Nations' income inequality predicts ambivalence in stereotype content: how societies mind the gap.

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 8105534 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2044-8309 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 01446665 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Br J Soc Psychol Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: <2012-> : Chichester : Wiley-Blackwell
Original Publication: Letchworth Herts : British Psychological Society

Income* ; Social Identification* ; Stereotyping*; Adult ; Africa ; Americas ; Asia ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Europe ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Oceania ; Social Environment ; Socioeconomic Factors ; Young Adult

Income inequality undermines societies: The more inequality, the more health problems, social tensions, and the lower social mobility, trust, life expectancy. Given people's tendency to legitimate existing social arrangements, the stereotype content model (SCM) argues that ambivalence-perceiving many groups as either warm or competent, but not both-may help maintain socio-economic disparities. The association between stereotype ambivalence and income inequality in 37 cross-national samples from Europe, the Americas, Oceania, Asia, and Africa investigates how groups' overall warmth-competence, status-competence, and competition-warmth correlations vary across societies, and whether these variations associate with income inequality (Gini index). More unequal societies report more ambivalent stereotypes, whereas more equal ones dislike competitive groups and do not necessarily respect them as competent. Unequal societies may need ambivalence for system stability: Income inequality compensates groups with partially positive social images.
(© 2012 The British Psychological Society.)

Br J Soc Psychol. 2009 Mar;48(Pt 1):1-33. (PMID: 19178758)
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58. (PMID: 12111919)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009 Sep;97(3):421-34. (PMID: 19685999)
J Exp Soc Psychol. 2012 Jan 1;48(1):77-85. (PMID: 26023243)
Am Psychol. 1993 Jun;48(6):621-8. (PMID: 8328729)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Nov;93(5):751-63. (PMID: 17983298)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002 Jun;82(6):878-902. (PMID: 12051578)
Am Psychol. 2010 Nov;65(8):698-706. (PMID: 21058760)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1968 Aug;9(4):283-94. (PMID: 5670821)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Jul;101(1):62-77. (PMID: 21355657)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Nov;85(5):823-37. (PMID: 14599247)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Nov;79(5):763-75. (PMID: 11079240)
Soc Sci Med. 2007 Nov;65(9):1965-78. (PMID: 17618718)
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2010 Jul;5(4):356-77. (PMID: 26162183)
Psychol Methods. 2001 Jun;6(2):161-80. (PMID: 11411440)
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):161-86. (PMID: 12869240)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Dec;89(6):899-913. (PMID: 16393023)
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2009 Nov;13(4):334-53. (PMID: 19815492)
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Feb;11(2):77-83. (PMID: 17188552)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Apr;92(4):631-48. (PMID: 17469949)
Br J Soc Psychol. 2012 Mar;51(1):1-12. (PMID: 22435843)
Anal Soc Issues Public Policy. 2012 Dec 1;12(1):324-329. (PMID: 24523628)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004 May;86(5):713-28. (PMID: 15161396)
Psychol Sci. 2011 Sep;22(9):1095-100. (PMID: 21841151)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Mar;88(3):498-509. (PMID: 15740442)
Psychol Sci. 2011 Nov;22(11):1413-8. (PMID: 21987694)
Psychol Women Q. 2011 Sep;35(3):530-535. (PMID: 24453402)
Psychol Sci. 2011 Oct;22(10):1254-8. (PMID: 21948855)
Am Psychol. 2001 Feb;56(2):109-18. (PMID: 11279804)
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012 Jun;102(6):1214-38. (PMID: 22448889)
Br J Soc Psychol. 2011 Dec;50(4):573-4. (PMID: 22122023)
Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2010 Nov;63(Pt 3):665-94. (PMID: 20497626)

R24 HD047879 United States HD NICHD NIH HHS

Date Created: 20121009 Date Completed: 20140729 Latest Revision: 20211021

20231215

PMC3855559

10.1111/bjso.12005

23039178