Examining the Structural Validity of Stereotype Content Scales - A Preregistered Re-Analysis of Published Data and Discussion of Possible Future Directions

Autor(en): Friehs, Maria-Therese
Kotzur, Patrick F.
Boettcher, Johanna
Zoeller, Ann-Kristin C.
Luettmer, Tabea
Wagner, Ulrich
Asbrock, Frank
Van Zalk, Maarten H. W. 
Stichwörter: AMBIVALENT STEREOTYPES; COMPETENCE; Confirmatory Factor Analysis; CONTENT MODEL; EQUIVALENCE; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; MEASUREMENT INVARIANCE; Psychology; Psychology, Social; Re-Analysis; RELIABILITY; SAMPLE-SIZE; Social Perception; Stereotype Content Model; UNIVERSAL DIMENSIONS; WARMTH
Erscheinungsdatum: 2022
Herausgeber: UBIQUITY PRESS LTD
Journal: INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volumen: 35
Ausgabe: 1
Zusammenfassung: 
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' cross group 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.
ISSN: 2397-8570
DOI: 10.5334/irsp.613

Zur Langanzeige

Google ScholarTM

Prüfen

Altmetric