They want to know that you understand them. Warmth is really about making the other person feel understood. They think, РІР‚СљI better get the floor first so that I can be in charge of what happens.РІР‚Сњ The problem with this is that you don't make the other person feel warmth toward you. I think people make the mistake, especially in business settings, of thinking that everything is negotiation. You can do this by simply asking them a question. One is to let the other person speak first or have the floor first. There are a lot of things that you can do. How do you convey trust in a first interaction?

If you are trusting, if you project trust, people are more likely to trust you. I know people find this very controversial but it's true. So I'm such a big believer in trying to establish trust, and there's evidence that shows that trust begets trust. It's not going to be any sort of natural interaction. Or they're going to feel defensive, or they're going to feel threatened, or they're going to try to out alpha you. So trying to be the more dominant one in the interaction is probably going to make it harder for you to get accurate information about the other person, because it's going to shut them down. People need to trust you in order to be themselves. To make an accurate judgment of somebody, you want to bring out their true nature. We want to see others as trustworthy but we want them to see us as competent or strong. You mentioned that when we first meet someone weРІР‚в„ўre often looking for warmth or trust, but trying to project competence and confidence. We usually see one trait or the other.Р”Р„t Poptech you also talked about how these reactions occur on a personal level. But this is rare, as is viewing someone as both cold and incompetent. What if you see a group as warm and competent? Groups that are seen as warm and trustworthy but incompetent illicit pity, which is about both compassion and sadness. So groups that are seen as competent but disliked elicit a lot of respect and admiration but also a lot of resentment and antipathy. The thing we found after sorting people into these four quadrants is that they predict four unique emotions and four unique behavioral responses. What else do these two traits tell you about how one group views another? Again this goes against the former popular thinking in social psychology, that it was just a mater of one group hating another. That is the quadrant that gets targeted for genocide. They were groups that were hated but respected. These arenРІР‚в„ўt groups that were both not liked and not respected. So the Tutsis in Rwanda, the Jews in Germany, educated people in Cambodia. They're groups that were seen as highly competent.

If you look over the last 100 years at the groups that have been the targets, they are not groups that were seen as incompetent.

When the economy or the status quo is threatened, often it is the high-status minority groups that get targeted for genocide. You don't actually have many groups that are both not trusted and not respected, or that are both loved and respected.Р”Р„nd you can somehow use this to predict who is at risk of genocide?

And what you end up getting is that most groups are seen as high on one trait and low on the other. People universally sort groups in a two by two matrix. When we meet somebody, what determines whether we see them as a member of a group or see them as an individual? And how do we determine if we like the other person or not? Through research we found that it really comes down to two traits: trustworthiness and competence. Our research group was interested in how people categorize each other. And we wanted to be able to predict discrimination. We didn't know who was going to be a target of genocide, who was going to be neglected, who was going to be mocked.Р”Вiscrimination comes in very nuanced forms these days. Ultimately, what we really want to know isn't just what you think and feel about somebody but also how do you treat them. And because that's not really what's happening, social psychologists were not able to use the in-group/out-group evaluation to predict discrimination. And the classic social-psychological model was that it's all about love for the РІР‚Сљin-groupРІР‚Сњ and hatred for the РІР‚Сљout-group.РІР‚Сњ The problem with this is that it assumed there's a single evaluative dimension: You either have negative or positive feelings toward a person or group. Since just after World War II, social psychologists have been studying prejudice, really trying to understand what drives it. Why did you get into this line of research?

Working bunni how we first met