www.psychologicalscience.org Open in urlscan Pro
20.12.2.209  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

GET https://www.psychologicalscience.org/

<form id="searchform" method="get" action="https://www.psychologicalscience.org/">
  <input type="search" id="search" name="s" placeholder="SEARCH..." class="formbtn texty">
  <button class="icon"><svg class="svg-inline--fa fa-search fa-w-16" aria-hidden="true" focusable="false" data-prefix="fa" data-icon="search" role="img" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 512 512" data-fa-i2svg="">
      <path fill="currentColor"
        d="M505 442.7L405.3 343c-4.5-4.5-10.6-7-17-7H372c27.6-35.3 44-79.7 44-128C416 93.1 322.9 0 208 0S0 93.1 0 208s93.1 208 208 208c48.3 0 92.7-16.4 128-44v16.3c0 6.4 2.5 12.5 7 17l99.7 99.7c9.4 9.4 24.6 9.4 33.9 0l28.3-28.3c9.4-9.4 9.4-24.6.1-34zM208 336c-70.7 0-128-57.2-128-128 0-70.7 57.2-128 128-128 70.7 0 128 57.2 128 128 0 70.7-57.2 128-128 128z">
      </path>
    </svg><!-- <i class="fa fa-search" aria-hidden="true"></i> --></button>
</form>

Text Content

 * News
 * Research Topics
 * Conventions & Events
   * 2024 APS Annual Convention
   * Webinars & Virtual Events
   * Past and Future Conventions
 * Journals
   * Psychological Science
   * Current Directions in Psychological Science
   * Psychological Science in the Public Interest
   * Perspectives on Psychological Science
   * Clinical Psychological Science
   * Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
 * The Observer 
   * Archive
   * About the Observer
   * Advertising
   * Contact the Editor
   * Presidential Columns
 * Funding & Policy
   * Get Informed
   * Get Funded
   * Get Involved
 * Members
   * Awards & Honors
   * Member Directory
   * Lifetime Members
   * Student Members
   * Teaching of Psychology
   * Donors
 * Career Resources
   * Employment
 * Podcasts & Videos
   * APS Podcasts and Audio Content
   * Up-and-Coming Voices
   * Convention Plenaries and Keynotes
   * Inside the Psychologist’s Studio
   * APS YouTube Channel
   * More APS Video Collections
 * About
   * Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
   * Board of Directors
   * Staff Directory
   * Ethics Policy & Code of Conduct
   * Policy & Position Statements

 * 

 * Login
 * Join APS

Observer > 2018 > February > Studying First Impressions: What to Consider?


STUDENT NOTEBOOK


STUDYING FIRST IMPRESSIONS: WHAT TO CONSIDER?

Irmak Olcaysoy Okten
January 31, 2018
Tags:
 * Behavioral Assessment
 * Implicit Bias
 * Implicit Processing
 * Judgment
 * Social Behavior
 * Social Cognition

Log in to Save for Later


First impressions are long-lasting. This familiar phrase indicates one of the
many reasons that studying people’s first impressions is critical for social
psychologists. Any information about a person, from her physical properties to
her nonverbal and verbal behaviors, and even the environment she inhabits,
influences our impressions and judgments about her (e.g., Ambady & Rosenthal,
1993; Gosling, Ko, Mannarell, & Morris, 2002). First impressions have been shown
to last for months (Gunaydin, Selcuk, & Zayas, 2017) and affect personal
judgments even in the presence of contradictory evidence about the individual
(e.g., Rydell & McConnell, 2006).

This article will briefly discuss some critical aspects of first impressions
based on existing social psychological research, including my own.

Types of First Impressions

What are our first impressions about? Social cognition literature conceptualizes
impressions via a number of constructs. The most studied form of impression in
social cognition is traits; people tend to form split-second impressions with
regard to others’ presumably stable characteristics, such as trustworthiness and
competence. They do this from others’ facial appearances (e.g., Willis &
Todorov, 2006) and simple behaviors — for example, having observed a person
taking an elevator up one flight, people may infer that she is lazy (Uleman,
Blader, & Todorov, 2005). The goals, values, and beliefs of others also have
been shown to influence first impressions (Moskowitz & Olcaysoy Okten, 2016).

Recent research from our lab has demonstrated the effect of behavior
characteristics on first impressions; when initially observed behaviors of
others are known or believed to be consistent over time, formation of trait
inferences has been observed to be more likely (Olcaysoy Okten & Moskowitz,
2017). Considering the elevator example, having observed the same person taking
an elevator up one flight on several occasions, people become more confident in
their assessment of this person as lazy. However, when a person takes an
elevator up one flight only on a specific occasion, people may believe he wants
to be quick in this specific situation.

Measuring Impressions: Explicit or Implicit?

First impressions are manifested not only in perceivers’ explicit reactions but
also in their spontaneous inferences. Implicit measures aim to capture the
spontaneous impressions that are typically invisible to the perceivers —
impressions they have formed without any awareness or intention. While explicit
measures of impressions include self-report tests such as ratings of evaluations
or inferences, implicit measures include memory tests that measure the extent to
which the target person is associated with a construct (such as a trait) in
memory. The exact relationship between implicit and explicit forms of
impressions has been a controversial question in the field of social cognition
(Payne, Burkley, & Stokes, 2008).

Research from many labs has also consistently shown that implicit impressions
are resistant to change (e.g., Gregg, Seibt, & Banaji, 2006; Mann & Ferguson,
2015). When changes in impressions do occur, it is typically explicit, but not
implicit, trait inferences that are altered (Olcaysoy Okten & Moskowitz, 2017b).
For example, after learning that the person who took the elevator up one flight
on several occasions actually works out regularly, perceivers update their
initial explicit judgment of her being lazy. However, they still tend to
classify the person as lazy in an implicit memory task. Thus, implicit biases
can persist and affect interpersonal interactions in significant ways, even when
perceivers are convinced that they have changed their impressions in light of
new information.

Why does someone form an impression of another person? Research has shown that
the answer to this question is critical to determining the way in which people
process information about others. Adopting the mindset of a “reporter” whose
goal is merely to discover the facts about a person might leave one with a
completely different impression than adopting the mindset of a person on a blind
date. In the former case, perceivers engage in systematic (comprehensive)
processing, whereas in the latter case, they tend to rely on heuristics that are
consistent with their goal to affiliate with the given person (Chen, Shechter, &
Chaiken, 1996). Such motivated processing can trigger a positivity bias in
evaluating others.

Impressions also are affected by environmental cues: For example, people
perceive an ambiguous behavior differently after being primed to see a trait as
“bold” versus “reckless” (Higgins, Rholes, & Jones, 1977). Perceivers’ long-term
goals also affect their interpretations of others’ actions during first
encounters. For example, those who have a higher need to reduce uncertainty in
their interpersonal interactions are more likely to infer stable traits from
mundane behaviors of others (Moskowitz, 1993) and less likely to change their
first impressions even after learning that those impressions were inaccurate
(Wyer, 2016).

Behavioral Implications of First Impressions

Despite the large literature on the formation of and change in first
impressions, less is known about their behavioral consequences (for a review,
see Harris & Garris, 2008). Much of the existing research has focused on
behavioral consequences of first impressions related to an existing stigma. In
these studies, perceivers’ stigma-related impressions resulted in discriminatory
practices, such as avoidance of interaction and experience of physiological
threat during such interactions (e.g., Blascovich, Mendes, Hunter, Lickel, &
Kowai-Bell, 2000; Peck & Denney, 2012).

Other research has focused on the outcomes in the domain of job recruitment.
First impressions significantly predict employers’ behavioral tendencies during
job interviews as well as their ultimate recruitment decisions (Barrick, Swider,
& Stewart, 2010; Swider, Barrick, & Harris, 2016). Specifically, employers tend
to ask questions that confirm their first impressions about the candidates and
treat them in ways that are consistent with such impressions (Snyder & Swann,
1978). If their initial impressions of the candidates are positive, employers
show a higher tendency to “sell” the job by providing information to the
candidates about the job rather than gathering information from them (Dougherty,
Ebert, & Callender, 1986; Dougherty, Turban, & Callender, 1994). In turn,
employers’ warmer behaviors typically elicit warmer behaviors from the
candidates (e.g., Snyder, Tanke, and Berscheid, 1977), and thus the employers’
initial positive impressions about the candidates are validated. Importantly,
however, even in cases when a job candidate performs in ways that disconfirm
employers’ first impressions, employers may fail to assess the candidate’s
performance accurately, preventing them from changing their first impressions
accordingly. Research has shown that this might be due to high levels of
self-regulation on behalf of the interviewers (Nordstrom, Hall, & Bartels,
1998). Therefore, reducing cognitive demands in an interview context by using
scripted questions or having third-party observers evaluate the interview
process might be effective in fostering accurate impressions and judgments of a
job candidate.

When forming first impressions, people typically have to rely on limited and
potentially misleading information about others. Drawing big conclusions from
such limited information can lead to poor decisions with broader implications.
Understanding the origins and consequences of first impressions is the first
step to addressing biases in those impressions. The points discussed above aim
to provide a brief guide to the students of psychological science who are
interested in taking part in this scientific journey.

References

Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher
evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical
attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 431–441.

Barrick, M. R., Swider, B. W., & Stewart, G. L. (2010). Initial evaluations in
the interview: Relationships with subsequent interviewer evaluations and
employment offers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 1163–1172.
doi:10.1037/a0019918

Blascovich, J., Mendes, W. B., Hunter, S. B., Lickel, B., & Kowai-Bell, N.
(2001). Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 253–267.

Chen, S., Shechter, D., & Chaiken, S. (1996). Getting at the truth or getting
along: Accuracy-versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic
processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 262–275.

Dougherty, T. W., Ebert, R. J., & Callender, J. C. (1986). Policy capturing in
the employment interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 9–15.

Dougherty, T. W., Turban, D. B., & Callender, J. C. (1994). Confirming first
impressions in the employment interview: A field study of interviewer
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 659–665.

Gosling, S. D., Ko, S. J., Mannarelli, T., & Morris, M. E. (2002). A room with a
cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 82, 379–398.

Gregg, A. P., Seibt, B., & Banaji, M. R. (2006). Easier done than undone:
Asymmetry in the malleability of implicit preferences. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 90, 1–20.

Gunaydin, G., Selcuk, E., & Zayas, V. (2017). Impressions based on a portrait
predict, 1-month later, impressions following a live interaction. Social
Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 36–44.

Harris, M. J., & Garris, C. P. (2008). You never get a second chance to make a
first impression: Behavioral consequences of first impressions. In N. Ambady &
J. J. Skowronski (Eds.), First impressions (pp. 147–168). New York, NY: Guilford
Press.

Higgins, E.T., Rholes, W.S., & Jones, C.R. (1977). Category accessibility and
impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141–154.

Mann, T. C., & Ferguson, M. J. (2015). Can we undo our first impressions? The
role of reinterpretation in reversing implicit evaluations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 823–849.

Moskowitz, G. B. (1993). Individual differences in social categorization: The
effects of personal need for structure on spontaneous trait inferences. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 132–142.

Moskowitz, G. B., & Olcaysoy Okten, I. (2016). Spontaneous goal inference
(SGI). Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 64–80.

Nordstrom, C. R., Hall, R. J., & Bartels, L. K. (1998). First impressions versus
good impressions: The effect of self-regulation on interview evaluations. The
Journal of Psychology, 132, 477–491.

Olcaysoy Okten, I., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2017a). How ideology shapes implicit
inference: Spontaneous goal inference versus spontaneous trait inference.
Manuscript invited for revision and resubmission.

Olcaysoy Okten, I., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2017b). Updating spontaneous trait
inferences. Manuscript in preparation.

Olcaysoy Okten, I., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2018). Goal versus trait explanations:
Causal attributions beyond the trait-situation dichotomy. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology. doi:10.1037/pspa0000104

Payne, B. K., Burkley, M. A., & Stokes, M. B. (2008). Why do implicit and
explicit attitude tests diverge? The role of structural fit. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 16–31.

Peck, B. M., & Denney, M. (2012). Disparities in the conduct of the medical
encounter: The effects of physician and patient race and gender. Sage Open, 2.
doi:10.1177/2158244012459193

Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2006). Understanding implicit and explicit
attitude change: A systems of reasoning analysis. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 91, 995–1008.

Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B. (1978). Hypothesis-testing processes in social
interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1202–1212.

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, 656–666.

Swider, B. W., Barrick, M. R., & Harris, T. B. (2016). Initial impressions: What
they are, what they are not, and how they influence structured interview
outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 625–638.

Uleman, J. S., Blader, S., & Todorov, A. (2005). Implicit impressions. In R.
Hassin, J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The new unconscious (pp. 362–392).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a
100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17, 592–598.

Wyer, N. A. (2016). Easier done than undone…by some of the people, some of the
time: The role of elaboration in explicit and implicit group
preferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 77–85.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Observer > 2018 > February > Studying First Impressions: What to Consider?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website.
Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By
posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your
profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions,
findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those
of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s
author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines.

Please login with your APS account to comment.

Login


ABOUT THE AUTHOR



Irmak Olcaysoy Okten is a fifth-year PhD student in the social psychology
program at Lehigh University. She examines issues relating to the roles of
biases in the processes of person perception, impression formation, and memory
during interpersonal interactions as well as the effect of perceivers’ goals on
these processes.




RELATED


CRFP ALUMNI IN THEIR OWN WORDS

Elizabeth Salmon is a postdoctoral Consortium Research Fellow working in the
Personnel Assessment Research Unit (PARU) within the US Army Research Institute
at Ft. Belvoir, Virginia. PARU researchers focus on developing and evaluating
assignment measures


REMEMBERING EARL B. ‘BUZ’ HUNT

Friends and colleagues of an acclaimed intelligence researcher celebrate his
wit, charm, and scientific focus on individual differences in cognitive
abilities.


TEACHING CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE

Edited by C. Nathan DeWall and David G. Myers  Aimed at integrating cutting-edge
psychological science into the classroom, Teaching Current Directions in
Psychological Science offers advice and how-to guidance about teaching a
particular area of


 * Who We Are
 * Privacy Policy
 * Contact Us
 * Donate
 * Advertising

 * Follow APS
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

© Association for Psychological Science

COOKIES

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by
remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you
consent to the use of ALL the cookies. To accept or reject certain categories of
cookies specifically please click the Cookie Settings link. Please read our
Cookie Policy for more information.

Do not sell my personal information.
Cookie settingsAccept Reject
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Close

PRIVACY OVERVIEW

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through
the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary
are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic
functionalities...
Necessary
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.
This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and
security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal
information.
Functional
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the
content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other
third-party features.

CookieDurationDescription__cf_bm30 minutesThis cookie, set by Cloudflare, is
used to support Cloudflare Bot Management.

Performance
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance
indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for
the visitors.

CookieDurationDescriptionAWSELBCORS5 minutesThis cookie is used by Elastic Load
Balancing from Amazon Web Services to effectively balance load on the servers.

Analytics
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the
website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of
visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

CookieDurationDescriptionat-randneverAddThis sets this cookie to track page
visits, sources of traffic and share counts.CONSENT2 yearsYouTube sets this
cookie via embedded youtube-videos and registers anonymous statistical data.uvc1
year 27 daysSet by addthis.com to determine the usage of addthis.com
service._ga2 yearsThe _ga cookie, installed by Google Analytics, calculates
visitor, session and campaign data and also keeps track of site usage for the
site's analytics report. The cookie stores information anonymously and assigns a
randomly generated number to recognize unique visitors._gat_gtag_UA_3507334_11
minuteSet by Google to distinguish users._gid1 dayInstalled by Google Analytics,
_gid cookie stores information on how visitors use a website, while also
creating an analytics report of the website's performance. Some of the data that
are collected include the number of visitors, their source, and the pages they
visit anonymously.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and
marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect
information to provide customized ads.

CookieDurationDescriptionloc1 year 27 daysAddThis sets this geolocation cookie
to help understand the location of users who share the
information.VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE5 months 27 daysA cookie set by YouTube to measure
bandwidth that determines whether the user gets the new or old player
interface.YSCsessionYSC cookie is set by Youtube and is used to track the views
of embedded videos on Youtube pages.yt-remote-connected-devicesneverYouTube sets
this cookie to store the video preferences of the user using embedded YouTube
video.yt-remote-device-idneverYouTube sets this cookie to store the video
preferences of the user using embedded YouTube
video.yt.innertube::nextIdneverThis cookie, set by YouTube, registers a unique
ID to store data on what videos from YouTube the user has
seen.yt.innertube::requestsneverThis cookie, set by YouTube, registers a unique
ID to store data on what videos from YouTube the user has seen.

Others
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been
classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT
Powered by