The Influence of Chronic and Situational Social Status on Stereotype Susceptibility

We tested whether stereotypical situations would affect low-status group members' performance more strongly than high-status group members'. Experiment 1 and 2 tested this hypothesis using gender as a proxy of chronic social status and a gender-neutral task thathas been randomly presented to favor boys (men superiority condition), favor girls (women superiority condition), or show no gender preference (control condition). Both experiments found that women's (Experiment 1) and girls' performance (Experiment 2) suffered more from the evoked stereotypes than did men's and boys' ones. This result was replicated in Experiment 3, indicating that short men (low-status group) were more affected compared to tallmen (high-status group). Additionally, men were more affected compared to women when they perceived height as a threat. Hence, individuals are more or less vulnerable to identity threats as a function of the chronic social status at play; enjoying a high status provides protection and endorsing a low one weakens individual performance in stereotypical situations

The Social Utility of Ambivalence: Being Ambivalent on Controversial Issues Is Recognized as Competence.

Research on attitudinal ambivalence is flourishing, but no research has studied how others perceive its expression. We tested the hypothesis that the expression of attitudinal ambivalence could be positively valued if it signals careful consideration of an issue. More specifically, ambivalence should be judged higher on social utility (competence) but not on social desirability (warmth), compared to clear-cut attitudes. This should be the case for controversial (vs. consensual) issues, where ambivalence can signal some competence. The participants in four experiments indeed evaluated ambivalence higher on a measure of social utility, compared to clear-cut (pro-normative and counter-normative) attitudes, when the attitude objects were controversial; they judged pro-normative attitudes higher for both social utility and social desirability when the attitude objects were consensual. Attitudinal ambivalence can therefore be positively valued, as it is perceived as competence when the expression of criticism is socially accepted

THE USEFUL SIDE OF AMBIVALENCE: Ambivalent attitudes can be adaptive and socially valued

En s'inspirant de la littérature récente qui a dépeint l'ambivalence comme étant adaptative et en lien avec des comportements stratégiques, cette thèse examine le versant utile des attitudes ambivalentes. Elle met tout d'abord en évidence que son expression peut-être sciemment contrôlée et mise en avant pour des raisons d'auto-présentation. De plus, elle démontre que les individus peuvent présenter une attitude ambivalente afin de gagner l'approbation sociale sur un objet d'attitude controversé alors que l'inverse a été observé sur des objets consensuels (Première ligne de recherche). Cette thèse a également révélé que l'expression d'attitudes ambivalentes pouvait amener à être valorisé socialement. En effet, contrairement à des attitudes plus tranchées (pro-normatives ou contre-normatives), les attitudes ambivalentes ont été évaluées de façon plus importante sur la dimension de l'utilité sociale (une dimension qui indique la compétence d'autrui ou encore la propension à évoluer dans la hiérarchie sociale). La valorisation de l'ambivalence n'est apparue que sur la dimension de l'utilité sociale et non sur la dimension de la désirabilité sociale (une dimension qui indique la sympathie d'autrui ainsi que la propension à être apprécié socialement). De plus, ce résultat a été observé sur des thèmes controversés et non sur des thèmes consensuels (Seconde ligne de recherche). Dans l'ensemble cette thèse soutient une approche de l'ambivalence comme donnant lieu à des bénéfices. Elle peut également ouvrir la voie à l'étude de l'ambivalence en lien avec la pensée critique. - Drawing on the recent literature that portrayed ambivalence as being adaptive and linked with strategic behaviors, this thesis examines the useful side of ambivalent attitudes. It first revealed that the expression of ambivalent attitudes could be controlled and purposely displayed for self-presentational concerns. Furthermore, it demonstrated that people could put ambivalence forward to gain social approval when expressing it on controversial social issues, whereas the opposite was true on consensual social issues (First line of research). The thesis also revealed that the expression of ambivalent attitudes could lead to be socially valued. Indeed, contrary to clear-cut attitudes (either pro-normative or counter-normative attitudes), ambivalent attitudes have been evaluated the highest on the social utility dimension (a dimension indicating people's competence as well as the extent to which they are likely to climb in social hierarchy). The valorization of ambivalent attitudes only appeared on social utility and not on social desirability (a dimension indicating people's niceness as well as the extent to which they are likely to be socially appreciated). This effect was true on controversial social issues but not on consensual ones (Second line of research). Overall, this thesis provides support for an approach that conceives attitudinal ambivalence as leading to benefits. It also may open avenues for the study of ambivalence in relation with critical thinking