Psych Exam #1/ Lecture #5/ Chp 5 (Impressions & Judgement) Flashcards
Self Presentation
refers to the ways in which we change, enhance, or emphasize aspects of the self
2 benefits of self-presentation
Social rewards, Identity rewards
Identity rewards
having others view us a certain way may help stabilize self-knowledge
Social Rewards
controlling how others see us may help us get dates, jobs, etc.
What impressions do we desire most in everyday life?
“Genuine” and Positive
“Genuine” Self Presentation
*most self-presentation is not very different from one’s own view of the self
Consistency or Self-verification motive
we want others to see us as we see the self, because it keeps expectations of other consistent with what we can do –social safety and security
Positive Self Presentation
most self-presentation also designed to show self as valuable (as defined in the culture), so will try to put “best face forward”
Self-enhancement motive
we want others to see us as positive, competent, and likable
Swann Study
Interact with two people, one who perceived your favorably but incorrectly, the other who perceives you accurately but unfavorable.
Self-Presentation
- Identity creation/ Self-construction
- Our self-presentation reflects our internal beliefs about ourselves (we may play up a particular aspect that we hold with pride/enhancement or certainty/verification)
- We may ‘display’ central aspects of self for that same reason (bumper stickers, T-shirts, coffee table books, style of dress, etc
- Self-presentation also may alter our internal, private beliefs –allow us to craft a new view of the self in the eyes of others and thus ourselves
Symbolic self-completion theory
- states that social validation is necessary to believing any aspect of the self
- Thus, people show symbols related to identity, discuss topics related to identity, etc. to have others validate it
When is symbolic self-completion likely to happen?
- New: e.g., new professors place diploma on wall, use “Dr” when referring to self more frequently than established, tenured professors
- Threatened: e.g., Wicklund & Gollwitzer guitarist study: Those told their personality profile was a mismatch to expert guitarists wanted to give guitar lessons more than those told their profiles matched.
- In both cases, if feel less like an expert, you present yourself to others in ways that make you appear more like an expert.
Who can self-presentation be for?
Self presentation can be for others (like when trying to make a good impression) OR for the self (when trying to strengthen a new or threatened aspect of self.
Social Perceivers
social perceivers are often “cognitive misers” –don’t put in much effort, but instead use shortcuts
sometimes shortcuts work
How fast can we form accurate impressions?
- Ambady’s “thin slice” research. 6 seconds of silent film–: teacher effectiveness; malpractice suits to surgeons; winning politicians
- Better at this type of impression when targets and perceivers are members of the same culture, and when behavior is unconstrained/naturalistic
What are impressions of others based upon?
- Information from TARGET
* Information processing by PERCEIVER
Information from TARGET
- Nonverbals –eye contact, smiling, body language. Interpretation of these may differ across cultures
- Appearance – attractiveness, facial structure, clothes
Information processing by PERCEIVER
- Category knowledge (i.e., stereotypes)
- Processing level: “Overthinking” may lead to less accuracy–fast impressions based on thin slices of data are one instance in which it is often better to use the automatic system rather than the conscious one
Target qualities
- Physical appearance: (automatic)
* Behaviors and speech (conscious)
Physical appearance
Facial features may sometimes be related to personality. partly due to heritability and partly to facial habits –thus faces better cues when older
Babyfacedness –warmth and protectiveness. Even extends to babyfaced animals.
Less blame in court cases, BUT also seen as less competent.
Attractive in females more than males –ryan vs emma
Behaviors and speech
(conscious)
more important when have longer time to form impressions and perceiver is motivated and processing
Perceivers: Who is better?
Women are better
: BUT seems to be motivation rather than ability – paying for accuracy wipes out differences
Further evidence of motivation’s impact:
People higher in “need to belong” or people who have been previously rejected (e.g., left out of a ball game) get better at social sensitivity measures. Automatic, but very adaptive in that if can understand the social world, can ‘fit into’ it better.
Perceiver Motivation
Choice between more category based (CB) vs more piecemeal (PM) processing
Categories
the big three: Sex, Race, Age –discerned automatically, also influence our judgments to be stereotype consistent
Expectancies
Halo effect: good with good/ bad with bad
“Sam kicks puppies” - does Sam also cheat at cards?
Sam kicks puppies= Sam is cruel (automatic trait inference) = bad
Cheating at cards? =dishonest =bad. Bad-Bad associated
trait transference
especially with strangers/initial impressions –what if Sam says “I dislike Mark for kicking a puppy” Then how do we feel about Sam?
Sam is a good person who disapproves of kicking puppies?
NOPE –”kicking puppies” gets associated with SAM
When will we use CB vs PM?
Good Mood, and Attention/Distraction= categorical
Outcome dependence= PM
Outcome dependence
Many studies show if you expect to be dependent on someone (you will be working with them in the future) – you will make the effort to use piecemeal, controlled processing – otherwise, automatic and categorical processing.
Power differences: those with less power in the relationship more piecemeal/effortful processing.
Ok, so we infer personality traits about people, but then what? How do traits combine?
*primacy effects, central traits, change of meaning
We tell a story and create a person, not just traits
Susan is kind and strict. . explain
Segregation – kind at home, strict at work
Depth –appears strict, but really kind
Cause/effect –kind so must be strict protection
Means/end – kind can act strict for goal (charity)
Common source – Puritan upbringing
counterregulation
the “what the heck” effect that occurs when people indulge in a behavior they are trying to regulate after an initial regulation failure
attributions
the causal explanations people give for their own and others’ behaviors, and for events in general
self-serving bias
the tendency to take credit for success but deny blame for failure; or internal attributions for success, external attributions for failure.
actor/observer bias
the tendency for actors to make external attributions and observers to make internal attributions
fundamental attribution error (correspondence bias)
the tendency for observers to attribute other people’s behavior to internal or dispositional causes and to downplay situational causes
heuristics
mental shortcuts that provide quick estimates about the likelihood of uncertain events
representativeness heuristic
the tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by the extent to which it resembles the typical case
availability heuristic
the tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by the ease with which relevant instances come to mind
simulation heuristic
the tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by the ease with which you can imagine (or mentally simulate) it
anchoring and adjustment
the tendency to judge the frequency or likelihood of an event by using a starting point (called an anchor) and then making adjustments up or down.
illusory correlation
the tendency to overestimate the link between variables that are related only slightly or not at all
confirmation bias
the tendency to notice and search for information that confirms one’s beliefs and to ignore information that disconfirms one’s beliefs
one-shot illusory correlation
an illusory correlation that occurs after exposure to only one unusual behavior performed by only one member of an unfamiliar group
base rate fallacy
the tendency to ignore or underuse base rate information and instead to be influenced by the distinctive features of the case being judged
hot hand
the tendency for gamblers who get lucky to think they have a “hot” hand and their luck will continue
gambler’s fallacy
the tendency to believe that a particular chance event is affected by previous events and that chance events will “even out” in the short run
false consensus effect
the tendency to overestimate the number of other people who share one’s opinions, attitudes, values, and beliefs
false uniqueness effect
the tendency to underestimate the number of other people who share one’s most prized characteristics and abilities
theory perseverance
proposes that
are more likely to think about the bad exceptions than about the good exceptions.
statistical regression (regression to the mean)
the statistical tendency for extreme scores or extreme behavior to be followed by others that are less extreme and closer to average
illusion of control
the false belief that one can influence certain events, especially random or chance ones
counterfactual thinking
imagining alternatives to past or present events or circumstances
first instinct fallacy
the false belief that it is better not to change one’s first answer on a test even if one starts to think that a different answer is correct
upward counterfactuals
imagining alternatives that are better than actuality
downward counterfactuals
imagining alternatives that are worse than actuality
