Two studies addressed the differential impact of unexpected positive versus negative behaviors on trait ratings and free response impression descriptions, using a 2 (Expected Likability) x 2 (Consistency of Subsequent Behavior) design. Unexpected negative behaviors had more impact than unexpected positive behaviors. In Experiment 1, this negativity effect was produced by an increase in ratings on negative traits, rather than a decrease on positive traits. In Experiment 2, unexpected negative behaviors produced an increase in the number of negative traits mentioned in impression descriptions, as well as a decrease in the number of positive traits, suggesting that negative behaviors reduced the accessibility of positive traits. Unexpected positive behaviors increased the number of conditional qualifiers attached to positive attributes, indicating more elaboration in the impressions. Results illustrate that there is more to negativity effects than is revealed by global evaluative ratings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, N. H. , & Hubert, S. (1963). Effects of concomitant verbal recall on order effects in personality impression formation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 379-391.
2.
Asch, S. E. , & Zukier, H. (1984). Thinking about persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1230-1240.
3.
Bakerman, R. , & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Observing interaction: An induction to sequential analysisCambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
Belmore, S. M. (1987). Determinants of attention during impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memo, and Cognition, 13, 480-489.
5.
Dreben, E. K. , Fiske, S. T., & Hastie, R. (1979). The independence of evaluative and item information: Impression and recall order effects in behavior-based impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1758-1768.
6.
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
7.
Hastie, R. (1980). Memory for behavioral information that confirms or contradicts a personality impression. In R. Hastie, T. M. Ostrom, E. B. Ebbesen, R. S. Wyer, Jr., D. L. Hamilton, & D. E. Carlston (Eds.), Person memory: The cognitive basis of social perception (pp. 155-177). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Hastie, R. (1981). Schematic principles in human memory. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Sherman, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Social cognition: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
John, O. P. , Hampson, S. E., & Goldberg, L. R. (1991). The basic level in personality-trait hierarchies: Studies of trait use and accessibility in different contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 348-361.
10.
Jones, E. E. , & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2). New York. Academic Press.
11.
Kaplan, M. F. (1973). Stimulus inconsistency and response dispositions in forming judgments of other persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 58-64.
12.
Kihlstrom, J. F. , & Cantor, N. (1983). Mental representations of the self In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 147). New York: Academic Press.
13.
Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage.
14.
Maheswaran, D. , & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: Effect of incongruent information on processing and judgmentJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13-25.
15.
Peeters, G. , & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 33-60). London: Wiley.
16.
Reeder, G. D. (1985). Implicit relations between dispositions and behaviors: Effects on dispositional attributions. In J. H. Harvey & G. Weary (Eds.), Attribution Basic issues and applications (pp. 87-116). New YorkAcademic Press.
17.
Reeder, G. D. , & Brewer, M. B. (1979). A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review, 86, 61-79.
18.
Reeder, G. D. , & Coovert, M. D. (1986). Revising an impression of morality. Social Cognition, 4, 1-17.
19.
Sande, G. N. , Goehals, G. R., & Radloff, C. E. (1988). Perceiving one's own traits and others': The multifaceted self. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 54, 13-20.
20.
Sears, D. O. (1983). The person-positivity bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 233-249.
21.
Skowronski, J. J. , & Carlston, D. E. (1987). Social judgment and social memory. The role of cue diagnosticity in negativity, positivity, and extremity biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 689-699.
22.
Srull, T. K. (1981). Person memory: Some tests of associative storage and retrieval models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Lening and Memory, 7, 440-463.
23.
Srull, T. K. , & Wyer, R. S. (1989). Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96, 58-83.
24.
Van derToorn, M. C. (1976). Nederlandse grammatical [Dutch grammar]. Groningen: 'Jeenk-Willink.
25.
Vonk, R (1990). The cognitive representation of persons: A multidimensional study of Implicit Personality Theory, impression formation, and person judgment Unpublished dissertation, Leiden University.
26.
Vonk, R. , & Heiser, W. J. (1991). Implicit personality theory and social judgment Effects of familiarity with a target person. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 69-81.
27.
Wong, P. T. P. , & Weiner, B. (1981). When people ask "why" questions and the heuristics of attributional search. Journal of Penalty and Social Psychology, 40, 650-663.
28.
Wright, J. C. , & Mischel, W. (1988). Conditional hedges and the intuitive psychology of traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 454-469.
29.
Zuckerman, MA. (1979). Attribution of success and failure revisited. Or, the motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory. Journal of Personality, 47, 245-287.
