View
233
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Chapter 2
Person Perception: Forming Impressions
of Others
Six General Principles minimal information salience context categorization enduring cognitive structures needs and goals
What Information Do We Use?
People often decide very quickly what others are like based on minimal information.
What Information Do We Use?
Roles People tend to think of others within a
role context first and only then according to personality traits
What Information Do We Use?
Physical Cues Appearance and behavior are key
determinants of our first impressions
What Information Do We Use?
Salience People pay attention to the figure
rather than to the ground or setting The most salient cues are used most
heavily Brightness, noisiness, motion, and
novelty
What Information Do We Use?
Effects of Salience Draws attention Influences perceptions of causality Produces evaluatively extreme
judgments Produce more consistency of judgment
What Information Do We Use?
We move very quickly from observable information (appearance & behavior) to personality trait inferences Traits are more economical to
remember Trait inferences occur automatically We use implicit personality theories to
infer traits from other traits
What Information Do We Use?
Which Traits? We tend to evaluate others along two
dimensions: Competence Interpersonal qualities
What Information Do We Use?
Central Traits Some traits may be more central than
others, that is, highly associated with many other characteristics
“Warm-Cold” appears to be such a trait (Kelley, 1950)
What Information Do We Use?
Categorization We automatically perceive stimuli as
part of a group or category
What Information Do We Use?
Consequences of Categorization leads to category-based social
judgments (stereotyping) speeds processing time can lead to errors
What Information Do We Use?
The Continuum Model of Impression Formation Impressions range from stereotypic,
category-based impressions to individuated impressions (dual processing)
What Information Do We Use?
Dual Processing We generally tend to use category-
based inference because it is easy and quick
We use individuated information when we are motivated to be accurate the person doesn’t fit our categories we have other reasons for wanting to
know the person better
What Information Do We Use?
Context Effects Contrast biases judgments away from
the context (sees them as different) Assimilation biases judgments in the
same direction as the context (sees them as similar)
What Information Do We Use?
Context Effects Assimilation occurs more when
people are using category-based processing
Contrast occurs more when people are using individuated information
Integrating Impressions We move quickly from
observations of appearance and behavior to inferences about personality
Integrating Impressions Negativity Effect
Negative traits tend to affect impressions more than positive ones (especially negative moral traits)
Positivity Bias Overall we tend to evaluate others
positively
Integrating Impressions We infer what others are like from
what emotions they express
Integrating Impressions The Averaging Principle
averaging is used to combine separate pieces of information about people, some of which are positive and others of which are negative
A weighted averaging model, in which traits are weighted by importance, provides the best predictions
Integrating Impressions Our perceptions of others’ personal
qualities undergoes a shift of meaning depending on context
Integrating Impressions People tend to form evaluatively
consistent impressions of others (halo effect)
Integrating Impressions Resolving Inconsistencies
Information that is inconsistent with other impressions may be remembered especially well
However, being “cognitively busy” prevents us from thinking about inconsistent information so we forget it
We may differentiate incongruent information by context
Sometimes we just recognize incongruities without integrating them
Integrating Impressions Schemas are organized, structured
sets of cognitions including knowledge about the object, relationships among its attributes, and specific examples
Integrating Impressions Schemas
Person schemas Role schemas Group schemas (stereotypes)
Integrating Impressions Schemas
Prototypes are the abstract ideal of a schema
Exemplars are particular instances of a category
Integrating Impressions Schemas
When we have little information about another, we use prototypes to make inferences about them
When we have a little more information, we use both exemplars and prototypes
When we have a great deal of information, we use more well-developed schemas as well as exemplars
Motivated Person Perception Our goals and feelings about other
people influence the information we gather about them
Motivated Person Perception Need for accuracy about another
leads to more systematic processing
We remember more about another when we expect to interact with him or her
Motivated Person Perception Communicating information about
another leads to more evaluatively consistent impressions
Motivated Person Perception When we are preoccupied we are
more likely to make trait inferences
Motivated Person Perception Factors influencing our reactions to
others Other’s similarity to self Our prior experiences Our prior expectations Our beliefs about traits as stable or
malleable Our own emotional state or mood
Attribution Theory Attribution theory is the area of
psychology concerned with when and how people ask “why” questions. Heider (1958) argued that we have needs to
understand and to control the environment. These needs lead us to make attributions.
We are especially likely to make attributions when events are negative or unexpected.
Attribution Theory dispositional or internal
attributions Refer to traits, attitudes, enduring
internal states versus
situational or external attributions Refer to aspects of the external
environment, including other people
Attribution Theory Correspondent Inference Theory (Jones
and Davis [1965]) Assumes that we seek to make
“correspondent inferences” The behavior (e.g., rude) corresponds to an
underlying characteristic of the person (rude) We use information about the social context
to see if we can make a correspondent inference
Attribution Theory We tend to make a correspondent
inference when A behavior is not socially desirable A behavior is freely chosen A behavior has a “noncommon effect” A behavior is not part of a social role
Attribution Theory Noncommon Effects
A student is choosing between 3 colleges
You attribute their motive as the distinctive effect for that choiceHarvard UMass Amherst
MA MA MA
Large Large Small
Exceptional
Excellent Excellent
$$$$ $$ $$$$
Attribution Theory The Covariation Model (Kelley,
1967) says that people try to see if a particular cause and a particular effect go together across situations.
Attribution Theory Consistency
Is the person’s response consistent over time?
Consensus Do other people have similar
responses? Distinctiveness
Does the person respond similarly to other similar stimuli?
Attribution Theory
Distinctiveness Consensus Consistency Attribution
High—she didn’t laugh at anyone else
High—
everyone else laughed
High—she always laughs at him
Stimulus
Low—she always laughs at comedians
Low—hardly anyone else laughed
High—she always laughs at him
Person
High —she didn’t laugh at anyone else
Low—hardly anyone else laughed
Low—she rarely laughs at comedians
Context
Why did Mary laugh at the comedian?
Attribution Theory The discounting principle suggests
that we are less likely to attribute an effect to a particular cause if more than one cause is likely. E.g., if a salesperson is nice to us, we
don’t necessarily assume he or she is intrinsically friendly
Attribution Theory By and large, research findings
show that people’s inferences do follow the patterns described by the covariation and discounting principles
Attribution Theory Biases in the Attribution Process
Considerable research suggests that there are several prominent biases in the ways we make causal attributions
Attribution Theory Fundamental Attribution Error
We are more likely to attribute others’ behavior to their dispositions than to the situation they are in
Attribution Theory The fundamental attribution error
may occur because people make dispositional attributions automatically, and then only later use situational information to discount it. People don’t tend to get to the second
step unless the contextual information is very compelling or salient
Attribution Theory There are some cultural
differences in attributions. People in all cultures seem to share
the correspondence bias (tendency to infer behaviors as due to dispositions)
But people in non-Western cultures are more likely to take situational and contextual information into account
Attribution Theory The Actor-Observer Bias is that we
tend to attribute other people’s behavior to their dispositions but our own to situations (Jones & Nisbett, 1972) Perceptual: actors look at the situation,
observers look at actors Access to different information: actors
have more background about themselves
Attribution Theory False Consensus Effect
We tend to see our own behavior and opinions as typical. Why?
We have a biased sample of similar others among our friends
Our own opinions are more accessible/salient We fail to realize that our choices reflect our
construals and that others have different perceptions
We are motivated to see ourselves as normal & good.
Attribution Theory The Self-Serving Attributional Bias
We tend to take credit for our successes but deny blame for our failures
Attribution Theory The self-serving bias may actually be
quite adaptive. There is more evidence that people take
credit for their successes than that they deny responsibility for failures. People may accept responsibility for failure especially if it is a factor they can control.
The self-serving bias is more likely in casual than in close relationships.
Attribution Theory Where do Biases Come From?
Cognitive shortcuts in service of efficiency
Needs and motives (biases to enhance self-esteem and perceptions of control)
Accuracy of Judgments Our judgments are both accurate
and inaccurate. We tend to be accurate about
external visible attributes. We are less accurate about inferred
internal states (traits or feelings).
Accuracy of Judgments Why are people’s personalities difficult
to judge accurately? Lack of objective criteria People have idiosyncratic criteria for judging
others They agree more about likeability than about
traits Personality traits tend to predict behavior in
only a limited set of circumstances
Accuracy of Judgments People agree more about observable
traits than about less observable ones People agree more with the person’s
self-perception if they know a person well
People are more accurate if the target’s behavior is not overly variable
People are more accurate if they are outcome dependent on the target
Accuracy of Judgments We are fairly accurate in our
perception of others’ emotional states Facial expressions of emotions may
be part of our evolutionary heritage
Accuracy of Judgments Continuum of emotions
Happiness/Joy Surprise, Amazement Fear Sadness Anger Disgust, Contempt Interest, Attentiveness
We easily distinguish emotions that are at least three categories apart
Accuracy of Judgments Two dimensions of emotion:
Pleasantness Arousal
We easily distinguish pleasant from unpleasant emotions, and arousing emotions from non-arousing ones The pleasantness dimension is easiest
to distinguish
Nonverbal Communication Even small amounts of nonverbal
behavior can convey substantial information
Channels Visible
Facial expressions, gestures, posture, appearance Paralinguistic
Pitch, amplitude, rate, voice quality of speech
Nonverbal Communication The Visible Channel
Distance Indicates friendliness
Gestures Vary by culture
Eye Contact Indicates interest (friendship or threat)
Facial Expressions
Nonverbal Communication Paralanguage
Paralanguage involves variations in speech other than verbal content
A simple statement can mean entirely different things depending on emphasis and inflection
Nonverbal Communication The more channels of
communication people have access to, the more accurate they are in judging others’ emotions.
However, the verbal channel tends to be the most influential.
Nonverbal Communication Are people successful or
unsuccessful liars? True emotions tend to “leak” out
through nonverbal channels Some nonverbal channels leak
more than others because they are less controllable The body is more likely than the face
to reveal deception
Nonverbal Communication People are more likely to perceive
a deceptive message as less truthful, but on the whole, people are not wonderful lie-detectors
The Giveaways Liars blink more, hesitate more, make
more speech errors, speak in higher-pitched voices, and have more dilated pupils
Nonverbal Communication People use nonverbal behaviors to
convey intended impressions Display rules are cultural norms
regarding how one conveys emotion to others
Nonverbal Communication There are gender differences in the
use of nonverbal behavior. Girls and women are more expressive in
their display of most emotions and are more accurate interpreters of nonverbal cues
Women are better at communicating happiness; Men at communicating anger
Both nature and nurture seem to be involved.