Nonverbal zero-acquaintance accuracy of self-esteem, social dominance orientation, and satisfaction with life

Yeagley, Erin; Morling, Beth; Nelson, Maria

doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.12.002

Cited by 27 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Future research might examine the importance of the trait relevance of situations as well as the social consequences evoked in the judgment context by realizing a more comprehensive behavioral approach and observing the same set of targets in several different situations and judgment contexts. With respect to previous research (Kilianski, 2008;Naumann et al, 2009;Yeagley et al, 2007), one could observe the same set of targets in both purely self-presentational versus more conversational settings and compare the levels of zero-acquaintance accuracy of independent samples of observers as well as underlying behavioral processes of self-esteem judgments. Moreover, future research might regard the influence of social consequences on the level of zero-acquaintance accuracy of selfesteem and the emergence of self-esteem-related behaviors in situations more strongly.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research found that self‐esteem perceptions of strangers were virtually inaccurate in conversational contexts ( r = .12 in Kilianski, ; r ≤ .14 in Yeagley et al, ). In contrast, the present findings indicate that lay observers were considerably accurate in detecting targets’ actual trait level of self‐esteem as measured by a joint self‐informant composite when judgments were based on videotaped self‐introductions ( r = .29).…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Given the interpersonal nature of self-esteem and the significant social impact of others' self-esteem perceptions, an important question is whether, and if so, why laypeople (i.e., observers) can accurately detect individuals' (i.e., targets) level of self-esteem when still unacquainted (i.e., zero acquaintance). Individuals quickly form trait impressions of strangers on the basis of "thin slices" of behavior (see Ambady, 2010;Carney, Colvin, & Hall, 2007); yet surprisingly, only a few studies have examined whether strangers' self-esteem judgments of individuals, based on such minimal information, converge with individuals' actual trait self-esteem (Kilianski, 2008;Naumann, Vazire, Rentfrow, & Gosling, 2009;Yeagley, Morling, & Nelson, 2007). 1 Moreover, such studies have produced inconsistent patterns of findings, with one study suggesting that individuals' self-esteem can be accurately detected by strangers (Naumann et al, 2009) and other studies suggesting the opposite (Kilianski, 2008;Yeagley et al, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of Self‐Esteem Judgments at Zero Acquaintance

Hirschmüller

Schmukle

Krause

et al. 2017

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 93%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy of Self‐Esteem Judgments at Zero Acquaintance

Hirschmüller

Schmukle

Krause

et al. 2017

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Perceivers can accurately perceive personality traits in healthy control populations. Traits including extraversion, conscientiousness, neuroticism, confidence, interpersonal warmth, intelligence, self-esteem, life satisfaction, sociosexuality and sexual orientation can all be perceived accurately from short silent videos of others (Albright, Kenny, & Malloy, 1988;Ambady, Hallahan, & Conner, 1999;Borkenau & Liebler, 1992, 1993Rule, Rosen, Slepian & Ambady, 2011;Slepian, Young, Rutchick, & Ambady, in press;Yeagley, Morling, & Nelson, 2007). Personality disorders have been considered to be maladaptive variants of personality traits (Widiger & Mullins-Sweatt, 2009), and indeed some personality disorders can be accurately perceived from thin slices.…”

Section: Personality Disordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thin-Slice Judgments in the Clinical Context

Slepian

Bogart

Ambady

2014

Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinicians make a variety of assessments about their clients, from judging personality traits to making diagnoses, and a variety of methods are available to do so, ranging from observations to structured interviews. A large body of work demonstrates that from a brief glimpse of another's nonverbal behavior, a variety of traits and inner states can be accurately perceived. Additionally, from these “thin slices” of behavior, even future outcomes can be predicted with some accuracy. Certain clinical disorders such as Parkinson's disease and facial paralysis disrupt nonverbal behavior and may impair cli-nicians' ability to make accurate judgments. In certain contexts, personality disorders, anxiety, depression, and suicide attempts and outcomes can be detected from others' nonverbal behavior. Additionally, thin slices can predict psychological adjustment to divorce, bereavement, sexual abuse, and well-being throughout life. Thus, for certain traits and disorders, judgments from a thin slice could provide a complementary tool for the clinician's toolbox.

show abstract

“…People are able to accurately detect an expresser's assertiveness based on 1 min videotaped interaction excerpts . Similarly, a study using the Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) Scale (Pratto et al 1994), which measures the extent to which an individual prefers social groups to differ in status and thus endorses a social hierarchy, shows that people are generally able to 9 accurately detect the level of a target's SDO from a 30 sec silent video excerpt, especially when the targets are men (Yeagley, Morling, and Nelson 2006).…”

Section: Accuracy and Verticalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

20 Power, dominance, and persuasion

Mast¹,

Cousin²

2013

Nonverbal Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"When two persons interact, they continually negotiate two major relationship issues: how friendly or hostile they will be with each other, and how much in charge or control each will be during their transactions" (Kiesler and Auerbach 2003: 1712). Social interactions can be mapped onto two main dimensions that are perpendicular to each other: the affiliation dimension -also called the horizontal dimension (Hall, Coats, and Smith LeBeau 2005), which is characterized by friendliness and warmth on the one end of the dimension and by hostility and aggression on the other end; and the control dimension -also called the vertical dimension -which relates to differences in power, dominance, and influence among two or more social interaction partners (Kiesler and Auerbach 2003;Moskowitz 1993;Tiedens and Jimenez 2003;Wiggins 1979).The vertical dimension of social interactions is present in nearly every social context. We live in a hierarchically organized society in which a member of the parliament is considered a higher status person than a janitor. We are confronted with hierarchies at our workplace when interacting with superiors, peers, and subordinates. Even among friends and family members the power dimension often plays a role. Not all hierarchies are explicit such as they appear in a company's organizational chart. Many hierarchies are more subtle, for instance as when an individual succeeds in convincing his or her group of friends to go watch a particular movie.The vertical or hierarchy dimension affects how we relate to others and it thus greatly impacts on real world outcomes. As an example, the status difference between an airplane captain and the other cockpit members (first officers and flight engineers) can entail ineffective communication leading to human error and ultimately to catastrophe. When an airplane crashes because the higher power position of the captain does not encourage the crew members to voice 2 their concerns or observations about flight irregularities, the hierarchical relationship can contribute to disaster.To maximize effective communication among members possessing different levels of power or status, not only the verbal content of a message is important but also the way the information is conveyed nonverbally plays a role. In the present chapter, we will focus on how the vertical dimension is linked to nonverbal behavior. We will review the expressed nonverbal behavior of people who differ on the vertical dimension and the perception of verticality based on the observation of people's nonverbal behavior. We will also discuss whether people are accurate in judging others' power and dominance. We will present the nonverbal behaviors that are associated with persuasion and we will talk about how nonverbal dominance affects interpersonal relationships and interactions. Finally, we will review individual characteristics that have been shown to moderate the expression or perception of power and dominance. Definition of the terms used to describe the vertical dimensionWe focus on the interp...

show abstract

Nonverbal zero-acquaintance accuracy of self-esteem, social dominance orientation, and satisfaction with life

Cited by 27 publications

References 15 publications

Accuracy of Self‐Esteem Judgments at Zero Acquaintance

Accuracy of Self‐Esteem Judgments at Zero Acquaintance

Thin-Slice Judgments in the Clinical Context

20 Power, dominance, and persuasion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About