1. The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction
Antu Schamberger and Julia Fehrenbach
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

2. VIDEO CLIP

3. The Study’s Objective
Determined whether it occurred at greater than chance levels
To test whether it occurred among strangers when no affiliation goal was operating
Manipulate mannerisms and behaviors of interaction partners, while having confederates so that they could also determine the direction of causality
To test for a chameleon type change in behavior as a function of the behavior of the current interaction partner
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

4. Major terms of study
Chameleon Effect: unconscious mimicry of the posture, mannerisms and facial expressions of one’s interaction partner
Principle of Ideomotor Action: states that simply thinking about a behavior increase the tendency to engage in that behavior
Facial Mimicry - has been focused on neonates’ mimicry of adult facial expressions
Behavior Matching - occurs when people mimic behavior patterns by adopting similar postures and body configurations
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

5. Experiment 1
Students participated in two sessions. Session 1 consisted of a ten minute interaction with one other participant that was a confederate (C1). During the session they took turns describing various photographs. Then in session 2 the participant repeated the task with a second confederate (C2)
There were thirty-nine male and female students
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

6. Experiment 2
Students participated in one 15 minutes session with a confederate. During the session they both described photographs. The confederates either mirrored the behavioral mannerisms of the participants (mimicry condition) or where neutral towards the participants (control condition). When the session was over the participants where asked to fill a questionnaire that asked them first, to report on how much they liked the confederate and second, how smoothly the interaction had gone
There were seventy-eight students that participated
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

7. Experiment 3
After the session of describing photographs the participant was asked to fill out a Davis’ Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) questionnaire. The IRI includes a subscale for empathic concern, which represents the emotional concern for others facet of empathy. Some sample items include, “When I’m upset at someone, I usually try to put myself in his/her shoes’ for a while.”
There were fifty-five students that participated
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

8. Results: Experiment 1
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

9. Results: Experiment 2
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

10. Results: Experiment 3
The results supported the hypothesis that those who have a higher perspective tendency are more likely to engage in mimicry behavioral activity.
When examining empathetic concern, discovered that there was no main effect of empathetic concern across the two types of mimicking, F < 1, nor was there an interaction between empathetic concern and type of behavior (face rubbing vs. foot shaking), F < 1.
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

11. Discussion

12. Critical Review: Interesting and Informative
People who are high perceiver takers are more likely to engage in non-conscious mimicry behaviors more often. The article suggests that this is do to people with higher social perception have greater skills in social interaction.
People who had a more smooth interaction and liked the confederate more tended to mimic the bodily movements and behaviors more frequently. The people that did not think the interaction was smooth or did not find the confederate likable tended to mimic the other person less often.
Mimicry is a mechanism for learning to adapt and succeed in environments. The article stressed how evolutionary it is beneficial to mimic people who have survival skills. Not only is the behavior demonstrated by infants, but is continued throughout ones lifespan nonconsciously.
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

13. Critical Review: Concerns of Article
The article’s beginning focus was primarily other researchers studies and less about their own experiment and potential findings.
The discussion did not extrapolate on other potential research projects to further examine their hypothesis. They did not suggest ways to make their study stronger or were inviting of other research to continue the study.
The sample was psychology students from NYU that had to do for course requirement. From an evolutionary standpoint, the study could be more representative of the general United States population. For future studies, a potential experiment would also examine cross-cultural behaviors.
Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The Chameleon Effect: The Perception-Behavior Link and Social Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,

14. Test Questions
1.What were three mechanisms that the confederates used in the study when talking to the participants?
a) shaking of the foot, scratching of the face, smiling
b) shaking of the foot, rubbing of the face, smiling
c) tapping on the desk, crossing arms, scratching of the face
d) tapping on the desk, scratching of the face, rubbing the face
2.What were the confederates and participants describing to each other?
a) photos
b) colors
c) shapes
d) paintings

15. Test Questions 3.What is the chameleon effect?
a) conscious mimicry of mannerisms and facial expressions of one’s interaction partner
b) unconscious mimicry of mannerisms and facial expressions of one’s interaction partner
c) understanding what the other individual is thinking
d) desiring the other person to approve of you
1. Were all three experiments hypothesis found to be true?
True/False
2. Mimicry does not cause greater liking or smoothness of social interaction?
3. There was a significant main effect of empathetic concern across the two mimicking behaviors.