Social Perception

Social Perception
To understand others, we observe
behavior and infer feelings, traits,
motives.
Important type of social perception is
making causal attributions:
Answering the Why question
Why did she smile at me?
Why was he rude?
Why is our server taking forever?

Two types of causal attributions:

Dispositional (internal) attribution
a person is behaving in a certain way
because of something about the person
(their attitude, character, personality).

Situational (external) attribution.

a person is behaving a certain way
because of something about the situation
assumption is that most people would
respond the same way in that situation

When making attributions, people are

often biased.
Remember the fundamental attribution
error: Tendency to explain peoples
behavior in terms of personality traits
Also called the correspondence bias:
belief that peoples behavior matches
(corresponds to) their disposition.

Classic study (Jones & Harris, 1967)

Participants read an essay about
Castro and had to guess the essaywriters attitude.
Essay was either pro- or anti-Castro
Half were told the writer could pick
stance, others told writer had no
choice.

Pro Castro

Pro-Castro

Anti-Castro

Anti Castro

Attitude Towards Castro

Choice

No Choice

When told the essay writer had no choice in their

stance, participants still inferred that their attitude
matched their essay.

Explanations of the correspondence

bias:
Situational factors sometimes
unknown
Lack of experience with situation

Experience and Correspondence bias

(Balcetis & Dunning, 2008)

Some people predicted whether they

Forecasters
will buy a baked good for a charity.
Also indicate % of others who will.
After charity event, other people
are
Experiencer
s
asked if they did buy a baked good.
Everyone forms impression about a
person who either did or did not buy
a baked good.

Holier-than-thou
Self

Other
100
80
60

% predicted/actually buyers

40

Inferences about generosity

Buyer

5.5
20
5
4.5
0
4
Forecasters
Generosity 3.5
3

Nonbuyer

Explanations of the correspondence

bias:
Situational factors sometimes
unknown
Lack of experience with situation

Situational factors often not salient

And salient factors perceived as cause

After observing
conversation, rated
who led conversation,
who chose topics
(among other things).

Participant 1

Participant 2

Participant 3
Confederate

One (or both) actors

were more salient

Confederate

Participants observed
a discussion by other
participants
(actually
confederates)

Actor A

Actor B

25
23
21
19
Rating of Actors Causal Role

17
15
13
11

Facing A

Facing Both

Facing B

Whoever was most salient was perceived as

having the biggest causal role.

Explanations of the correspondence

bias:
Situational factors sometimes
unknown
Lack of experience with situation

Situational factors often not salient

And salient factors perceived as cause

Two-step process of making

attributions
Observe

This happens automatically!

Behavior

Step 1:
Make internal
attribution

Behavior is caused by
disposition (personality)

Step 2:
Consider other
explanations

Dispositional attribution
is adjusted to account
for situational factors

This step takes effort.

Only engage in Step 2 if
motivated and able

Support for the 2-step process

(Gilbert, Pelham, &

Krull, 1988)

Participants listened to student give proor antiabortion speech that he was

assigned to write (always had no choice).
Half just listened to speech.
Other half told that after hearing the
speech, theyd have to write and deliver
their own speech.
Everyone asked to predict speech-writers
attitude.

Proabortion

Antiabortion

Attitude Towards Abortion (higher = pro)

12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
Just Listening

Much larger bias when people were distracted

by thinking about upcoming speech.
They didnt adjust to take situational factors
into account.

Two-step process of making

attributions
Observe

This happens automatically!

Behavior

Step 1:
Make internal
attribution

Behavior is caused by
disposition (personality)

Step 2:
Consider other
explanations

Dispositional attribution
is adjusted to account
for situational factors

This step takes effort.

Only engage in Step 2 if
motivated and able

Summary of correspondence bias:

People generally assume behavior is
caused by disposition.
Happens because situational factors often
unknown or not salient.
Bias is reduced with experience.
2-step process of making attributions
Making dispositional attribution is automatic
Adjusting to take situational factors into
account takes effort

Correspondence bias describes social

perception:
Why did he fail the test?
What about self-perception?
Why did I fail the test?
Why did I ace the test?

When explaining our own behavior, we

often exhibit self-serving attributions
Success caused by dispositional
factors
We won because our team played great!

Failure caused by situational factors

We lost because the refs were terrible!

SSAs in sportswho makes them?

Experienced vs. novices
Experienced LESS likely to make SSAs
Experienced know that wins arent only
because of good playing and sometimes
they deserve to lose.

Solo sport (e.g., tennis) vs. team sport

(e.g., basketball)
Solo sports MORE likely to make SSAs
For solo sports, internal attributions feel
better with wins and worse with losses than
in team sports.

Why self-serving attributions?

1. Maintain or raise self-esteem
Self-serving attributions most likely
when we fail at something we cant
change.
If we think we can change, more likely to
make dispositional attribution and then
work on improving.

Why self-serving attributions?

2. Self-presentation
We want others to have good opinion of
us
Self-serving attributions more likely
when we care what others think

Why self-serving attributions?

3. Perceptual Salience
When thinking about our own behavior,
the situation is salient

4. Difference in available information

We know more about ourselves
I never fail an exam!

Why self-serving attributions?

1. Maintain or raise self-esteem
Motivational
Explanations
2. Self-presentation
3. Perceptual Salience
Cognitive
Explanations
4. Difference in available information