People perception: Social vision of groups and consequences for organizing and interacting

Phillips, L Taylor; Weisbuch, Max; Ambady, Nalini

doi:10.1016/j.riob.2014.10.001

Cited by 42 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 249 publications

(338 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, while most diversity research has implicitly assumed that perceptions of diversity are accurate, this paper contributes to an emerging literature on the microfoundations of diversity perceptions (e.g. Homan, Greer, Jehn, & Koning, 2010;Loyd, Wang, Phillips, & Lount, 2012;Phillips & Loyd, 2006;Phillips, Mannix, Neale, & Gruenfeld, 2004;Phillips, Northcraft, & Neale, 2006;Phillips, Weisbuch, & Ambady, 2014;Zellmer-Bruhn, Maloney, Bhappu, & Salvador, 2008) suggesting that people's assessments of diversity may not always be veridical.…”

Section: Contributionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Spillover bias in diversity judgment

Daniels

Neale

Greer

2017

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diversity research has long assumed that individuals' perceptions of diversity are accurate, consistent with normative theories of judgments in economics and decision theory. We challenge this assumption. In six experiments, we show that when there is more diversity along one dimension (e.g., race, clothing color), people also perceive more diversity on other dimensions (e.g., gender, skill) even when this cannot reflect reality. This spillover bias in diversity judgment leads to predictable errors in decision making with economic incentives for accuracy, and it alters support for affirmative action policies in organizations. Spillover bias in diversity judgment may help explain why managerial decisions about groups often appear to be suboptimal and why diversity scholars have found inconsistent associations between objective diversity and team outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Contributionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Spillover bias in diversity judgment

Daniels

Neale

Greer

2017

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ensemble perception of facial attractiveness may be of evolutional importance as it enables comparison of attractiveness on a group basis for socially significant inferences and decision making (Phillips, Weisbuch, & Ambady, 2014). Moreover, our impression of the overall attractiveness of a social group could implicitly influence our judgment of individual members in the group, which could subsequently bias inference of personal traits and likeability of individual members.…”

Section: Future Directions and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ensemble perception of facial attractiveness

Luo

Zhou

2018

Journal of Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensemble perception, the extraction of a statistical summary of multiple instances of a feature, enables efficient processing of information. Here we investigated whether ensemble representations can be formed for facial attractiveness, a socially important complex feature. After verifying that our face stimuli produced by geometric morphing represented a valid continuum of attractiveness (Experiment 1), we asked participants to compare the average attractiveness of four faces with a single probe face. Whether the four faces were homogeneous or heterogeneous resulted in highly similar performance levels, suggesting the visual system could extract an ensemble representation of the attractiveness of a heterogeneous group of faces. Statistical simulations with human-level bias and noise indicated participants did not rely on subsampling one random face or the most/least attractive face from the array (Experiment 2). Ensemble perception of facial attractiveness was not affected by variance in the stimulus array (Experiment 3), did not depend on memory of individual faces in the array (Experiment 4), and could be extended to larger arrays with faces asymmetrically distributed around the set mean (Experiment 5). Our findings give further evidence to the prevalence of perception of statistical regularities in vision.

show abstract

“…Facial attractiveness is signalled by the characteristics of the face being examined, including averageness, symmetry, and a sexually dimorphic appearance 8 – 10 . Because attractiveness is related to physical cues in the face, the majority of research has presented facial stimuli in isolation (i.e., a single face is presented at a time) 11 . Yet, we often meet strangers for the first time in social settings (e.g., in a boardroom or a bar).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the cheerleader effect occurs for groups of various sizes, from 4–16 group members 13 . The cheerleader effect strongly suggests that it is not only the attractiveness of the individual face that is evaluated, but that the surrounding faces are also encoded by the observer, which interfere with attractiveness evaluations 11 . Together, these findings show that attractiveness judgments change when an individual appears in a group, and that the social perception of an individual within a group is a unique process, whereby irrelevant faces influence our judgments of specific individuals 11 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visuospatial asymmetries do not modulate the cheerleader effect

Carragher

Lawrence

Nicholls

2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cheerleader effect occurs when the same individual appears to be more attractive when seen in a group, compared to alone. As observers over-attend to visual information presented in the left visual field, we investigated whether the spatial arrangement of the faces in a group would influence the magnitude of the cheerleader effect. In Experiment 1, target faces were presented twice in the centre of the display: once alone, and once in a group. Group images featured two distractor faces, which were presented in either the left or the right visual field, or on either side of the target. The location of the distractor faces did not modulate the size of the cheerleader effect, which was observed in each group configuration. In Experiment 2, we manipulated the location of the target faces, which were presented at the far left, far right, or centre of the group. Faces were again significantly more attractive in each group configuration, and the spatial location of the target face did not influence the size of the cheerleader effect. Together, our results show that the cheerleader effect is a robust phenomenon, which is not influenced by the spatial arrangement of the faces in the group.

show abstract

People perception: Social vision of groups and consequences for organizing and interacting

Cited by 42 publications

References 249 publications

Spillover bias in diversity judgment

Spillover bias in diversity judgment

Ensemble perception of facial attractiveness

Visuospatial asymmetries do not modulate the cheerleader effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About