Four studies tested the hypothesis that temporal distance increases the weight of global dispositions in predicting and explaining future behavior. Study 1 found that the correspondence bias was manifested more strongly in predictions of distant future behavior than of near future behavior. Study 2 found that participants predicted higher cross-situational consistency in distant future behavior than in near future behavior. Study 3 found that participants sought information about others' more global dispositions for predicting distant future than near future behavior. Finally, Study 4 found that participants made more global causal attributions for distant future outcomes than for near future outcomes. The results were interpreted as supporting the assumption of construal level theory that perceivers use more abstract representations (higher level construals) to predict and explain more distant future behaviors.The ability to control one's outcomes in social situations often depends on one's ability to predict others' behavior. The quality of everyday life decisions, such as the decision to approach or avoid others, to compete or cooperate, or to seek or avoid help, depends on one's ability to predict how others will respond. Indeed, much of the motivation for social information processing has been assumed to derive from the need to reduce uncertainty in predicting others' behavior (see, e.g., Fiske, 1993;Higgins & Bargh, 1987;Trope & Liberman, 1996). Sometimes these predictions concern others' near future behavior (e.g., "Will Leslie come to my birthday party this weekend?"). In other cases, the predictions concern more distant future behavior (e.g., "Will Leslie come to my birthday party next month?"). The question we address in this article is what kind of knowledge perceivers use for predicting behavior in near future versus distant future situations. If we suppose that perceivers have the same information about the two situations, the question is whether perceivers would use this information differently depending on whether they are trying to predict others' behavior in near future or in distant future situations. Temporal ConstrualOur approach to this question is grounded in the socialcognitive view that perceivers' predictions of future events depend on how the perceivers mentally construe those events (see, e.g., Griffin & Ross, 1991;Sherman, 1980;Wilson, Wheatley, Meyers, Gilbert & Axsom, 2000). In this view, perceivers' predictions about their own and others' behavior are based on an abstract, schematic representation of the behavior and fail to incorporate contextual factors. Overreliance on schematic models of future behavior has been assumed to underlie individuals' overconfident behavior predictions (Dunning, Griffin, Milojkovic, & Ross, 1990;Vallone, Griffin, Lin, & Ross, 1990). Several researchers have suggested that the planning fallacy-namely, the tendency to underestimate task completion times-can be traced to individuals' reliance on oversimplified representations of future tasks-representati...

Seven studies provide evidence that representations of the self at a distant-future time point are more abstract and structured than are representations of the self at a near-future time point and that distant-future behaviors are more strongly related to general self-conceptions. Distant-future self-representations incorporate broader, more superordinate identities than do near-future self-representations (Study 1) and are characterized by less complexity (Study 2), more cross-situational consistency (Study 3), and a greater degree of schematicity (Study 4). Furthermore, people’s behavioral predictions of their distant-future (vs. near-future) behavior are more strongly related to their general self-characteristics (Study 5), distant-future behaviors are seen as more self-expressive (Study 6), and distant-future behaviors that do not match up with acknowledged self-characteristics are more strongly rejected as reflections of the self (Study 7). Implications for understanding both the nature of the self-concept and the way in which distance may influence a range of self-processes are discussed.

Four studies investigated individuals' confidence in predicting near future and distant future outcomes. Study 1 found that participants were more confident in theory-based predictions of psychological experiments when these experiments were expected to take place in the more distant future. Studies 2-4 examined participants' confidence in predicting their performance on near and distant future tests. These studies found that in predicting their more distant future performance, participants disregarded the format of the questions (e.g., multiple choice vs. open ended) and relied, instead, on their perceived general knowledge (e.g., history knowledge). Together, the present studies demonstrate that predictions of the more distant future are based on relatively abstract information. Individuals feel more confident in predicting the distant future than the near future when the predictions concern outcomes that are implied by relatively abstract information.Keywords: time distance, construal level theory (CLT), prediction, confidence, overconfidence Effective planning often requires predicting outcomes that are expected in the relatively distant future. For example, planning a vacation often requires predicting a long time in advance the weather conditions at the destination of the trip. Similarly, class registration requires predicting a long time in advance whether the selected courses would live up to one's expectations. The question then is whether and how temporal distance from future outcomes affects individuals' predictions about those outcomes. Does temporal distance affect the confidence with which predictions are made? Temporal distance from future outcomes ordinarily reduces the accuracy with which those outcomes can be predicted. Are individuals sensitive to these temporal differences in accuracy?There is a large amount of research on how individuals predict the future and the factors that influence those predictions (see, e.g., Griffin, Dunning, & Ross, 1990;Kahneman & Lovallo, 1991;Sherman, 1980;Wilson, Wheatley, Meyers, Gilbert, & Axsom, 2000). However, this research has typically compared predictions with actual outcomes. There is relatively little research on how temporal distance from future outcomes affects predictions about those outcomes. In an early study addressing this issue, Nisan (1972) asked participants to estimate their chances of correctly answering a random question from a test they expected to take on the same day or 4 weeks later. The results showed that greater temporal distance enhanced expectancy of success and risk-taking, particularly by individuals who were success rather than failure oriented. More recently, Gilovich, Medvec, and their colleagues (Gilovich, Kerr, & Medvec, 1993;Savitsky, Medvec, Charlton, & Gilovich, 1998) reported a series of studies showing that individuals had higher performance expectancies for distant future tasks as compared with near future tasks, a phenomenon they labeled "cold feet." For example, participants expected to perform better on a variety of...

No abstract

No abstract