The Relationship Between Rorschach Responses and Attitudes Toward Parents

Effects of self-ideal discrepancy and favorability of content on subjects' acceptance of personality interpretations were studied. Subjects accepted more favorable than neutral statements and more neutral than unfavorable statements. A significant effect was found for self-ideal discrepancy and for the interaction between self-ideal discrepancy and content favorability. In contrast to moderate and low discrepancy subjects, high discrepancy subjects accepted more of the interpretations, accepted more unfavorable, and rejected more favorable interpretations. High discrepancy subjects also accepted more neutral interpretations than did low discrepancy subjects. High discrepancy subjects expected to receive more negative feedback than low discrepancy subjects, and also interpreted this feedback more negatively than did low discrepancy subjects, while scores for the moderate discrepancy subjects were consistently between these two groups.     

Self-esteem and cognitive consistency effects on self-other evaluation

Reactions to bogus evaluations of one's self, either positively or negatively discrepant from one's own self-evaluation, were investigated among subjects differing in self-ideal discrepancy. All subjects exhibited greater acceptance of the source of favorable information than the source of unfavorable information, and changed their self-evaluation more toward the favorable than unfavorable position. However, among low self-ideal discrepancy subjects, the change in self-evaluation was accompanied by a similar change in friend evaluation, thereby maintaining their standing in relation to this friend after receiving either positive or negative evaluations. In contrast, high discrepancy subjects downgraded the friend more and upgraded the friend less than themselves, thereby enhancing their relative standing as a result of the feedback. These findings indicated that defensive or self-enhancing effects on self-evaluation processes are determined by self-ideal discrepancy.     

Cognitive dissonance as a function of self-esteem and logical inconsistency

An experiment was conducted to test the importance of self-esteem in the arousal of cognitive dissonance. Recently, Aronson (1969) suggested that the reason an attitude-discrepant speech can arouse dissonance is that it is an indecent act committed by an individual who likes to think of himself as a good and decent person. Looking at counterattitudinal behavior as a discrepancy with one's self-concept rather than as a logical discrepancy between behavioral and attitudinal cognitions differs from Festinger and Carlsnuth's (1959) original notion In the experiment reported, subjects volunteered to take a personality inventory and received either neutral, very favorable, or very unfavorable feedback In this way, subjects' level of self-esteem was raised or lowered Following this procedure, subjects were induced to record a speech that was known to be discrepant with their private beliefs. They were offered either a small or a large inducement for their statements. It was predicted that, regardless of their level of self-esteem, subjects would manifest the inverse relationship between incentive magnitude and attitude change predicted by dissonance theory The major analysis of the results, and the concomitant internal analysis, generally supported the prediction With one qualification, the results were held to be consistent with Festinger and Carlsmith's version of dissonance arousal and inconsistent with the self-esteem analysis     

Predicting and accepting personality test scores

Three studies are reported concerned with people's perception of their own personality, their acceptance of bogus ‘personality’ feedback, and the relationship between their ‘actual’ personality scores and their willingness to accept bogus feedback. In the first study subjects attempted to predict their own and a well-known other person's personality scores. They were fairly good at predicting some of their own scores (extraversion, neuroticism) but less so others, suggesting that people can recognize their own ‘correct’ personality feedback. In the second study subjects were given either positive (Barnum Statements) or negative (reverse Barnum Statements) ‘bogus’ feedback after a personality test. They tended to accept the positive feedback as more accurate than the negative feedback though this was not related to their actual scores. In the third study subjects were given four types of feedback statements after a personality test: general positive, general negative, specific positive and specific negative. As predicted, people tend to accept general rather than specific, and positive rather than negative feedback as true. Furthermore, acceptance was closely related to neuroticism and extraversion in a predicted direction. These results are discussed in terms of the uses and abuses of validation of personality feedback.     

Spontaneous skepticism: the interplay of motivation and expectation in responses to favorable and unfavorable medical diagnoses

The quantity of processing view of motivated reasoning predicts that individuals are more likely to spontaneously question the validity of unfavorable than favorable feedback even when the objective likelihood of the feedback is equivalent. Participants were videotaped self-administering a bogus medical test revealing either a favorable or an unfavorable result. In Studies 1 and 2, unfavorable result participants required more time to accept the validity of the test result and were more likely to spontaneously recheck its validity than were favorable result participants. However, unfavorable results also were perceived as less expected than were favorable results, even though the information supplied about their objective likelihood was identical. Study 3 showed that participants evaluating another student's results perceived favorable and unfavorable outcomes as equally likely, suggesting that the subjective likelihood of positive and negative feedback is also subject to motivational influence.     

Politeness and memory for the wording of remarks

Three experiments were conducted to examine whether people spontaneously remember the wording used to convey politeness. In all experiments, subjects heard statements varying in politeness that had been made by either a high-status (e.g., a professor) or equal-status (e.g., another student) speaker. Subjects’ incidental memory for these statements was then tested with either a recognition (Experiments 1 and 3) or a recall (Experiment 2) procedure. As expected, there was evidence of significant memory for wording that conveyed politeness, and subjects were more likely to remember forms that were incongruous with the speaker’s status. There was also some evidence that subjects encoded the politeness of a remark even when they were unable to recall the specific remark. The results demonstrate the role of the interpersonal dimension in the processing of language in context.     

Being angry for different reasons: the role of personality in distributive justice

The present research examines personality predictors of anger in response to unfavorable and favorable outcomes with regard to violations of the distributive justice principle of equality. Two studies showed that feelings of anger in response to equality violations were related to neuroticism and agreeableness, albeit for different reasons. Depending on whether the equality violation was favorable or not, anger could be predicted by either feelings of threat or guilt for neuroticism and perceptions of responsibility for agreeableness. These findings add to the literature on boundary conditions of justice and reveal how core personality dimensions contribute to emotional reactions in distributively unjust situations, even if the outcome is personally favorable.     

Accepting personality test feedback: A review of the Barnum effect

This article attempts a comprehensive and critical review of the by-now fairly extensive literature on the Barnum effect—the approval/acceptance by subjects of bogus personality interpretations supposedly derived from standard tests. Since the last major review eight years ago various methodological extensions have occurred and various rival hypotheses for established findings have been proposed. The present review is divided into three major sections: client and clinician characteristics; feedback statements and test format; and implications for personality assessment and measurement. Nearly 50 studies on the acceptance of personality interpretations are systematically reviewed and criticized.     

Attitude and the perception of faces

To assess the effects of affective orientation on the judgment of facial attriutes, 165 subjects were asked to make judgments of the attributes of each of two faces. For each face, subjects were either given no information about the person in the photo, or were given biographical information connoting either a favorable or unfavorable personality. It was predicted that when subjects make judgments along dimensions that were evaluatively loaded (e.g., smilling vs frowning mouth), manipulated attitude would influence these judgments. For the seven dimensions rated by the subjects, four dimensions showed the predicted effect. The other three dimensions, which did not show the effect, were the only ones that showed a significant effect due to the face itself. It was concluded that for dimensions that are not highly structured by the characteristics of the face, attitude can significantly influence judgments of facial attributes.     

Effects of "favorability" and type of assessment device upon acceptance of general personality interpretations

College students' acceptance of general personality interpretations was evaluated as a function of type of test and assessment device employed and interpretation favorability. Unlike previous studies, only interpretation favorability influenced acceptance. The effect of interpretation favorability upon acceptance, however, was shown to be due to the higher base-rate accuracy of favorable, relative to unfavorable, interpretations. It was concluded that the universal validity of general interpretations may supersede the effects of situational factors upon acceptance.     

Attitude attribution when behavior is constrained

Five experiments were conducted in which subjects were asked to attribute attitudes to target persons on the basis of opinion statements written under high constraints, i.e., the target persons were instructed to prepare the statements but were given no choice concerning the position to be endorsed. In previous studies it had been observed that reader-subjects tended to attribute attitudes in line with the opinion statement even when the writer obviously had no choice. However, in these earlier studies the opinion endorsements were actually standardized statements prepared by the investigators and they may have contained subtle cues indicating attitude strength. In the present experiments the statements were those actually written by other subjects in response to no choice instructions. Even though the subjects as attributors were well aware of these instructions, and had complied to the same instructions as target persons, attitudes in line with expressed opinions were attributed. In the final experiment, constraints were strengthened even further by the provision of specific arguments that had to be included in the opinion statements. Here the “over attribution effect” finally fell below significance. With the exception of such extreme variants of constraint, the results provide further evidence that people tend to make dispositional attributions to “explain” behavior, underestimating the role of environmental constraints.     

Categorization,attitude and memory for the source of attitude statements

In a study of factors influencing recognition-memory for the sources of attitude statements, a final sample of 107 subjects, aged 15–16, first rated their agreement with 24 statements concerning drug-use, 12 of which were attributed to one, and 12 to another, fictitiously named newspaper. Later, the statements were re shown to subjects with half the names altered, and subjects had to indicate which names were correct (i.e., unaltered). Discrimination sensitivity was very significantly higher in a condition where the initial relationship between the sources and the statements was systematic, so that the 12 most pro-drug statements were attributed to one newspaper and the 12 most anti-drug statements to the other, than in two conditions where the initial relationship was random, in which discrimination was at chance level. In the first of these conditions, subjects were also more likely to claim that the attributed source was correct if they had previously agreed with the statement. overall, subjects were more accurate in discriminating correct and incorrect sources for statements to which they had previously given a more moderate, or a more negative response on the agreement scale.     

Maternal Acceptance: Its Contribution to Children's Favorable Perceptions of Discipline and Moral Identity

The authors examined the contribution of maternal acceptance or warmth to children's and adolescents’ perceptions of discipline and formation of moral identity. The sample consisted of 93 male and female students from Grades 5, 8, and 10 and their mothers. Students completed measures pertaining to perceived maternal discipline practices and acceptance-rejection, as well as moral identity. A subsample of mothers reported on their accepting or rejecting actions toward their children. Children were more likely to feel accepted, if their mothers used inductive discipline (vs. power assertion and love withdrawal). Perceived acceptance was also related to more favorable discipline evaluations in certain respects. Specifically, inductive discipline recipients who felt accepted also evaluated induction as appropriate and responded to it with positive and guilt-related emotions. Power assertion was evaluated as appropriate among those children who did feel accepted. Finally, among inductive discipline recipients, those who felt accepted also reported higher moral identity.     

Averaging processes in ratings and choices based on numerical information

Ss were presented sets of numbers said to represent sample price information from grocery stores. Ss rated the relative desirability of shopping at each of a series of stores and were also asked to make paired-comparison preference choices. In Experiment I, some sets contained favorable information, some contained unfavorable information, and some contained neutral information added to the favorable or unfavorable information. The addition of neutral information led to a decrease in the polarity of responses. This is consistent with an averaging, but not an adding, formulation of how the information is integrated. In Experiment II, sets of favorable or unfavorable information varied in size and a set-size effect was obtained. The greater the amount of favorable or unfavorable information, the more extreme the response. This was accounted for by assuming that an initial neutral expectancy is averaged with the information presented.     

Rose colored webcam: Discrepancies in personality estimates and interview performance ratings

Companies increasingly use computer-controlled interviews as a less expensive and more efficient way to screen job applicants. Despite these advantages, this interview format may prevent evaluators from accurately judging an applicant’s personality traits, which, in turn, may influence hiring decisions. Two traits in particular, agreeableness and conscientiousness, have been found to predict performance in many occupational settings. In the current research, participants randomly were assigned to either a face-to-face (FTF) or computer-controlled (CC) mock job interview. Interviewees were rated by external observers as higher in conscientiousness and agreeableness when the interview was CC rather than FTF. In addition, observers rated interview performance more positively than did the interviewees themselves – particularly when the interview was CC. Finally, the discrepancy between self and observer judgments of the interviewees’ personality (in terms of agreeableness and conscientiousness) mediated the relation between interview format and the discrepancy between self and observer ratings of interview performance. These findings suggest that CC interviews have the potential to yield overly positive evaluations of interviewees, thereby biasing personality judgments and estimations of ultimate job performance.