↓ Skip to main content

Warmth and competence in your face! Visual encoding of stereotype content

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Warmth and competence in your face! Visual encoding of stereotype content
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00386
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roland Imhoff, Jonas Woelki, Sebastian Hanke, Ron Dotsch

Abstract

Previous research suggests that stereotypes about a group's warmth bias our visual representation of group members. Based on the stereotype content model (SCM) the current research explored whether the second big dimension of social perception, competence, is also reflected in visual stereotypes. To test this, participants created typical faces for groups either high in warmth and low in competence (male nursery teachers) or vice versa (managers) in a reverse correlation image classification task, which allows for the visualization of stereotypes without any a priori assumptions about relevant dimensions. In support of the independent encoding of both SCM dimensions hypotheses-blind raters judged the resulting visualizations of nursery teachers as warmer but less competent than the resulting image for managers, even when statistically controlling for judgments on one dimension. People thus seem to use facial cues indicating both relevant dimensions to make sense of social groups in a parsimonious, non-verbal and spontaneous manner.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 140 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 18%
Student > Master 23 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 14%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 28 19%
Unknown 26 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 79 53%
Social Sciences 9 6%
Neuroscience 9 6%
Computer Science 4 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 33 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,904,299
of 26,396,170 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,907
of 35,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,225
of 294,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#373
of 967 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,396,170 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,311 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 967 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.