Impression Formation I: Classic Approaches

Question 1

ASCH’S HOLISTIC MODEL

Answer 1

• immediate character impressions via first sight/some spoken words; tell highly complex story
• such impressions form w/high rapidity and ease

Question 2

ASCH’S PROCEDURE

Answer 2

• ie. never getting to make a second first impression
• Asch’s pps given trait word list:
  1. intelligent/industrious/impulsive/critical/stubborn/envious
  2. envious/stubborn/critical/impulsive/industrious/intelligent

Question 3

ASCH’S RESULTS

Answer 3

• pps formed a unified impression
• pps went beyond given info
• focus on order effects aka. first impressions primacy
• info in each list made dif resulting impressions (1 = competent/ambitious; 2 = overly emotional/socially maladjusted)
• aka. knock-on/primary effects

Question 4

PRIMARY EFFECTS STUDIES

Answer 4

ANDERSON & BARRIOS (1961)
- person described as positive first, then negative = more likeable
PARK (1986)
- naturalistic demo
- ascribed traits endure over time
JONES ET AL. (1968)
- order affects ability judgements
- IRL implications in recruitment settings (aka. how essays are marked)

Question 5

JONES ET AL (1968)

Answer 5

• pps looked at student performance folders =
  A. 10/15 correct; 5/15 correct = started good but faded
  B. 10/15 incorrect; 5/15 incorrect = started poor but improved
  C. control = correct/incorrect equally spread
• pps rated abilty/competence
• A rated higher than control; B = least competent

Question 6

TRAIT CENTRALITY & WARM VS COLD

Answer 6

• some traits are more important in impression shaping than others aka. Warm VS Cold study
• pps received:
  A. intelligent-skillful-industrious-warm-determined-practical-cautious
  B. intelligent-skillful-industrious-cold-determined-practical-cautious
  C. completed trait rating task
• A pps = target is generous/wise/happy/humorous
• B pps = target is opposite of As so…
  POLITE-BLUNT VS WARM-COLD = LESS IMPACT

Question 7

LECTURE IMPRESSION FORMATION

Answer 7

KELLEY (1950)
- gave student expectation A/B about guest lecturer
- trait rating task showed similar results
- pps > discuss is describes as warm VS cold (56% VS 32%)
WIDMEYER & LOY (1988)
- same expectancies but pps later rated on teaching ability
- warm = >effective/sociable/formal

Question 8

KEY POINTS

Answer 8

• central traits = expectancies -> influence new info interpretation

Question 9

IMPLICIT PERSONALITY THEORY

Answer 9

• some traits are more central than others
• we acquire assumptions about trait pairings/bad ideas aka. implicit theories about personality
  BRUNER & TAGIURI (1954)
• impressions influenced by general trait relationship rules (ie. positive + positive, negative + negative, etc)
  -> BIAS

Question 10

THE HALO EFFECT

Answer 10

• positive + positive trait bias
• ie. if you learn that someone is very honest, you assume they’re also generous/reliable etc.
• new info moulded to fit first impression
• ie. you see someone giving advice = helpful attribution over bossiness/interference
• same rule for negative impressions

Question 11

NISBETT & WILSON (1977)

Answer 11

• students watched videotape of prof expressing positive/negative attitudes
• pps seeing positives = positive appearance/NVC/accent ratings

Question 12

PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS

Answer 12

DION, BERSCHEID & WALSTER (1972)
- attractive people = >positive trait rating than “non-attractive” people
- attractive people = >in relationships/successful/high stat jobs/overall happier than others
- Eagly et al (1991) found similar more recent findings

Question 13

EXCEPTION: NOT ALL POSITIVES LIKE EACH OTHER

Answer 13

• traits have descriptive meanings that influence association
• ie. cautious/bold = both positive BUT imply opposite behs
• IPT influence by both evaluative/descriptive meaning

Question 14

IS ASCH STILL RELEVANT?

Answer 14

• primary effects in impression formation found in many newer studies
• BUT often delicate/prone to contextual factor contamination even when reversed

Question 15

SULLIVAN (2019)

Answer 15

• scrutinised staying power of primary effects
• attempted several Asch replications; 5 used new stimuli w/bigger samples

Question 16

PRAGMATIC SOLUTIONS: WHAT SHOULD I THINK?

Answer 16

• ie. “I just saw this woman give a talk and she was a real star!”
• obvs she’s not an astral body; go beyond semantics; look at holistic info to unpack meaning
• person’s intentions (ie. important stuff first; maybe we all emphasis value like this)
  GRICE (1975); WILSON & SPERBER (2004)
• communication principles; even arbitrary things ie. what order we say things always have purpose

Question 17

TESTING THE PRAGMATIC EXPLANATION

Answer 17

THINK
- ie. if it’s to do with inferencing speaker’s motives ->
1) compare w/non-speaker
2) computer
LOGIC
- if primacy effect only occurs in speaker condition, it may well be down to pragmatics

Question 18

STUDY EXAMPLE 1

Answer 18

• pps rated target job applicant on likeability/hireability
• order/source manipulated (from employer/randomly computer generated)
• no evidence of primary effects; no source difs (no pragmatic support)
• BUT important difs between studies found (ie. stimuli/design difs)

Question 19

LATER STUDIES

Answer 19

• mostly/all of Asch’s original materials used
• all = primary effects evidence BUT weaker than Asch’s; suggests contextual factors
• still no pragmatic explanation evidence (some studies showed PEs whether person/computer)
• file drawer effect = publication bias over-representing true PE extent
• no pragmatic explanation support = other more apt explanations (ie. Anderson’s (1963) attentional explanations; PE down to biased attention weighting)