Research Article
Let me count the ways in which I respect thee: does competence compensate or compromise lack of liking from the group?
Russell Spears,
Naomi Ellemers, Bertjan Doosje,
Corresponding Author
Russell Spears
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Cardiff University of Wales, UK
All authors contributed equally to this paper: names are listed in random order.
School of Psychology, Cardiff University of Wales, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK.Search for more papers by this authorRussell Spears,
Naomi Ellemers, Bertjan Doosje,
Corresponding Author
Russell Spears
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Cardiff University of Wales, UK
All authors contributed equally to this paper: names are listed in random order.
School of Psychology, Cardiff University of Wales, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK.Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Two studies examined the effects of competence-based respect in relation to liking-based respect from ingroup members. First, a pilot study confirmed the impact of competence feedback from ingroup members on affective and emotional reactions (membership esteem, feelings of pride and shame). The main studies orthogonally manipulated both liking- and competence-based respect from other ingroup members in order to examine whether (high) competence-based respect compensates for lack of liking, or compromises the subjective position in the group, on affective and emotional reactions to the feedback. Using a scenario methodology Study 1 produced no evidence for compensation, and indicated that liking was primary in this context. Study 2, using experimental groups, provided further evidence that those who were disliked by their fellow group members felt compromised by a favourable evaluation of their competence, while remaining committed to the group. These effects are related to the different properties and implications of competence and liking dimensions in group interaction. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
REFERENCES
- Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.
- Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachment as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.
- Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., Ellemers, N., & Doosje, B. (2002). Intragroup and intergroup evaluation effects on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 744–753.
- Crocker, J., & Luthanen, R. (1990). Collective self-esteem and ingroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 60–67.
- Crocker, J., & Luthanen, R. (1991). Self-esteem and intergroup Comparisons: Toward a theory of collective self-esteem. In J. Suls, & T. Ashby Wills (Eds.), Social comparison: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 211–234). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Doosje, B., Ellemers, N., & Spears, R. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 617–626.
- Doosje, B., Spears, R., & Koomen, W. (1995). When bad isn't all bad: The strategic use of sample information in generalization and stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 642–655.
- Duck, J. M., & Fielding, K. S. (2003). Leaders and their treatment of subgroups: Implications for evaluations of the leader and the superordinate group. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 387–401.
- Ellemers, N., van Knippenberg, A., & Wilke, H. (1990). The influence of permeability of group boundaries and stability of group status on strategies of individual mobility and social change. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 233–246.
- Ellemers, N., Doosje, B., & Spears, R. (2004). Sources of respect: From the eefects of being liked by ingroups and outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 155–172.
- Feather, N. T. (1994). Attitudes toward high achievers and reactions to their fall: Theory and research concerning tall poppies. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 1–73.
- Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473–489.
- Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & 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.
- Haslam, S. A., & Platow, M. J. (2001). The link between leadership and followership: How affirming social identity translates vision into action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1469–1479.
- Haslam, S. A., McGarty, C., Brown, P. M., Eggins, R. A., Morrison, B. E., & Reynolds, K. J. (1998). Inspecting the emperor's clothes: Evidence that randomly selected leaders can nuance group performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 2, 168–184.
10.1037/1089-2699.2.3.168 Google Scholar
- Hollander, E. P. (1964). Leaders, groups and influence. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Jetten, J., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., & McKimmie, B. (2003). Predicting the paths of peripherals: The interaction of identification and future possibilities. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 130–140.
- Manstead, A. S. R. (1996). Situations, belongingness, attitudes, and culture: Four lessons learned from social psychology. In C. McGarty, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology (pp. 238–251). Oxford: Blackwell.
- McFarland, C., & Buehler, R. (1995). Collective self-esteem as a moderator of the frog-pond effect in reactions to performance feedback. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1055–1070.
- Noel, J. G., Wann, D. L., & Branscombe, N. R. (1995). Peripheral ingroup membership status and public negativity toward outgroups. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 68(1), 127–137.
- Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
- Peeters, G. (2002). From good and bad to can and must: Subjective necessity of acts associated with positively and negatively valued stimuli. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 125–136.
- Platow, M. J., Hoar, S., Reid, S., Harley, K., & Morrison, D. (1997). Endorsement of distributively fair and unfair leaders in interpersonal and intergroup situations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 465–494.
- Reeder, G. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1979). A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review, 86, 61–79.
- Robinson, M. D., & Clore, G. L. (2001). Simulation, scenarios, and emotional appraisal: Testing the convergence of real and imagined reactions to emotional stimuli. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1520–1532.
- Rosenberg, S., Nelson, S., & Vivekanathan, P. S. (1968). A multi-dimensional approach to the study of personality impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 238–294.
- Seta, J. J., & Seta, C. E. (1996). Big fish in small ponds: A social hierarchy analysis of intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1210–1221.
- Simon, B., & Stürmer, S. (2003). Respect for group members: Intragroup determinants of collective identification and group-serving behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 183–193.
- Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 131–142.
- Smith, H. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1997). Choosing the right pond: The impact of group membership on self-esteem and group-oriented behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 146–170.
- Smith, R. H., Turner, T. J., Garonzik, R., Leach, C. W., Urch, V., & Weston, C. (1996). Envy and Schadenfreude. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 158–168.
- Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics ( 4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson–Hall.
- Turner, J. C. (1987). A self-categorization theory. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 42–67). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
10.1007/BF00866883 Google Scholar
- Tyler, T. R. (1999). Why people cooperate with organizations: An identity-based perspective. Research in Organizational Behavior, 21, 201–246.
- Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2002). Autonomous vs. comparative status: Must we be better than others to feel good about ourselves? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 813–838.
- Tyler, T. R., Degoey, P., & Smith, H. J. (1996). Understanding why the justice of group procedures matters: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 913–930.
- Vonk, R. (1999). Effects of other-profitability and self-profitability on evaluative judgements of behaviours. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 833–842.
