lecture 2 social perception Flashcards by Annabel Neller

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

problem with attribution theory and covariation principle

do we really follow all these steps?

what about errors in judgement?

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

what is actor observer bias

tendency to overlook personal attributions and apply situational attributions to our own behaviour

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

motivational causes of attribution error

when improve self esteem and self presentation motives - peronally attribute success but situationally attribute failure

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

mind perception

recognise others have agency and experience

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

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