1. Person Perception: Forming Impressions of Others
Chapter 2
Person Perception: Forming Impressions of Others

2. Six General Principles
minimal information
salience
context
categorization
enduring cognitive structures
needs and goals

3. What Information Do We Use?
People often decide very quickly what others are like based on minimal information.

4. What Information Do We Use?
Roles
People tend to think of others within a role context first and only then according to personality traits

5. What Information Do We Use?
Physical Cues
Appearance and behavior are key determinants of our first impressions

6. 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

7. What Information Do We Use?
Effects of Salience
Draws attention
Influences perceptions of causality
Produces evaluatively extreme judgments
Produce more consistency of judgment

8. 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

9. What Information Do We Use?
Which Traits?
We tend to evaluate others along two dimensions:
Competence
Interpersonal qualities

10. 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)

11. What Information Do We Use?
Categorization
We automatically perceive stimuli as part of a group or category

12. What Information Do We Use?
Consequences of Categorization
leads to category-based social judgments (stereotyping)
speeds processing time
can lead to errors

13. What Information Do We Use?
The Continuum Model of Impression Formation
Impressions range from stereotypic, category-based impressions to individuated impressions (dual processing)

14. 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

15. 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)

16. 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

17. Integrating Impressions
We move quickly from observations of appearance and behavior to inferences about personality

18. 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

19. Integrating Impressions
We infer what others are like from what emotions they express

20. 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

21. Integrating Impressions
Our perceptions of others’ personal qualities undergoes a shift of meaning depending on context

22. Integrating Impressions
People tend to form evaluatively consistent impressions of others (halo effect)

23. 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

24. Integrating Impressions
Schemas are organized, structured sets of cognitions including knowledge about the object, relationships among its attributes, and specific examples

25. Integrating Impressions
Schemas
Person schemas
Role schemas
Group schemas (stereotypes)

26. Integrating Impressions
Schemas
Prototypes are the abstract ideal of a schema
Exemplars are particular instances of a category

27. 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

28. Motivated Person Perception
Our goals and feelings about other people influence the information we gather about them

29. 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

30. Motivated Person Perception
Communicating information about another leads to more evaluatively consistent impressions

31. Motivated Person Perception
When we are preoccupied we are more likely to make trait inferences

32. 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

33. 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.

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. Attribution Theory Noncommon Effects
A student is choosing between 3 colleges
You attribute their motive as the distinctive effect for that choice
Harvard
UMass
Amherst MA
Large
Small
Exceptional
Excellent
$$$$ $$

38. 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.

39. Attribution Theory Consistency Consensus Distinctiveness
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?

40. Attribution Theory High—she didn’t laugh at anyone else High—
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

41. 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

42. Attribution Theory
By and large, research findings show that people’s inferences do follow the patterns described by the covariation and discounting principles

43. Attribution Theory Biases in the Attribution Process
Considerable research suggests that there are several prominent biases in the ways we make causal attributions

44. Attribution Theory Fundamental Attribution Error
We are more likely to attribute others’ behavior to their dispositions than to the situation they are in

45. 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

46. 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

47. 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

48. 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.

49. Attribution Theory The Self-Serving Attributional Bias
We tend to take credit for our successes but deny blame for our failures

50. 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.

51. 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)

52. 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).

53. 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

54. 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

55. 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

56. 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

57. 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

58. 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

59. Nonverbal Communication
The Visible Channel
Distance
Indicates friendliness
Gestures
Vary by culture
Eye Contact
Indicates interest (friendship or threat)
Facial Expressions

60. 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

61. 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.

62. 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

63. 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

64. Nonverbal Communication
People use nonverbal behaviors to convey intended impressions
Display rules are cultural norms regarding how one conveys emotion to others

65. 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.