The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation
Abstract
Research has shown that warmth and competence are core dimensions on which perceivers judge others and that warmth has a primary role at various phases of impression formation. Three studies explored whether the two components of warmth (i.e., sociability and morality) have distinct roles in predicting the global impression of social groups. In Study 1 ( N = 105) and Study 2 ( N = 112), participants read an immigration scenario depicting an unfamiliar social group in terms of high ( vs. low) morality, sociability, and competence. In both studies, participants were asked to report their global impression of the group. Results showed that global evaluations were better predicted by morality than by sociability or competence‐trait ascriptions. Study 3 ( N = 86) further showed that the effect of moral traits on group global evaluations was mediated by the perception of threat. The importance of these findings for the impression‐formation process is discussed.
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
SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03206553 · Cited by 17,383
Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005 · Cited by 4,567
First Impressions: Making Up Your Mind After a 100-Ms Exposure to a Face
Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x · Cited by 2,300
Behavioral Decision Theory: Processes of Judgement and Choice
Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. (1981) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000413 · Cited by 1,691
Intergroup Threat and Outgroup Attitudes: A Meta-Analytic Review
Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4 · Cited by 1,588
Automatic and intentional brain responses during evaluation of trustworthiness of faces
Winston, J. S., Strange, B. A., O'Doherty, J., & Dolan, R. J. (2002) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn816 · Cited by 993
Beyond beliefs: Religions bind individuals into moral communities
Graham, J., & Haidt, J. (2010) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868309353415 · Cited by 842 · cited 1×
“Even if the moral domain might be conceived as even broader than this definition, such an operationalization of the moral domain is widespread in Western cultures (Graham & Haidt, 2010; Haidt, Koller, & Dias, 1993; Shweder, Much, Mahapatra, & Park, 1997).”
A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception.
Reeder, G. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1979) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.86.1.61 · Cited by 723
Morality and competence in person- and self-perception
Wojciszke, B. (2005) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463280500229619 · Cited by 553
Amaral, D. G. (2002) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(01)01307-5 · Cited by 349
Cited by
Communal 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
Abele, A. E., Hauke, N., Peters, K., Louvet, E., Szymkow, A., & Duan, Y. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810 · Cited by 426
Ellemers, N., van der Toorn, J., Paunov, Y., & van Leeuwen, T. (2019) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868318811759 · Cited by 394
Abele, A. E., Ellemers, N., Fiske, S. T., Koch, A., & Yzerbyt, V. (2021) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000262 · Cited by 380
Self-citationOn the Importance of Being Moral: The Distinctive Role of Morality in Social Judgment
Brambilla, M., & Leach, C. W. (2014) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.2014.32.4.397 · Cited by 373
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Rusconi, P., Cherubini, P., & Yzerbyt, V. Y.
- Venue
- British Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-03-29
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 149-166
- ISSN
- 0144-6665 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8309
- OpenAlex
- W1913389741
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 30.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02011.x
- The paper
- Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Rusconi, P., Cherubini, P., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2012). You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation. British Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02011.x
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.
