高低自我监控者在不同互动情境中的被洞悉错觉

用Snyder的自我监控量表，从大学生中筛选出典型高低自我监控者。要求他们不动声色地喝下1杯醋和4杯水，而后，让观众根据他们的表现去辨别饮料的味道，并让被试预测可能猜中的人数。在实验1中，被试和观众以录像为媒介间接的互相推测；在实验2中，被试和观众现场直接的互相推测。两个实验都包括高低自我监控者各21名。实验结果表明，自我监控水平对被洞悉错觉有明显的影响，在直接和间接两种互动情境中，低自我监控者的被洞悉错觉都比高自我监控者强烈。互动情境对高自我监控者有明显的影响，在间接的互动中，高自我监控者出现了明显的被洞悉错觉；而在直接的互动情境中，低自我监控者的被洞悉错觉依然非常明显，高自我监控者则趋于消失

Illusion of Transparency between Individuals of High and Low Self-Monitoring

The purpose of this study is to examine the differences in illusion of transparency between high and low self-monitoring individuals in reference to the experimental paradigm of “drinks recognition” by Gilovich, Savitsky, and Medvec (1998). It is hypothesized that: 1) the differences in impression management among the high and low self-monitoring individuals has influence on the strength of illusion of transparency, with a stronger illusion of transparency being demonstrated in low self-monitoring individuals than high self-monitoring individuals; 2) in face-to-face interactive situations between the subjects and audience, subjects with a high level of self-monitoring will show a stronger tendency to focus on subtle feedback from the audience, which may reduce their illusion of transparency. Two experiments were designed to examine these hypotheses. A total of 42 subjects participated in experiment 1. Subjects that scored over 15 on the Self-Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974) were placed in the high self-monitoring group, and those scored under 9 were placed in the low self-monitoring group. The subjects were required to drink 5 cups of liquids (one of them was vinegar and the rest were water) without revealing the clues of the liquid types from their facial expressions. The drinking process was videotaped and shown to the audience who were requested to tell vinegar from water on the basis of the subjects’ facial expressions. The subjects were also asked to estimate the maximum number of correct distinctions between the vinegar and water that would be made by the 10 audience members. In experiment 2, the procedures and number of subjects were the same as experiment 1, except that the subjects performed in front of the audience instead of being videotaped. Findings indicated that low self-monitoring subjects showed a higher level of illusion of transparency than that of the high–monitoring subjects. In comparison to the videotaped experiment, the individuals characterized as high self-monitors showed a further decline in illusion of transparency in face-to-face situations. Possible explanations that the high self-monitoring group had a low level of illusion of transparency include the following: the high self-monitoring group, in comparison to the low self-monitoring group, might have tried harder to control their facial expressions and therefore may have experienced a lower level of anxiety. This could be caused by the fact that participants were more confident about their ability to control their facial expressions. Another possible explanation could be that participants were willing to take higher levels of risks regarding judgment. A final explanation could be that these participants observed the reaction of the audience in the face-to-face situation