Person Perception: Forming Impressions of Others Chapter 2 Person Perception: Forming Impressions of Others Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall

Six General Principles Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Six General Principles People form impressions of others: Quickly and with minimal information Pay attention to salience features Context of person’s behavior Categorizing or grouping stimuli Our enduring cognitive structures Perceiver’s own needs and goals

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall What Information Do We Use? People often decide very quickly what others are like based on minimal information.

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall What Information Do We Use? Physical Cues Appearance and behavior are key determinants of our first impressions

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall What Information Do We Use? Salience People pay attention to stimuli that stand out against a background The most salient cues are stand out: Brightness, noisiness, motion, and novelty

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Theory: beliefs about which personality traits go with other traits

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall What Information Do We Use? Categorization We tend to perceive people as members of groups or categories rather than as distinct individuals Consequences of categorizing people stereotyping can lead to errors

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall What Information Do We Use? The Continuum Model of Impression Formation Impressions range from stereotypical, category-based impressions to much more individuated impressions Individuated impression processing is called dual processing, where people process information in a careful, systematic fashion

What Information Do We Use? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall What Information Do We Use? Context Effects Contrast biases refer to a biasing effect on judgments away from the environmental context (sees communicator’s position as different) Assimilation biases refer to biasing of a judgment in the same direction as the context (sees communicator’s position as similar)

Integrating Impressions Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Integrating Impressions We move quickly from observations of appearance and behavior to inferences about personality 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Integrating Impressions We infer what others are like from what emotions they express

Integrating Impressions Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Integrating Impressions Our perceptions of others’ personal qualities undergoes a shift of meaning depending on context

Integrating Impressions Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Integrating Impressions Halo Effect: A liked person is assumed to have many other good qualities. People tend to form evaluatively consistent impressions of others.

Integrating Impressions Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Integrating Impressions Schemas are organized, structured sets of cognitions, including: knowledge about the object, relationships among its attributes, and specific examples

Integrating Impressions Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Integrating Impressions Schemas Stereotypes are beliefs about typical characteristics of members of a group or social category Prototypes are the abstract ideal of a schema Exemplars are particular instances of a category

Motivated Person Perception Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Motivated Person Perception Our goals and feelings about other people influence the information we gather about them 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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

Taylor, 2006, Prentice Hall 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 (internal) Attributions Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory Dispositional (internal) Attributions Refer to traits, attitudes, enduring internal states versus Situational (external) Attributions Refer to aspects of the external environment, including other people

Attribution Theory Correspondent Inference Theory Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 “non-common effect” A behavior is not part of a social role

Attribution Theory Noncommon Effects Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory Noncommon Effects For example, if you are choosing between two graduate school programs that are equally reputable, both at good universities and both offer a stipend, You choose the one with an internship; one might infer that the additional training is important to you

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory Kelley’s Covariation Model (1967) states that people try to see if a particular cause and a particular effect go together across situations.

Attribution Theory Consistency Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 High—she didn’t laugh at anyone else High— Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory Why did Mary laugh at the comedian? 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 Person High —she didn’t laugh at anyone else Low—she rarely laughs at comedians Context

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Biases in the Attribution Process Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory Biases in the Attribution Process Considerable research suggests that there are several prominent biases in the ways we make causal attributions Fundamental Attribution Error: people tend to overestimate how much a person’s actions are due to dispositions, such as personality, rather than, for example, the situation

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory Actor-Observer Bias suggests that observers overestimate the importance of an actor’s dispositions for causing the actor’s behavior; actors overestimate the importance of the situation in explaining their own behaviors 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory False Consensus Effect Why do we tend to see our own behavior and opinions as typical? 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Attribution Theory The Self-Serving Attributional Bias We tend to take credit for our successes but deny blame for our failures Although, people may accept responsibility for failure especially if it is a factor they can control.

Attribution Theory Where do Biases Come From? Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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. Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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).

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Pragmatic Accuracy: knowing enough about Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Accuracy of Judgments Pragmatic Accuracy: knowing enough about a person to achieve one’s relationship goals. For example, romantic partners are fairly accurate about each other on personal qualities that are relevant to the relationship Thus, pragmatic accuracy need not be terribly accurate

Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 Universal continuum of emotions Happiness/Joy Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Accuracy of Judgments Universal 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Accuracy of Judgments Two dimensions of emotion: Pleasantness Arousal We easily distinguish pleasant from unpleasant emotions, as well as arousing emotions from non-arousing ones The pleasantness dimension is easiest to distinguish

Nonverbal Communication Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Nonverbal Communication Body Language 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Nonverbal Communication The Visible Channel Distance Indicates friendliness Gestures Vary by culture Eye Contact [not made in some cultures] Indicates interest (friendship or threat) Facial Expressions

Nonverbal Communication Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Nonverbal Communication Paralanguage: information conveyed by speech other than words, such as pitch Paralanguage involves variations in speech other than verbal content A simple statement can mean entirely different things depending on emphasis and inflection

Nonverbal Communication Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Nonverbal Communication People, who have access to multiple channels of communication, tend to be more accurate in judging others’ emotions. Generally, the verbal channel tends to be the most influential.

Nonverbal Communication Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Nonverbal Communication The problem of deception: Are people successful or unsuccessful liars? Nonverbal leakage: 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall Nonverbal Communication Lying: 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 Taylor, Copyright 2006, Prentice Hall 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 than men are Women are better at communicating happiness; Men at communicating anger Both nature and nurture And culture seem to be involved