The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What do people desire in others? A sociofunctional perspective on the importance of different valued characteristics.
Open accessAbstract
Humans, as discriminately social creatures, make frequent judgments about others' suitability for interdependent social relations. Which characteristics of others guide these judgments and, thus, shape patterns of human affiliation? Extant research is only minimally useful for answering this question. On the basis of a sociofunctional analysis of human sociality, the authors hypothesized that people highly value trustworthiness and (to a lesser extent) cooperativeness in others with whom they may be interdependent, regardless of the specific tasks, goals, or functions of the group or relationship, but value other favorable characteristics (e.g., intelligence) differentially across such tasks, goals, or functions. Participants in 3 studies considered various characteristics for ideal members of interdependent groups (e.g., work teams, athletic teams) and relationships (e.g., family members, employees). Across different measures of trait importance and different groups and relationships, trustworthiness was considered extremely important for all interdependent others; the evidence for the enhanced importance of cooperativeness across different interdependence contexts was more equivocal. In contrast, people valued other characteristics primarily as they were relevant to the specific nature of the interdependent group or relationship. These empirical investigations illuminate the essence of human sociality with its foundation of trust and highlight the usefulness of a theoretically derived framework of valued characteristics.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure
Goldberg, L. R. (1992) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 · Cited by 5,530
Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures
Buss, D. M. (1989) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00023992 · Cited by 4,484
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0033731 · Cited by 3,865
Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: the NEO personality inventory
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5 · Cited by 3,414
Rempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P. (1985) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95 · Cited by 3,146
The Social Psychology of Stigma
Major, B., & O'Brien, L. T. (2005) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137 · Cited by 3,114
Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109 · Cited by 1,875
What Is Beyond the Big Five? Plenty!
Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. (2000) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00117 · Cited by 454
The Evolution of Human Ultrasociality
Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (1998) · Indoctrinability, Ideology and Warfare · doi:10.2307/jj.7079921.9 · Cited by 187
Cited by
Going green to be seen: status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0017346 · Cited by 2,174
Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether, and why.
Li, N. P., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.468 · Cited by 699
Self-citationCommunal and Agentic Content in Social Cognition
Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2014) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-800284-1.00004-7 · Cited by 669
The evolutionary genetics of personality
Penke, L., Denissen, J. J. A., & Miller, G. F. (2007) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.629 · Cited by 610
Do you believe in atheists? Distrust is central to anti-atheist prejudice.
Gervais, W. M., Shariff, A. F., & Norenzayan, A. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0025882 · Cited by 495
Metadata
- Authors
- Cottrell, C. A., Neuberg, S. L., & Li, N. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 208-231
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2102555020
- Cited by
- 404
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 47.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What do people desire in others? A sociofunctional perspective on the importance of different valued characteristics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.208
- The paper
- Cottrell, C. A., Neuberg, S. L., & Li, N. P. (2007). What do people desire in others? A sociofunctional perspective on the importance of different valued characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.208
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.