Who makes a more consistent first impression? Examining the structure and correlates of dissensus

IF 5 1区 心理学 Q1 Psychology Journal of Personality Pub Date : 2023-11-28 DOI:10.1111/jopy.12906
Elizabeth U. Long, Erika N. Carlson, Victoria Pringle, Norhan Elsaadawy, Marc A. Fournier, Brian S. Connelly
{"title":"Who makes a more consistent first impression? Examining the structure and correlates of dissensus","authors":"Elizabeth U. Long,&nbsp;Erika N. Carlson,&nbsp;Victoria Pringle,&nbsp;Norhan Elsaadawy,&nbsp;Marc A. Fournier,&nbsp;Brian S. Connelly","doi":"10.1111/jopy.12906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective and Background</h3>\n \n <p>How do targets shape consensus in impression formation? Targets are known to play an outsized role in the accuracy of first impressions, but their influence on consensus has been difficult to study. With the help of the recently developed extended Social Relations Model, we explore the structure and correlates of individual differences in consensus (i.e., dissensus).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Across 3 studies, 187 photographs of targets were rated by 960 perceivers on personality and evaluative traits, as well as being coded for physical cues by trained coders. We explored the within-target consistency of consensus across traits, as well as its relationship to four categories of theoretically relevant correlates: expressiveness, normativity, positivity, and social categories.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The tendency to make a consistent impression on others was broadly consistent across traits. High-consensus targets tended to be more expressive, had more normative physical cues, and were viewed more positively.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>At least in a first impression context, targets may play a unique role in predicting the consensus of personality judgments by providing perceivers with more information to work with, and making a negative impression on others may carry social costs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personality","volume":"92 6","pages":"1497-1513"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personality","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jopy.12906","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective and Background

How do targets shape consensus in impression formation? Targets are known to play an outsized role in the accuracy of first impressions, but their influence on consensus has been difficult to study. With the help of the recently developed extended Social Relations Model, we explore the structure and correlates of individual differences in consensus (i.e., dissensus).

Method

Across 3 studies, 187 photographs of targets were rated by 960 perceivers on personality and evaluative traits, as well as being coded for physical cues by trained coders. We explored the within-target consistency of consensus across traits, as well as its relationship to four categories of theoretically relevant correlates: expressiveness, normativity, positivity, and social categories.

Results

The tendency to make a consistent impression on others was broadly consistent across traits. High-consensus targets tended to be more expressive, had more normative physical cues, and were viewed more positively.

Conclusions

At least in a first impression context, targets may play a unique role in predicting the consensus of personality judgments by providing perceivers with more information to work with, and making a negative impression on others may carry social costs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谁给人的第一印象更一致?检查不同意见的结构和相关关系。
目的与背景:目标如何在印象形成中形成共识?众所周知,目标在第一印象的准确性方面发挥着巨大的作用,但它们对共识的影响一直很难研究。在最近发展的扩展社会关系模型的帮助下,我们探讨了共识(即异议)中个体差异的结构和相关性。方法:在3项研究中,由960名被测者对187张被测者的照片进行人格和评价特征评定,并由训练有素的编码员编码为身体线索。我们探讨了跨特征共识的目标内一致性,以及它与四类理论相关相关因素的关系:表达性、规范性、积极性和社会类别。结果:给别人留下一致印象的倾向在性格特征上大体一致。高共识目标往往更善于表达,有更多规范的身体线索,并且被认为更积极。结论:至少在第一印象情境中,目标可能在预测人格判断的共识方面发挥着独特的作用,因为它为感知者提供了更多的信息,而给他人留下负面印象可能会带来社会成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Personality
Journal of Personality PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
6.00%
发文量
100
期刊介绍: Journal of Personality publishes scientific investigations in the field of personality. It focuses particularly on personality and behavior dynamics, personality development, and individual differences in the cognitive, affective, and interpersonal domains. The journal reflects and stimulates interest in the growth of new theoretical and methodological approaches in personality psychology.
期刊最新文献
Measures of Subclinical Psychopathy and Everyday Sadism are Still Redundant: A Conceptual Replication and Extension of Blötner and Mokros (2023). The (Un)Attractiveness of Dark Triad Personalities: Assessing Fictitious Characters for Short- and Long-Term Relationships. Understanding Parenting Stress in Adoptive Parents: A Longitudinal Multilevel Study of Parents' Self-Criticism, Child Negative Emotionality, and Child Age at Placement. Personality and Meat Consumption Among Romantic Partners in Daily Life Development of Self‐Reported Reward Responsiveness and Inhibitory Control and the Role of Clinical and Neural Predictors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1