Search

The present paper extends the needs-based model of reconciliation to contexts marked by status inequalities rather than by overt intergroup aggression. Specifically, we investigated whether and when members of high-status versus low-status groups experience divergent socio-emotional needs vis-à-vis members of the respective other status group. Building on research informed by social identity theory, we hypothesized that the groups' different positions in the social hierarchy only translate into divergent needs when the status differences are perceived as illegitimate. In Study 1 (N = 130), we tested this prediction by manipulating status and perceived legitimacy of status differences in a setting with artificially created groups. Results confirmed that the need to be socially accepted by members of the other status group was stronger in high-status compared with low-status group members but, as expected, only when the status differences were perceived to be illegitimate. Also as predicted, the need to be empowered by the other status group was stronger in low-status compared with high-status group members, again only under conditions of illegitimate status differences. Study 2 (N = 169) further corroborated our perspective by replicating these findings in a naturalistic intergroup context. Implications for the role of legitimacy perceptions in determining differential socio-emotional needs and for the promotion of sustainable social change are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of this paper are two-fold: (i) to examine the impact of audience individualism and collectivism orientation on the judgment of strategic self-presentations and (ii) to test whether audience individualism and collectivism orientation would affect the importance of likeability and competence in determining social outcomes. In two studies, participants evaluated modest and boastful presentations in an achievement context. It was found that the more collectivistic the audience was, the more likely the modest presenter was to be rated as likable, competent, and deserving of a desirable social outcome. In contrast, the more individualistic the audience was, the more likely the boastful presenter was to be rated as likeable, competent, and deserving of a desirable social outcome. The importance of likeability and competence in predicting the final social outcome was moderated by audience individualism and collectivism orientation. Likeability was more important in deciding the social outcome for those who were more collectivistic than for those who were less so (Study 1). Competence was more important in determining the social outcome for those who were more individualistic (Study 2). These studies build a potential theoretical bridge between social influence and social perception/social judgment literature. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]