Perceiving Others: Impression Formation and Attribution

Perceiving Others
social cognition: content and process explicitly talking about perceiving other people in our world

Perceiving Others
Why is it important to understand others in our social world?
we are interdependent, social beings getting ahead, getting along accurate predictions

Perceiving Others
What are other people like?
impression formation

What are other people likely to do?

attribution

Impression Formation
How do we make initial judgments of others? What sorts of information do we use?
Note: We often form impressions rather quickly, sometimes without any direct evidence.

Impression Formation
What are the raw materials?
some questions about Austin:
How old is he? Gender? Marital status? What is his favorite leisure time activity?

Impression Formation
What are the raw materials?
some questions about Austin:
Is he intelligent? Extraverted? Friendly? Dishonest?

Impression Formation
observations
visible cues
age, gender, marital status

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
one of the most powerful influences on our initial impressions of others Physical beauty is the sign of an interior beauty, a spiritual and moral beauty.
Johann Schiller

what-is-beautiful-is-good stereotype (Dion,

Berscheid, & Walster, 1972)

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
rate the ability of alleged VPs based on photos 2 (attractiveness) X 2 (gender) ratings of ability

(Heilman & Stropek, 1985)

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
rate the ability of alleged VPs based on photos 2 (attractiveness) X 2 (gender) ratings of ability more attractive man = higher in ability less attractive woman = higher in ability

(Heilman & Stropek, 1985)

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
more attractive man = higher in ability less attractive woman = higher in ability
Why?

(Heilman & Stropek, 1985)

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
more attractive man = higher in ability less attractive woman = higher in ability
women more likely to get ahead based on appearance, less likely to occur that way for men

(Heilman & Stropek, 1985)

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
physically attractive defendants charged with misdemeanor offenses get lower bail settings than do less attractive defendants professional men 62 and over get starting salaries 10% higher than shorter men

Impression Formation
physical attractiveness
physical appearance (e.g., height, beauty) exerts a powerful influence on our impressions of others

Impression Formation
observations
behavior
Has Austin been friendly so far? Does he seem to be extraverted?

Impression Formation
implicit personality theories
what characteristics go together
If you said friendly, did you not say dishonest?

Impression Formation
implicit personality theories
once we make assumptions based on one trait (e.g., friendly), we use our IPT to draw conclusions about other traits (e.g., honest)

Impression Formation
implicit personality theories
some traits more central, thus more descriptive
e.g., hostile vs. tidy

central traits more powerful when forming impressions

e.g., Kelleys warm/cold variables

Impression Formation
stereotypes
intelligent? leisure time activities?

Impression Formation
stereotypes
would typically say intelligent would say reading, but perhaps not sports would probably not say dishonest, but dont know

reliance on schemas and heuristics can be problematic

Problems with Impression Formation

reliance on schemas and heuristics can be problematic over-reliance on first impressions

Problems with Impression Formation

reliance on schemas and heuristics can be problematic over-reliance on first impressions actor/observer differences
focus on dispositional, not situational, cues

Problems with Impression Formation

reliance on schemas and heuristics can be problematic over-reliance on first impressions actor/observer differences expectancies can influence behaviors
e.g., Word, Zanna, & Cooper (1974)

Problems with Impression Formation

expectancies can influence behaviors
What is the non-verbal behavior of whites when they interact with African-Americans? hypothesis: attitudes influence non-verbal behavior immediacy behaviors: orient ourselves closer, maintain eye contact, and lean forward while interacting
(Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

Problems with Impression Formation

expectancies can influence behaviors
white male participants: interviews with another white male or an African-American male told they were to select a teammate for a subsequent, competitive task

(Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

Problems with Impression Formation

expectancies can influence behaviors
when interviewing an African-American:
sat further away shorter interviews more speech errors fewer immediacy behaviors

(Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

Problems with Impression Formation

expectancies can influence behaviors
second experiment:
confederate interviewer interviewees: white male participants immediacy behaviors: few or many

(Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

Problems with Impression Formation

expectancies can influence behaviors
when treated with fewer immediacy behaviors (i.e., like the African-Americans), they were rated:
less competent less composed liked less also, they liked the interviewer less

(Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

Problems with Impression Formation

expectancies can influence behaviors
There are real, and potentially harmful, social effects of our impressions of others. Our expectations can influence our verbal and nonverbal behaviors in ways that may elicit the very characteristics we expected.

(Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly)

Target Person

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly)

Target Person

2. ambiguous behavior (could be friendly)

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly) 3. expectation strengthened by perceptual confirmation

Target Person

2. ambiguous behavior (could be friendly)

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly) 3. expectation strengthened by perceptual confirmation 4. biased hypothesis testing (e.g., warm, friendly overtures)

Target Person

2. ambiguous behavior (could be friendly)

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly) 3. expectation strengthened by perceptual confirmation 4. biased hypothesis testing (e.g., warm, friendly overtures)

Target Person

2. ambiguous behavior (could be friendly)

confirmation bias

5. expectationconsistent response

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly) 3. expectation strengthened by perceptual confirmation 4. biased hypothesis testing (e.g., warm, friendly overtures)

Target Person

2. ambiguous behavior (could be friendly)

confirmation bias

5. expectationconsistent response 6. expectation further strengthened by behavioral confirmation (fundamental

attribution error)

Perceiver 1. tentative expectation (e.g., friendly) 3. expectation strengthened by perceptual confirmation 4. biased hypothesis testing (e.g., warm, friendly overtures)

Target Person

2. ambiguous behavior (could be friendly)

confirmation bias

5. expectationconsistent response 6. expectation further strengthened by behavioral confirmation (fundamental

attribution error)

7. self-concept change?

Overall Evaluations
we rely on different types of information
e.g., physical appearance, verbal and nonverbal behavior, implicit personality theories

How do we organize the information into an overall evaluation of the person?

Overall Evaluations
two schools of thought
cognitive algebra
evaluate first, then integrate based on weights assigned to individual traits
e.g., practical (.25) + mean (.75)

bottom-up process

Overall Evaluations
two schools of thought
holistic impressions (Gestalt)
integrate first, then evaluate the person
e.g., implicit personality theories

top-down process

Nonverbal Behavior
A World of Gestures

Attribution
What are people like?
impression formation

What are people likely to do?

attribution

Attribution
attribution theory: a group of theories that describe how people explain the causes of behavior
Why do people behave the way that they do? What are they likely to do in the future?

Attribution
types of attributions
personal attributions -- internal situational attributions -- external

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory (Jones & Davis,
1965)

Kelleys covariation model (Kelley, 1972)

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory
we are best able to make inferences about a persons underlying disposition (e.g., trait, attitude, intent) when actions are freely chosen and unexpected

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory
1. Is the behavior freely chosen? 2. Is the behavior expected? 3. What are the intended effects?

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory
expectedness freely chosen

high high
trivial ambiguity

low

intended effects

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory
expectedness freely chosen

high high
trivial ambiguity

low
intriguing ambiguity

intended effects

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory
expectedness freely chosen

high high
trivial ambiguity trivial clarity

low
intriguing ambiguity

intended effects

Two Theories of Attribution

correspondence inference theory
expectedness freely chosen

high high
trivial ambiguity trivial clarity

low
intriguing ambiguity
correspondent inference

intended effects

only here that behavior should be taken at face value

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
start with a behavior
your friend recommends a movie

figure out the reason for the behavior

Is it something about the movie? Is it something about your friend? Is it something unpredictable?

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
gather information
Do other people recommend the movie? Does your friend still recommend the movie when you ask a week later? Does your friend recommend all movies?

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
three types of information: CONSENSUS
Do other people react/behave the same way? Do other people recommend the movie?

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
three types of information: CONSISTENCY
Is the persons reaction/behavior the same over time? Does your friend still recommend the movie when you ask a week later?

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
three types of information: DISTINCTIVENESS
Does the other person react/behave the same way with other stimuli? Does your friend recommend all movies?

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
Is it something about the movie (i.e., external)?
high consensus: other people recommend high consistency: recommendation holds over time high distinctiveness: doesnt recommend all movies

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
Is it something about your friend (i.e., internal)?
low consensus: only your friend recommends it high consistency: recommendation holds over time low distinctiveness: recommends all movies

Two Theories of Attribution

Kelleys covariation model
What if consistency is low?
attribution that something unusual is going on

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error: the tendency to overestimate a persons dispositional factors and underestimate the situational factors when explaining their behavior
What if I had been late for the first day of class?

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error
Is Alex Trebek intelligent? Why?

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error
staged a quiz show questioner, contestant, or spectator questioner: write 10 challenging questions
e.g., Which team won the Stanley Cup in 1968? Who was the first governor of Idaho?

(Ross, Amabile, & Steinmetz, 1977)

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error
staged a quiz show questioner, contestant, or spectator contestants: attempted to answer the questions
about 40% correctly

(Ross, Amabile, & Steinmetz, 1977)

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error
staged a quiz show questioner, contestant, or spectator all participants: ratings of contestants and questioners general knowledge on a scale of 0100

(Ross, Amabile, & Steinmetz, 1977)

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error
staged a quiz show questioner, contestant, or spectator spectators: rated the questioners above average and contestants below average in general knowledge even contestants rated themselves lower than the questioners

(Ross, Amabile, & Steinmetz, 1977)

Problems with Attribution

fundamental attribution error
may not be universal (Morris & Peng, 1994)
explanation for mass murders American newspapers vs. Chinese newspapers

Problems with Attribution

actor/observer effect
an extension of the FAE others behavior: dispositional attributions own behavior: situational attributions

Problems with Attribution

self-serving biases
locate the causality of the behavior in the place that most benefits us

Problems with Attribution

These players played great all year, their best in the big games and they deserve it, they really deserve it.
Bill Belichick, coach New England Patriots

Problems with Attribution

Theyre an elite team. We played sloppy, but they made us play sloppy at times.
Terrell Owens, wide receiver Philadelphia Eagles

Problems with Attribution

self-serving biases
basking-in-reflected-glory (BIRG): increasing our self-esteem by associating with others who are successful

Problems with Attribution

self-serving biases
basking-in-reflected-glory (BIRG) cut-off-reflected-failure (CORF): maintaining our self-esteem by cutting off or denying our association with others who have failed

Problems with Attribution

self-serving biases
basking-in-reflected-glory (BIRG) cut-off-reflected-failure (CORF)
Cialdini et al. Study 1: number of students who wore school paraphernalia (e.g., sweatshirts) after football games Study 2: called students after football games to ask what they remembered about the game

Conclusion
we rely on different types of information when forming impressions of others attributions help us to understand and explain why people do what they do attributions can also be flawed
egocentric cultural influences

Next Time
the social self: how the self-concept is influenced by our social world