PDF(870 KB)
Competence vs. Warmth?: Thinking Styles and Information Sharing Perceptions Shape Advice-Seeking Preferences
Hu Yinfeng, Bi Chongzeng
Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2026, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (3) : 622-632.
PDF(870 KB)
PDF(870 KB)
Competence vs. Warmth?: Thinking Styles and Information Sharing Perceptions Shape Advice-Seeking Preferences
Research has shown that the impressions and cognitive evaluations individuals form of others influence their willingness to seek advice and whom they prefer to ask. For example, people tend to seek advice from those they perceive as competent or warm individuals (e.g., confident or polite). However, it is unclear whether competence or warmth is the preferred trait when seeking advice. Most relevant studies have focused on how an advisor’s impression affects advice-taking, and these studies have typically examined only a single dimension, overlooking the fact that ambivalent stereotypes—where individuals may be seen as both competent and lacking in warmth, or vice versa—are more commonly formed in real life. Accordingly, the present study examined individuals’ willingness and preferences for seeking advice from high competence-low warmth (HC-LW) and high warmth-low competence (HW-LC) individuals to test whether competence or warmth is more valued. In decision-making, thinking styles play a critical role in shaping outcomes. The different cognitive and emotional needs of decision-makers, depending on their mode of thinking, can influence their advice-seeking preferences. Since the goal of seeking advice is often to gather new information, decision-makers tend to prefer advisors with unique insights. The level of information sharing between decision-makers and advisors determines how well these needs are met, which affects their preference for competence or warmth. This study also investigates how thinking styles and perceptions of information sharing impact advice-seeking preferences.
Experiment 1 investigated the impact of thinking styles on advice-seeking preferences using an escape room scenario task. A total of 163 participants were assigned to a 2 (ambivalent stereotypes: HC-LW, HW-LC) × 2 (thinking styles: analytical, intuitive) mixed experimental design, with 84 participants engaged in analytical thinking and 79 in intuitive thinking. All participants read advice-seeking scenarios and assessed their willingness to seek advice from two individuals representing ambivalent stereotypes, as well as their preference between the two. The results showed that participants generally preferred seeking advice from HC-LW individuals. However, a clear preference for competence emerged only when analytical thinking was activated, while no preference for competence or warmth was observed under intuitive thinking.
Experiment 2 further examined how advice-seeking preferences are influenced by thinking styles under different information sharing states. A total of 315 participants were randomly assigned to a 3-factor mixed experimental design: 2 (ambivalent stereotypes: HC-LW, HW-LC) × 2 (thinking styles: analytical, intuitive) × 2 (shared information states: fully shared information, incompletely shared information). Of these participants, 158 were in the fully shared information group (73 engaged in analytical thinking, and 85 engaged in intuitive thinking), and 157 were in the incompletely shared information group (80 engaged in analytical thinking and 77 engaged in intuitive thinking). The experimental procedure was similar to that of Experiment 1, except participants received information about the state of shared information between the decision-maker and the advisor after the contextual imagery task. The findings revealed that the fully shared information scenario produced results similar to those observed in Experiment 1, in which no specific information about sharing was provided. In contrast, the incompletely shared information scenario led to a greater preference for warmth, with the intuitive thinking group favoring advice from HW-LC individuals, whereas the analytical thinking group showed no preference between the two ambivalent stereotype individuals.
This study clarifies the competence preference effect when people seek advice from others, provides direct support for the “interest-interdependence hypothesis”. In addition, this study explores how two key variables, thinking styles and perceptions of information sharing states, affect the competence preference effect, and identifies the conditions under which competence preference disappears or reverses, providing new insights into the mechanisms of preference change in the process of advice seeking.
competence / warmth / thinking styles / information sharing perception / advice-seeking preferences
| [1] |
杜秀芳, 袁晓倩, 徐政. (2023). 建议者印象和基于动机的个体差异特征对建议采纳的影响. 心理科学, 46(3), 719-725.
|
| [2] |
柳武妹, 王璐. (2024). 流浪动物慈善救助中的“远狗近猫”效应及其机制探析. 心理学报, 56(6), 777-805.
已有的亲社会研究都在关注对人的慈善捐赠, 关于流浪动物的慈善救助并未有人探讨。由于日常生活中流浪动物救助信息通常会同时呈现动物类型和空间距离, 因此本文基于动物类型和空间距离之间的联结来探讨二者对流浪动物救助意愿的影响, 以及其中的机制和边界条件。通过1个内隐联想测验、1个田野实验和7个不同情景的线上实验和实验室实验, 本文发现：猫与近空间距离更匹配; 狗与远空间距离更匹配(实验1a、1b)。因此, 在近空间距离的情况下, 呈现流浪猫(vs.流浪狗)引发人们对流浪动物的更高救助意愿; 在远空间距离的情况下, 呈现流浪狗(vs.流浪猫)引发人们对流浪动物的更高救助意愿(实验2、3、3S、4、4S、5); 加工流畅性是内在中介(实验4、4S、5)。此外, 思维模式会调节上述“远狗近猫”效应, 也即该效应在基于情感的思维模式下存在但在基于理性的思维模式下消失(实验6)。理论层面, 本文关注了流浪动物这一新颖的慈善捐赠对象, 验证了动物类型和空间距离的内在联系。本文还识别出了流浪动物救助中的“远狗近猫”效应。实践层面, “远狗近猫”效应可以指导慈善组织和机构根据动物类型和空间距离的匹配来合理呈现救助信息。
|
| [3] |
尚雪松, 陈卓, 陆静怡. (2021). 帮忙失败后我会被差评吗?好心帮倒忙中的预测偏差. 心理学报, 53(3), 291-305.
好心帮倒忙事件时有发生, 帮忙失败的施助者往往认为受助者会苛责自己, 因而可能不愿再次提供帮助。这种预测准确吗?通过6个研究( N = 1763), 对比施助者对受助者反应的预测和受助者的实际反应, 发现了施助者在好心帮倒忙时的预测偏差：他们高估了受助者的负面反应。而在帮忙成功时, 施助者未出现预测偏差或预测偏差的强度较弱。导致该预测偏差的原因是, 施助者更为关注自身的能力, 以为受助者也关注自己的能力, 而受助者更为在意施助者的温暖程度。
|
| [4] |
闫宜人, 刘宁. (2023). 热情还是能力?合作关系中的热情-能力偏好. 心理科学, 46(3), 594-602.
|
| [5] |
杨晓莉, 邹妍, 周文文, 王源, 王芳. (2023). 遵从排斥者的心理代价与补偿行为:被排斥者热情和能力的调节作用. 中国临床心理学杂志, 31(6), 1281-1287.
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
Prior advice research has focused on why people rely on (or ignore) advice and its impact on judgment accuracy. We expand the consideration of advice-seeking outcomes by investigating the interpersonal consequences of advice seekers' decisions. Across nine studies, we show that advisors interpersonally penalize seekers who disregard their advice, and that these reactions are especially strong among expert advisors. This penalty also drives advisor reactions to a widely-recommended advice-seeking strategy: soliciting multiple advisors to leverage the wisdom of crowds. Advisors denigrate and distance themselves from seekers who they learn consulted others, an effect mediated by perceptions that their own advice will be disregarded. Underlying these effects is an asymmetry between advisors' and seekers' beliefs about the purpose of the advice exchange: whereas advisors believe giving advice is more about narrowing the option set by providing direction, seekers believe soliciting advice is more about widening the option set by gathering information.
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
Dual Process Theory has recently been applied to Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to suggest that reasoning by people with ASD and people with higher levels of ASD-like traits can be characterised by reduced intuitive and greater reflective processing. 26 adolescents and adults with ASD and 22 adolescent and adult controls completed an assessment of ASD-like traits, the cognitive reflections test (CRT) to measure intuitive and reflective reasoning and an index of general cognitive ability. The ASD group produced less intuitive responses, and the degree of ASD-like traits showed a negative correlation with intuitive responses and positive correlation with reflective responses on the CRT. Together, these results are consistent with ASD being associated with reduced intuitive reasoning and greater deductive reasoning.
|
| [11] |
Which social decisions are influenced by intuitive processes? Which by deliberative processes? The dual-process approach to human sociality has emerged in the last decades as a vibrant and exciting area of research. Yet a perspective that integrates empirical and theoretical work is lacking. This review and meta-analysis synthesizes the existing literature on the cognitive basis of cooperation, altruism, truth telling, positive and negative reciprocity, and deontology and develops a framework that organizes the experimental regularities. The meta-analytic results suggest that intuition favors a set of heuristics that are related to the instinct for self-preservation: people avoid being harmed, avoid harming others (especially when there is a risk of harm to themselves), and are averse to disadvantageous inequalities. Finally, this article highlights some key research questions to further advance our understanding of the cognitive foundations of human sociality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
Dual-process and dual-system theories in both cognitive and social psychology have been subjected to a number of recently published criticisms. However, they have been attacked as a category, incorrectly assuming there is a generic version that applies to all. We identify and respond to 5 main lines of argument made by such critics. We agree that some of these arguments have force against some of the theories in the literature but believe them to be overstated. We argue that the dual-processing distinction is supported by much recent evidence in cognitive science. Our preferred theoretical approach is one in which rapid autonomous processes (Type 1) are assumed to yield default responses unless intervened on by distinctive higher order reasoning processes (Type 2). What defines the difference is that Type 2 processing supports hypothetical thinking and load heavily on working memory. © The Author(s) 2013.
|
| [16] |
To explore the relationship between self-control, rejection sensitivity, loneliness, and problematic internet use in college students.A total of 725 college students were investigated using Self-control Scale, Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire, Loneliness Scale, and Internet Addiction Scale.① Correlation analysis showed that self-control was negatively related to rejection sensitivity, loneliness, and problematic internet use; rejection sensitivity was positively related to loneliness and problematic internet use; loneliness was positively related to problematic internet use. ② Chain mediating effect analysis showed that self-control can not only affect problematic internet use in college students, but also through three indirect paths, as follows: the mediating role of rejection sensitivity and loneliness, the chain mediating roles of rejection sensitivity and loneliness, and the mediating effect size, accounting for 9.76%, 20.73%, and 4.88% of the total effect, respectively.Rejection sensitivity and loneliness played a chain mediating role in the relationship between self-control and problematic internet use in college students.© 2022 Fan et al.
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
The classic answer to what makes a decision good concerns outcomes. A good decision has high outcome benefits (it is worthwhile) and low outcome costs (it is worth it). I propose that, independent of outcomes or value from worth, people experience a regulatory fit when they use goal pursuit means that fit their regulatory orientation, and this regulatory fit increases the value of what they are doing. The following postulates of this value from fit proposal are examined: (a) People will be more inclined toward goal means that have higher regulatory fit, (b) people's motivation during goal pursuit will be stronger when regulatory fit is higher, (c) people's (prospective) feelings about a choice they might make will be more positive for a desirable choice and more negative for an undesirable choice when regulatory fit is higher, (d) people's (retrospective) evaluations of past decisions or goal pursuits will be more positive when regulatory fit was higher, and (e) people will assign higher value to an object that was chosen with higher regulatory fit. Studies testing each of these postulates support the value-from-fit proposal. How value from fit can enhance or diminish the value of goal pursuits and the quality of life itself is discussed.
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
Many studies confirmed the positive effect of trust on human relations and performance in organizations. As a social judgment, trust should be related to perceived competence and warmth as two basic dimensions of person perception. Surprisingly, to date no attempts have been made to examine the influence of attributed competence and warmth on social judgments in interpersonal relations at work. To this end, we examine the influence of perceived competence and warmth on trust, liking and respect in upward and downward work relations. A study involving 190 middle-stage managers revealed that the two fundamental dimensions of social cognition (competence and warmth) influence respect, liking and trust. Competence had a stronger effect on respect than warmth; the opposite was true for liking. Trust was conditioned by both competence and warmth to an equal, high extent. At the same time, warmth expressed by supervisors led to higher results in liking, respect and trust in them than warmth expressed by subordinates.
|
| [28] |
We review recent evidence revealing that the mere willingness to engage analytic reasoning as a means to override intuitive gut feelings is a meaningful predictor of key psychological outcomes in diverse areas of everyday life. For example, those with a more analytic thinking style are more skeptical about religious, paranormal, and conspiratorial concepts. In addition, analytic thinking relates to having less traditional moral values, making less emotional or disgust-based moral judgments, and being less cooperative and more rationally self-interested in social dilemmas. Analytic thinkers are even less likely to offload thinking to smartphone technology and may be more creative. Taken together, these results indicate that the propensity to think analytically has major consequences for individual psychology.
|
| [29] |
This meta-analysis examined whether tendencies to use reflective and intuitive thinking styles predicted decision performance (normatively correct responding) and decision experience (e.g., speed, enjoyment) on a range of decision-making tasks. A pooled sample of 17,704 participants (Mage = 25 years) from 89 samples produced small but significant weighted average effects for reflection on performance (r =.11) and experience (r =.14). Intuition was negatively associated with performance (r = -.09) but positively associated with experience (r =.06). Moderation analyses using 499 effect sizes revealed heterogeneity across task-theory match/mismatch, task type, description-based versus experience-based decisions, time pressure, age, and measure type. Effects of both thinking styles were strongest when the task matched the theoretical strengths of the thinking style (up to r =.29). Specific tasks that produced the largest thinking style effects (up to r =.35) were also consistent with system characteristics. Time pressure weakened the effects of reflection, but not intuition, on performance. Effect sizes for reflection on performance were largest for individuals aged either 12 to 18 years or 25+ (up to r =.18), and the effects of both reflection and intuition on experience were largest for adults aged 25+ (up to r =.27). Overall, our results indicate that associations between thinking styles and decision outcomes are context dependent. To improve decision performance and experience, decision architects and educators should carefully consider both individual differences in the decision maker and the nature of the decision task.(c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).
|
| [30] |
Workplace incivility is rampant and on the rise-with costs to individuals and organizations. Despite the increased need for civility, little is known about potential individual benefits of civility, defined as behavior involving politeness and regard for others in the workplace, within workplace norms for respect (Andersson & Pearson, 1999). Recent research has suggested that being civil may be hazardous to influence, power, and income (see Forni, 2002; Judge et al., 2012).Yet, throughout history, civil behavior has been extolled because it paid dividends to the person who behaved well. The focus of this research is whether that holds true in organizations. Using social exchange theory, we developed hypotheses about how civility benefits people, and investigated this in 2 studies. First, in a 2-wave social network study of a research and development department (n = 31) of a biotechnology firm, we found that people who perceived a colleague as civil would be more likely to seek that person out for work advice and to see that person as a leader. The more the individual was perceived as civil by others in his or her network, the better his or her performance. Being sought out for work advice and being viewed as a leader mediated this effect. In the second experiment (n = 162), we extended our understanding of what drove these benefits. We found that people who are civil were perceived as warm and competent, and these positive perceptions, in turn, helped to explain the benefits garnered. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.(c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
. Growing Muslim minorities in Western societies has sparked debate about which Muslim practices should be accepted, with many people finding certain practices intolerable. Two competing perspectives on this intolerance argue that it represents either principled objections or prejudice. Using four large samples from the Netherlands, we apply latent profile analysis and find four groups of people: two groups that like and dislike Muslims and their practices respectively, but also two groups who are intolerant of some or most Muslim practices without necessarily displaying prejudice. A person-centered analysis of key demographic and psychological variables suggests that the two intolerant groups differ with one group’s intolerance motivated more by anti-Muslim feelings, while the second group’s intolerance is motivated more by principled objections.
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
