| Abstract: | Forty men were selected from a larger pool of 235 college students who had completed three questionnaires designed to measure social competence. Twenty high socially competent and 20 low socially competent college men were given either positive or negative feedback by a woman confederate in a five-minute dyadic interaction. The confederate made either four all-positive or all-negative statements on the impression she was forming about the men during the interaction. Measures were taken of the amount of time the men spoke, the latency of their response to the confederate's statements, and the number of topics and topic changes used during the interaction. Judgements were also made on the men's physical attractiveness and social skill. Finally, the men's verbal reactions to the confederate statements were content analyzed for direction (self, confederate, or other) and valence (positive, negative, or neutral). A 2-by-2-by-4 (competence by feedback by statements) ANOVA indicated that subjects differed over trials (statements) in their reaction latencies as a function of their competence level and feedback: low competent men took considerably longer to react to the confederate's negative feedback than did men in other conditions. There were no differences among groups on the amount of conversation time or number of topics and topic changes. High competent men were judged to be more attractive and more socially skilled than low competent men. Content analysis revealed that high competent and low competent men did not differ in their verbal responses when receiving positive feedback. During negative feedback, however, high competent men employed a wider range of responses than low competent men. These findings suggest that high and low socially competent men may differ in their responses to evaluative feedback such that high competent men are both quicker to respond and have a broader repertoire of response than do low competent men. |
