Hoist on your own petard: When prejudiced remarks are recognized and backfire on speakers

Mae, Lynda; Carlston, Donal E.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.06.011

Cited by 42 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other research that has focused on the prevalence and antecedents of positive stereotypes -including research on the Stereotype Content Model (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002) and the system justifying function of complementary stereotypes (Kay & Jost, 2003) -has similarly theorized about the potentially insidious nature of positive stereotypes. Finally, Mae and Carlston (2005) observed that White participants asked to look for prejudice judged speakers who offered negatively valenced comments about a social group as more prejudiced than speakers who offered positively valenced comments (see also Czopp & Monteith, 2006;Devine & Elliot, 1995). To the extent this suggests positive stereotypes may go unnoticed and unchallenged (Barreto & Ellemers, 2005;Kervyn, Bergsieker, & Fiske, 2012), we propose two consequences that have not been directly addressed in any previous research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

The insidious (and ironic) effects of positive stereotypes

Kay

Day

Zanna

et al. 2013

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

The insidious (and ironic) effects of positive stereotypes

Kay

Day

Zanna

et al. 2013

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…After all, self-presenters who claim that they are superior to others may judge others favorably while reckoning that they are still a little bit better. One explanation evokes the presence of a strong social norm against negativity in descriptions of groups and individuals (Jones, Hester, Farina, & Davis, 1959;Mae & Carlston, 2005;Sutton, Elder, & Douglas, 2006).…”

Section: Limitations and Future Research Directionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Self-enhancement Provokes Dislike: The Hubris Hypothesis and the Aversiveness of Explicit Self-superiority Claims

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most people believe that they are in many respects superior to others. When they publicly express their superiority, they may do so in an explicitly or implicitly comparative manner ("I am better than others" vs. "I am good"). According to the hubris hypothesis, observers dislike explicit self-superiority claims, because these suggest a negative view of others and hence of the observers. The results of two experiments were consistent with the hubris hypothesis.Participants evaluated explicit self-superiority claimants more unfavorably than implicit selfsuperiority claimants (Experiments 1-2). They attributed less warmth, but not less competence, to explicit than implicit self-superiority claimants (Experiment 2), and this occurred to the extent that participants inferred a negative view of others (Experiments 1-2) and hence of them (Experiment 2).Keywords: self-enhancement, superiority, self-presentation, social comparison, hubris hypothesis HUBRIS HYPOTHESIS 3 Why Self-Enhancement Provokes Dislike:The Hubris Hypothesis and the Aversiveness of Explicit Self-Superiority Claims People believe that, in many respects, they are better and behave better than others (Alicke & Govorun, 2005;Sedikides & Alicke, 2012). These self-superiority beliefs have been linked with diverse interpersonal consequences, ranging from social acceptance to social rejection (Hoorens, 2011;Sedikides, Hoorens, & Dufner, 2015). We argue that the interpersonal consequences of self-superiority beliefs hinge, in part, on the manner in which they are expressed.People may convey self-superiority beliefs by claiming that they are "better than others." Alternatively, they may do so by claiming that they are "good." Borrowing terms introduced by Alicke (2007), we call these "explicit self-superiority claims" and "implicit self-superiority claims," respectively (cf. Hoorens & Van Damme, 2012). Although it is tempting to refer to the latter as non-comparative rather than implicitly comparative (cf. Hoorens, Pandelaere, Oldersma, & Sedikides, 2012), we have come to prefer the explicit-implicit distinction because even seemingly non-comparative self-judgements involve social comparison (Corcoran & Mussweiler, 2010). Performance success is typically defined as doing better than others (Gaines, Duvall, Webster, & Smith, 2005). Also, socially comparative information often influences selfjudgments more than any other type of information (Goolsby & Chaplin, 1988;Klein, 2003;Wood & Wilson, 2003; but see Moore & Klein, 2008). Socially comparative information even influences self-judgments, affect, and behavioral intentions in those cases where objective standards are available and relevant (Klein, 1997).There are good reasons to assert, therefore, that both explicit and implicit self-superiority claims rest upon the belief of being superior to others. Still, observers dislike explicit, but not implicit, self-superiority claims and claimants . But why do they do so?The answer cannot be that explicit, relative to implicit, self-superiority claims communic...

show abstract

“…Moreover, people often fail to perceive the inappropriateness of positive stereotypes when evaluating others' expressions of stereotypes. Mae and Carlston (2005) found that White participants rated speakers who endorsed positive stereotypes of various social groups as less prejudiced and more likable (and similar to control conditions) compared to speakers who endorsed negative stereotypes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

When is a compliment not a compliment? Evaluating expressions of positive stereotypes

Czopp

2008

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hoist on your own petard: When prejudiced remarks are recognized and backfire on speakers

Cited by 42 publications

References 43 publications

The insidious (and ironic) effects of positive stereotypes

The insidious (and ironic) effects of positive stereotypes

Why Self-enhancement Provokes Dislike: The Hubris Hypothesis and the Aversiveness of Explicit Self-superiority Claims

When is a compliment not a compliment? Evaluating expressions of positive stereotypes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About