Department of Psychology, Friedrich-Alexander University.
Faculty of Social Sciences, Utrecht University.
Psychol Rev. 2021 Mar;128(2):290-314. doi: 10.1037/rev0000262. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
Social evaluation occurs at personal, interpersonal, group, and intergroup levels, with competing theories and evidence. Five models engage in adversarial collaboration, to identify common conceptual ground, ongoing controversies, and continuing agendas: Dual Perspective Model (Abele & Wojciszke, 2007); Behavioral Regulation Model (Leach, Ellemers, & Barreto, 2007); Dimensional Compensation Model (Yzerbyt et al., 2005); Stereotype Content Model (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002); and Agency-Beliefs-Communion Model (Koch, Imhoff, Dotsch, Unkelbach, & Alves, 2016). Each has distinctive focus, theoretical roots, premises, and evidence. Controversies dispute dimensions: number, organization, definition, and labeling; their relative priority; and their relationship. Our first integration suggests 2 fundamental dimensions: Vertical (agency, competence, "getting ahead") and Horizontal (communion, warmth, "getting along"), with respective facets of ability and assertiveness (Vertical) and friendliness and morality (Horizontal). Depending on context, a third dimension is conservative versus progressive Beliefs. Second, different criteria for priority favor different dimensions: processing speed and subjective weight (Horizontal); pragmatic diagnosticity (Vertical); moderators include number and type of target, target-perceiver relationship, context. Finally, the relation between dimensions has similar operational moderators. As an integrative framework, the dimensions' dynamics also depend on perceiver goals (comprehension, efficiency, harmony, compatibility), each balancing top-down and bottom-up processes, for epistemic or hedonic functions. One emerging insight is that the nature and number of targets each of these models typically examines alters perceivers' evaluative goal and how bottom-up information or top-down inferences interact. This framework benefits theoretical parsimony and new research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
社会评价发生在个人、人际、群体和群体间层面,存在着相互竞争的理论和证据。五种模型进行对抗性合作,以确定共同的概念基础、持续的争议和持续的议程:双重观点模型(Abele 和 Wojciszke,2007 年);行为调节模型(Leach、Ellemers 和 Barreto,2007 年);维度补偿模型(Yzerbyt 等人,2005 年);刻板印象内容模型(Fiske、Cuddy、Glick 和 Xu,2002 年);以及机构-信仰-交流模型(Koch、Imhoff、Dotsch、Unkelbach 和 Alves,2016 年)。每个模型都有独特的焦点、理论根源、前提和证据。争议争议维度:数量、组织、定义和标签;它们的相对优先级;以及它们的关系。我们的第一次整合表明存在两个基本维度:垂直(机构、能力、“领先”)和水平(交流、温暖、“相处”),以及相应的能力和自信方面(垂直)和友好和道德方面(水平)。根据上下文,第三个维度是保守与进步的信仰。其次,不同的优先级标准有利于不同的维度:处理速度和主观权重(水平);实用诊断性(垂直);调节因素包括目标的数量和类型、目标-感知者关系、上下文。最后,维度之间的关系具有相似的操作调节因素。作为一个整合框架,维度的动态也取决于感知者的目标(理解、效率、和谐、兼容性),每个目标都平衡自上而下和自下而上的过程,以实现认知或享乐功能。一个新的见解是,这些模型通常检查的目标的性质和数量改变了感知者的评价目标,以及自上而下的信息或自下而上的推断如何相互作用。这个框架有利于理论简约和新的研究。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2021 APA,保留所有权利)。