Likable co-witnesses increase eyewitness accuracy and decrease suggestibility

This study examines the impact of likability on memory accuracy and memory conformity between two previously unacquainted individuals. After viewing a crime, eyewitnesses often talk to one another and may find each other likable or dislikable. One hundred twenty-seven undergraduate students arrived at the laboratory with an unknown confederate and were assigned to a likability condition (i.e., control, likable or dislikable). Together, the pair viewed pictures and was then tested on their memory for those pictures in such a way that the participant knew the confederate's response. Thus, the participant's response could be influenced both by his or her own memory and by the answers of the confederate. Participants in the likable condition were more accurate and less influenced by the confederate, compared with the other conditions. Results are discussed in relation to research that shows people are more influenced by friends than strangers and in relation to establishing positive rapport in forensic interviewing.     

In search for schemata underlying the inference of traits from interpersonal sentiment relations

Three schemata relevant to the inference of traits attributed to a and b from respectively reciprocal liking and disliking relations between a and b are derived from the research literature: (a) Homogeneity according to which likable traits would be attributed to a and b if they like each other, while dislikable traits if they dislike each other; (b) balance according to which more similarity would be attributed to a and b if they like each other than if they dislike each other, the relative similarity effect being localized on a likableness dimension; (c) positivity bias according to which favorable traits would be attributed irrespective of the stimulus information given. An experiment is reported which provides support for the three schemata with the exception that no unequivocal evidence is obtained for the restriction of the balance effect to a likableness dimension. Further, individual Ss are found not to have stable preferences for particular schemata but to switch readily from one schema to the other.     

Social Identification and Interpersonal Communication in Computer‐Mediated Communication: What You Do Versus Who You Are in Virtual Groups

This study investigates the influence of interpersonal communication and intergroup identification on members’ evaluations of computer‐mediated groups. Participants (N= 256) in 64 four‐person groups interacted through synchronous computer chat. Subgroup assignments to minimal groups instilled significantly greater in‐group versus out‐group identification. One member in each group was instructed to exhibit interpersonally likable or dislikable behavior. Analysis revealed that confederates acting likably were more attractive than those acting dislikably regardless of their in‐group or out‐group status. Further results indicated that interpersonal behavior interacted with subgroup membership on identification shifts following online discussions. Interpersonal dynamics generally provided stronger effects on members in virtual groups than did intergroup dynamics, in contrast to predictions from previous applications of social identification to computer‐mediated communication.     

Is gossip power? The inverse relationships between gossip,power, and likability

Despite widespread conjecture regarding the functions and consequences of gossip, little empirical attention has investigated how gossipers are perceived by others. In the present study, 128 individuals were asked to think about a person who either frequently or rarely discussed others while not in their presence. Gender of the target and valence of the gossip were also manipulated. High‐frequency gossipers were perceived as less powerful and were liked less than low‐frequency gossipers, and those who gossiped negatively were liked less than those who gossiped positively. High‐frequency negative gossipers emerged as the least powerful and least likable targets. These results are discussed in relation to the transfer of attitudes recursively effect. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

THE DISTINCTIVENESS EFFECT IN SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION:

Abstract— Three studies tested the hypothesis that people assume that the identities of other people are tied more closely to their distinctive than to their nondistinctive traits. In Studies 1 and 3, subjects predicted the preferences of a target person who was a member of both a statistically distinctive and a statistically nondistinctive category (e g, sky diver and tennis player). In Study 2, subjects judged the degree of interpersonal similarity between pairs of people sharing distinctive as opposed to nondistinctive category memberships. Consistent with the hypothesis, subjects linked targets with their more distinctive traits and assumed targets would be more similar to people who shared their distinctive traits than to people who shared their nondistinctive traits. The implications of this distinctiveness effect for an understanding of stereotyping are explored.     

The third person effect: Social distance and perceived media bias

Two studies were conducted to determine the conditions under which the third person effect (Davison, 1983) operates. It was hypothesized that the effect would be accentuated as target groups of others became more remote from the self. A second objective was to determine whether the effect operates in the absence of overtly persuasive intent in the media. Television programmes concerned with moral themes were employed as stimuli. The results further support Davison's claim that overestimation of media effects is greater when people imagine the responses of others whom they do not know than those of familar individuals. The results also indicate that the third person effect does operate in the absence of perceived persuasive intent, but is accentuated when bias is perceived by viewers.     

A Self‐Categorization Explanation for the Third‐Person Effect

Three studies tested a self‐categorization theory explanation for the third‐person effect. In Study 1 (N= 49) undergraduate students judged the influence of the National Enquirer, Wall Street Journal, and TV show Friends on themselves, relative to low‐ and high‐status outgroup members, and other undergraduate students. The profile of first‐ and third‐person perceptions was largely consistent with predictions, and the size of the third‐person effect decreased as perceived similarity to target others increased—but only for media that were normative for comparison others. Study 2 (N= 49) provided evidence for this process with different media and showed that the profile of first‐ and third‐person perceptions matched closely with perceived norms of media consumption—but not the social desirability of those media. Study 3 (N= 64) showed that the third‐person effect for the same media and target other shifts with the frame of reference in which the judgment is made. Taken together, the findings are consistent with self‐categorization theory and difficult to reconcile with other explanations.     

Through the looking glass clearly: accuracy and assumed similarity in well-adjusted individuals' first impressions

Do well-adjusted individuals have particularly accurate insight into what others are like or are they biased, primarily seeing their own characteristics in others? In the current studies, the authors examined how psychologically adjusted individuals tend to see new acquaintances, directly comparing their levels of distinctive accuracy (accurately perceiving others' unique characteristics), normative accuracy (perceiving others as similar to the average person), and assumed similarity (perceiving others as similar to the self). Across two interactive, round-robin studies, well-adjusted individuals, compared with less adjusted individuals, did not perceive new acquaintances' unique characteristics more accurately but did perceive new acquaintances, on average, as similar to the average person, reflecting an accurate understanding of what people generally tend to be like. Furthermore, well-adjusted individuals had a biased tendency to perceive their own unique characteristics in others. Of note, both pre-existing perceiver adjustment and target-specific liking independently predicted greater accuracy and assumed similarity in first impressions. In sum, well-adjusted individuals see through the looking glass clearly: although they erroneously see others as possessing their own unique characteristics, they accurately understand what others generally tend to be like.     

Equity vs equality: Sex differences in leadership

The present study investigated differences between male and female leaders' responses to poorly performing subordinates. Ninety-four male and 94 female leaders were presented with a vignette describing an incident of poor performance that occurred in a distribution center. The subordinate in the vignette was either male or female, likable or dislikable, and performed poorly due to internal or external factors. Leaders studied the vignette and then rated the appropriateness of a series of corrective actions. Analyses indicated that the corrective actions of female leaders were more affected by the likableness and sex of the subordinate than were the corrective actions of male leaders. The results support the proposition that male leaders tend to respond to subordinates based upon a norm of equity, while female leaders respond to subordinates based upon a combination of equity and equality. Implications of the findings for management training and organizational effectiveness are discussed.     

Narcissism and Other‐Derogation in the Absence of Ego Threat

The relation between narcissism and other‐derogation has been examined primarily in the context of ego threat. In three studies, we investigated whether narcissistic individuals derogate others in the absence of ego threat. In Study 1, 79 judges watched four videotaped dyadic interactions and rated the personality of the same four people. In Study 2, 66 judges rated the personality of a friend. In Study 3, 72 judges considered the average Northeastern University student and rated the personality of this hypothetical person. Across the three studies, targets' personality characteristics were described on the 100‐item California Adult Q‐Sort (CAQ; Block, 2008). Judges' ratings of targets were compared to a CAQ prototype of the optimally adjusted person to assess target‐derogation. Judges' narcissism and other‐derogation were positively related in Studies 1 and 2. Narcissism positively predicted and self‐esteem negatively predicted target‐derogation after controlling for each other in Study 3. Narcissistic individuals derogate others more than non‐narcissistic individuals regardless of whether ego threat is present or absent.     

Drawn towards what others seem to like: Implicit preference for objects and people looked at with a duchenne smile

People tend to like objects that are looked at by others, especially if the person looking at the object expresses a positive emotion. But not all positive emotions are equal. We investigated the effect of third party gazing while expressing subtle positive emotions on perceivers’ subsequent preferences and evaluations of objects and people. In two studies participants saw faces looking at target objects and people either with a Duchenne, a non-Duchenne smile, or a neural expression. Participants first indicated gaze direction and later reported intuitive target preference and evaluated the targets. Results show a preference for target stimuli that were smiled at with a Duchenne smile as opposed to when they were looked at with a non-Duchenne smile or a neutral expression. More explicit evaluations of the target stimuli were not affected by the type of facial expression.     

Impressions at the intersection of ambiguous and obvious social categories: Does gay + Black = likable?

How do perceivers combine information about perceptually obvious categories (e.g., Black) with information about perceptually ambiguous categories (e.g., gay) during impression formation? Given that gay stereotypes are activated automatically, we predicted that positive gay stereotypes confer evaluative benefits to Black gay targets, even when perceivers are unaware of targets' sexual orientations. Participants in Study 1 rated faces of White straight men as more likable than White gay men, but rated Black men in the opposite manner: gays were liked more than straights. In Study 2, participants approaching Whites during an approach–avoidance task responded faster to straights than gays, whereas participants approaching Blacks responded faster to gays than straights. These findings highlight the striking extent to which less visible categories, like sexual orientation, subtly influence person perception and determine the explicit and implicit evaluations individuals form about others.     

Recipient's mood, relationship type, and helping

We conducted two studies to examine how a potential helper is affected by having a communal orientation toward a relationship with a potential recipient and by the potential recipient's sadness. We hypothesized that (a) having a communal orientation would increase helping and that (b) people high in communal orientation, but not others, would respond to a potential recipient's sadness by increasing helping. These hypotheses were tested in two studies. In Study 1, individual differences in communal orientation toward relationships were measured by using a new communal orientation scale reported for the first time in this article. In Study 2, manipulations were used to lead subjects to desire either a communal or an exchange relationship with another person. In both studies, subjects were exposed to a sad person or to a person in a neutral mood whom they were given a chance to help. As hypothesized, in both studies communally oriented subjects helped the other significantly more than did others. Also as hypothesized, in both studies communally oriented subjects but not others, increased helping in response to the other person's sadness although this effect reached statistical significance only in the second study.     

Proximity attitudes toward objects and people: reference to a category and a self-representation?

The relative strength of similarity to self and category typicality as predictors of proximity attitudes (social distance) toward people of varying race and objects associated with people of varying race was investigated. Similarity to self and category typicality were significant predictors of proximity attitudes toward both objects and people, but similarity to self was the significantly stronger predictor. The predictive utility of similarity to self was greater for object judgments than person judgments, but category typicality was a better predictor of person judgments than object judgments. Although the results provide evidence of ingroup favoritism in proximity attitudes toward people, the ingroup bias did not extend to objects associated with people. Category typicality was positively related to attitudes, even for distanced groups. The role of predictability of the target in determining proximity attitudes is discussed.     

Reconsidering research on self-humanizing: The importance of mean comparative judgments

Self-humanization is defined as the tendency to view oneself as more essentially human than others. Researchers have claimed that people attribute human nature traits more strongly to themselves than to others, but not uniquely human traits. In this article we suggest that such claims are based on the misinterpretation of results. Most studies have not presented mean comparative judgments, making it impossible to determine whether people thought they possessed characteristics less strongly or more strongly than the average person. We found that people (N = 256) in Poland, Italy, and Korea perceived themselves as possessing desirable human nature and uniquely human characteristics more than others, as possessing undesirable uniquely human traits less than others, and as similar to others in terms of undesirable human nature characteristics. It seems that being more human than others means possessing some traits more than others and possessing some traits less than others.     

The order effect in self–other predictions: considering target as a moderator

Two factors known to affect the use of self in social prediction, target similarity and order of predictions, are considered in concert to understand how the use of self varies across the prediction of different targets. Replicating earlier studies, we predicted and found that people use the self more when predicting similar others than when predicting dissimilar others. Extending existing studies, we predicted and found order effects for similar others. As predicted no order effects emerged for predictions for dissimilar targets. Because the self is more accessible during the prediction of similar others, it matters whether self‐predictions precede or follow other‐predictions. Feature‐matching theory is proposed as a possible explanation for the emergence of order effects in predictions of similar targets. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Examining the world of the depressed: do depressed people prefer others who are depressed?

Two studies were conducted to examine the interpersonal world of the depressed person. In Study 1, depression levels and perceptions of depressed and nondepressed people and their best friend were assessed to test the hypothesis that depressed Ss have best friends who are themselves more depressed than the best friends of nondepressed Ss. The hypothesis was confirmed, suggesting that depressed persons may prefer others who also tend toward depression. To examine this possibility, in Study 2 depressed and nondepressed college students spoke with one another in either depressed-depressed, nondepressed-depressed, or nondepressed-nondepressed pairs. It was found that depressed Ss felt worse than nondepressed Ss after speaking with nondepressed targets, but not after speaking with depressed targets. There were no differences in liking or in perceived similarity between the groups. Implications for the social world of the depressed person are discussed.     

Self-generated persuasion: effects of the target and direction of arguments

Previous research has revealed that self-persuasion can occur either through role-playing (i.e., when arguments are generated to convince another person) or, more directly, through trying to convince oneself (i.e., when arguments are generated with oneself as the target). Combining these 2 traditions in the domain of attitude change, the present research investigated the impact on self-persuasion of the specific target of one's own persuasive attempt (i.e., others vs. oneself). We found that the efficacy of self-persuasion depended on whether people believed that they would have to put more or less effort in convincing the self or others. Specifically, we found opposite effects for self-generated arguments depending on whether the topic of persuasion was proattitudinal or counterattitudinal. Across 4 studies, it was shown that when the topic of the message was counterattitudinal, people were more effective in convincing themselves when the intended target of the arguments was themselves versus another person. However, the opposite was the case when the topic was proattitudinal. These effects were shown to stem from the differential effort perceived as necessary and actually exerted in trying to produce persuasion under these conditions.     

Liking persons versus liking groups: a dual-process hypothesis

Most research on liking of persons and groups has been conducted within separate paradigms, but the implicit assumption has been that the same processes govern judgments of liking or disliking regardless of the nature of the target. Departing from this assumption, we suggest a dual-process hypothesis according to which people base their liking of a target person primarily on the desirability of the person's characteristics, whereas they base their liking of a group primarily on the degree of similarity between the group and themselves. To test this hypothesis, participants were presented with either positively or negatively valenced sketches that either described an individual person or a group of people. Path analyses revealed that liking of a person was best predicted by desirability ratings, whereas liking of a group was best predicted by similarity ratings. Implications of these findings for stereotype maintenance are discussed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.