domain: shs scco

text:
Diego Dametto

Luc Vieira

Tobias Schröder

Christophe Blaison

A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture

Keywords: Affect Control Theory, Semantic differential, Consensus analysis, Crosscultural Comparisons, Affective meanings Affect control theory, semantic differential, consensus analysis, cross-cultural analysis, affective meanings

HAL is

Introduction

Social identities and roles mediate social interactions between members of the same language culture. Through social comparison, individuals learn to identify themselves and others with these categories, which are fundamental to forming social impressions and expectations [START_REF] Berger | Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation-states approach[END_REF][START_REF] Heise | Understanding events: Affect and the construction of social action[END_REF][START_REF] Stets | Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory[END_REF]. Affect control theory (ACT) posits that affective meanings attached to social identities and roles enable people to engage in smooth interactions aligned with cultural norms without engaging in much cognitive effort, since affective meanings are largely shared among individuals within the same culture and to some extent even across cultures [START_REF] Heise | Understanding events: Affect and the construction of social action[END_REF][START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF]2010). Following these ideas, the present research investigates patterns of consensus and diversification in affective meanings attributed to social identities in France and Germany (i.e., these cultures' "theory of people" -cf. MacKinnon & Heise 2010), collected with the semantic differential technique along the dimensions of evaluation, potency, and activity (EPA). To our knowledge, this is the first ACT study, in which EPA ratings were collected in France, as well as the first cross-cultural comparison of affective meanings based on data from representative samples. Investigating patterns of consensus and diversification in France and Germany is of particular interest because these two countries do not share an official language. Nonetheless, they historically have close ties and as founding members of the European Union have been undergoing a process of economic, political and -possibly?cultural convergence.

Background

Affective meanings

Being labeled as a hypocrite, a shyster, or being introduced to someone as an engineer, or a dental assistant do matter for social interactions. Individuals develop first-order expectations concerning the self and others, and second-order expectations regarding one's perception of others' expectations regarding him or herself [START_REF] Berger | Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation-states approach[END_REF][START_REF] Ridgeway | Status: Why Is It Everywhere? Why Does It Matter[END_REF]. Those expectations rely on meanings transmitted -among others -by the language and that can be divided heuristically into denotative/cognitive meanings, which inform the practical knowledge of everyday activities [START_REF] Berger | The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge[END_REF], and connotative/affective meanings, which shape the emotional experience of individuals (Osgood et al. 1975;[START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF][START_REF] Heise | Identities, Roles, and Social Institutions[END_REF]. Affective meanings accumulate to inform the sentiments and beliefs shared by members of the same culture. These beliefs and sentiments constitute the vocabulary enacted in social interactions [START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF] and define the cultural "theory of people" (MacKinnon & Heise 2010) which embodies the status hierarchy in society (cf. [START_REF] Ridgeway | Status: Why Is It Everywhere? Why Does It Matter[END_REF].

Empirical research has demonstrated the relative stability and ubiquity of the overall affective structure as measured by the EPA framework1 (Osgood et al. 1975;[START_REF] Skrandies | The Structure of Semantic Meaning: A Developmental Study[END_REF], as well as the consensus about affective meanings attributed to social concepts (e.g., Heise 2010;Ambrasat et al. 2014). Affective meanings are thus not simply the results of transient impressions but rather they are fundamentally rooted in the language used by members of the same culture (in the following: language culture; [START_REF] Heise | Understanding events: Affect and the construction of social action[END_REF]. By carrying prejudices, associations, shared beliefs, and representations, i.e., the affective knowledge, language cultures inform and constrain the behavior of social actors in diverse institutional domains [START_REF] Dimaggio | Culture and Cognition[END_REF][START_REF] Heise | Cultural meanings and social institutions: Social organization through language[END_REF]. The shared affective meanings of roles and identities link individuals to culture, provide a basic structure for their selves, and preserve and reproduce the social order [START_REF] Heise | Identities, Roles, and Social Institutions[END_REF][START_REF] Mackinnon | Self, Identity, and Social Institutions[END_REF].

Within countries analysis: Great consensus and stability

Within this theoretical framework, empirical analyses were conducted to assess affective meanings attached to concepts and the degree of consensus about them. Using Heise's cultural survey approach (Heise 2010), a great amount of consensus among members of the same culture has been repeatedly demonstrated (Osgood et al. 1975;[START_REF] Heise | Understanding events: Affect and the construction of social action[END_REF][START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF]Heise 2010;Ambrasat et al. 2014;[START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF]. For evaluation, about 80% of individual sentiment is given by cultural norms. The potency and activity dimensions are slightly more idiosyncratic and culturally defined at a 60% level (Heise 2010). Building on the Q-methodology developed by Romney, Weller, and Batchfelder (1986), Heise (2010) also demonstrated that a single factor governed the evaluation, potency, and activity judgments of all respondents. Hence, variance in connotative meanings as described by affective ratings can be explained rather as an individual or group-specific variation to a norm than as the coexistence of polarized positions (Heise 2010). Considering the two countries relevant for our analysis, a consistent consensus around affective meanings attached to identities and behaviors was already reported by Ambrasat and colleagues (2014) in the case of Germany. To our knowledge, no similar studies have been conducted in France so far.

Besides being widely shared within cultures, affective meanings attached to identities are also stable over short and long time periods. Heise (2010) reported that ratings collected six weeks apart reliably correlate at 0.9 level for evaluation, between 0.8 and 0.9 for potency, and from approximately 0.6 to 0.9 for activity. Considering a much longer time span, [START_REF] Mackinnon | Changes in identity attitudes as reflections of social and cultural change[END_REF] found that EPA values collected in Ontario, Canada, in 1981 can explain about 80% of the variance of EPA values collected 14 years later in the same region. Nonetheless, the authors suggest that while affective meanings attached to social identities are quite stable over time, important changes in attitude towards select few identities have taken place and could be explained by historical events.

Similarly, Quinn and colleagues (2022) report that EPA ratings representative of the US American population for essential and non-essential professions collected six-month apart yet separated by the major event of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak are statistically somewhat different.

Nonetheless, a major caveat that comes with this line of research is related to the sampling approach used in cultural surveys. Since the main goal is to obtain a sample of participants who are culturally homogeneous and well-inculcated in the culture of interest, surveys have been mainly conducted among undergraduate students (e.g., Heise 2010;[START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF] or specific groups of interests (e.g., teenagers from US American Black communities; [START_REF] Sewell | Racial Differences in Sentiments: Exploring Variant Cultures[END_REF]. Therefore, claims of widespread consensus in society are not generalizable. Only recently, Ambrasat and colleagues (2014) combined the representative sample approach with cultural surveys to investigate patterns of consensus and stratification in German society, largely confirming the affective-consensus hypothesis. They only observed subtle variations related to socio-economic status of respondents for specific clusters of identities and behaviors (Ambrasat et al. 2014).

Replicating this methodology, Quinn and colleagues (2022) investigated cultural change in the US American affective culture using multiple representative waves.

Focusing on specific target groups, further analyses have investigated patterns of variation that still exist within language cultures beyond the broad consensus in society. [START_REF] Skrandies | The Structure of Semantic Meaning: A Developmental Study[END_REF] investigated EPA ratings produced by children and teenagers; his results show that the connotative meaning of concepts changes as a function of age and gender. [START_REF] Thomas | Mining Error Variance and Hitting Pay-Dirt: Discovering Systematic Variation in Social Sentiments[END_REF] conducted an explorative analysis of systematic variation in social sentiments and found evidence that cultural inculcation -defined as the competence that a participant has in a specific culture -varies following the number and diversity of social networks in which a person is embedded. [START_REF] Sewell | Racial Differences in Sentiments: Exploring Variant Cultures[END_REF] investigated ratings provided by Black teenagers in Chicago in the '70s and reported relative low levels of correlation with ratings provided by White respondents. Hence, they showed that a Black affective culture alternative to the White majority culture existed. [START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF] considered similarities and differences between students from a predominantly White and a mostly Black US American college. Her results show substantial consensus both within and between samples of racially different students. Nonetheless, patterns of variation concerning specific concepts and identities do exist and can be explained by racial differences. Finally, investigation related to specific subcultures revealed that members of these subgroups typically have a different, more positive sentiment about concepts crucial for their subculture [START_REF] Smith-Lovin | An affect control analysis of two religious subcultures[END_REF][START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF][START_REF] Hunt | Examining the Affective Meanings of Interaction Settings in the Jamband Music Subculture[END_REF].

To summarize, these results show that EPA ratings are consistent over time and widely shared among members of the same language culture, while social position does account for subtle deviations from the overall consensual patterns. In the present study, we aim to extend these findings by comparing the patterns of consensus versus variation in French and German cultures.

Cross-cultural analyses: Consistent between-countries consensus and language culture specific patterns

While the data reviewed in the previous section suggest that affective language cultures are largely homogenous, EPA studies also suggest consistent cross-cultural patterns of similarity. Heise collected affective ratings of identities, behaviors, emotions, and traits through the internet across six countries (Canada, the People's Republic of China, Germany, Northern Ireland, Japan, and the U.S.A) and reported strong cross-national correlations. The median values of correlations were 0.83 for Evaluation, 0.66 for Potency, and 0.58 for Activity. He also reported that correlations were slightly higher among capitalist countries as well as between English-speaking countries [START_REF] Heise | Project Magellan: Collecting cross-cultural affective meanings via the internet[END_REF]; thus, he implicitly suggests that macro-cultural clusters influence affective meanings. These findings resonate with the analysis of US American and Canadian ratings provided by MacKinnon and [START_REF] Mackinnon | The Structure of Emotions: Canada-United States Comparisons[END_REF]. They show that despite some differences in affective range and intensity, the USA and Canada do share affective meanings attributed to words describing emotions. Nonetheless, when countries using different official languages are compared, patterns of cross-cultural variation emerge and become more consistent. Schneider found differences between German and US American affective ratings regarding sexual identities [START_REF] Schneider | Sexual-Erotic Emotions in the U.S. in Cross-Cultural Comparison[END_REF], neo-conservatism (Schneider 1999a), types of authority ( 2004), as well as the clustering of meanings in affective space (Schneider 1999b). [START_REF] Schröder | A Model of Language-Based Impression Formation and Attribution Among Germans[END_REF] investigated affective ratings of social identities designating authority and found that they are rated systematically higher on evaluation by US Americans compared to Germans. Moreover, Schröder and colleagues (2013) compared ratings of stereotyped social groups provided by US American, German, and Japanese students and found between-countries consensus to be clearly lower compared to withincountry consensus. Similarly, previous analyses by [START_REF] Smith | The Formation of Gender-differentiated Sentiments in Japan[END_REF] showed clear differences between Japanese and US-American affective culture.

All these findings suggest that while language cultures do share a relatively high amount of consensus around affective meanings, meaningful patterns of cross-cultural variation could be detected and interpreted as reflecting meaningful differences in the social order. Additionally, patterns of cross-cultural variation are mainly found when cultures are not expressed in the same language or part of the same cultural tradition. Historically, France and Germany share a common history that traces back at least to Charlemagne in the 8th century. The Carolingian empire was later partitioned into different territories which later evolved into France and Germany. After centuries of ferocious rivalry culminated in the two World Wars of the 20th century, the two countries -founding members of the European Union -underwent a process of economic, political, cultural, and social convergence. Against this background, whether these two countries share a rather consensual Franco-German ("Carolingian") cultural space remains an open question that we address with our first research question (RQ1) focusing on whether the level of affective consensus is higher within the single countries or when considering them together as part of the same culture. While no EPA-based French-German cultural comparison is available, cross-cultural analysis based on data collected in the '90s as well as throughout the 2000s and 2010s through the European Value Study (EVS), the World Values Survey (WVS), and the European Social Survey (ESS) provide interesting insights for developing the hypothesis. [START_REF] Inglehart | Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values[END_REF] empirical analysis places France and Germany in two distinct macro-cultural clusters -respectively corresponding to catholic and protestant Europe -and argue that the broad cultural heritage of a society does leave an imprint that resists the process of homogenization carried on by modernization. Following their analysis, cross-national societal value differences out-size those found within these two countries by a large magnitude. Similarly, [START_REF] Minkov | Is National Culture a Meaningful Concept?[END_REF] show that national cultures and by means of cluster analysis report that cross-cultural differences are still expected to be larger than within-countries differences [START_REF] Inglehart | Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values[END_REF][START_REF] Minkov | Is National Culture a Meaningful Concept?[END_REF][START_REF] Van Houwelingen | Convergence on Political Values? A Multi-Level Analysis of Developments in 15 EU Countries 2002-2016[END_REF].

Hence, we build on those cross-cultural analyses and advance the hypothesis that (HP1) differences in ratings of identities should be bigger between rather than within countries and, conversely, the level of consensus higher within rather than when both countries are considered together. Nonetheless, as suggested by cross-cultural EPA studies in general and by some of the research groups mentioned above, we still acknowledge that the magnitude of the expected differences should remain moderate.

Conceptions of power: the German peculiarity and the comparison with France

While HP1 suggests differences in ratings of identities, it is unclear which specific patterns of differentiation should be expected. A hint is given by cross-cultural research on how different language cultures frame power. [START_REF] Mondillon | Beliefs About Power and Its Relation to Emotional Experience: A Comparison of Japan, France, Germany, and the United States[END_REF] used surveys to compare the concepts of power between U.S. Americans, German, French, and Japanese. Their results suggest that US Americans and Germans do use a different conception of power and that French's conception is rather similar to the German than to the US American and Japanese one: "the emotions elicited by powerful others were highly similar in Germany and France [...] high-power people in those two countries were believed to elicit largely F o r P e e r R e v i e w 13 negative emotions" [START_REF] Mondillon | Beliefs About Power and Its Relation to Emotional Experience: A Comparison of Japan, France, Germany, and the United States[END_REF]. Additionally, they report a peculiarity of German culture: "Generally, individuals in the two European countries, especially in Germany, tend to hold the belief that power is defined in terms of the liberty to violate social norms without sanction and to control the outcomes of other people" [START_REF] Mondillon | Beliefs About Power and Its Relation to Emotional Experience: A Comparison of Japan, France, Germany, and the United States[END_REF]. Hence, they suggest a common tendency of French and German -but still stronger in Germany -of framing power in a negative and coercive way addressed to others rather than self.

The peculiar German view of power is confirmed by [START_REF] Hofstede | Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values[END_REF] crosscultural research program. It points to the lower power distance of Germany compared to US American and French society, suggesting that less powerful members of organizations and institutions in Germany should be less prone to accept unequal power distributions (Hofstede Insights 2022). As already mentioned, [START_REF] Schneider | The Ideal Type of Authority in the United States and Germany[END_REF] and [START_REF] Schröder | A Model of Language-Based Impression Formation and Attribution Among Germans[END_REF] already confirmed the fit of affective meaning data with Hofstede's results by pointing to the averagely higher evaluation of potent identities in the USA compared to Germany.

Moreover, Schauenburg and colleagues (2015) further explored the affective connotation of powerful identities in Germany by comparing EPA ratings with an additional dimension describing authority and communality. They found a positive relationship between authority and potency and, conversely, a negative correlation between evaluation and authority. Nonetheless, the latter effect disappears when concepts are rated high on the community dimension. Hence, Germans do have a negative bias towards authorities which vanishes when the source of power is rooted in the community [START_REF] Schauenburg | Emotional Connotations of Words Related to Authority and Community[END_REF]. Building on these lines of research, we ask the question about (RQ2) countryspecific patterns of differentiation related to the interaction between evaluation and potency and advance the hypothesis that (HP2) the positive correlation between evaluation and potency should be greater in the French datasets than in the German one.

Research questions

Summing up, we will investigate two research questions. The first one concerns the question of whether (RQ1) the level of consensus about affective meanings is higher within the single countries or when considering them together as part of the same culture, and we advance the hypothesis that (HP1) differences in ratings of identities should be bigger between rather than within countries and, conversely, the level of consensus higher within rather than when considering both countries together.

Secondly, we ask the question about (RQ2) country-specific patterns of differentiation related to the interaction between evaluation and potency. We hypothesize that (HP2) the positive correlation between evaluation and potency should be larger in the French dataset. By contrast, we expect it to be weaker -or possibly negative -for German respondents. Given the fact that we are not distinguishing between sources of authority, we expect to find strong outliers to this pattern that should represent accepted and legitimate authorities.

Methods

Construction of stimuli

Traditionally, ACT studies have relied on thesauruses (e.g., [START_REF] Mackinnon | The Structure of Emotions: Canada-United States Comparisons[END_REF][START_REF] Smith-Lovin | The Affective Control of Events within Settings*[END_REF][START_REF] Schröder | A Model of Language-Based Impression Formation and Attribution Among Germans[END_REF] or on previous research (e.g., Schneider 1999b;[START_REF] Schröder | Affective Meanings of Stereotyped Social Groups in Cross-Cultural Comparison[END_REF][START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF] for the construction of stimuli. To our knowledge, only Ambrasat and colleagues (2014) adopted a bottom-up approach and asked student participants to identify seed words representative of specific semantic domains, which were then used to generate a corpus. The present study adopts a slightly new approach.

We were interested in systematically comparing between France and Germany the affective meanings attached to social identities which represent these two cultures' theories of people. We thus needed to build a dictionary of identities that can be reasonably expected to occupy the entire affective space. For this purpose, we sampled identities from the largest affective dictionary of identities available: the USA Combined Surveyor Dictionary 2015 (Smith-Lovin et al. 2016). Out of the 929 identities enlisted in this US American dataset, 195 identities were selected following these steps: (1) a cluster analysis was performed, and 5 clusters with specific evaluation-potency-activity profiles were identified.

(2) Identities specific to US American society were discarded (four identities were added).

(3) For each cluster, identities were ranked by the distance to the cluster's centroid and the closest identities were selected (see Supplementary Information "S2

Cluster analysis -USA Combined Surveyor Identities Dictionary 2015").

Since both French and German do have grammatical gender, each identity was translated into a gender-specific version. For example, the social identity musician was translated into German as "ein Musiker" (male), "eine Musikerin" (female), and into French as "un musicien" (male), "une musicienne" (female). For some innately gendered identities (gentleman, imam, drag queen), there was only one variant. The final dictionary consists of 194 male and 193 female identities (total N=387). See the Supplementary Information for the full list of identities and their mean values ("S10 Mean ratings for evaluation, potency, and activity").

Translations were validated through back translation. First, English identities were translated into French by a native French speaker proficient in English. Second, a German co-author proficient in French translated the identities into German. Last, a German coauthor proficient in English translated the identities back into English. In case of incongruencies, the project team discussed the translations to ensure the best possible alignment between French and German identities, using online automated translation tools for support.

The 387 identities were randomly divided across ten subsets of 37 to 40. Each word set had a balanced distribution of female and male identities. Moreover, the affective clusters and the EPA classes derived from the US American data are also evenly represented. The word sets were identical between countries. Rating procedure and semantic differential scales

The ratings were collected as follows: Identities were presented one at a time to the respondents who rated them by dragging a pointer along three bipolar scales corresponding to the evaluation, potency, and activity dimensions. No skip option was given. The adjectives used as contrasting anchors in German were already well established [START_REF] Schneider | Mean Affective Ratings of 804 Concepts by West German Students in 1989[END_REF][START_REF] Schröder | A Model of Language-Based Impression Formation and Attribution Among Germans[END_REF]

Sample

We collected affective ratings through two parallel online surveys in France and Germany.

The surveys were implemented in Qualtrics (https://www.qualtrics.com). Participants were recruited from a commercial volunteer access panel (Bilendi). We defined quotas regarding sex, age, and region to obtain a stratified representation of both countries for each word set (see Supplementary Information "S4 Quotas for Germany" and "S5 Quotas for France"). Participants were randomly allocated to one set given the quotas' constraints.

The direction of the semantic-differential scales as well as the order of the words were randomized across participants.

As an attention check for quality control, participants were asked at the end of the instructions and before starting the task, to rate a grandmother as extremely powerful regardless of their actual sentiment. Those who did not pass the check were excluded from the survey. We also excluded all participants who read the instructions in fewer than 90 seconds, which we considered the minimum for sufficient understanding of the survey.

700 qualified German participants took part in the German survey (360 female, 340 male). 700 qualified French participants took part in the French survey (360 female, 340 male).

Before the rating procedure, we collected sociodemographic data for gender, age, and region; after the rating procedure participants provided further information regarding profession, level of education, town size, income, and mother tongue.

Results

Exploratory analysis

The distributions of identities As a first step in our analysis, we computed for each identity mean values for evaluation (E), potency (P), and activity (A) for each country separately. We investigated possible cross-cultural differences by comparing the distributions of mean ratings. In Figure 1, we plot the distributions resulting from the average ratings of the 387 identities. In Table 1, the basic statistical parameters describing the two distributions are reported. We used a distribution-free overlapping measure developed by [START_REF] Pastore | Measuring Distribution Similarities Between Samples: A Distribution-Free Overlapping Index[END_REF] to further quantify similarity between the two samples. The index suggests that German and French distributions of identity ratings have 70% overlap for E, while the overlap is much higher for P (86%) and A (84%). In the appendix ("S6 Exploratory analysis"), we report more detailed statistical comparisons of the distributions, which also support the visual impressions from Figure 1: While the distributions of potency and activity ratings do not differ between France and Germany, for evaluation there seem to be different rating patterns. The French distribution is wider and bimodal, whereas the German ratings appear more condensed and centered around one peak, pointing at larger "moral polarity" in the French cultural theory of people when compared to Germany. However, cross-country correlations of ratings are high (r(387) = .93 for E, r(387) = .86 for P, and r(387) = .84 for A), suggesting that the identities rank similarly along the affective dimensions in French and German culture.

Individual identity level

As a second step, we investigated statistically significant mean differences for E, P, and A identity meanings between countries. We calculated 1.161 (387 identities × 3 dimensions)

t-Tests with Bonferroni correction, a conservative approach with = .00004, resulting in 53 significant differences for E (14%), 11 for P (3%), and 12 for A (3%). As displayed in Figure 2, most of the significant differences in E by country are related to extreme ratings.

French respondents tend to rate good identities (e.g., firefighter, athlete, artist, author) better than German respondents, while German respondents rate bad identities (e.g., criminal, pickpocket, shyster, malingerer) better than French respondents. This mirrors the above mentioned finding of larger moral polarity in the French theory of people. The gender of identity does not moderate this pattern of results. Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 22 display non-significant differences, while identities rated significantly higher by Germans are colored in gold, while identities that are rated higher by French respondents are rated in blue.

Affective clusters of identities

Our present results suggest that French and German respondents do have very similar affective theories of people with differences mainly related to extreme evaluation ratings.

Building on this finding, we conducted a cluster analysis of the average ratings computed over all respondents from both countries, aimed at investigating the organization of the affective space (cfr. Schneider 1999b; Ambrasat et al. 2014;[START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF].

The Gap statistic (Tibshirani, Walther, and Hastie 2001) suggests a 4-cluster solution, which we computed using the k-means clustering algorithm and which is represented in Figure 3 along the evaluation and potency dimensions. The first cluster (N=76, ME=-2.58, MP=.29, MA=.83) is composed of very bad, somehow potent, and moderately active identities. We labeled this cluster as criminals since the identities closest to the centroid are crook, scoundrel, pusher, hothead, and felon. Nonetheless, the cluster also contains some identities related to mental and behavioral issues such as psychopath, lunatic, and even shyster. The second cluster (N=51, ME=-1.31, MP=-1.15, MA=-1.02) was labeled deviants. The identities in this cluster are rated as bad, not potent, and inactive.

The identities in the dense area around the centroid are beggar, loser, failure, pessimist, degenerate, and bum. close to zero or centered around the mean, we labeled the cluster neutral identities. The fourth cluster (N=133, ME=1.18, MP=1.52, MA=1.50) is made up of identities that are socially esteemed for their skills and work and hence rated as good, potent, and active.

Around the centroids are located identities such as tool and die maker, auto mechanic, manager, entrepreneur, butcher, truck driver, worker, and self-employed worker (see Supplementary Information "S7 Cluster analysis" Table 7). (ME German = .97; ME French = 1.38). For the neutral identities, there are no differences (see Supplementary Information "S7 Cluster analysis" Table 8).

Wrap-up -Exploratory analysis

In conclusion, the exploratory analysis suggests that French and Germans share a consistent consensus about the affective meanings we investigated. The effect is much stronger when considering the potency and activity dimensions. Evaluation ratings are somewhat more influenced by the specific language culture. Especially when considering the non-neutral-identities, Germans and French do show country-specific patterns that reflect slightly different affective perceptions of the identities we considered. The results of the cluster analysis further buttress this latter finding. French respondents consider identities in the more positive cluster to be even better, while Germans report less negative evaluation and higher potency ratings when considering bad identities, in particular the bad and impotent ones.

Consensus analysis

In order to test our hypothesis (research question 1) that differences in ratings of identities should be bigger between rather than within countries and, conversely, the level of consensus higher within rather than between countries, we used the Q-methodology, a principal component analysis (PCA) performed on the correlation matrix between the respondents (cf. Romney, Weller, & Batchfelder 1986;Heise 2010;[START_REF] Schröder | A Model of Language-Based Impression Formation and Attribution Among Germans[END_REF]Ambrasat et al. 2014;[START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF]. We computed Q-correlations between respondents by word sets separately for each country and dimension. The loading on the first component

F o r P e e r R e v i e w
is generally interpreted as the amount of consensus around a single common culture. The ratio between the first and second component eigenvalues is conventionally considered an indicator of whether a second culture exists besides the dominant one (Heise 2010). Our result -Table 2 -shows that the main component on average explains 67% of the variance in evaluation ratings in the French and 72% in the German dataset. By contrast, the potency and activity first components are smaller for both countries (see Supplementary

Information "S8 Consensus analysis" Figure 2). A similar trend can be observed for the first-to-second component ratio. Evaluation ratings are clearly more dominated by a strong first component than potency and activity ratings, in line with previous findings under the ACT research paradigm (Heise 2010). Interestingly for potency, a second consistent component seems to exist in France (see Supplementary Information "S8 Consensus analysis" Figure 3).

To answer the question as to whether consensus is higher within or between countries, we conducted a second consensus analysis considering respondents from both countries. In performing PCA, the larger the sample size the more stable are the results [START_REF] Kyriazos | Applied Psychometrics: Sample Size and Sample Power Considerations in Factor Analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in General[END_REF][START_REF] Devellis | Scale Development: Theory and Applications[END_REF]. For this reason, we adopted a bootstrapping approach -typical of PCA studies (e.g., [START_REF] Costello | Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four Recommendations for Getting the Most from Your Analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Shaukat | Impact of Sample Size on Principal Component Analysis Ordination of an Environmental Data Set: Effects on Eigenstructure[END_REF]. We sampled 150 times 35 French and 35 German respondents. After this number of repetitions, the results were clearly stable and reliable (see Supplementary

Information "S8 Consensus analysis" Figure 4 and5). As reported in Tables 2 and3, for all three affective dimensions the eigenvalues of the first component as well as the firstto-second component ratio, computed by sampling recipients from both countries, are All in all, the hypothesis seems to be only partially confirmed and the answer to our research question is twofold. There is more consensus within countries than between countries considering the German level of consensus. By contrast, there is more consensus between countries than within countries considering the French level of consensus. We found a higher level of consensus among Germans compared to French respondents.

When considered together, the level of consensus between countries was higher when considering the French level of consensus as baseline, while it was below the level of consensus established within Germany. Hence, the first hypothesis is only partially confirmed.

Cross-cultural differences in evaluating potent identities

Our second research question concerns the relationship between evaluation and potency.

To test our pre-registered hypothesis, based on existing cross-cultural research, that the correlation between evaluation and potency is higher in the French datasets, we computed cross-dimensional correlations within countries. This analysis (displayed in Table 4) indeed shows that E and P have a stronger linear Pearson correlation in the French (r(387)

= .57) compared to the German dataset (r(387) = .31). Noteworthy is the fact that the correlations between E and A have a slightly smaller difference (r(387) = .2 for Germany and r(387) = .33 for France), while the correlations between P and A are very similar (r(387) = .80 for Germany and r(387) = .82 for France). We extended the correlation analysis by considering the affective clusters identified previously to dig deeper into the relationship between evaluation and potency.

German correlations between E and P are much stronger for identities with very high (esteemed) and very low (criminal) average evaluations (Table 5). In both cases, there is a negative correlation between the two dimensions. For the two central clusters -neutral and deviant -there is almost no correlation. By contrast, the opposite case is true in the French dataset. Correlations are positive and higher in the central clusters and close to zero at the extremes. As the last step, we performed regression analyses. First, we regressed the mean evaluations on the mean potency ratings of the identities and the language culture as fixed effects as well as their interaction terms. While the resulting model (displayed in Table 6) can only explain a limited amount of variation in evaluation (R² = .237, F (3, 770) = 81.2 , p < 2.2e-16), we observe a significant main effect of the average potency on the evaluation rating evaluation. Moreover, we also observe a significant main effect of language culture on the average evaluation: Germans generally consider identities to be slightly higher on the E dimension. Most importantly, as predicted by our hypothesis, the interaction effect between average potency and culture is significant. Hence, an increase in mean potency leads in the German as opposed to the French language culture to a smaller increase in the mean evaluation.

Second, we tested whether the individual ratings also reproduce the same relationship between evaluation and potency. Due to the balanced incomplete block design of the survey, we computed a mixed-effects regression model (cfr. Ambrasat et al. 2014) with fixed effects for individual ratings of potency and language culture of participants and crossed random effects for participants and identities. Additionally, we also computed the interaction term between potency rating and language culture. Results confirm that Germans compared to French respondents react to an increase in the potency rating with a lower increase in evaluation rating. The interaction of potency ratings with language culture is significant and has the strongest effect among the interaction terms (Table 7). We found that the correlation between evaluation and potency is stronger in the French than in the German datasets. The regression analyses confirm that, compared to the French participants, for Germans the more powerful an identity is perceived to be, the smaller is the increase in evaluation ratings. Hence, the second hypothesis can be fully confirmed.

Discussion

This research replicated the methodology proposed by Ambrasat and colleagues (2014) who combined the representative sample approach with cultural surveys (Heise 2010). We extended this methodology by comparing two countries, Germany and France, and considering cross-cultural differences in the organization of the respective cultural theories of people in the affective space. Our exploratory analysis as well as the investigation of In general, we found a high correlation between potency and activity. As Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum (1957), Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick (2008), and [START_REF] Rogers | The Affective Structure of Stereotype Content[END_REF] reported, the overlap between these two dimensions is typical when considering social identities.

Moreover, we found strong between-country similarities for the potency and activity dimensions and more dissimilarity along the evaluation dimension. Hence, we confirm previous cross-cultural studies suggesting that this latter dimension is more culturally determined compared to potency and activity [START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF]. Interestingly, between-country correlation levels of E are higher compared to P and A; hence, how identities are evaluated in France has a strong relationship with the evaluation in Germany.

Nonetheless compared to the other two dimensions, (I) the distributions of evaluation mean ratings have a relatively low overlap, (II) more mean ratings of social identities are statistically different, and (III) when considered together participants have a lower crosscultural consensus. Hence, while Germans and French do agree on the evaluative ranking of the social identities, they provide statistically different absolute ratings resulting in discrepant distributions. Particularly, French mean ratings are bimodally distributed and social identities are more likely to be grouped around a "good" or a "bad" cluster. By contrast, German average evaluation ratings are more normally distributed around neutral values. A possible interpretation of this fact could be that French evaluation ratings are affected by a stronger moral component which leads to a slightly more polarized

F o r P e e r R e v i e w
perception than it is the case in the German cultural theory of people. The alternative explanation that the effect is due to subject-scale interactions or to rating styles is still possible yet not supported by the facts that (I) we carefully aligned labels and scale anchors, (II) the effect is present only on the evaluation dimension, and (III) it is not uniformly distributed in the affective space but more concentrated at the extremes of the evaluation spectrum. As such, German and French do disagree only in relation to specific areas of the affective space and can be considered as two subcultures within a larger "Carolingian" affective culture that they share.

This latter interpretation is supported by the results of the consensus analysis which provides evidence for consistent consensus around the affective meanings attributed to identities not only within but also between countries. Our results show that while members of the French language culture do share less consensus among them, a consistent group of French respondents finds a broad consensus cross-culturally when compared to Germans.

As such, the two cultures reveal a common core. Yet, the cross-cultural consensus for the evaluation dimension is slightly lower than the levels found within both countries. This twofold pattern fits well with the results provided by the cross-cultural literature based on values surveys. The values that are shared within and between these two countries lead to similar cultural norms that inform the individual affective meanings reported in this study [START_REF] Heise | Expressive order: Confirming sentiments in social actions[END_REF]) and that have led some authors to claim great similarity between the two countries (Van Vlimmeren, Moors, and Gelissen 2017; Akaliyski 2019; Bréchon 2020).

Nonetheless, disagreement around the evaluation dimension exists and points to some The levels of consensus, as measured by the eigenvalues obtained from the consensus analysis, for the potency and activity dimensions are in line with the ones reported in previous studies [START_REF] Schröder | Affective Meanings of Stereotyped Social Groups in Cross-Cultural Comparison[END_REF]Ambrasat et al. 2014;[START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF].

Considering the evaluation dimension, the level of consensus was higher compared to those reported by Heise (2010) and [START_REF] Schröder | Affective Meanings of Stereotyped Social Groups in Cross-Cultural Comparison[END_REF], comparable to that obtained by [START_REF] Rogers | Sources of Consensus and Variegation in Cultural Affective Meanings[END_REF], and smaller than the one identified by Ambrasat et al. (2014). A possible reason why the levels of consensus we found are higher compared to the cross-cultural analysis of social identities conducted by Schröder and colleagues (2013) may lay in the specific stimuli we presented. By considering stereotyped social groups -defined by general traits such as nationality, religion, race, and political orientation -respondents may either comply with social desirability or openly express the prejudice they learnt as members of a specific culture [START_REF] Devine | Implicit Prejudice and Stereotyping: How Automatic Are They? Introduction to the Special Section[END_REF]. At the aggregate level, this will lead to higher variance and lower consensus [START_REF] Schröder | Affective Meanings of Stereotyped Social Groups in Cross-Cultural Comparison[END_REF]. By contrast, social identities such as professions and social roles are tightly embedded in specific institutional domains. In this case, the affective appraisal of an identities is deeply intertwined with many semantic and affective associations related to behaviors, goals, as well as to further co-interacting identities [START_REF] Duncan | Affect Is a Form of Cognition: A Neurobiological Analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Madva | Stereotypes, Prejudice, and the Taxonomy of the Implicit Social Mind1[END_REF]. Because of the strength of this embedding, affective meanings are less volatile across the population.

By answering the second research question we dove deeper into the cross-cultural dissimilarities between the two countries by considering the relationship between the positive and negative evaluation spectrum, suggest that in these cases power is interpreted as the ability to coerce others. Criminals are bad and potent because they act negatively on others. Similarly, some esteemed identities are perceived in a less positive way when they have an excessive power over others. By contrast, French ratings result in a moderate positive correlation, especially in the case of deviant identities. In this cluster, the more powerful an identity, the better is its evaluation. This fact seems to suggest that power is interpreted as the ability to control oneself and adapt to the social order.

Conclusion

We collected affective meanings for 387 social identities on the EPA dimensions using two samples representative of the German and French population. We found a high level of consensus within-country but also between countries. Hence, our first hypothesis was only partially confirmed, and a common French-German affective cultural space seems to

exist. Yet, especially when considering identities at the extremes of the evaluation Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 36 spectrum, language culture-specific patterns exist. In addition, patterns specific to national language cultures can still be identified with respect to the potency dimension and its interaction with the evaluation dimension. We found confirmation for our second hypothesis pointing to the negative effect of potency on evaluation in German compared to French language culture. Table 6: Regression analysis at aggregated level between average potency ratings, language culture as independent variable, and average evaluation ratings as dependent variable.

F
Table 7: Mixed-effects regressions coefficients for identities' evaluation. a Pearson correlation at the 0.5 and 0.9 level, respectively. Thus, Kervyn, Fiske, and Yzerbyt confirm, at least in part, the theoretical expectation originally proposed by Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick (2008) and find that power does not correspond to competence, while [START_REF] Rogers | The Affective Structure of Stereotype Content[END_REF] do not. The latter group of researchers suggests that the EPA and SCM dimensions are two parsimonious models that similarly map the semantic space that individuals use to organize social perception [START_REF] Rogers | The Affective Structure of Stereotype Content[END_REF]. Chapman, Gardner, and Lyons (2022) compared Osgood's model with the three-dimensional approach based on valence, arousal, and dominance developed by Mehrabian and Russel (1974). Their analysis suggests that evaluation is strongly correlated A cluster analysis was performed on the mean ratings of evaluation, potency, and activity for the identities included in the USA Combined Surveyor Dictionary 2015 (Smith-Lovin et al. 2016). Data were collected at the University of Georgia, Duke University, and in the Durham community (North Carolina) using the Surveyor tool (Heise 2010). In total, the lexicon contains 929 identities.

Figures

F o r P e e r
We used the gap statistic (Tibshirani, Walther, and Hastie 2001) and the elbow method based on the Within Cluster Sum of Squares (WCSS) to define the number of clusters. Since we have an exploratory approach, we chose a five-cluster solution instead of a three-cluster solution. As shown in Figure 1, the five-cluster solution provides the best trade-off between granularity on the one hand and WCSS and gap statistics on the other. cluster: "Powerful and Negative Identities"). The second, on average more negative cluster contains identities that are on average less potent and active than the previous cluster. Most centrally located are identities such as dolt, lackey, scapegoat, dope, conformist, and invalid (cluster: "Impotent and Negative Identities"). The third cluster consists of moderately positive and more powerful and active identities. Because it contains mostly professional identities, such as businessman, journalist, construction foreman, and defense attorney, we labeled it "professional identities". A second relatively neutral cluster can be found around the mean of the evaluation distribution. In this case, the identities are also neutral on the potency and activity dimensions. The identities closest to the centroid are classmate, sister-in-law, telephone installer, bohemian, and worker (cluster: "Neutral Identities"). Finally, the fifth cluster consists of identities that are clearly good, strong, and averagely neutral on the activity dimension. This cluster includes identities such as foster parent, benefactor, storyteller, husband, army chaplain, and fire investigator (cluster:

"Positive and Helpful").

After identifying five clusters spanning the affective space, we then selected approximately 40 identities (min. 34, max. 41) for each cluster using the following criteria:

-Identities specific to U.S. American society (e.g., army chaplain, cheerleader, Mormon) were deleted.

-Identities irrelevant to the general purpose of this project, especially family-related identities (e.g., foster parent, uncle, brother-in-law) were discarded. -We also discarded some identities whose translations in either German or French were judged to be difficult for participants to understand or would have led to synonyms (e.g., blockhead and ninny).

-One job identity, "telephone operator," was updated to "call center agent," which is a more typical job in the contemporary labor market and was judged by the research team to be easier for participants to understand.

This resulted in a set of 193 identities that could be translated into French and German in both grammatical gender versions. For two male identities (gentleman, imam) and one female identity (drag queen), the opposite gender was not considered unambiguously understandable by the participants.

Sample of participants

We recruited a sample of 152 French participants (gender: male = 76, female = 76; age: "18 to 24" = 10, "25 to 34" = 21, "35 to 49" = 27, "50 to 64" = 59, "over 65" = 35) from a commercial volunteer access panel (Bilendi). Participants under the age of 18 were not allowed to participate in the survey. Each participant was asked to rate three words from each of the eight quadrants formed by the dimensions E, P, and A (E+P+A+, E+P+A-, E+P-A+, E+P-A-, E-P+A+, E-P+A-, E-P-A+, E-P-A-; 24 words in total). The median task duration was approximately 21 minutes. The survey was administered online.

Stimuli words

The stimulus words were selected based on the ratings provided by German respondents in a previous study (Ambrasat et al., 2014; see Table 1). The words were considered to be the most representative for each quadrant and were translated using the back-translation method by independent bilingual translators. For each of the 24 stimulus words, participants were asked to rate the word using 12 semantic differential scales (four scales per EPA dimension). The list of stimulus words is shown in Table 2. 2006). The resulting sample of scales is shown in Table 2. . The order and direction of the stimulus scales were randomized across the stimulus words. The order of the words was randomized across participants.

Methods

As is typical in the development of psychological scales, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis [START_REF] Fabrigar | Evaluating the Use of Exploratory Factor Analysis in Psychological Research[END_REF]. For each word, the stimulus scales were rotated using the varimax method. We then extracted the first three factors using maximum likelihood and collected the highest loadings of each scale on these three factors across the 24 words. Using the resulting data set, we first examined the extent to which related scales consistently loaded the highest on the same factor. Overall, the scales that should load together on a given dimension according to the studies mentioned above have their highest Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 9 loadings on the same factor. Only the "léger-lourd" scale, which was used in the German EPA studies for the potency dimension, loaded highest on the same factor of the activity scales for a significant proportion of the words. Therefore, we discarded this scale in further rounds of analyses. Next, we calculated the average loadings for each scale across the 24 words. The results are shown in Table 3.

For 20 out of 24 words, the evaluation scales have their highest loadings on the first factor. For two other cases (the words un enterrement [a funeral]; être avachi [slumped]), two evaluation scales have their highest loadings on the second factor. In total, for 22 out of 24 words, the evaluation scales were coherently loaded on the same factor. Only the stimulus scale "méchant-gentil" has twice (for the stimulus words "son chez soi" [one's home]; "un terrain de jeu" [a playground]) the highest loading on another factor, which is not consistent with the other evaluation scales. In addition, méchant-gentil has the lowest mean of the maximum loadings. It is therefore the less representative scale of the evaluation dimension.

Compared to the evaluation dimension, the loadings for the potency scales are more scattered. Only for five out of 24 words do the potency scales uniformly have their highest loadings on the same factor. However, for 14 other words, at least three potency scales have their highest loadings on the same factor. The remaining 5 words do not have at least three scales loading on the same factor. In 11 of the 14 cases where at least three scales were aligned, the scale "léger-lourd" was not aligned with the other potency-related scales, while "délicat-puissant" did not load on the same factor in the remaining three cases. These two scales also have the lowest average maximum loadings. Because the stimulus scale Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 10 "léger-lourd" was not aligned with the other potency scales in most cases, and because it has slightly lower average maximum loadings, we considered it to be the less representative scale for the potency dimension. .604 Note: The symbol '*' marks the stimuli scales that were selected.

The average loadings for the activity scales are more consistent than for the potency scales and less consistent than for the evaluation scales. For 17 out of 24 words, the activity scales have their highest loading factor coherently on the same scale. In three of the remaining seven cases, three scales were aligned, while in the other four cases there was no consistency. In the three cases with partial alignment, twice (the stimulus words "embrasser" and "harmonie") the "inerte-vif" scale was not aligned and in one case ("être sage") the "calme-agité" scale did not load on the same factor as the other activity scales.

Considering the means of the maximum loadings, "calme-agité" has the lowest maximum loading and should be considered as the less representative scale for the activity dimension.

S6 Exploratory analysis

First, we conducted an exploratory analysis to examine similarities and dissimilarities in the distributions resulting from the means for evaluation (E), potency (P), and activity (A) separately for each country.

  legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 10 Case study: French and German cultures Within and between countries consensus: Does a French-German cultural space exist?

  distinguished by means of appropriate cultural indicators. Their analysis based on data from the ESS demonstrates that the administrative regions of most European countries -including Germany and France -tend to group into clusters corresponding to national borders. As such, the two countries must be considered as two clearly distinctive cultures[START_REF] Minkov | Clustering of 316 European Regions on Measures of Values[END_REF]).Yet this latter claim has been intensively debated. Considering the multiple waves of the EVS and the WVS that have been conducted between 1981 and 2014, Akaliyski (2019) identified (1) a process of homogenization among European countries between 1992 and 2008 with new country members being increasingly closer to the European founding members which (2) are by far the more homogenous group within EU states. Thereafter -because of the economic and migration crises -the EU homogenization process may have stopped, but only considering the cleavage between EU founding and new member countries (Van Houwelingen, Iedema, and Dekker 2019). Given these puzzling results, whether Germany and France should be considered as homogenous cultures probably depend on the specific topic and on the corresponding indicators. Van Houwelingen, Iedema, and Dekker (2019) considered core political values from the ESS and grouped France and Germany in two different clusters. Van Vlimmeren, Moors, and Gelissen (2017) found that France and Germany in an EU comparison do group together when considering gender roles and family values. Bréchon (2020) reports that French and Germans have a similar level of tolerance towards stereotyped categories, and satisfaction with the political system.

  In summary, cross-cultural analysis based on data from the EVS, ESS, and WVS suggest strong consensus about values between France and Germany (van Vlimmeren, Moors, and Gelissen 2017; Akaliyski 2019; Bréchon 2020) at least when they are compared to other EU members. Yet other authors also pointed to the strength of national

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Distributions of evaluation, potency, and activity average ratings by language culture.

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Differences in average rating of evaluation by country. Each line represents an identity. The left (right) end of the lines indicates the lower (higher) average evaluation in France vs. Germany. Gray lines

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: Identities plotted by evaluation -x-axis -and potency -y-axis -and colored by cluster. The grey lines indicate the mean evaluation and potency.

  to the results of the consensus analysis on German respondents, but bigger compared to the outputs of the consensus analysis on French respondents. The only exception to this pattern is represented by the median first-to-second component on the evaluation dimension.

  question confirms and enriches previous findings well-established in EPA studies.

  . Overall, the analysis suggests that evaluation and potency have a weaker correlation in the German compared to the French dataset. This fact resonates with our pre-registered hypothesis, confirming the expectations derived from Hofstede's work on power distance(Hofstede Insights 2022). Nonetheless, the effect of potency on evaluation is not homogenous, suggesting that a closer look is necessary at how exactly power is interpreted by French and German cultural informants (cf.[START_REF] Mondillon | Beliefs About Power and Its Relation to Emotional Experience: A Comparison of Japan, France, Germany, and the United States[END_REF] Schauenburg et al. 2014). The negative correlations for the esteemed and criminal identity clusters in the German data set, which are the clusters highest on potency respectively in

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Distributions of evaluation, potency, and activity average ratings by language

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Differences in average rating of evaluation by country.

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: Identities plotted by evaluation -x axis -and potency -y axis -and colored by

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Elbow method (left) and gap statistic (right) for optimal value of clusters.

-

  Four sexual identities were considered by the research team to be of particular interest and were included in the dataset.

  legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 11 S4 Quotas for Germany

First, we assessed

  differences in the distributions across countries and within dimensions. The p-value of the F-tests for equality of variance is greater than the significance level for potency (F = 1.213, num df = 386, denom df = 386, p = .058) and activity (F = 1.030, num df = 386, denom df = 386, p = .772). We also tested whether the medians and means were significantly different using the unpaired two-sample Wilcoxon test and the one-way ANOVA test, respectively. Analysis of the p-values shows that the medians of potency (W = 77203, p = .456) and activity (W = 72923, p = .528) are above the significance level. The one-way ANOVA test is also not significant (for P: F (1, 772) = 1.157, p =.283; for A: F (1, 772) = .519, p =.471) Thus, considering the variance, the median and the mean as well as -as reported in

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Loadings on the first component by word set and country.

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: First-to-second component ratio by word set and country.

Figure 4 :

 4 Figure 4: Average loadings on the first component by dimension and number of repetitions.

Figure 5 :

 5 Figure 5: Average first-to-second component ratio by dimension and number of repetitions.

Table 1 : Descriptive statistics of mean values for evaluation, potency, and activity

 1

		Evaluation		Potency		Activity
		France Germany	France Germany	France Germany
	Min	-3.88	-3.54	-2.19	-2.07	-3.00	-3.06
	1st Q	-1.71	-.94	-.12	.04	.16	.22
	Mdn	.51	.47	.54	.54	.83	.81
	M	-.09	.01	.52	.60	.71	.66
	3rd Q	1.43	1.13	1.25	1.26	1.39	1.31
	Max	3.24	2.70	3.25	3.29	3.08	2.90
	SD	1.87	1.46	1.08	.98	.98	.97

Table 2 : Eigenvalues of first component obtained from principal component analyses of respondents' correlations

 2

			France			Germany		Bootstrapping
		E	P	A	E	P	A	E	P	A
	Min	.40	.35	.30	.57	.41	.35	.60	.32	.32
	MD	.67	.39	.37	.72	.49	.43	.68	.44	.39
	Max	.76	.51	.51	.84	.63	.57	.80	.49	.50

Table 3 : First-to-second component ratio of eigenvalues obtained from principal component analyses of respondents' correlations

 3

			France			Germany		Bootstrapping
		E	P	A	E	P	A	E	P	A
	Min	1.90	1.18	1.13	6.08	1.93	2.01	6.68	1.44	1.70
	MD	10.03	1.70	2.29	12.41	3.76	2.81	9.33	2.31	2.65
	Max	15.58	3.62	4.08	28.38	8.32	5.32	19.22	3.73	4.84

Table 4 : Correlation between dimensions by language culture and dimension

 4

		France		Germany
	E	P	A	E	P	A
	E	-	-	-	-	-	-
	P	.57	-	-	.31	-	-
	A	.33	.80	-	.20	.84	-

Table 5 : Evaluation and potency Pearson correlation coefficients by cluster

 5

		France	Germany
	Esteemed	.05	-.20
	Neutral	.13	-.04
	Deviant	.33	.00
	Criminal	-.02	-.30

Table 6 : Regression analysis at aggregated level between average potency ratings, language culture as independent variable, and average evaluation ratings as dependent variable

 6

	95% CI

Table 7 : Mixed-effects regressions coefficients for identities' evaluation

 7

	95% CI

Note: Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1. SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.

Table 1 :

 1 Descriptive statistics of mean values for evaluation, potency, and activity.

	o r
	P e
	e r
	R e
	v
	i e
	w

Table 2 :

 2 Eigenvalues of first component obtained from principal component analyses of respondents' correlations.

Table 3 :

 3 First-to-second component ratio of eigenvalues obtained from principal component analyses of respondents' correlations.

Table 4 :

 4 Correlation between dimensions by language culture and dimension.

Table 5 :

 5 Evaluation and potency Pearson correlation coefficients by cluster.

Combined Surveyor Identities Dictionary 2015

  Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 2 with valence (.89), while the correlation coefficients between arousal and activity (.37) and potency and dominance (.09) are weaker[START_REF] Chapman | Gender Differences in Emotional Connotative Meaning of Words Measured by Osgood's Semantic Differential Techniques in Young Adults[END_REF]. A possible reason for this may be that Osgood's EPA dimensions are designed to measure a semantic property inherent in the meaning of the word, whereas Mehrabian and Russel's approach points to an individual's emotional response to a word[START_REF] Chapman | Gender Differences in Emotional Connotative Meaning of Words Measured by Osgood's Semantic Differential Techniques in Young Adults[END_REF]. In general, comparative analyses point to the universality of the evaluation/valence dimension. In contrast, findings related to the potency and activity dimensions appear to be only partially generalizable to other models.

	Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture
	S2 Cluster analysis -USA
	F o r
	P e
	e r
	R e R e
	v v
	i e i e
	w w
	3

Table 1 .

 1 The cluster with the lowest average evaluation contains identities that are slightly potent and active. Closest to the centroid are identities such as psychopath, spoilsport, bigamist, and vandal, while at the extreme end of the evaluation spectrum are

	criminal identities (e.g., child molester, wife abuser, rapist, terrorist, murderer, kidnapper;
	F o r
	P e
	e r
	R e
	v
	i e
	w
	4

Table 1 : Descriptive statistics by clusters and dimensions

 1

		Evaluation	Potency	Activity
		N Min M Max Min M Max Min M Max
	Positive and helpful 205 .62 2.06 3.63 .65 1.83 3.70 -1.52 0.25 2.29
	Neutral identities 298 -.69 .92 2.50 -2.55 .07 1.66 -1.52 .18 2.24
	Professional identities 166 -.85 .86 2.13 .24 1.69 3.34 .00 1.30 3.08
	Impotent and negative	114 -3.30 -1.10 1.37 -2.95 -1.55 .03 -2.45 -.82 .74
	identities
	Potent and negative	146 -4.19 -2.07 -.36 -1.93 .12 -1.07 -1.07 .98 2.92
	identities

Table 2 : Stimuli words in German and French by EPA quadrant

 2 French with respondents from the Cajun minority in the US state of Louisiana(Breiger

		Word 1	Word 2	Word 3
		DE → FR → EN	DE → FR → EN	DE → FR → EN
	E+P+A+ Liebe → amour → love küssen → embrasser	Freiheit → liberté →
			quelqu'un → to hug	freedom
			someone
	E+P+A-Zuhause → son chez-	Harmonie → harmonie	Verständnissvoll → être
		soi → one's home	→ harmony	compréhensif →
				sympathetic
	E+P-A+ Baby → bébé → baby Kind → enfant → child Spielplatz → terrain de
				jeu → playground
	E+P-A-	weich → tendre →	Seniorin → une senior	brav → être sage →
		soft	→ senior woman	well-behaved
	E-P+A+ bewaffnet → être armé	Diktator → dictateur →	Gewalt → violence →
		armed	dictator	violence
	E-P+A-	Beerdigung →	Behörde → une	trauern → être en deuil
		enterrement → funeral	administration →	→ to mourn
			government agency
	E-P-A+	Schwätzer →	klauen → piquer	Straftäter → délinquant
		baratineur → windbag	quelque chose → to	→ criminal
			pinch
	E-P-A-	Faulenzer → fainéant	mutlos → être	schlapp → être avachi
		→ loafer	découragé →	→ slumped
			discouraged
	Stimuli scales
	The sample of scales was selected to maximize overlap with previous relevant
	studies. In particular, we considered (1) a study conducted by Noel & Dardenne (2022) in

French with a sample of Belgian respondents, (2) the scales used in previous studies in German

[START_REF] Schröder | Affective Dynamics of Leadership: An Experimental Test of Affect Control Theory[END_REF] Ambrasat et al. 2014), and

(3) a study conducted in

Table 3 : Stimuli scales in French by dimension

 3

		Scale 1	Scale 2	Scale 3	Scale 4
	Evaluation bien -mal	agréable -	méchant -gentil déplaisant -
			désagréable		plaisant
	Potency	petit -grand	faible -fort	léger -lourd	fluet -puissant
	Activity	silencieux -	calme -excité	lent -rapide	tranquille -
		bruyant			animé

The labels used to mark the 9-point-scale were aligned with the German anchors as used by Ambrasat and colleagues (

2014

): etwas/un peu [slightly], ziemlich/plutôt [quite], sehr/très [very], äußerst/extrem. [extremely]. The center of the scale was labeled neutral/neutre [neutral]

Table 4 : Mean of max. loadings by dimensions and stimuli scales

 4

	Dimensions	Scales	Mean of max loading
	Evaluation	désagréable-agréable *	.811
		mal-bien *	.804
		méchant-gentil	.700
		déplaisant-plaisant *	.860
	Potency	délicat-puissant *	.473
		faible-fort *	.776
		petit-grand *	.656
		léger-lourd	.410
	Activity	calme-agité	.539
		lent-rapide *	.603
		silencieux-bruyant *	.652
		inerte-vif *

Table 5 : Quotas and sample size by gender, age, and region for Germany.

 5

	Variables

Table 6 : Quotas and sample size by gender, age, and region for France.

 6 Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture 13

	Variables

Table 7 : Descriptive statistics by clusters and dimensions

 7 Table1of the article -the range and the standard deviation, there is no significant difference in the potency and activity dimension between the German and the French data sets. In contrast, the evaluation distributions are statistically different with respect to variance (F = 1.654, num df = 386, denom df = 386,

	p-value = 8.881e-07), but not with respect to means (F (1, 772) = .750, p =.387) and
	medians (W = 73464, p = .648).
	Second, we examined the shape of the distributions by country and dimension. The
	evaluation distributions are both platykurtic (skewness for Germany -.70, for France -.52)
	and moderately negatively skewed (kurtosis for Germany: 2.48, for France: 1.97). As

Table 8 : Differences between the overall and the country-based means by cluster and dimension

 8

			Evaluation		Potency			Activity
		N	M -	M	M -	M -	M	M -	M -	M	M -
			MDE		MFR	MDE		MFR	MDE		MFR
	Esteemed	133 -.20 1.18	.20	.14 1.52 -.15 -.08 1.50	.08
	identities
	Neutral identities 127	.01	.72 -.01	.17	.42 -.17	.00	.43	.00
	Deviants 51	.43 -1.31 .-43 -.03 -1.02	.02	.02 -1.15 -.02
	Criminals 76	.31 -2.58 -.31 -.01	.29	.01	.06	.83	.06
	Note: DE = Germany, FR = France.

Table 9 : Socio demographic variables by country

 9 Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture Charlemagne's legacy: A consensus analysis of affective meanings in French and German culture

	France	Germany

http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/spq

In the supplementary information ("S1 Measuring the affective space -Cross-model comparisons") we provide a short cross-model comparison of a few frameworks used to map concepts in the affective space.

http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/spq Social Psychology Quarterly