Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Examining the Structural Validity of Stereotype Content Scales – A Preregistered Re-Analysis of Published Data and Discussion of Possible Future Directions Cover

Examining the Structural Validity of Stereotype Content Scales – A Preregistered Re-Analysis of Published Data and Discussion of Possible Future Directions

International Review of Social Psychology
Volume 35 (2022): Issue 1
By: Maria-Therese Friehs,  Patrick F. Kotzur,  Johanna Böttcher,  Ann-Kristin C. Zöller,  Tabea Lüttmer,  Ulrich Wagner,  Frank Asbrock and  Maarten H. W. van Zalk  
Open Access
|Feb 2022

References

  1. 1Abele, A. E., Ellemers, N., Fiske, S. T., Koch, A., & Yzerbyt, V. (2021). Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psychological Review, 128(2), 290–314. DOI: 10.1037/rev0000262
    Back to article
  2. 2Abele, A. E., Hauke, N., Peters, K., Louvet, E., Szymkow, A., & Duan, Y. (2016). Facets of the fundamental content dimensions: Agency with competence and assertiveness—Communion with warmth and morality. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810
    Back to article
  3. 3Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 751–763. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751
    Back to article
  4. 4Asbrock, F. (2010). Stereotypes of social groups in Germany in terms of Warmth and Competence. Social Psychology, 41(2), 76–81. DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000011
    Back to article
  5. 5Asbrock, F., Nieuwoudt, C., Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2011). Societal stereotypes and the legitimation of intergroup behavior in Germany and New Zealand. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 11(1), 154–179. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01242.x
    Back to article
  6. 6Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Multiple-group factor analysis alignment. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(4), 495–508. DOI: 10.1080/10705511.2014.919210
    Back to article
  7. 7Bandalos, D. L. (2018). Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences. Guilford Press.
    Back to article
  8. 8Boehnke, K., Arnaut, C., Bremer, T., Chinyemba, R., Kiewitt, Y., Koudadjey, A. K., Mwangase, R., & Neubert, L. (2014). Toward emically informed cross-cultural comparisons: A suggestion. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(10), 1655–1670. DOI: 10.1177/0022022114547571
    Back to article
  9. 9Boer, D., Hanke, K., & He, J. (2018). On detecting systematic measurement error in cross-cultural research: A review and critical reflection on equivalence and invariance tests. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(5), 713–734. DOI: 10.1177/0022022117749042
    Back to article
  10. 10Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Rusconi, P., & Goodwin, G. P. (2021). The primacy of morality in impression development: Theory, research, and future directions. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 64, 187–262. Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2021.03.001
    Back to article
  11. 11Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (Second edition). The Guilford Press.
    Back to article
  12. 12Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456–466. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456
    Back to article
  13. 13Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504. DOI: 10.1080/10705510701301834
    Back to article
  14. 14Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1005–1018. DOI: 10.1037/a0013193
    Back to article
  15. 15Davenport, E. C., Davison, M. L., Liou, P.-Y., & Love, Q. U. (2015). Reliability, dimensionality, and internal consistency as defined by Cronbach: Distinct albeit related concepts. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 34(4), 4–9. DOI: 10.1111/emip.12095
    Back to article
  16. 16Davey, C., & Hargreaves, J. (2015, July 23). How re-analysing the data of scientific research can change the findings. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/how-re-analysing-the-data-of-scientific-research-can-change-the-findings-44926
    Back to article
  17. 17David, D., Bizo, A., Cimpean, A. I., Oltean, H., Cardos, R., Soflau, R., & Negut, A. (2018). The effect of research method type on stereotypes’ content: A brief research report. The Journal of Social Psychology, 158(3), 379–392. DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2017.1361375
    Back to article
  18. 18Davidov, E., Meuleman, B., Cieciuch, J., Schmidt, P., & Billiet, J. (2014). Measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Annual Review of Sociology, 40(1), 55–75. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043137
    Back to article
  19. 19Durante, F., Fiske, S. T., Gelfand, M. J., Crippa, F., Suttora, C., Stillwell, A., Asbrock, F., Aycan, Z., Bye, H. H., Carlsson, R., Björklund, F., Dagher, M., Geller, A., Larsen, C. A., Latif, A.-H. A., Mähönen, T. A., Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., & Teymoori, A. (2017). Ambivalent stereotypes link to peace, conflict, and inequality across 38 nations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(4), 669–674. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1611874114
    Back to article
  20. 20Durante, F., Fiske, S. T., Kervyn, N., Cuddy, A. J. C., Akande, A. D., Adetoun, B. E., Adewuyi, M. F., Tserere, M. M., Ramiah, A. A., Mastor, K. A., Barlow, F. K., Bonn, G., Tafarodi, R. W., Bosak, J., Cairns, E., Doherty, C., Capozza, D., Chandran, A., Chryssochoou, X., …, & Storari, C. C. (2013). Nations’ income inequality predicts ambivalence in stereotype content: How societies mind the gap. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(4), 726–746. DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12005
    Back to article
  21. 21Earp, B. D., & Trafimow, D. (2015). Replication, falsification, and the crisis of confidence in social psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00621
    Back to article
  22. 22Ellemers, N. (2021). Science as collaborative knowledge generation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(1), 1–28. DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12430
    Back to article
  23. 23Fiske, S. T. (2017). Going in many right directions, all at once. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(4), 652–655. DOI: 10.1177/1745691617706506
    Back to article
  24. 24Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
    Back to article
  25. 25Fiske, 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(6), 878–902. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
    Back to article
  26. 26Fiske, 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(3), 473–489. DOI: 10.1111/0022-4537.00128
    Back to article
  27. 27Flake, J. K., & Fried, E. I. (2020). Measurement schmeasurement: Questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(4), 456–465. DOI: 10.1177/2515245920952393
    Back to article
  28. 28Flake, J. K., Pek, J., & Hehman, E. (2017). Construct validation in social and personality research: Current practice and recommendations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 370–378. DOI: 10.1177/1948550617693063
    Back to article
  29. 29Green, S. B., & Yang, Y. (2015). Evaluation of dimensionality in the assessment of internal consistency reliability: Coefficient alpha and omega coefficients. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 34(4), 14–20. DOI: 10.1111/emip.12100
    Back to article
  30. 30Grigoryan, L., Bai, X., Durante, F., Fiske, S. T., Fabrykant, M., Hakobjanyan, A., Javakhishvili, N., Kadirov, K., Kotova, M., Makashvili, A., Maloku, E., Morozova-Larina, O., Mullabaeva, N., Samekin, A., Verbilovich, V., & Yahiiaiev, I. (2020). Stereotypes as historical accidents: Images of social class in postcommunist versus capitalist societies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(6), 927–943. DOI: 10.1177/0146167219881434
    Back to article
  31. 31Grigoryev, D., Fiske, S. T., & Batkhina, A. (2019). Mapping ethnic stereotypes and their antecedents in Russia: The stereotype content model. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1643. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01643
    Back to article
  32. 32Hackbart, M., Rapior, M., & Thies, B. (2020). Wie werden Erziehungsberatende in Abhängigkeit von Geschlechts- und ethnischer Zugehörigkeit kognitiv repräsentiert? [How are educational consultants cognitively represented as a function of gender and ethnicity?]. Zeitschrift Für Soziologie Der Erziehung Und Sozialisation, 40(2), 116–132. DOI: 10.3262/ZSE2002116
    Back to article
  33. 33Halkias, G., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2020). Universal dimensions of individuals’ perception: Revisiting the operationalization of warmth and competence with a mixed-method approach. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(4), 714–736. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.02.004
    Back to article
  34. 34Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. DOI: 10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629
    Back to article
  35. 35Hester, N., Axt, J., & Hehman, E. (2022, January 14). Evaluating Validity Properties of 25 Race-Related Scales. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/vxbtg
    Back to article
  36. 36Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117–144. DOI: 10.1080/03610739208253916
    Back to article
  37. 37Hussey, I., & Hughes, S. (2020). Hidden invalidity among fifteen commonly used measures in social and personality psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(2), 166–184. DOI: 10.1177/2515245919882903
    Back to article
  38. 38Janssens, H., Verkuyten, M., & Khan, A. (2015). Perceived social structural relations and group stereotypes: A test of the Stereotype Content Model in Malaysia: Social structure and stereotypes. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 18(1), 52–61. DOI: 10.1111/ajsp.12077
    Back to article
  39. 39Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507. DOI: 10.1177/0049124114543236
    Back to article
  40. 40Kervyn, N., Fiske, S. T., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2013). Integrating the stereotype content model (warmth and competence) and the Osgood semantic differential (evaluation, potency, and activity): Integrating the SD and the SCM. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(7), 673–681. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.1978
    Back to article
  41. 41Kervyn, N., Fiske, S., & Yzerbyt, V. (2015). Forecasting the primary dimension of social perception: Symbolic and realistic threats together predict warmth in the Stereotype Content Model. Social Psychology, 46(1), 36–45. DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000219
    Back to article
  42. 42Koch, A., Imhoff, R., Dotsch, R., Unkelbach, C., & Alves, H. (2016). The ABC of stereotypes about groups: Agency/socioeconomic success, conservative–progressive beliefs, and communion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(5), 675–709. DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000046
    Back to article
  43. 43Koch, A., Imhoff, R., Unkelbach, C., Nicolas, G., Fiske, S., Terache, J., Carrier, A., & Yzerbyt, V. (2020). Groups’ warmth is a personal matter: Understanding consensus on stereotype dimensions reconciles adversarial models of social evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 89, 103995. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103995
    Back to article
  44. 44Koch, A., Yzerbyt, V., Abele, A., Ellemers, N., & Fiske, S. T. (2021). Social evaluation: Comparing models across interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup, several-group, and many-group contexts. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 63, pp. 1–68). Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.11.001
    Back to article
  45. 45Kotzur, P. F., Forsbach, N., & Wagner, U. (2017). Choose your words wisely: Stereotypes, emotions, and action tendencies toward fled people as a function of the group label. Social Psychology, 48(4), 226–241. DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000312
    Back to article
  46. 46Kotzur, P. F., Friehs, M., Asbrock, F., & Zalk, M. H. W. (2019). Stereotype content of refugee subgroups in Germany. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(7), 1344–1358. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2585
    Back to article
  47. 47Kotzur, P. F., Veit, S., Namyslo, A., Holthausen, M., Wagner, U., & Yemane, R. (2020). ‘Society thinks they are cold and/or incompetent, but I do not’: Stereotype content ratings depend on instructions and the social group’s location in the stereotype content space. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(4), 1018–1042. DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12375
    Back to article
  48. 48Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(2), 234–249. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234
    Back to article
  49. 49Meitinger, K., Davidov, E., Schmidt, P., & Braun, M. (2020). Measurement invariance: Testing for it and explaining why it is absent. Survey Research Methods, 345–349. DOI: 10.18148/SRM/2020.V14I4.7655
    Back to article
  50. 50Meredith, W., & Millsap, R. E. (1992). On the misuse of manifest variables in the detection of measurement bias. Psychometrika, 57(2), 289–311. DOI: 10.1007/BF02294510
    Back to article
  51. 51Meyer, B., & Asbrock, F. (2018). Disabled or cyborg? How bionics affect stereotypes toward people with physical disabilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2251. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02251
    Back to article
  52. 52Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002). How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(4), 599–620. DOI: 10.1207/S15328007SEM0904_8
    Back to article
  53. 53Pettigrew, T. F. (2018). The emergence of contextual social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(7), 963–971. DOI: 10.1177/0146167218756033
    Back to article
  54. 54Pettigrew, T. F. (2021). Contextual social psychology: Reanalyzing prejudice, voting, and intergroup contact. American Psychological Association. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1gd0vp8. DOI: 10.1037/0000210-000
    Back to article
  55. 55Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2011). Introduction to psychometric theory. Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203841624
    Back to article
  56. 56Sass, D. A. (2011). Testing measurement invariance and comparing latent factor means within a confirmatory factor analysis framework. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 347–363. DOI: 10.1177/0734282911406661
    Back to article
  57. 57Sayans-Jiménez, P., Cuadrado, I., Rojas, A. J., & Barrada, J. R. (2017). Extracting the evaluations of stereotypes: Bi-factor model of the stereotype content structure. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1692. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01692
    Back to article
  58. 58Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.
    Back to article
  59. 59Schimmack, U. (2020). A meta-psychological perspective on the decade of replication failures in social psychology. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 61(4), 364–376. DOI: 10.1037/cap0000246
    Back to article
  60. 60Sechrest, L., Fay, T. L., & Zaidi, S. M. H. (1972). Problems of Translation in Cross-Cultural Research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 3(1), 41–56. DOI: 10.1177/002202217200300103
    Back to article
  61. 61Sörbom, D. (1978). An alternative to the methodology for analysis of covariance. Psychometrika, 43(3), 381–396. DOI: 10.1007/BF02293647
    Back to article
  62. 62Stanciu, A. (2015). Four sub-dimensions of stereotype content: Exploratory evidence from Romania. International Psychology Bulletin, 19(4), 14–20.
    Back to article
  63. 63Stanciu, A., Cohrs, J. C., Hanke, K., & Gavreliuc, A. (2017). Within-culture variation in the content of stereotypes: Application and development of the stereotype content model in an Eastern European culture. The Journal of Social Psychology, 157(5), 611–628. DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2016.1262812
    Back to article
  64. 64Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. DOI: 10.1177/109442810031002
    Back to article
  65. 65Vauclair, C.-M., Hanke, K., Huang, L.-L., & Abrams, D. (2017). Are Asian cultures really less ageist than Western ones? It depends on the questions asked. International Journal of Psychology, 52(2), 136–144. DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12292
    Back to article
  66. 66Wang, Y. A., & Rhemtulla, M. (2021). Power Analysis for Parameter Estimation in Structural Equation Modeling: A Discussion and Tutorial. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 251524592091825. DOI: 10.1177/2515245920918253
    Back to article
  67. 67Wetzel, E., & Roberts, B. W. (2020). Commentary on Hussey and Hughes (2020): Hidden invalidity among 15 commonly used measures in social and personality psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(4), 505–508. DOI: 10.1177/2515245920957618
    Back to article
  68. 68Wolf, E. J., Harrington, K. M., Clark, S. L., & Miller, M. W. (2013). Sample size requirements for structural equation models: An evaluation of power, bias, and solution propriety. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(6), 913–934. DOI: 10.1177/0013164413495237
    Back to article
  69. 69Yzerbyt, V., Provost, V., & Corneille, O. (2005). Not competent but warm… Really? Compensatory stereotypes in the French-speaking world. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8(3), 291–308. DOI: 10.1177/1368430205053944
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.613 | Journal eISSN: 2397-8570
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: May 17, 2021
Accepted on: Dec 13, 2021
Published on: Feb 9, 2022
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
Stereotype Content Model,
Social Perception,
Confirmatory Factor Analysis,
Measurement Invariance,
Re-Analysis

© 2022 Maria-Therese Friehs, Patrick F. Kotzur, Johanna Böttcher, Ann-Kristin C. Zöller, Tabea Lüttmer, Ulrich Wagner, Frank Asbrock, Maarten H. W. van Zalk, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 35 (2022): Issue 1Next article