Huo Binning Compass 2008

Social and Personality Psychology Compass 2 (2008): 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00129.
Why the Psychological Experience of Respect

Matters in Group Life: An Integrative Account
Yuen J. Huo* and Kevin R. Binning
University of California, Los Angeles
Abstract
The psychological experience of respect has implications for the nature and
quality of group life and for the individual’s psychological and physical well-
being. However, the manner in which respect has been studied and defined has
frequently differed among researchers, making it difficult to connect the various
findings. Whereas some researchers have focused on the implications of respectful
treatment from group members (e.g., authorities, peers), others have focused on
individuals’ perceptions of how they are generally evaluated by the group. We
present the dual pathway model of respect in which these various lines of research
are integrated within a single framework. Organized around two basic social
motives – the need for status and the need to belong – the model describes two
pathways (status evaluation and liking) through which respect from the group
shapes social engagement, self-esteem, and health. These evaluative dimensions
are informed by interactions with group authorities and peers and differentially
predict social psychological outcomes.
What respect is and who deserves it are central questions in social life.
Those who have experienced social exclusion, a loss of standing within a
community, or endured undignified treatment by others fully understand
the significance of the psychological experience of respect. Normative ideals
of what respect is and who deserves it have been central questions in the
discipline of philosophy (e.g., Rawls, 1971). However, only in recent years
has empirical research begun to map out the phenomenological experience
of respect and its social–behavioral consequences. What is now clear is
that the giving and receiving of respect are important both in regulating
group dynamics and in influencing personal well-being. Alluding to this
point, the sociologist Richard Sennett (2003, p. 3) poignantly asked,
‘Unlike food, respect costs nothing. Why then should it be in short supply?’
The observation that respect is withheld and doled out sparingly highlights
its significance in social relationships. Although it cannot be quantified in
the same way that money or other concrete resources can be, it is valuable
and can be thought of as a form of social currency. Our goal is to review
© 2008 The Authors
Journal Compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
2 The Psychology of Respect
the various lines of social–behavioral work on the role of respect in group

life and to present a conceptual model for integrating what we currently
know about the determinants of this distinct psychological experience and
its consequences for the functioning of the group and the individuals
within it.
Respect in Group Life

For the lay person, respect connotes attitudes as varied as deference to
social rules, the distribution of power in groups, and concern for others
(Langdon, 2007). Because respect is a term that is frequently and widely
used in everyday language, it naturally evokes a wide range of interpretations.
The various conceptions of respect are important in their own right and
useful in the analysis of a number of different phenomena including close
relationships (Hendrick & Hendrick, 2006) and the formation of social
policy (Sennett, 2003). However, our focus is on the role of perceived
respect in shaping group life. In this context, the feeling of respect, in its
broadest sense, is operationalized as an individual’s assessment of how
they are evaluated by those with whom they share common group
membership. This is akin to the notion of social reputation – a reflection of
the opinions other group members hold of the person (Emler & Hopkins,
1990). Groups capable of providing meaningful social feedback can be
as defined and as small as a few individuals charged with solving a
specific problem at work. Or they can be as diffuse and as large as a
residential community such as the city one resides in. What matters is
that these groups are important to how the individual sees him/herself
(Tajfel & Turner, 1986).
Conceiving of respect as reflecting the collective opinion group mem-
bers hold of the individual, we consider the research evidence linking
respect to a number of outcomes that affect the dynamics of a group and
the internal mental and physical state of the individual. We will also
address one of the essential conceptual challenges facing this emerging
field: Respect seems to mean different things to different researchers. In
particular, it has alternately been conceived of as respectful treatment from
another group member or leader, affective evaluation (liking), and status
evaluation ( judgments of worth). That respect has been conceived of in
these different ways is not surprising, given that the empirical work
emerged primarily out of two distinct theoretical traditions – the group-
value model of procedural justice and the related relational model of
authority (Lind & Tyler, 1988; Tyler & Lind, 1992) and social identity
theory (see discussion of respect within the social identity framework in
Spears, Ellemers, Doosje, & Branscombe, 2006).
These different lines of thinking about respect and their outcomes have
in common the shared understanding that what is at stake is people’s
relationships to their groups. As social beings, people seek out meaningful
© 2008 The Authors Social and Personality Psychology Compass 2 (2008): 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00129.x
The Psychology of Respect 3
Figure 1 Dual-Pathway Model of Respect.
social interactions and are attentive to information about the quality of

their relationship with others in the group. The dual-pathway model of
respect (see Figure 1) represents an effort to integrate these different
traditions. Within this model, we propose that the experience of respect
matters to people because it satisfies two core motives of social life – the
striving for status and the need to belong. Relying on these core motives as
organizing principles, we outline two pathways (liking and status evaluation)
through which respect feedback from the group shapes attitudes and
behaviors that affect the welfare of the collective (social engagement) and
of the individual (self-esteem and health).
Core Motives as Organizing Principles

The emerging field of the psychology of respect has demonstrated that
perceived respect plays a critical role in shaping not only group dynamics
but also the individual’s emotional experiences and self-construal (see
Spears et al., 2006; Tyler & Smith, 1999 for reviews). The question becomes
one of why this psychological experience should matter in these
important ways. We suggest that the experience of respect matters to
people because it reflects two core motives of social life – the striving for
status (recognition as a worthy contributor to the group) and the need
to belong (formation of meaningful, affiliative bonds with other group
members). The current wave of empirical research on the experience of
respect implicates both of these motives. A potential source of conceptual
confusion, however, is that these two motives are often confounded and
used interchangeably. Below, we clarify the distinctions between the

motives and discuss the implications of viewing respect as reflecting the
two motives.
Respect as reflecting the status motive

The striving for status has been argued to be a universal and primary
social motive that underlies interactions in social groups (Frank, 1985;
Hogan & Hogan, 1991). To have high status within a group can alternatively
imply that one has a highly regarded role or position (e.g., captain of the
team vs. one of the players), to be perceived to be a generally worthy
member of the group (Tyler & Smith, 1999), or to be viewed as competent
on specific dimensions important to the group (e.g., to be a productive
scholar in an academic department; Spears et al., 2006; Thibaut & Kelley,
1959). Sociological conceptions of status tend to focus on the person’s objective
status, which has been found to predict a number of important outcomes
including social power, psychological well-being, and physical health
(Adler, Epel, Castellazzo, & Ickovics, 2000; Berger, Cohen, & Zelditch,
1972; Marmot, 2004). Status can also be thought of as socially constructed.
As such, respect can be derived from the collective opinions of the group
members (Emler & Hopkins, 1990) and reflect the reputational self – i.e.,
the part of one’s identity that is linked to attributes valued by the group
(Tyler & Smith, 1999).
The notion of respect as reflecting one’s status or position within the
group was propelled in large part by the group-value model of procedural
justice (Lind & Tyler, 1988) and the related relational model of authority
(Tyler & Lind, 1992). The theoretical perspective represented by these
models was developed to explain what has been termed the procedural
justice effect or the fair treatment effect – the observation that people
are strongly affected by the interpersonal aspects of their interactions
with decision makers. To explain the relatively robust fair treatment effect,
the group-value model takes as its point of departure the premise that
people care about their status within groups they belong to and identify
with. They seek out information about the degree to which they are
valued members of the community. One way in which their status within
these communities can be conveyed is through the actions of group
authorities. Empowered by the group, the actions of these authorities
are presumed to reflect the views of group members as a whole. Thus,
individuals pay close attention to whether the authority has behaved in
a neutral, trustworthy, and polite way. When authorities’ behaviors conform
to these relational standards, people will feel that they have been treated
fairly. Fair treatment, in turn, suggests that the individual is a respected
(valued) member of the community. Treatment that fails to meet these
standards communicates an absence of respect and that the individual is a
marginal member of the group.
Respect as reflecting the belongingness motive
Just as some argue that respect reflects the status motive, others argue
that it reflects another basic human motive – the need to belong
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995). As such, respect serves a critical function by
communicating information about a person’s inclusion within a social
group. There are several lines of work in support of respect as serving the
need to belong. One investigation found that the effect of respectful
treatment on willingness to contribute to group welfare was more
pronounced among peripheral members than among more central members
(De Cremer, 2002). Another found that self-reports of belongingness
mediated the relationship between perceived respect and contributions to
the group (De Cremer, 2003). A third study found that respectful treatment
increased individuals’ perception that they are welcomed or accepted within
a group in which they are a member (Simon & Sturmer, 2005). These
findings are consistent with the idea that respect is rooted in a fundamental
need for acknowledgment that one is an accepted member of the group
and that one belongs.
Together, the need for status and the need to belong represent core social
needs that can potentially be met when individuals participate in group life.
By recognizing that they are conceptually distinct, we can then explore their
antecedents as well as their effects on different social psychological outcomes.
Reactions to the Experience of Respect

We have argued that the experience of respect matters because it satisfies
concerns about fundamental social needs. In our conceptual model, we posit
that the satisfaction of these concerns, in turn, has critical implications for
the functioning of the group and the well-being of individuals within the
group. Research has shown that by knowing people’s perceptions of the
extent to which they are respected by relevant others, it is possible to
predict and explain significant aspects of everyday experience, including
when and why people choose to engage in groups and communities
(social engagement), how people feel about themselves (self-esteem), and
differences in psychosocial and physical well-being (health). Below, we
introduce the evidence linking respect (variously operationalized) to each
of these key outcomes of social life.
Social engagement
Social engagement refers to a broad cluster of attitudes and behavioral
intentions that are associated with the desire to actively participate in, and
to maintain and improve upon, the collective experience in groups and
communities. Much of the research on respect has focused on its effect
on the internal dynamics of groups. We now have clear evidence that
having information about the extent to which group members feel

respected tells us much about the role they will play in sustaining and
improving the groups to which they belong. This evidence comes from
both laboratory studies of ad hoc groups and from field studies of individuals
reporting about their everyday life experiences.
Laboratory experiments are important in demonstrating that the
experience of being respected by other group members leads to higher
levels of social engagement. For example, the communication of respect
by group members results in increases in (1) willingness to engage in
group-serving behavior and identification with the group (Simon & Sturmer,
2005; Simon, Lucken, & Sturmer, 2006); (2) cooperation in a social
dilemma (De Cremer, 2002); and 3) efforts to improve the group
(Branscombe, Spears, Ellemers, & Doosje, 2002; Smith & Tyler, 1997;
Spears, Ellemers, & Doosje, 2005). It is critical to note that across these
studies, the causal effect of respect on social engagement depended on the
social evaluation coming from other members of the ingroup. In fact,
when individuals who were not well respected within an ingroup instead
received respect from an outgroup, they reported feelings of shame
(Ellemers, Doosje, & Spears, 2004). The finding that respect matters most
when it comes from the ingroup is consistent with our assumption that
one of the purposes of respect is to regulate the internal dynamics of a group.
Field studies of people’s experiences in their everyday life draw similar
conclusions. Studies of perceived respect from authorities in natural
groups found that feeling respected was linked to a number of indicators
of social engagement, including compliance with group rules, group
commitment, and engaging in extra-role behavior to improve the group
(Tyler, Degoey, & Smith, 1996). While this set of studies focuses on
authorities as the source of respect, other studies evaluate the influence of
respect from peers – or other group members. Respect from other group
members has been linked to the desire to engage in group-oriented
behaviors, especially behaviors that are not required but nonetheless help
the group (e.g., voluntary activities that enhance the reputation of the
group; Smith & Tyler, 1997). Along the same lines, perceived respect from
the community predicts higher levels of self-reported civic engagement
(e.g., going to neighborhood meetings; Boeckmann & Tyler, 2002). At
the intergroup level, feelings of respect also shape social engagement.
Feeling that one’s ethnic subgroup (e.g., Latinos) is respected by others in
the broader community predicts support for political institutions among
Americans (Huo & Molina, 2006) and school engagement among students
(Huo, Molina, Binning, & Funge, 2008).
Although thus far we have focused on feelings of respect, feelings of
disrespect also have significant implications. Interviews with inner city
youth generate two important insights about what happens when the
need for respect is not met (Anderson, 1994). First, among at-risk youths,
disrespectful treatment carries with it the risk of retaliatory violence as
a way of regaining lost status. Second, it is among this most marginalized

segment of society that respect seems to carry the most weight. These
conclusions are consistent with findings from a survey of young African-
American men by Leary, Brennan, and Briggs (2005). Leary et al. developed
an African-American Respect Scale and found that scores on this scale
were negatively correlated with violent behavior. The less respect an
individual reported feeling, the more likely that person was to report
engaging in some form of violent behavior.
These studies suggest that having a basic level of respect is important, but
they also suggest that the significance of respect may be moderated by
situational and historical features of the environment. Ethnographic studies
point to the idea that respect gains special meaning in places with a weak
or informal system of law enforcement because it is these places where the
appearance of honor and social status becomes most critical to protecting
one’s socio-economic livelihood (Cohen, Nisbett, Bowdle, & Schwarz, 1996).
Being deprived of respect can be construed as a signal to outsiders that
one is unable or unwilling to protect one’s self or resources, which can trigger
anger and violence on behalf of the wronged in an effort to restore status.
Self-esteem
Feelings of respect are important not only for the well-being of the
collective; they also affect the individual. One of the most robust effects
in the research on respect is the relationship between respect and personal
self-esteem (how the individual feels about him or herself) as predicted by
the group-value model (Lind & Tyler, 1988). A review of ten datasets
found positive associations between perceptions of being respected by
other group members and self-esteem with an average effect size of 0.36
(Smith, Tyler, & Huo, 2003). These associations are documented in data
from correlational studies of experiences in real groups (e.g., Tyler et al.,
1996) and in experimental studies in the laboratory (e.g., Smith et al.,
1998). Other studies have found similar effects for respect on collective
self-esteem or the aspect of one’s self-concept associated with group
identity (Ellemers et al., 2004). As a form of social evaluation, respect
seems to play an important role in shaping the self-concept.
Health
Although the evidence is more tentative, there are hints in the literature
suggesting an intriguing and potentially important link between experiences
with respect and another aspect of personal well-being – the individual’s
mental and physical health. The epidemiologist Michael Marmot (2004)
coined the term, ‘status syndrome,’ to describe the idea that social
evaluations have fundamental effects on our health. Drawing on large-scale
epidemiological datasets, Marmot observed that after controlling for obvious

predictors of health and longevity, such as income and lifestyle, status
(social position within a community) independently predicted health
outcomes. That is, those in positions socially recognized as having higher
status are healthier and live longer. One of the key ideas behind this
research is that a lack of status is associated with relatively less control over
one’s life outcomes, and this lack of control contributes to relatively high
levels of stress, depression, and poor physical health.
Research on stereotype threat (Steele, 1997) provides a potential
illustration of how perceived respect at the psychological level can
contribute to poor health outcomes. This research has found that being a
member of a low status, negatively stereotyped group is a psychological
stressor that interferes with academic performance (e.g., on an exam) and
thereby contributes to still lower social status (e.g., lower grades) in the
domain (Cohen Garcia, Apfel, & Master, 2006). Low performance in one
domain, such as academics, might then limit one’s ability to achieve
status in another domain, such as employment. This could of course
further limit one’s control and increase stress in a downward cycle.
Although the literature on experiences with racial prejudice and health
outcomes has not, to our knowledge, directly assessed perceived respect,
a number of studies suggests that negative social evaluations of one’s group
membership can have significant adverse effects on stress level, depression,
and overall physical health (Blascovich, Spencer, Quinn, & Steele, 2001;
Clark, Anderson, Clark, & Williams, 1999; Fang & Myers, 2001; and
Liebkind & Jasinskaja-Lahti, 2000).
Attesting to the link between subjective experiences of respect and
health outcomes, a large-scale survey of over 30,000 Finnish public sector
employees found that perception of fair and respectful treatment by work
supervisors was negatively related to length of sickness-related absenteeism
(Elovainio et al., 2005). The study also found that the relationship
between perceived treatment and on-the-job illness can be explained by
two factors – lack of work-time control and negative changes in the work
environment. A survey of German factory workers uncovered a similar
finding. That study found that experiences of fair and respectful treatment
were negatively associated with psychosomatic well-being (number of sick
days reported and frequency of feeling ill at work) (Schmitt & Dorfel,
1999). Finally, a field experiment of nurses who have received an
involuntary salary reduction found that those with supervisors trained to
behave in a respectful and fair manner suffered fewer occurrences of sleep
problems such as insomnia (Greenberg, 2006).
Respect, self-esteem, and health

Interestingly, there is evidence that respect for a group one belongs to
and identifies with is associated with reports of health outcomes, but not
with personal self-esteem (Huo, Molina, Binning et al., 2008). This

pattern of findings suggests that the impact of group respect may be more
easily detected in physiological processes, which is a more direct measure
of internal states than are reports of self-esteem. Moreover, the absence of
a relationship between group respect and self-esteem is a significant
departure from other work, which shows that personal respect or respect
for the individual is reliably associated with higher levels of self-esteem
(Smith et al., 2003). These findings suggest that group respect may
function differently from personal respect. When a self-relevant group
identity is under scrutiny, it poses an additional source of threat to the
self. However, negative evaluation of an individual based on group
membership may be perceived as illegitimate and thus buffers its effect on
the self-concept.
Together, these diverse pieces of evidence, while tentative, suggest that
the experience of respect can operate at a more fundamental level than
we may have anticipated – eliciting psychological responses that are
filtered through physiological pathways. It also suggests the importance
of distinguishing between self-esteem and more health-related outcomes
since the effect of group-level respect on these person-level variables
appear to differ in potentially interpretable and meaningful ways.
Status and Liking: Two Pathways
It should be clear by now that perceived respect plays an important role

in regulating not only group life, but also in shaping the individual’s
internal mental and physical state. However, as we noted, this body of
literature has alternatively operationalized respect as treatment by another
group member (an authority or peer), liking, or status evaluation. In an
effort to clarify these distinctions and their relationship to the various
psychological outcomes of perceived respect, we outline two pathways
through which respect may shape social engagement and personal
well-being (self-esteem and health): the status path (reflecting the need for
status) and the liking path (reflecting the need to belong).
These two paths draw from the observation that there are two basic
dimensions on which individuals can be judged by the group: how
worthy a group member they are and how much they are liked by others.
Both are social evaluations of the person and contribute to more general
assessments of perceived respect within the group. Although these two
forms of evaluations presumably share common variance, they are
theoretically distinct much like the two basic dimensions of warmth and
competence in social perception (Fiske, Xu, Cuddy, & Glick, 1999). One
can easily think of examples in which the most well-liked person in a
group is not the person conferred with the highest status within the group
or vice versa. For example, one can win the title of Miss Congeniality in
a beauty pageant but not the pageant title itself. Similarly, a high-status
individual within a group may not be well liked (e.g., the CEO of a
company). In this way, the respect accorded an individual can alternately
be informed by how well one is liked by other group members and by
perceptions of one’s status in the eyes of the same group members.
The works by Ellemers, Spears, and their colleagues offer insight into
the important distinction between the liking and status aspects of respect.
How well one is liked by other group members as a basis for respect has
been implicated in a number of social phenomena including intergroup
discrimination (Branscombe et al., 2002) and willingness to work on behalf
of the group (Ellemers et al., 2004). There is also evidence that competence
judgments reflecting status concerns has similar effects as liking on both
the desire to exert effort on behalf of the group and on self-evaluations
(Spears et al., 2005). Interestingly, when the two dimensions are considered
jointly in an experimental context, warmth or liking emerges as the
primary influence on the person’s self-perceptions and perceptions of the
group (Spears et al., 2005).
Spears et al. (2005) have also found evidence of an interaction between
the two aspects of respect such that individuals who are judged to be highly
competent (reflecting status) but not well-liked by other group members
report the highest level of negative emotions although not lower commitment
to the group. Thus, although not being liked affects the internal emotional
life of highly competent group members, it does not negatively affect group
commitment. A field study of adolescents similarly show that the two forms
of evaluations are empirically distinct, and that they independently predict
perceptions of the extent to which an individual report feeling respected
by the community as a whole (Huo, Binning, & Molina, 2008). Thus, there
is already some empirical evidence to support the conceptual distinction
between status evaluation and liking. These distinctions are important in
designing future research to flush out the two paths through which respect
affects different outcomes variables (i.e., social engagement, self-esteem,
and health).
Authorities and Peers as Sources of Respect

As we have pointed out, research on respect has developed from two
theoretical traditions. The work by Spears et al. demonstrated that the
liking and status evaluation dimensions of respect are distinct and uniquely
predict group-based attitudes and emotions (Spears et al., 2006). One of
the primary contributions of their work is the identification of two distinct
sources of respect – being liked by the group and being viewed as worthy
by the group (in general or on a specific dimension valued by the group).
In contrast, the work by Tyler & Smith (1999) highlights the role that the
actions of individual group members (authorities in particular) can have
in shaping perceptions of respect. In our model, we bring these two
perspectives together by suggesting that treatment by group authorities

and peers can shape people’s perceptions of the extent to which they are
liked and valued by the group.
The manner in which status perceptions (judgments of one’s worth as
a group member) are formed can be easily answered by going back to the
relational model of authority (Tyler & Lind, 1992). According to the
relational model, fair and respectful treatment by group authorities
communicates to the individual that s/he is a respected and valued
member of the group. Such recognition, in turn, motivates the individual
to internalize the group’s norms and to adopt attitudes and behaviors that
benefit the group – what we call social engagement (Tyler & Smith, 1999).
Being accorded status also shapes the individual’s evaluations of him or
herself (Smith et al., 2003). The actions of group authorities are argued
to matter because they represent the views of the group as a whole. It
follows that peer treatment should similarly feed into perceptions of one’s
status within the group. Work by Simon et al. suggests that peer treatment
can motivate social engagement in much the same way as authority treatment
(Simon & Sturmer, 2003).
What shapes perceptions of liking? The answer to this question is less
clear but there is evidence pointing toward peer treatment as the more
influential (although not sole) source of information about how well one
is liked by the group as a whole. This argument follows from the observation
that the dimensions of warmth or liking should be most salient in communal
relationships such as that found among peers (Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick,
2007). Work on the sociometer theory also point toward the role of peers
in shaping perceptions of how well one is liked by the group. According
to the sociometer hypothesis, the self-esteem system functions like an
internally held meter of the extent to which individuals are being
included or excluded in social situations (Leary & Baumeister, 2000).
Support for the hypothesis has primarily come from studies in which
feedback in the form of level of liking from interaction partners resulted
in systematic changes in self-evaluations (e.g., Srivastava & Beer, 2005).
This line of inquiry highlights the role of equal others in communicating
information about belongingness. This is not to say that the actions of
group authorities cannot also convey similar sentiments. However, the
actions of the peers, unfiltered through authority channels, may be a more
authentic reflection of the degree to which an individual is accepted
within a group.
Status Evaluations vs. Liking: Which One Matters?

The relative ability of liking and status evaluation to predict different
outcome variables is an important one. There are intriguing hints in the
literature that the relative strength of each variable depends on whether
we are considering group-oriented or person-oriented variables. When
we consider person-oriented variables, including one’s level of self-esteem

and health, there is evidence implicating both status and belongingness
concerns. For example, research on the group-value model shows a consistent
relationship between status (perceived worthiness/value as a group member)
and self-esteem (Smith et al., 2003). More recent work on the health
gradient demonstrates that relative social standing predicts health and
longevity (Marmot, 2004). These linkages are not surprising when we
consider the psychological benefits of having high status in social groups.
Status is associated with power and control which are positively correlated
with more positive psychological functioning (Adler et al., 2000).
Liking should have similar effects as status evaluation on personal well-
being although for different reasons. The sociometer hypothesis highlights
the belongingness motive, by proposing that self-esteem is a reflection of
social acceptance – the degree to which one is liked by others and included
in the group (Leary & Baumeister, 2000). This premise is consistent with
studies showing that social exclusion leads to anxiety and depression (see
Williams, Forgas, von Hippel, & Zadro, 2005 for a discussion). In sum, the
need to belong as reflected in liking and the need for status as reflected
in judgments of one’s worth or contributions to the group should both
predict person-oriented variables including self-esteem and health.
The evidence linking respect to social engagement seems to point more
strongly toward the need for status as the primary motive relative to the
need to belong. Because perceived status reflects how generally useful we
see ourselves to be to the group and the extent to which our specific
talents and abilities contribute to the overall functioning of the group, it
is easy to see why status should be linked to social engagement. As a form
of social identity, when respect is granted, it activates norms for behavior
that are consistent with group goals (Spears et al., 2006; Tyler & Smith,
1999). It can also be thought of as a form of social currency – a reward
or recognition that the group gives to members who contributes or has
the potential to contribute to the group’s success (Thibaut & Kelley,
1959). Thus, the relationship between respect and group members’
willingness to act on behalf of the group is reinforced in both directions.
In contrast, whether others think of us as likable and feel warmly
toward us primarily reflects affiliative signals and should affect how we feel
about ourselves but perhaps not of tasks and other behaviors relevant to
group functioning. Although some studies found that information about
how much one is liked by other group members leads to higher levels
of group commitment and group-oriented behavior (Branscombe et al.,
2002; Ellemers et al., 2004), findings from other studies suggest that when
status is controlled for, the relationship between liking and indicators
of social engagement attenuates (Huo, Binning, & Molina, 2008; Spears
et al., 2005). Although by no means definitive, these initial findings suggest
that the extent to which a person is willing to work on behalf of a group
may be more strongly linked to status versus belongingness concerns.
Conclusion
What do we know about the psychology of respect? We know that it is

a basic form of social evaluation that emerges in group interactions and
that it plays an important role in shaping not only social engagement in
group life but also the self-esteem and physical well-being of the individual.
There is little disagreement on the predictive value of perceived respect.
Where opinions diverge is on how individual researchers choose to define
respect and how these various experiences with respect shape different
outcomes. We suggest that these alternate definitions (and their consequences
downstream) are not right or wrong or even competing with each other.
On the contrary, our understanding of the phenomenological experience
of respect can only be enriched by drawing these alternative conceptions
together within an integrated framework.
The dual-pathway model is intended to move toward this goal and
does so by organizing the various lines of work around two core motives
– the need for status and the need to belong. By recognizing that there
are two distinct motivational bases for concerns about respect, we are
able to use insights derived from past work to suggest the different paths
through which interpersonal treatment from group authorities and
members can shape perceptions of two distinct social evaluations from
the group (liking vs. status evaluations) which then forms the basis of
generalized respect. Most importantly, we suggest that the identification of
the two pathways underlying the core motives has the potential to illuminate
the psychological bases of a number of important outcomes including what
individuals are willing to do for the group, how they feel about themselves,
and even their physical health.
Short Biographies
Yuen J. Huo is associate professor of psychology at the University of
California, Los Angeles. Her research explores how fairness concerns
and social identity processes jointly operate to influence efforts at conflict
management as well as the exercise of authority. Her publications on
these topics have appeared in numerous journals and three co-authored
books: Social Justice in a Diverse Society (Westview Press, 1997), How Different
Ethnic Groups React to Legal Authority (2000, PPIC), and Trust in the Law
(Russell Sage, 2002). Her current research efforts focus on the role of justice-
based emotions on political attitudes and on the relationship between
perceptions of (in)justice and health outcomes. Her research examining
the influence of group identities on ethnic conflicts in diverse settings was
recognized by the Otto Klineberg Intercultural and International Relations
Award from the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues
(SPSSI). She currently sits on the Board of Directors for SPSSI. Before
joining the UCLA faculty, she was a research fellow at the Public Policy
Institute of California. She holds BA, MA, and PhD degrees from the
University of California, Berkeley.
Kevin R. Binning is a doctoral candidate in social psychology at the
University of California, Los Angeles. He received a master’s in social
psychology from the same institution in 2003, has won several awards for
research and teaching, and is currently funded by the Frank Joseph McGuigan
Dissertation Year Fellowship. His research focuses on the psychology of
intragroup and intergroup relations, including issues related to respect,
discrimination, and the beliefs and ideologies underpin tolerance of inhumane
treatment of outgroups. Binning expects to defend his dissertation in
spring of 2008 and looks forward to a career of teaching and research.
Endnotes
* Correspondence address: Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles,
4625 Franz Hall, Box 951563, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563, USA. Email:
[email protected].
References
Adler, N. E., Epel, E., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. (2000). Relationship of subjective and
objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in
healthy White women. Health Psychology, 1, 586–592.
Anderson, E. (1994). The code of the streets. The Atlantic Monthly, 273, 81–94.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
117, 497–529.
Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., & Zeltich, M. Jr. (1972). Status characteristics and social interactions.
American Sociological Review, 37, 241–255.
Blascovich, J., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D., & Steele, C. (2001). (African Americans and high
blood pressure: The role of stereotype threat. Psychological Science, 12, 225–229.
Boeckmann, R. J., & Tyler, T. R. (2002). Trust, respect and the psychology of political
engagement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 2067–2088.
Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., Ellemers, N., & Doosje, B. (2002). Intragroup and intergroup
evaluation effects on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 744–753.
Clark, R., Anderson, N. B., Clark, V. R., & Williams, D. R. (1999). Racism as a stressor for
African Americans. American Psychologist, 54, 805 –816.
Cohen, D., Nisbett, R., Bowdle, B., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult, aggression, and the southern
culture of honor: An experimental ethnography. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 70,
945– 60.
Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap:
A social-psychological intervention. Science, 313, 1307–1310.
De Cremer, D. (2002). Respect and cooperation in social dilemmas: The importance of feeling
included. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1335–1341.
De Cremer, D. (2003). Noneconomic motives predicting cooperation in public good dilemmas:
The effect of received respect on contributions. Social Justice Research, 16 (4), 367–377.
Ellemers, N., Doosje, B., & Spears, R. (2004). Sources of respect: The effects of being liked
by ingroups and outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 155 –172.
Elovainio, M., van den Bos, K., Linna, A., Kivimäki, M., Ala-Mursula, L., & Pentti, J. et al.
(2005). Combined effects of uncertainty and organizational justice on employee health:
Testing the uncertainty management model of fairness judgments among Finnish public
sector employees. Social Science & Medicine, 61 (12), 2501–2512.
Emler, N., & Hopkins, N. (1990). Reputation, social identity and the self. In D. Abrams &
M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (pp. 113–130).
New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Fang, C. Y., & Myers, H. F. (2001). The effects of racial stressors and hostility on cardiovascular
reactivity in African American and Caucasian men. Health Psychology, 20, 64 –70.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition:
Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11 (2), 77–83.
Fiske, S., Xu, J., Cuddy, A., & Glick, P. (1999). (dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and
interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social
Issues, 55, 473 – 489.
Frank, R. H. (1985). Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Greenberg, J. (2006). Losing sleep over organizational injustice: attenuating insomniac reactions
to underpayment inequity with supervisory training in interactional justice. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 91, 58 – 69.
Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (2006). Measuring respect in close relationships. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 881–899.
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (1991). Personality and status. In D. G. Gilbert & J. J. Connolly (Eds.),
Personality, Social Skills, and Psychopathology: An Individual Differences Approach (pp. 137–154).
New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Huo, Y. J., & Molina, L. E. (2006). Is pluralism a viable model of diversity? The benefits and
limits of subgroup respect. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9, 359–376.
Huo, Y. J., Binning, K. R., & Molina, L. E. (2008). Liking vs. Status Evaluation as Sources of
Generalized Respect. Manuscript in preparation.
Huo, Y. J., Molina, L. E., Binning, K. R., & Funge, S. (2008). Subgroup Respect, Social
Engagement, and Well-Being: A Field Study of an Ethnically Diverse High School. Manuscript
under review.
Langdon, S. W. (2007). Conceptualizations of respect: Qualitative and quantitative evidence of
four (five) themes. The Journal of Psychology, 141, 469–484.
Leary, J. D., Brennan, E. M., & Briggs, H. E. (2005). The African American adolescent respect
scale: A measure of a prosocial attitude. Research on Social Work Practice, 15, 462– 469.
Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer
theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 1– 62.
Liebkind, K., & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2000). Acculturation and psychological well-being among
immigrant adolescents in Finland: A comparative study of adolescents from different cultural
backgrounds. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, 446–469.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York, NY:
Plenum Press.
Marmot, M. (2004). The Status Syndrome. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
Schmitt, M., & Dörfel, M. (1999). Procedural injustice at work, justice sensitivity, job satisfaction
and psychosomatic well-being. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29 (4), 443– 453.
Sennett, R. (2003). Respect in a World of Inequality. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Simon, B., & Sturmer, S. (2003). Respect for group members: Intragroup determinants of
collective identification and group-serving behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
29, 183–193.
Simon, B., & Stürmer, S. (2005). In search of the active ingredient of respect: A closer look at
the role of acceptance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35 (6), 809– 818.
Simon, B., Lücken, M., & Stürmer, S. (2006). The added value of respect: Reaching across
inequality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45 (3), 535 –546.
Smith, H. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1997). Choosing the right pond: The impact of group membership
on self-esteem and group-oriented behavior. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 33,
146 –170.
Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2003). Interpersonal treatment, social identity and
organizational behavior. In S. A. Haslam, D. van Knippenberg, M. J. Platow, & N. Ellemers
(Eds.), Social Identity at Work: Developing Theory for Organizational Practice (pp. 155–171).
Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D., & Lind, E. A. (1998). The self–relevant
implications of the group-value model: Group membership, self-worth, and treatment quality.
Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 34, 470 – 493.
Spears, R., Ellemers, N., & Doosje, B. (2005). Let me count the ways in which I respect thee:
Does competence compensate or compromise lack of liking from the group? European Journal
of Social Psychology, 35 (2), 263–279.
Spears, R., Ellemers, N., Doosje, B., & Branscombe, N. (2006). The Individual Within the
Group: Respect! Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Srivastava, S., & Beer, J. S. (2005). How self-evaluations relate to being liked by others:
Integrating sociometer and attachment perspectives. Journal of personality and social psychology,
89 (6), 966 –977.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and
performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613– 629.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In
S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL:
Nelson-Hall.
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. New York, NY: Wiley.
Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1999). Justice, Social Identity, and Group Processes. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Tyler, T. R., Degoey, P., & Smith, H. (1996). Understanding why the justice of group procedures
matters: A test of the psychological dynamics of the group-value model. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 70, 913 –930.
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, A. E. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 115 –191.
Williams, K. D., Forgas, J. P., von Hippel, W., & Zadro, L. (2005). The social outcast: An
overview. In K. D. Williams, J. P. Forgas, & W. von Hippel (Eds.), The Social Outcast:
Ostracism, Social Exclusion, Rejection, and Bullying (pp. 1–16). New York, NY: Psychology
Press.

Huo Binning Compass 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Huo Binning Compass 2008

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Huo Binning Compass 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Social and Personality Psychology Compass 2 (2008): 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00129.

Why the Psychological Experience of Respect

the various lines of social–behavioral work on the role of respect in group

Respect in Group Life

Figure 1 Dual-Pathway Model of Respect.

social interactions and are attentive to information about the quality of

Core Motives as Organizing Principles

used interchangeably. Below, we clarify the distinctions between the

Respect as reflecting the status motive

Respect as reflecting the belongingness motive

Reactions to the Experience of Respect

having information about the extent to which group members feel

a way of regaining lost status. Second, it is among this most marginalized

epidemiological datasets, Marmot observed that after controlling for obvious

Respect, self-esteem, and health

with personal self-esteem (Huo, Molina, Binning et al., 2008). This

Status and Liking: Two Pathways

It should be clear by now that perceived respect plays an important role

Authorities and Peers as Sources of Respect

perspectives together by suggesting that treatment by group authorities

Status Evaluations vs. Liking: Which One Matters?

we consider person-oriented variables, including one’s level of self-esteem

What do we know about the psychology of respect? We know that it is

You might also like