The Stereotype Content Model (SCM) plays a prominent role in social perception research when comparing the evaluation of different targets on warmth and competence dimensions. However, there is scarce information on the SCM's measurement properties. Thus, in this article, we provide a comprehensive test of the SCM's structural validity (i.e., reliability, dimensionality, cross-group comparability of measurement properties). We re-analysed published SCM data from English speaking participants (study 1: 78 datasets from 43 original publications, N = 20,819) and German participants (study 2: 29 datasets from 23 original publications, N = 10,854). We used confirmatory factor analyses to assess the scales' reliability and dimensionality as well as measurement invariance assessment to examine cross-group comparability as a precondition for meaningful and valid mean-value comparison. We found on average good reliabilities of the SCM scales. In contrast, about 35% of all 1093 examined SCM measurement models presented adequate scale dimensionality, and regarding the scales' crossgroup comparability, we found (partial) scalar measurement invariance in about 11% of all cases. These findings indicate considerable validity concerns in published SCM research, as a meaningful and valid measurement of warmth and competence was not given in approximately two thirds of all cases, and mean-value comparisons were potentially biased due to lacking cross-group comparability for about eight out of nine cases. We propose future directions to improve the measurement quality and validity in SCM research and invite fellow researchers to constructively discuss these ideas.

The stereotype content model (SCM), which defines warmth and competence as fundamental dimensions of social perception, plays a prominent role in contemporary research. Recently, researchers suggested that the SCM scales currently utilised in English contexts might perform less well than previously assumed (Friehs et al., 2021). This was particularly the case when it came to meeting prerequisites for mean-value comparisons, which are the kinds of analyses that SCM scales are mostly submitted to. We build on this research by investigating the scale properties of SCM measures in the German language context. Thus, we investigated the reliability, dimensionality and cross-target group measurement equivalence of German SCM scales in 29 published data sets (N = 10,854) using a preregistered analysis protocol. Confirmatory factor analyses of 507 SCM measurement models showed that the reliability of the used scales was on average good and that they showed adequate dimensionality in 35.10 % of all cases. We additionally assessed (partial) scalar measurement equivalence as a prerequisite for meaningful mean-value comparisons and found evidence for it in 11.44% of all cases. Our findings echo those from the English context and indicate that the currently utilised German scales perform less well than we would have hoped. Moreover, our findings contribute to a debate about how to measure stereotype content, and we call on all researchers to invest in scale development efforts to ensure highly reliable and valid social perception research in Germany and elsewhere.