lecture 2 social perception Flashcards
how do facial features influence first impressions
first thing we see when we perceive someone
have a schema of what it looks like to be nice/trustworthy
changes in face shape impacts someones impressions (not always correct)
hold schemas about what someone with certain characteristics might look like
describe willis and todrov facial features and first impressions
participants judge faces for different traits with varied presentation time
compared with judgement under no time constraint
- influence in judgement does not change - first impressions appear to be rigid and automatic
what is non verbal behaviour
unintentional behaviours which communicate opinions/attitudes towards someone without meaning to ie facial expressions, body language, eye contact, personal space and tone of voice
can be culturally specific - depends on what behaviours are socially acceptable to be expressed
interpret NVs based on our expectations of the situation
what are the 6 universally expressed and recognised facial expressions
ekmon et al 1975
anger fear disgust happy sad suprise high agreement across cultures about what these facial expressions represent/mean
attribution theory
heider 1958
variation in the extent that feel need to explain human behaviour - based on context
-personal attribution
- situational attribution
focus of behaviour on intentionality to perform
kelley 1971 covariation theory
situational and personal attributions are made based on the covariation principle
- people are naive scientists and attribute based on 3 questions
1- consensus
2- distinctiveness
3- consistency
what attributions are people likely to make based on the covariation principle
stranger likes film
personal attribution -
-low consensus (no one else rave about film)
-low distinctiveness (stranger likes many films)
-high consistency (stranger always likes films)
situational attribution -
- high consensus (many others like film)
- high distinctiveness (stanger doesnt like other films)
- high consistency (always likes this film)
problem with attribution theory and covariation principle
do we really follow all these steps?
what about errors in judgement?
describe ross amabile and steinmetz 1975 attribution errors
simulated quiz game where they were randomly assigned to the roles of either questioner or contestant. role of questioner or contestant was randomly allocated to one person in each pair - questionner make own qs
Twenty-four observers watched
what is fundamental attribution error
ross 1977
when explaining behaviour we overestimate the role of personal factors and overlook the situation
BUT also have a tendency to attribute situational factors to our own behaviour as opposed to personal ones
what is actor observer bias
tendency to overlook personal attributions and apply situational attributions to our own behaviour
taylor and fiske 1975 perceptual salience in fundamental attribution error
observers of two confederates having a discussion
diff seating give diff views of confederates
both confederates contribute equally and give fair opinions
observers facing a say actor a more role in discussion and vise versa
underestimate context and when see only certain aspects of behaviour form a bias opinion
cognitive causes of attribution error
perceptual saliency of information and availability
thinking style also influence ie aisan cultures have hollistic thought style that prevents fundamental attribution errors
motivational causes of attribution error
when improve self esteem and self presentation motives - peronally attribute success but situationally attribute failure
what defensive biases can occur in attribution error
have need for control when hear bad things that happen
- just cause in just world - good happens to good people and bad to bad peopel
- victim blaming - attribute to other persons control therefore what happened to them wont happen to you and have ability to prevent
mind perception
recognise others have agency and experience
dehumanisation
representing humans as non human objects or animals and denying them of having thought or emotion
- often in war in propaganda ie nazi call jew ‘rats’
means of self justification of the other group as enemy and able to treat inhumanely
anthropomorphism
representation of non human agents as humans
ie attributing humans emotions to animals
motivated by a need to conntect with and understand the world
how is primacy used in social experiments
see how information presented can influence impressions that people make
ie list of words begin positive but become negative
- impression positive as first words positive
higgins ‘1977 donald’ primacy and priming
memorise unrelated words in verbal task either mostly positive or mostly negative
read description of donald (ambiguous)
- pos prime increase pisitive impression
how do central traits influence perception of peripheral traits
central traits - view person as warm/cold
- therefore assume if warm more generous etc
self fulfilling prophecy
have a tendency to seek/interpret/create info that verifies existing beliefs - expectations about a person lead them to behave in such a way that the expectations are confirmed
trope 2000 who do we judge as being kind
photos of people who have round faces, long eyelashes, bug eyes and an upturned mouth
judge as kind > mean
types of NVBs
facial expressions ie smiling/frowning body langage ie approach/avoidance eye contact and gaze personal space and physical touch tone of voice
describe different interpretations of eye contact
frequent gazing infers intimact and high self concept/confidence
staring infers dominance and tension
avoiding eye contact infers anxiousness and low self concept
how might physical touch determine dominance
henly 1977
men, older people and people of higher SES are more likely to instigate physical contact with women, younger individals and low SES groups
thought to imply dominance
is NVB innate
no
change over cultures
ie bulgaria shake head for yes and nod for no
elbefein and nalini 2002 universal facial expressions and cultural differences
all cultures can recognise these expressions
BUT better at recognising in people of same nationality/ethnicity
why might we have universal expressions?
fox et al 2002
adaptive mechanism that allows us all to react effectively to others
ie quicker to pick an angry face our of a crowd and harder to stop looking - able to recognise possible threat stimuli quickly
attribution theory heider 1958 Personal Attribution
behaviour that is intentional and due to own characteristics
ie explain by reference to their character - “theyre not a nice person”
attribution theory heider 1958 situational attribution
behaviour not due to self but because of external/contextual factors
ie explain by reference to the context - “theyre having a bad day”
Kelley 1971 covariation principle CONSENSUS
- how are other people reacting to this
kelley 1971 covariation principle DISTINCTIVENESS
person react the same or differently to other stimuli
kelley 1971 covariation principle CONSISTENCY
is the persons reaction consistent over time
results ross amabile and steinmetz 1975 attribution errors
contestants and observers rate the questionner as more knowledgable than the contestant even though unlikely - just know the answers to their own questions
make false attributions based on the individuals role in the situation
gilbert and malone 1995 perceptual salience in fundamental attribution errors
errors due to how we attribute
1 . identify the behaviour and make quick attribution
2. put in cog effort and account for the situation
cultural differences in fundamental attribution errors
markus et al 2006
differ in what we focus on as a culture
USA highlight athletes personal attributes in success
Japan highlight context and coaching
fundamentals more common in western > aisan cultures
motivational causes of attribution error
alicke and largo 1995
more likely to percieve own behaviour as socially appropriate and acceptable but less so for other people
mind perception AGENCY
capacity for planning, intention and goals
Mind Perception EXPERIENCE
Capacity for feeling, emotion and desire
Asch 1956 primacy effect on impressions
pps read words describing a person either initially positive or negative
those who eas pos more likely to view a pos and neg as neg
what are the different influences on impression formation
primacy effect
central traits
priming
imlicit personality theories
define confirmation bias
tend to seek interpret and create information that coincides with our existing beliefs
ie self fulfilling procphecy
reducing bias
awareness
knowing about implicit bias and its potentially harmful effects on judgment and behavior may prompt individuals to pursue corrective action (cf. Green, Carney, Pallin, Ngo, Raymond, Iezzoni, & Banaji,
2007).
Although awareness of implicit bias in and of itself is not sufficient to ensure that effective debiasing efforts take place (Kim, 2003), it is a crucial starting point that may prompt individuals to seek out and implement the types of strategies to prevent
