As we were interested in the meta-accuracy of not yet modified “very first impressions” (term borrowed from Bar et al., 2006, p. Although, as stated earlier, first impressions generally tend to be exceptionally persistent, they can still be modified following subsequent exposure to new information under the right circumstances (e.g., Gawronski et al., 2010). First, articles needed to be based on empirical data and be published peer-reviewed journals. The 70 articles underwent further detailed manual scrutiny with respect to several inclusion criteria. Jane, for example, believes that Professor Jones sees her as incompetent and might try to work harder to prove that she is not and/or engage in self-fulfilling-prophecy behaviors and indeed present herself as incompetent. What we believe others make of us may to a large extent determine our own behavioral tendencies. Understanding the meta-accuracy of first impressions is just as important as understanding their accuracy because it, too, has the potential to shape subsequent interactions. Things are further complicated by the target’s and judge’s views having both shared and distinctive components, by targets and judges achieving different levels of accuracy for different information types (e.g., self–other knowledge asymmetry or SOKA Vazire, 2010), and by “blindness” to how one is perceived under certain circumstances (e.g., Gallrein et al., 2013, 2016). It is important to note, however, that the matter of meta-accuracy is far more complex than the mere agreement between target and perceiver and instead is the result of the interplay between various factors and moderators ( Funder, 1995 Carlson and Elsaadawy, 2021). In our opening scenario, meta-accuracy relates to the correspondence between what Professor Jones thinks of Jane and what Jane thinks Professor Jones thinks of her. The accuracy with which one infers others’ perception of oneself is termed as meta-accuracy ( Kenny and DePaulo, 1993). In social interactions, there is a significant amount of trying to figure out what others think. The model also discusses moderators of interpersonal accuracy, such as the qualities of the perceiver, target, trait of interest, and the information involved. Funder (1995) discusses common problems with defining and measuring interpersonal accuracy and proposes the Realistic Accuracy Model whose aim is to resolve many of these problems. Divergent findings on interpersonal accuracy may to a large extent be explained by differences in conceptualization and measurement approaches. First impressions can be (e.g., Ambady et al., 1999) but are not necessarily accurate (e.g., Rule et al., 2013 see Wood, 2014 for a detailed review on first impressions accuracy). Is the first impression of Professor Jones about Jane accurate? Accuracy in interpersonal perception typically refers to the correspondence between the subjective perception of the interaction partners and some more objective (i.e., more stable with respect to time and influences) criterion (e.g., Funder and West, 1993 Brauer and Proyer, 2020). One important characteristic of first impressions is their accuracy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |