Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When Do Subgroup Parts Add Up to the Stereotypic Whole? Mixed Stereotype Content for Gay Male Subgroups Explains Overall Ratings

Clausell, Eric, Fiske, Susan T.·2005·Social Cognition

Abstract

Gay men appear neutral in Stereotype Content Model (SCM; Fiske et al., 2002) outgroup maps, contradicting well–documented prejudice but perhaps masking disparate subgroups. Subgroup analyses test SCM on subordinate levels, generalizing beyond macro social groups in multicultural societies. Analyses also test subgroups as diagnostic for gays, investigating their meaningful differentiation. Pretests identified 10 distinct subgroups which undergraduates then rated on SCM dimensions “warmth” and “competence.” As predicted, (a) three clusters emerge; (b) mixed stereotype content predominates; and (c) no subgroups are high–high, but (d) two are low–low. Perceived status and competence correlate, although unexpectedly not competition and warmth. “Feminine” and “masculine” subgroups replicate SCM locations for traditional women and men. SCM apparently generalizes and differentiates gay male subgroups.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/soco.23.2.161.65626

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. 10.1037/0022-3514.41.4.656 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.4.656 · Paper page
  2. 10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00381.x · DOI · Paper page
  3. Cuddy, Journal of Social Issues
  4. 10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991 · Paper page
  5. 10.1023/A:1021020920715 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1111/0022-4537.00128 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491 · Paper page
  9. 10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1105 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1105 · Paper page
  10. 10.1037/0022-3514.55.6.893 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.55.6.893 · Paper page
  11. 10.1177/0146167204271320 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1007/BF02936334 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.812 · DOI
  14. 10.1300/J082v12n01_06 · DOI
  15. 10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.553 · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.553 · Paper page
  16. 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0501_4 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Clausell, E., & Fiske, S. T.
Venue
Social Cognition
Published
2005-04
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
161-181
ISSN
0278-016X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998443325
Cited by
183
References
2
FWCI
18.16
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: When Do Subgroup Parts Add Up to the Stereotypic Whole? Mixed Stereotype Content for Gay Male Subgroups Explains Overall Ratings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1521/soco.23.2.161.65626
The paper
Clausell, E., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). When Do Subgroup Parts Add Up to the Stereotypic Whole? Mixed Stereotype Content for Gay Male Subgroups Explains Overall Ratings. Social Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.23.2.161.65626

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.