Pratfall effect

Last updated

In social psychology, the pratfall effect is the tendency for interpersonal appeal to change after an individual makes a mistake, depending on the individual's perceived competence. In particular, highly competent individuals tend to become more likeable after committing mistakes, while average-seeming individuals tend to become less likeable even if they commit the same mistake.

Contents

Originally described in 1966 by Elliot Aronson, [1] numerous studies have since been conducted to isolate the effects of gender, self-esteem, and blunder severity on change in appeal and likability. Occasionally referred to as the blemishing effect [2] when used as a form of marketing, generalizations of the pratfall effect are often used to explain the counterintuitive benefits drawn from making mistakes.

Research

Details of the pratfall effect were first described by Aronson in his experiment testing the effects of a simple blunder on perceived attraction. The experimental subjects consisted of male students from the University of Minnesota who would listen to tape recordings of a confederate (actor) pretending to be a contestant for the show College Bowl. The tapes contained staged interviews with difficult questions given to a confederate, who plays the role of either an unrealistically knowledgeable individual who almost always answers correctly (92%) or a mediocre one who answers only a few questions correctly (30%). After the questioning, the strong-performing actor admits to a stellar high school career marked with academic and nonacademic successes, while the unremarkable actor describes an ordinary high school career, earning average grades with weak involvement in extracurriculars. At the end of the interview, some tapes recorded the actor spilling a cup of coffee and apologizing for doing so, while others omitted this portion to serve as a control. Aronson's research found that a knowledgeable blunderer was rated to be more attractive, while the more average ones suffered decreases in their perceived attractiveness. [1] Later research inspired by Aronson experimentally defined appeal as a combination of liking and respect and replicated similar results. [3]

A research study showed that making a clumsy mistake increases the appeal of an exceptional individual whereas making the same mistake seems to make an average person less attractive. Additionally, these findings were anticipated based on the hypothesis that although a mistake helps to humanize someone and boost their appeal, a superior person may be perceived as extraordinary and aloof. [4]

Gender

Effects of pratfall are most directly applicable to males. Women tend to prefer the non-blunderer regardless of gender, and although findings of pratfall cannot be readily generalized to female populations, neither population preferred the mediocre blunderer. [5]

Severity of pratfall

Research by Mettee and Wilkins reveals that the severity of pratfall plays a major role in determining attractiveness after a pratfall is committed. Experimentally, each condition was conveyed by changing the response of the interviewer and blunderer:

An able individual who commits a minor pratfall (2) will have an insignificant decrease in average liking and a small decrease in average respect, while the able individual who commits a major pratfall (3) will receive a significant increase in liking and an insignificant decrease in respect. A less able individual who commits any pratfall (2,3) will have a decrease in liking, which increases with the severity of the blunder. Respect only decreases in the less competent individual after a minor mistake is committed. [3]

Self-esteem

Research conducted on self-image suggests that self-esteem influences whether positive aspects of the pratfall effect and self-comparisons will occur. [6] An individual with high self-esteem will prefer the non-pratfalling highly able individual to the pratfalling individual of equal ability. This is well explained by social comparison theory which investigates the tendency to compare oneself to others with similar capabilities. [7] When an individual of similar competency to a rater commits a pratfall, the relatability between the observer and blunderer can cause mental discomfort which then results in lower likability ratings. [3] Since observers seek to build accurate self-evaluations, the commonality shared between the blunderer and the observer could threaten the observer's self-concept, especially in self-evaluations of abilities. A rater with a high level of self-esteem would therefore feel threatened by a blundering competent individual, therefore preferring the non-blundering able individual since that individual poses no threat to the observer's self-esteem. For the same reason, an average blunderer would pose more of a threat to an average individual, resulting in similar losses in likability. Individuals with low self-esteem tend to prefer highly able individuals. Although no research has been conducted on this topic, one such explanation suggests that a person with low self-esteem would expect to be "outshone", and desires to find relatability between themselves and the perceived competent individuals. [3]

Attitude

Kiesler and Goldberg proposed that similarity in attitude between observers and blunderers can determine the extent at which changes in attractiveness occur. Greater similarities in attitudes resulted in more derogation, even to the point where the blunderer is subject to derogation regardless of perceived ability. This was determined experimentally by directly telling observers that they were extremely similar to the confederate, especially in prose and in the form of responses to questioning. [8] This research implies that similarities in attitude can be more significant in determining attractiveness, especially with the knowledge of congruence in attitude.

Explanation

Aronson explained the results of this experiment and the pratfall effect as due to increased sympathy with successful individuals after they make a mistake. Later work has suggested that the pratfall effect is explained by self-comparison between blunderers and observers in addition to the observer's desire for accurate self-evaluations. The derogation toward an average confederate appears after the confederate commits the pratfall since humor allows the individuals to comfortably rate attractiveness more congruently with immediately felt (negative) emotions. [9] These emotions vary based on the ability of the observer, with the average participant feeling the most discomfort due to the participant's similarity to the mediocre performer, and the performer's mistake. [3] [7] As a result of threatened self-esteem (in the observer), the perceived average individual's attractiveness is rated lower. The perceived able individual is rated higher after the pratfall since the able individual appears more relatable and therefore approachable and likeable. [10]

An alternative explanation is that the pratfall effect is due to increased attention to the target individuals, which in turn results in better realization of their appropriateness and/or inappropriateness given the evaluation criteria. [11]

Examples

The pratfall effect is notably attributed to John F. Kennedy in the aftermath of the Bay of the Pigs Invasion [12] and to Apple Maps' initial failure. [13]

Applications

Marketing

Research on the potential positive effects of "blemishes" in product marketing suggests that in certain situations, desirability and eventual purchase decisions both increased after presenting a product blemish, but only under low-effort processing conditions, or when cognitive resources are low due to preoccupation or distraction. Under high-effort processing conditions, presenting a blemish decreased desirability and amounts of purchases. Primacy effects suggest that under low-effort processing conditions, positive effects create a reference point at which a product is evaluated, and conflicting negative information presented boosts the initial positive impression formed by the product.

This was demonstrated through research by approaching students before an exam—when students likely had their attention focused elsewhere—versus approaching students leisurely walking around and offering to sell them a chocolate bar. The chocolate bar was advertised positively: chilled, favored by consumers on a taste test, and offered at a discount. In the experimental condition, the chocolate bar was described as discounted since it was broken. The chocolate bar was packed in a transparent wrapper, so the broken piece of chocolate could clearly be seen by the students. Students in the low-effort experimental group were twice as likely to purchase the chocolate bar after being presented negative information, while in the high-effort group, students were half as likely to purchase the chocolate bar. [2]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Popularity</span> Concept in sociology

In sociology, popularity is how much a person, idea, place, item or other concept is either liked or accorded status by other people. Liking can be due to reciprocal liking, interpersonal attraction, and similar factors. Social status can be due to dominance, superiority, and similar factors. For example, a kind person may be considered likable and therefore more popular than another person, and a wealthy person may be considered superior and therefore more popular than another person.

A self-serving bias is any cognitive or perceptual process that is distorted by the need to maintain and enhance self-esteem, or the tendency to perceive oneself in an overly favorable manner. It is the belief that individuals tend to ascribe success to their own abilities and efforts, but ascribe failure to external factors. When individuals reject the validity of negative feedback, focus on their strengths and achievements but overlook their faults and failures, or take more credit for their group's work than they give to other members, they are protecting their self-esteem from threat and injury. These cognitive and perceptual tendencies perpetuate illusions and error, but they also serve the self's need for esteem. For example, a student who attributes earning a good grade on an exam to their own intelligence and preparation but attributes earning a poor grade to the teacher's poor teaching ability or unfair test questions might be exhibiting a self-serving bias. Studies have shown that similar attributions are made in various situations, such as the workplace, interpersonal relationships, sports, and consumer decisions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elliot Aronson</span> American psychologist (born 1932)

Elliot Aronson is an American psychologist who has carried out experiments on the theory of cognitive dissonance and invented the Jigsaw Classroom, a cooperative teaching technique that facilitates learning while reducing interethnic hostility and prejudice. In his 1972 social psychology textbook, The Social Animal, he stated Aronson's First Law: "People who do crazy things are not necessarily crazy", thus asserting the importance of situational factors in bizarre behavior. He is the only person in the 120-year history of the American Psychological Association to have won all three of its major awards: for writing, for teaching, and for research. In 2007, he received the William James Award for Lifetime Achievement from the Association for Psychological Science, in which he was cited as the scientist who "fundamentally changed the way we look at everyday life". A Review of General Psychology survey, published in 2002, ranked Aronson as the 78th most cited psychologist of the 20th century. He officially retired in 1994 but continues to teach and write.

The halo effect is the tendency for positive impressions of a person, company, country, brand, or product in one area to positively influence one's opinion or feelings. Halo effect is ”the name given to the phenomenon whereby evaluators tend to be influenced by their previous judgments of performance or personality.” The halo effect is a cognitive bias which can prevent someone from accepting a person, a product or a brand based on the sum of all objective circumstances at hand.

The physical attractiveness stereotype is the tendency to assume that people who are physically attractive, based on social beauty standards, also possess other desirable personality traits. Research has shown that those who are physically attractive are viewed as more intelligent, competent, and socially desirable. 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.

Deindividuation is a concept in social psychology that is generally thought of as the loss of self-awareness in groups, although this is a matter of contention. For the social psychologist, the level of analysis is the individual in the context of a social situation. As such, social psychologists emphasize the role of internal psychological processes. Other social scientists, such as sociologists, are more concerned with broad social, economic, political, and historical factors that influence events in a given society.

Attitudes are associated beliefs and behaviors towards some object. They are not stable, and because of the communication and behavior of other people, are subject to change by social influences, as well as by the individual's motivation to maintain cognitive consistency when cognitive dissonance occurs—when two attitudes or attitude and behavior conflict. Attitudes and attitude objects are functions of affective and cognitive components. It has been suggested that the inter-structural composition of an associative network can be altered by the activation of a single node. Thus, by activating an affective or emotional node, attitude change may be possible, though affective and cognitive components tend to be intertwined.

Social comparison theory, initially proposed by social psychologist Leon Festinger in 1954, centers on the belief that individuals drive to gain accurate self-evaluations. The theory explains how individuals evaluate their opinions and abilities by comparing themselves to others to reduce uncertainty in these domains and learn how to define the self. Comparing oneself to others socially is a form of measurement and self-assessment to identify where an individual stands according to their own set of standards and emotions about themselves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social rejection</span> Deliberate exclusion of an individual from social relationship or social interaction

Social rejection occurs when an individual is deliberately excluded from a social relationship or social interaction. The topic includes interpersonal rejection, romantic rejection, and familial estrangement. A person can be rejected or shunned by individuals or an entire group of people. Furthermore, rejection can be either active by bullying, teasing, or ridiculing, or passive by ignoring a person, or giving the "silent treatment". The experience of being rejected is subjective for the recipient, and it can be perceived when it is not actually present. The word "ostracism" is also commonly used to denote a process of social exclusion.

In social research, particularly in psychology, the term demand characteristic refers to an experimental artifact where participants form an interpretation of the experiment's purpose and subconsciously change their behavior to fit that interpretation. Typically, demand characteristics are considered an extraneous variable, exerting an effect on behavior other than that intended by the experimenter. Pioneering research was conducted on demand characteristics by Martin Orne.

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.

The jigsaw technique is a method of organizing classroom activity that makes students dependent on each other to succeed. It breaks classes into groups that each assemble a piece of an assignment and synthesize their work when finished. It was designed by social psychologist Elliot Aronson to help weaken racial cliques in forcibly integrated schools. A study by John Hattie found that the jigsaw method benefits students' learning.

Ingratiating is a psychological technique in which an individual attempts to influence another person by becoming more likeable to their target. This term was coined by social psychologist Edward E. Jones, who further defined ingratiating as "a class of strategic behaviors illicitly designed to influence a particular other person concerning the attractiveness of one's personal qualities." Ingratiation research has identified some specific tactics of employing ingratiation:

In social psychology, illusory superiority is a cognitive bias wherein a person overestimates their own qualities and abilities compared to other people. Illusory superiority is one of many positive illusions, relating to the self, that are evident in the study of intelligence, the effective performance of tasks and tests, and the possession of desirable personal characteristics and personality traits. Overestimation of abilities compared to an objective measure is known as the overconfidence effect.

Implicit self-esteem refers to a person's disposition to evaluate themselves in a spontaneous, automatic, or unconscious manner. It contrasts with explicit self-esteem, which entails more conscious and reflective self-evaluation. Both explicit and implicit self-esteem are constituents of self-esteem.

Self-justification describes how, when a person encounters cognitive dissonance, or a situation in which a person's behavior is inconsistent with their beliefs (hypocrisy), that person tends to justify the behavior and deny any negative feedback associated with the behavior.

Praise as a form of social interaction expresses recognition, reassurance or admiration. Praise is expressed verbally as well as by body language.

Frederick Rhodewalt was an American social psychologist at the University of Utah.

Social vision is a sub-topic of social psychology that investigates the ways from which individuals extract information and perceive others using their vision alone. The field of social vision is highly interdisciplinary and located at the nexus of social psychology, communication studies, and vision science.

References

  1. 1 2 Aronson, E., Willerman, B., & Floyd, J. (1966). The effect of a pratfall on increasing interpersonal appeal. Psychonomic Science.
  2. 1 2 Ein-Gar, D., Shiv, B., & Tormala, Z. L. (2012). When blemishing leads to blossoming: The positive effect of negative information. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(5), 846-859.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 Mettee, D. R., & Wilkins, P. C. (1972). When similarity" hurts": Effects of perceived ability and a humorous blunder on interpersonal attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22(2), 246.
  4. ↑ Aronson, Elliot; Willerman, Ben; Floyd, Joanne (2014). "The effect of a pratfall on increasing personal attractiveness". Psychonomic Science. 4 (6): 227–228. doi: 10.3758/BF03342263 .
  5. ↑ Deaux, K. (1972). To err is humanizing: But sex makes a difference. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 3, 20-28.
  6. ↑ Koch, Erika J., and James A. Shepperd. "Testing ability and acceptance explanations of self-esteem." Self and Identity 7.1 (2008): 54-74.
  7. 1 2 Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human relations, 7(2), 117-140.
  8. ↑ Kiesler, C. A., & Goldberg, G. N. (1968). A multi-dimensional approach to the experimental study of interpersonal attraction: Effect of a blunder on the attractiveness of a Competent other. Psychological Reports, 22(3), 693-705.
  9. ↑ Landy, D., & Mettee, D. (1969). Evaluation of an aggressor as a function of exposure to cartoon humor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12(1), 66.
  10. ↑ Helmreich, R., Aronson, E., & LeFan, J. (1970). To err is humanizing sometimes: Effects of self-esteem, ability, and a pratfall on interpersonal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16(2), 259.
  11. ↑ Yechiam, E, & Hochman, G. (2013) Losses as modulators of attention: Review and analysis of the unique effects of losses over gains. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 497-518.
  12. ↑ Berglas, S. (1996, September 1). The Entrepreneurial Ego: Pratfalls. Retrieved from Inc. Magazine: http://www.inc.com/magazine/19960901/1796.html
  13. ↑ Kessler, Z. (2012, December 13). How Apple Will Benefit From Its Miserable Maps Failure. Bloomberg. Retrieved October 18, 2013, from "How Apple Will Benefit from Its Miserable Maps Failure - Bloomberg". Bloomberg News . Archived from the original on November 13, 2013. Retrieved November 13, 2013.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.