rocky road from acts to dispositions. American Psychologist, 34, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jost, J. T. and Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jost, J. T. and Burgess, D. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence and the conflict between group and system justification motives in low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., and Sullivan, B. N. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jost, J. T., Glasner, J., Kruglanski, A., and Sulloway, F. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, I. and Haas, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, A. C. and Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krueger, J. (1996). Personal beliefs and cultural stereotypes about racial characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 536–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langer, E. J. and Benevento, A. (1978). Self-induced dependence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 886–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J. and Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, L., Constantine, V., Fiske, S., Dunham, Y., and Banaji, M. (2005). The Princeton quartet: Changing public and private stereotype content. Manuscript under review.
LeVine, R. A. and Campbell, D. T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: Theories of conflict, ethnic attitudes, and group behavior. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
Linssen, H. and Hagendoorn, L. (1994). Social and geographical factors in the explanation of the content of European nationality stereotypes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loo, R. (2002). A psychometric and cross-national examination of a belief in a just-world scale. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1396–1406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, G. and Miller, N. (1987). Ten years of research on the false consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 72–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961–978.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Overbeck, J. R., Jost, J. T., Mosso, C. O., and Flizik, A. (2004). Resistant versus acquiescent responses to ingroup inferiority as a function of social dominance orientation in the USA and Italy. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 7, 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phalet, K. and Poppe, E. (1997). Competence and morality dimensions of national and ethnic stereotypes: A study in six eastern-European countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 703–723.3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppe, E. (2001). Effects of changes in GNP and perceived group characteristics on national and ethnic stereotypes in central and eastern Europe. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1689–1708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poppe, E. and Linssen, H. (1999). In-group favouritism and the reflection of realistic dimensions of difference between national states in Central and Eastern European nationality stereotypes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgeway, C. L. and Berger, J. (1986). Expectations, legitimating, and dominance behavior in task groups. American Sociological Review, 51, 603–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. x, pp. 174–221). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rudman, L. A. and Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 157–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaffer, D. R., Crepaz, N., and Sun, C. R. (2000). Physical attractiveness stereotyping in cross-cultural perspective: Similarities and differences between Americans and Taiwanese. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 31, 557–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidanius, J. and Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephan, W. G., Diaz Loving, R., and Duran, A. (2000). Integrated threat theory and intercultural attitudes: Mexico and the United States. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 31, 240–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., Martinez, C. M., Schwarzwald, J., and Tur Kaspa, M. (1998). Prejudice toward immigrants to Spain and Israel: An integrated threat theory analysis. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 29, 559–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, L. and Kim, Y. (1997). What is beautiful is culturally good: The physical attractiveness stereotype has different content in collectivistic cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 795–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wojciszke, B., Baryla, W., and Mikiewicz, A. (2003). Two dimensions of interpersonal attitudes: Liking is based on self-interest, respect is based on status. Unpublished manuscript, Polish Academy of Science.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] 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
×