Stereotype content model

These groups and individuals fall along the low end of the warmth spectrum, while social groups and individuals with high social status (e.g., economically or educationally successful) are considered competent, and are found at the high end of the competence dimension's spectrum.

[1][2] The model was first proposed by social psychologist Susan Fiske and her colleagues Amy Cuddy, Peter Glick and Jun Xu.

[7] Assessments of an out-group or individual's potential threat level predicts the group or person's place along the warmth dimension's high/low spectrum.

In the same paper, Kervyn, Fiske, and Yzerbyt also broadened their concept of warmth and defined it as an umbrella term that encompasses both sociability and morality.

Durante et al. (2013) cross-cultural review of the literature reported an average correlation between status and competence of r = .9 (range = .74–.99, all ps < .001).

[16][7] The SCM broke from former research literature with a mixed stereotype approach that formalized multiple out-group categories.

[17] Fiske et al. (2002), also credited their decision to adopt a dual warmth/competence model to a 1997 study from Bogdan Wojciszke's laboratory, which found that warmth and competence accounted for 82% of the variance in social perceptions of daily behaviors.

The second behavior spectrum, harm/facilitation, is included in the BIAS Map to differentiate out-groups that the in-group is positioned to either assist or to harm.

This study supports the claim that ego defense mechanisms are dimension specific; if a person experiences a threat to their level of competence they will reduced their rating of others stereotyped to be highly competent, but will not downgrade their perception of those groups stereotyped to be high on warmth.

A 2005 experimental study by Judd et al. reported a trade off between high and low assessments of warmth and competence when directly comparing the relative attributed of two social groups.