As you start your career, you may consider going into academia or industry. Either way, the career path you choose can affect how others view you—even without knowing anything about you. This type of stereotyping allows people to make fast decisions about a person’s intentions. Is this person good or bad? So how will others perceive you when you begin your new career?




Why Should You Care?

Perhaps you’re thinking I don’t care what other people think. Who cares about haters anyway? Congratulations, you have self-confidence. This will serve you well in life. However, if you are going to be interacting with people at any point in the future, how you are perceived by others can affect your relationship with them. As a professional, you need to be aware of how you come across to others if you want to promote positive, constructive relationships.

How Do People Create Preconceived Notions of You?

According to the stereotype content model, interpreting the behavior of others can change across two important dimensions: warmth and competence (Cuddy et al., 2009; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002; Kervyn, Fiske, & Yzerbyt, 2013). When we think that someone is super-likable, they are perceived as being high in warmth. When we think that someone is really good at what they do, they are perceived as being high in competence. According to Fiske and her colleagues, people can be categorized as 4 types: (1) high-warmth/high-competence, (2) high-warmth/low-competence, (3) low-warmth/high-competence, and (4) low-warmth/low-competence. Of course, if you were to actually measure these things, people would fall across a continuum. However, people like to make broad generalizations of others. So viewing people as being in one of the four categories better represents how people stereotype others in real life.

How is Your Career Viewed by Others?

At a conference I attended several months ago, Susan Fiske presented some unpublished data regarding how different US jobs are perceived by others (Dupree & Fiske, 2013, as cited in Fiske & Ames, 2014). Her results were quite fascinating. Some people were perceived as being cold and incompetent (e.g., fast food workers, laborers, taxi drivers, etc.). Some were perceived as middle in warmth and competence (e.g., politicians, salespeople, construction workers). Some high warmth and competent folks were nurses, farmers, and child care workers. Some cold and competent folks were CEOs, lawyers, and accountants.

A Warning to Professors/Researchers

Of interest to people in higher education: Susan Fiske showed a split between teachers/professors and researchers/scientists. Teachers and professors were viewed as relatively high in warmth and competence; however, researchers and scientists were viewed as being high in competence but low in warmth. This may be a problem for people who want to be both a professor/teacher and researcher/scientist. As a teacher, you’re perceived as warm and competent, but as a researcher you’re perceived as cold and competent. As you initiate conversations with people in your workplace (e.g., students, peers, superiors), know that when you put yourself in the researcher/scientist role you might come across as not having the best of intentions despite your impressive credentials.

 

Communicate Your Intentions

No matter your chosen career, demonstrate to others that your intentions are good-willed, and people will view you as trustworthy. Broadcasting your academic credentials may increase your competency points, but you may suffer in warmth. It’s probably best to establish your qualifications to others at the beginning of your interactions (e.g., inserting Ph.D. on your syllabus) but not to beat them over the head with your credentials. As you communicate your good intentions, others will be more willing to trust you, and your relationship with them will be more productive and collaborative.

 

References

Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V. S. Y., Glick, P., Demoulin, S. Leyens, J.-P.,…, Ziegler, R. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 1-33. doi: 10.1348/014466608X314935
Fiske, S. T., & Ames, D. L. (2014, February). We are intent-detectors. In H. Song (Chair),Approaches to anthropomorphism and its social and moral consequences. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Austin, TX.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. ( 2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878– 902. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
Kervyn, N., Fiske, S. T., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2013). Integrating the stereotype content model (warmth and competence) and the Osgood semantic differential (evaluation, potency, and activity). European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 673-681. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1978

See also

L Neely. (2013, October 21). Is “cold but competent” a problem in science communication? [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://compassblogs.org/blog/2013/10/21/is-cold-but-competent-a-problem-in-science-communication/

 

Image used with permission by MJ Photography via iStockphoto .

 

0 comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.