Abstract
The stereotype content model (Fiske et al., 2002) defines warmth and competence as basic dimensions of social judgment, with warmth often dominating perceptions; it also states that many group-related stereotypes are ambivalent, featuring high levels on one dimension and low levels on the other. Persuasion theories feature both direct and indirect source effects (Bohner et al., 1995). Combining both the approaches, we studied the persuasiveness of ambivalently stereotyped sources. Participants (total n = 296) read persuasive arguments attributed to groups stereotyped as either low in competence but high in warmth (e.g., housewives) or vice versa (e.g., lawyers). In Study 1, high competence/low warmth sources were more persuasive than low competence/high warmth sources. In Study 2, this pattern replicated when an accuracy motive had been induced, whereas it reversed when a connectedness motive had been induced. These source effects were direct, that is, independent of message processing. We discuss our findings in terms of the persuasiveness of warmth vs. competence of the source as being dependent on recipient motivation; we also consider theoretical implications and perspectives for future research.
Highlights
Groups are both targets of social perception (Cuddy et al, 2008) and sources of social influence (Moscovici, 1976)
The student condition and the hc/lw group conditions did not differ, t < 1. These results suggest that high competence, rather than high warmth, of a message source is the relevant factor in changing attitudes
We found the opposite; groups stereotyped as being high in competence but low in warmth were more successful in promoting the shower foam
Summary
Groups are both targets of social perception (Cuddy et al, 2008) and sources of social influence (Moscovici, 1976). We focus on ambivalent group stereotypes in terms of the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske et al, 2002), comparing groups perceived to be high in competence but low in warmth (e.g., lawyers) with groups perceived to be high in warmth but low in competence (e.g., disabled people) as sources of persuasion. By default, high competence/low warmth groups may have a persuasive advantage over high warmth/low competence groups (Study 1), and that this advantage may reverse if recipients are connectedness-motivated (Study 2). In order to elaborate our research questions, we address theorizing on source characteristics and processing motives in persuasion, as well as the role of ambivalent source cues both generally and in relation to the SCM
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
