Finding the tipping points between two models of social evaluation: an adversarial collaboration between ABC and DCM
(2023) European Association of Social Psychology (EASP) General Meeting — Location: Krakow (30.June.2023)
Files
EASP2023_final.docx
Open Access - Microsoft Word XML
- 22.58 KB
Details
- Authors
Barbedor, Julien 
- et. al.
- Abstract
- One major controversy that emerged from a recent adversarial collaboration on social evaluation (Abele et al., 2021) concerns the relations between the vertical (agency and competence) and the horizontal (morality and warmth) dimensions. The ABC model and DCM make opposite predictions with respect to the trait judgments of a target group on the horizontal dimension depending on its ratings on the vertical dimension. Focusing on a two-group context, the DCM argues for compensation in that the evaluations on horizontal traits depend on the direction of the comparison on status (looking up vs. looking down). In contrast, ABC focuses on a multi-group context and predicts that judgments on horizontal traits are solely a function of the distance (similarity) between the self and the target in terms of status. Using a paradigm that allowed creating each model’s relevant social context, the results of six pre-registered experiments (total N = 3,031) confirm that both models account for horizontal evaluations when examined in their own context. On average, participants rated a higher than-self-status group lower on horizontal traits than a lower-than-self-status group in the presence of two groups. However, their ratings were equivalent when evaluating more than two groups. Confirming the analysis laid out in the unified model of social evaluation, the number of targets evaluated is the critical factor that accounts for the difference in the patterns observed in DCM and ABC.
- Affiliations
Citations
Barbedor, J., & et al. (2023). Finding the tipping points between two models of social evaluation: an adversarial collaboration between ABC and DCM. European Association of Social Psychology (EASP) General Meeting, Krakow. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/238295