Evaluating Others: The Role of Who We Are Versus What We Think Traits Mean

McElwee, Rory O'Brien; Dunning, David; Tan, Patricia Lim; Hollmann, Sara

doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2302_4

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…People asked to describe their impressions of iconic leaders, such as George Washington and Mahatma Gandhi, tend to believe that those leaders share the same leadership qualities as themselves. Task-oriented individuals emphasize task skills more than do people-oriented peers; peopleoriented individuals emphasize people skills more than their task-oriented counterparts (McElwee, Dunning, Tan, & Hollmann, 2001).…”

Section: Definitions Of Social Traits and Judgmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Image Motives and Consumer Behavior: How Sacrosanct Self‐Beliefs Sway Preferences in the Marketplace

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews social cognitive research suggesting that people shape their beliefs and judgments of the social world to maintain sacrosanct beliefs of the self as a capable, lovable, and moral individual. This article then argues that consumer behavior might similarly be designed to bolster positive self‐views and then discusses the potential role played by these self‐image motives in recently documented consumer behavior phenomena (e.g., endowment, compensation, affirmation, and licensing effects). This article then articulates some questions for future research if one presumes that consumer decision making, at least in part, strives to harmonize preferences with bedrock beliefs that the self is an able and principled person.

show abstract

Section: Definitions Of Social Traits and Judgmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Image Motives and Consumer Behavior: How Sacrosanct Self‐Beliefs Sway Preferences in the Marketplace

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An important extension to the self-serving bias contends that individuals tend to judge the attributes and characteristics necessary for success as those characteristics they possess. Therefore when defining positive traits, we are prone to emphasize those traits that are descriptive of ourselves, conversely when defining negative traits we de-emphasize our own characteristics (Beauregard & Dunning, 2001;McElwee, Dunning, Tan, Hollmann, 2001;Story & Dunning, 1998). The implications of this for evaluating selection procedures are clear; appropriate staffing procedures are those we perform well in.…”

Section: Self-serving Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Applicant Attribution‐Reaction Theory (AART): An Integrative Theory of Applicant Attributional Processing

Ployhart

Harold

2004

Int J Selection Assessment

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article proposes a new theory called the Applicant Attribution-Reaction Theory (AART) to better understand attributional processes in the formation of applicant reactions. The theory proposes that applicants' affective, behavioral, and cognitive reactions, such as fairness, test perceptions, test performance, and motivation, are fundamentally driven by an attributional process. A key implication of the theory is that perceptions such as fairness and test attitudes carry little explanatory power; instead they are consequences of attributional processing. We provide a brief review of dominant applicant reactions frameworks, review the social psychological literature on attributions, and present the theory. We then contrast the theory to existing conceptualizations, and finally describe its potential for better understanding several key topics in applicant reactions, including the justice judgment process, test performance, and racial subgroup differences. The theory has the potential to integrate many diverse perspectives on applicant reactions, and provides numerous directions for future research and practice.

show abstract

“…People choose whom to make friends with. Casual observation as well as academic research indicates that attitudinal similarity is a major determinant of interpersonal attraction and positive social judgment (e.g., Byrne 1971; McElwee et al 2001; Newcomb 1961; Wittenbaum, Hubbell, and Zuckerman 1999). In other words, even after controlling for socioeconomic status, people prefer to associate with those who share similar views as their own.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutual Admiration Clubs

Suen¹

2010

Economic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"This article proposes a theory of group formation based on the motive to seek informed opinion. Because an individual evaluates whether others are informed or not using his own priors, he identifies people with similar beliefs to be more informed than those with different beliefs. The result is an equilibrium in which like-minded individuals self-select into distinct groups, with members of each group believing that their own group is superior." ("JEL" D71, D81, D83, D85) Copyright (c) 2009 Western Economic Association International.

show abstract

Evaluating Others: The Role of Who We Are Versus What We Think Traits Mean

Cited by 15 publications

References 29 publications

Self‐Image Motives and Consumer Behavior: How Sacrosanct Self‐Beliefs Sway Preferences in the Marketplace

Self‐Image Motives and Consumer Behavior: How Sacrosanct Self‐Beliefs Sway Preferences in the Marketplace

The Applicant Attribution‐Reaction Theory (AART): An Integrative Theory of Applicant Attributional Processing

Mutual Admiration Clubs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About