Personality judgment

Last updated

Personality judgment (or personality judgement in UK) is the process by which people perceive each other's personalities through acquisition of certain information about others, or meeting others in person. The purpose of studying personality judgment is to understand past behavior exhibited by individuals and predict future behavior. Theories concerning personality judgment focus on the accuracy of personality judgments and the effects of personality judgments on various aspects of social interactions. [1] Determining how people judge personality is important because personality judgments often influence individuals' behaviors. [2]

Contents

Accuracy

Perspectives on accuracy

Research on the accuracy of personality judgments varies based on three major perspectives on the basis of accurate personality judgment. [3] These perspectives vary based on the criteria used to determine accuracy. [3]

Contributors to accurate personality judgment

A variety of variables contribute to the accuracy or inaccuracy of personality judgment in systematic ways. These variables include characteristics of the individual whose personality is being judged as well as characteristics of the individual who is judging personality. [4]

Judge characteristics

Characteristics of the individual judging personality that contribute to accuracy include the following:

  • Gender and ethnic similarity to target [5]
    • A person is more likely to make an accurate personality judgment when the individual they are judging has the same gender and ethnicity as the judge. [5]
  • Stereotype knowledge and utilization, [6]
    • When judges are only aware of the target's group membership, judges are likely to base personality judgments on their knowledge of stereotypes concerning the relevant group. [6] However, these effects are much stronger for gender stereotypes than ethnic stereotypes, such that even when abundant information about the target is available, judges will base personality judgment on gender stereotypes but not ethnic stereotypes. [6]
  • Relationship to the target individual [7]
    • Judges who are acquainted with the target individual typically provide more accurate personality judgments, presumably due to their knowledge of the individual across different types of situations. [7]
  • Number of judges [7]
    • Although one judge may provide an accurate personality judgment, the average of multiple judgments from different individuals more strongly predicts behavior than judgments from one individual. [7]
  • Sex of the judge [5]
    • Females typically provide more accurate personality judgments than males. [5]

Target characteristics

Characteristics of the target individual that are important for accurate personality judgment include the following:

  • Visibility of the trait in question [8]
    • Traits that are more readily observable are more likely to elicit accurate judgments. [8] Extraversion is typically considered a more visible trait, whereas neuroticism is considered a less visible trait. [8]
  • Psychological adjustment of the target individual [9]
    • Individuals who are well-adjusted are more likely to elicit accurate personality judgments. [9] Well-adjusted individuals reveal more about their personality to those they interact with, thus making it easier for others to judge them accurately. [9]
  • Amount of personal disclosure [10]
    • Targets of personality judgment who reveal personal information about themselves facilitate ease of accurate personality judgment for the traits of agreeableness, openness to experience, and extraversion. [10] Additionally, individuals who disclose personal values to others may facilitate the ease of accurate judgment of neuroticism. [10]
  • Expressions of emotion [11]
    • Individuals who display facial expressions corresponding to negative emotions such as fear and sadness are judged as being more neurotic and less extraverted and agreeable. [11] Individuals who display facial expressions corresponding to positive emotions are typically judged as being more extraverted and agreeable. [11]
  • Facial expressions corresponding to personality traits [12]
    • Individuals are able to accurately judge many traits on the basis of viewing photographs of the faces of people who exemplify specific traits. [12] Individuals are especially accurate at judging personality when viewing a photograph that consists of a composite of faces that display the same trait. [12]

Effects on behavior

Personality judgment not only influences perceptions of individuals, it also may influence the behavior of individuals being judged. This phenomenon is known as behavioral confirmation, and occurs when one's preconceived ideas about a person influence the behavior of the person. For example, if an individual is believed to be aggressive, one's behavior toward that individual may elicit an aggressive response, even if the individual is not typically aggressive. [2] Behavioral confirmation may occur in a variety of settings, including classrooms and social interactions. Researchers have shown that when a male individual believes he is talking to an attractive woman over the phone, the woman will act more sociable and agreeable than if the male believes he is talking to an unattractive woman. [13] This suggests that the woman's behavior in this situation is being influenced by the male's expectations concerning her appearance, rather than her actual personality characteristics. [13]

Cultural influences

An additional determinant of the processes through which personality is judged and the accuracy of these judgments is culture. Typically, researchers report cross-cultural consistency in the judgment of personality. [14] However, people from different types of cultures tend to find certain traits more easily identifiable than others, based on judging personality from facial characteristics of targets alone. [15] For example, people from Western cultures are typically better able to identify the traits of extroversion and aggression than individuals from Eastern cultures. [15]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fundamental attribution error</span> Psychological phenomenon

In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error is a cognitive attribution bias in which observers underemphasize situational and environmental factors for the behavior of an actor while overemphasizing dispositional or personality factors. In other words, observers tend to overattribute the behaviors of others to their personality and underattribute them to the situation or context. Although personality traits and predispositions are considered to be observable facts in psychology, the fundamental attribution error is an error because it misinterprets their effects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gaydar</span> Colloquialism for intuitively assessing peoples sexual orientation

Gaydar is a colloquialism referring to the intuitive ability of a person to assess others' sexual orientations as homosexual, bisexual or straight. Gaydar relies on verbal and nonverbal clues and LGBT stereotypes, including a sensitivity to social behaviors and mannerisms like body language, the tone of voice used by a person when speaking, overt rejections of traditional gender roles, a person's occupation, and grooming habits.

The out-group homogeneity effect is the perception of out-group members as more similar to one another than are in-group members, e.g. "they are alike; we are diverse". Perceivers tend to have impressions about the diversity or variability of group members around those central tendencies or typical attributes of those group members. Thus, outgroup stereotypicality judgments are overestimated, supporting the view that out-group stereotypes are overgeneralizations. The term "outgroup homogeneity effect", "outgroup homogeneity bias" or "relative outgroup homogeneity" have been explicitly contrasted with "outgroup homogeneity" in general, the latter referring to perceived outgroup variability unrelated to perceptions of the ingroup.

Conscientiousness is the personality trait of being responsible, careful, or diligent. Conscientiousness implies a desire to do a task well, and to take obligations to others seriously. Conscientious people tend to be efficient and organized as opposed to easy-going and disorderly. They tend to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; they display planned rather than spontaneous behavior; and they are generally dependable. Conscientiousness manifests in characteristic behaviors such as being neat, systematic, careful, thorough, and deliberate.

The physical attractiveness stereotype, commonly known as the "beautiful-is-good" stereotype, is the tendency to assume that physically attractive individuals, coinciding with social beauty standards, also possess other desirable personality traits, such as intelligence, social competence, and morality. The target benefits from what has been coined as “pretty privilege”, namely social, economic, and political advantages or benefits. Physical attractiveness can have a significant effect on how people are judged in terms of employment or social opportunities, friendship, sexual behavior, and marriage.

Interpersonal attraction, as a part of social psychology, is the study of the attraction between people which leads to the development of platonic or romantic relationships. It is distinct from perceptions such as physical attractiveness, and involves views of what is and what is not considered beautiful or attractive.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Big Five personality traits</span> Personality model consisting of five broad dimensions

In trait theory, the Big Five personality traits are a group of five characteristics used to study personality:

Depressive realism is the hypothesis developed by Lauren Alloy and Lyn Yvonne Abramson that depressed individuals make more realistic inferences than non-depressed individuals. Although depressed individuals are thought to have a negative cognitive bias that results in recurrent, negative automatic thoughts, maladaptive behaviors, and dysfunctional world beliefs, depressive realism argues not only that this negativity may reflect a more accurate appraisal of the world but also that non-depressed individuals' appraisals are positively biased.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agreeableness</span> Personality trait

Agreeableness is a personality trait referring to individuals that are perceived as kind, sympathetic, cooperative, warm, honest, and considerate. In personality psychology, agreeableness is one of the five major dimensions of personality structure, reflecting individual differences in cooperation and social harmony.

The negativity bias, also known as the negativity effect, is a cognitive bias that, even when positive or neutral things of equal intensity occur, things of a more negative nature have a greater effect on one's psychological state and processes than neutral or positive things. In other words, something very positive will generally have less of an impact on a person's behavior and cognition than something equally emotional but negative. The negativity bias has been investigated within many different domains, including the formation of impressions and general evaluations; attention, learning, and memory; and decision-making and risk considerations.

Social perception is the study of how people form impressions of and make inferences about other people as sovereign personalities. Social perception refers to identifying and utilizing social cues to make judgments about social roles, rules, relationships, context, or the characteristics of others. This domain also includes social knowledge, which refers to one's knowledge of social roles, norms, and schemas surrounding social situations and interactions. People learn about others' feelings and emotions by picking up information they gather from physical appearance, verbal, and nonverbal communication. Facial expressions, tone of voice, hand gestures, and body position or movement are a few examples of ways people communicate without words. A real-world example of social perception is understanding that others disagree with what one said when one sees them roll their eyes. There are four main components of social perception: observation, attribution, integration, and confirmation.

In social psychology, entitativity is the degree to which a group is perceived as a cohesive, unified entity. It describes how much a collection of individuals is seen as "group-like" and bonded by common attributes, such as shared goals or traits. Perceived entitativity occurs when people view an aggregate of individuals as a single entity, attributing to them common characteristics or a collective purpose. Thus, a group is seen as a "real" group when its members' behaviors are seen as stemming from shared goals or traits.

Self-enhancement is a type of motivation that works to make people feel good about themselves and to maintain self-esteem. This motive becomes especially prominent in situations of threat, failure or blows to one's self-esteem. Self-enhancement involves a preference for positive over negative self-views. It is one of the three self-evaluation motives along with self-assessment and self-verification . Self-evaluation motives drive the process of self-regulation, that is, how people control and direct their own actions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stereotype</span> Generalized but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing

In social psychology, a stereotype is a generalized belief about a particular category of people. It is an expectation that people might have about every person of a particular group. The type of expectation can vary; it can be, for example, an expectation about the group's personality, preferences, appearance or ability. Stereotypes are often overgeneralized, inaccurate, and resistant to new information. A stereotype does not necessarily need to be a negative assumption. They may be positive, neutral, or negative.

Thin-slicing is a term used in psychology and philosophy to describe the ability to find patterns in events based only on "thin slices", or narrow windows, of experience. The term refers to the process of making very quick inferences about the state, characteristics or details of an individual or situation with minimal amounts of information. Research has found that brief judgments based on thin-slicing are similar to those judgments based on much more information. Judgments based on thin-slicing can be as accurate, or even more so, than judgments based on much more information.

Impression formation in social psychology refers to the processes by which different pieces of knowledge about another are combined into a global or summary impression. Social psychologist Solomon Asch is credited with the seminal research on impression formation and conducted research on how individuals integrate information about personality traits. Two major models have been proposed to explain how this process of integration takes place. The configural model suggests that people form cohesive impressions by integrating traits into a unified whole, adjusting individual traits to fit an overall context rather than evaluating each trait independently. According to this model, some traits are more schematic and serve as central traits to shape the overall impression. As an individual seeks to form a coherent and meaningful impression of another individual, previous impressions significantly influence the interpretation of subsequent information. In contrast, the algebraic model takes a more additive approach, forming impressions by separately evaluating each trait and then combining these evaluations into an overall summary. A related area to impression formation is the study of person perception, making causal attributions, and then adjusting those inferences based on the information available.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">HEXACO model of personality structure</span> Six-dimensional model of human personality

The HEXACO model of personality structure is a six-dimensional model of human personality that was created by Ashton and Lee and explained in their book, The H Factor of Personality, based on findings from a series of lexical studies involving several European and Asian languages. The six factors, or dimensions, include honesty-humility (H), emotionality (E), extraversion (X), agreeableness (A), conscientiousness (C), and openness to experience (O). Each factor is composed of traits with characteristics indicating high and low levels of the factor. The HEXACO model was developed through similar methods as other trait taxonomies and builds on the work of Costa and McCrae and Goldberg. The model, therefore, shares several common elements with other trait models. However, the HEXACO model is unique mainly due to the addition of the honesty-humility dimension.

Personality change refers to the different forms of change in various aspects of personality. These changes include how we experience things, how our perception of experiences changes, and how we react in situations. An individual's personality may stay somewhat consistent throughout their life. Still, more often than not, everyone undergoes some form of change to their personality in their lifetime.

A zero-acquaintance situation requires a perceiver to make a judgment about a target with whom the perceiver has had no prior social interaction. These judgments can be made using a variety of cues, including brief interactions with the target, video recordings of the target, photographs of the target, and observations of the target's personal environments, among others. In zero-acquaintance studies, the target's actual personality is determined through the target's self-rating and/or ratings from close acquaintance(s) of that target. Consensus in ratings is determined by how consistently perceivers rate the target's personality when compared to other raters. Accuracy in ratings is determined by how well perceivers' ratings of a target compare to that target's self-ratings on the same scale, or to that target's close acquaintances' ratings of the target. Zero-acquaintance judgments are regularly made in day-to-day life. Given that these judgments tend to remain stable, even as the length of interaction increases, they can influence important interpersonal outcomes.

In social psychology, social projection is the psychological process through which an individual expects behaviors or attitudes of others to be similar to their own. Social projection occurs between individuals as well as across ingroup and outgroup contexts in a variety of domains. Research has shown that aspects of social categorization affect the extent to which social projection occurs. Cognitive and motivational approaches have been used to understand the psychological underpinnings of social projection as a phenomenon. Cognitive approaches emphasize social projection as a heuristic, while motivational approaches contextualize social projection as a means to feel connected to others. In contemporary research on social projection, researchers work to further distinguish between the effects of social projection and self-stereotyping on the individual’s perception of others.

References

  1. Funder, David C. (1995). "On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach". Psychological Review. 102 (4): 652–670. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.321.2328 . doi:10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.652. ISSN   0033-295X. PMID   7480467.
  2. 1 2 Snyder, Mark; Klein, Olivier (2005). "Construing and constructing others: On the reality and the generality of the behavioral confirmation scenario". Interaction Studies. 6 (1): 53–67. doi:10.1075/is.6.1.05sny. ISSN   1572-0373.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Funder, D. C.; West, S. G. (1993). "Consensus, self-other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment: An introduction". Journal of Personality. 61 (4): 457–476. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00778.x. PMID   8151499.
  4. Funder, D.C. (2010). The personality puzzle. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
  5. 1 2 3 4 Letzring, T. D. (2010). "The effects of judge-target gender and ethnicity similarity on the accuracy of personality judgments". Social Psychology. 41 (1): 42–51. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000007.
  6. 1 2 3 Chan, W.; Mendelsohn, G. A. (2010). "Disentangling stereotype and person effects: Do social stereotypes bias observer judgment of personality? ". Journal of Research in Personality. 44 (2): 251–257. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2010.02.001.
  7. 1 2 3 4 Connelly, B. S.; Ones, D. S. (2010). "An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers' accuracy and predictive validity". Psychological Bulletin. 136 (6): 1092–1122. doi:10.1037/a0021212. PMID   21038940.
  8. 1 2 3 Funder, David C.; Dobroth, Kathryn M. (1987). "Differences between traits: Properties associated with interjudge agreement". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 52 (2): 409–418. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.2.409. ISSN   0022-3514. PMID   3559898.
  9. 1 2 3 Human, Lauren J.; Biesanz, Jeremy C. (2011). "Target adjustment and self-other agreement: Utilizing trait observability to disentangle judgeability and self-knowledge". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 101 (1): 202–216. doi:10.1037/a0023782. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   21604892.
  10. 1 2 3 Beer, Andrew; Brooks, Cody (2011). "Information quality in personality judgment: The value of personal disclosure". Journal of Research in Personality. 45 (2): 175–185. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.01.001. ISSN   0092-6566.
  11. 1 2 3 Hall, Judith A.; Gunnery, Sarah D.; Andrzejewski, Susan A. (2011). "Nonverbal emotion displays, communication modality, and the judgment of personality". Journal of Research in Personality. 45 (1): 77–83. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2010.11.012. ISSN   0092-6566.
  12. 1 2 3 Penton-Voak, Ian S.; Pound, Nicholas; Little, Anthony C.; Perrett, David I. (2006). "Personality Judgments from Natural and Composite Facial Images: More Evidence For A "Kernel Of Truth" In Social Perception". Social Cognition. 24 (5): 607–640. doi:10.1521/soco.2006.24.5.607. ISSN   0278-016X.
  13. 1 2 Snyder, M.; Tanke, E. D.; Berscheid, E. (1977). "Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 35 (9): 656–666. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.656.
  14. Albright, L.; Malloy, T. E.; Dong, Q.; Kenny, D. A.; Fang, X. (1997). "Cross-cultural consensus in personality judgments". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 72 (3): 558–569. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.558. PMID   9120784.
  15. 1 2 Walker, M.; Jiang, F.; Vetter, T.; Sczesny, S. (2011). "Universals and Cultural Differences in Forming Personality Trait Judgments From Faces". Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2 (6): 609–617. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.718.486 . doi:10.1177/1948550611402519. ISSN   1948-5506. S2CID   109928748.