Social roles, social control, and biases in social-perception processes.

Ross, Lee; Amabile, Teresa M.; Steinmetz, Julia

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.7.485

Cited by 459 publications

(189 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

174

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that when people know they have been observed engaging in situationally constrained behavior, they overestimate the extremity of observers' dispositional inferences about them (Savitsky, Epley, & Gilovich, 2001;Van Boven, Kamada, & Gilovich, 1999; see also Miller, Baer, & Schonberg, 1979). In one study, people who were assigned the role of contestant in a quiz show, whose performance was constrained by the disadvantageous position of being tested on another person's idiosyncratic repertoire of trivia (Ross, Amabile, & Steinmetz, 1977), overestimated how harshly others would judge them (Savitsky et al, 2001, Study 3).…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

Intuitions about situational correction in self and others.

Boven¹,

White²,

Kamada³

et al. 2003

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People's attributional phenomenology is likely to be characterized by effortful situational correction. Drawing on this phenomenology and on people's desire to view themselves more favorably than others, the authors hypothesized that people expect others to engage in less situational correction than themselves and to make more extreme dispositional attributions for constrained actors' behavior. In 2 studies, people expected their peers to make more extreme dispositional inferences than they did themselves for a situationally constrained actor's behavior. People's expectation that they engage in more situational correction than their peers was diminished among Japanese participants, who have less desire to view themselves as superior to their peers (Study 3), and among participants who were led to view dispositional attributions more favorably than situational attributions (Study 4).

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 84%

Intuitions about situational correction in self and others.

Boven¹,

White²,

Kamada³

et al. 2003

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their experiment, actors made attributions to the environment while observers made dispositional attributions to the actor. Ross, Amabile, and Steinmetz (1977) extended this work with a "Quiz Show" study. Undergraduate observers made attributions of higher intelligence to a questioner than to the answerer even though the situation overwhelmingly favored the question asker.…”

Section: Task Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Perspective on Perspective Taking: A Multidimensional Approach to Conceptualizing an Aptitude

Gehlbach

2004

Educational Psychology Review

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social perspective taking (SPT) is thought to be important in its own right and is often associated with other important skills, such as interpersonal conflict resolution.Thus, it is critical for researchers to systematically understand SPT and how it relates to other valued educational outcomes. In particular, a complete understanding of SPT might assist educational psychologists to apply this knowledge in school settings to improve the effectiveness of students' social interactions. Previous research on SPT, however, has conceptualized it as a unidimensional construct leaving scholars with an insufficient understanding of this aptitude. To best understand SPT, a multidimensional approach should include assessments of personal characteristics (including the propensity and the ability to engage in SPT) and features of the situation (including features of the SPT task and the larger context). Using Snow's conceptualization of aptitudes as a framework, this article illustrates the problems with treating SPT as a unidimensional construct, defines SPT as a complex aptitude, and provides a taxonomy to develop our understanding of SPT and to guide future research in this area. The taxonomy organizes and reviews the existing literature that relates personal and situational characteristics to SPT aptitude. Where research has not yet been conducted, this article hypothesizes how these characteristics will relate to SPT aptitude.

show abstract

“…One of the most interesting studies of attribution error is by L. Ross, Amabile, and Steinmetz (1977). Compared to most research in this area, the situation it created for subjects was unusually realistic.…”

Section: Social Rolesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment.

Funder¹

1987

Psychological Bulletin

800

461

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

research on "error" in social judgment has largely supplanted research that addresses accuracy issues more directly. Moreover, this research attracts a great deal of attention because of what many take to be its dismal implications for the accuracy of human social reasoning. These implications are illusory, however, because an error is not the same thing as a "mistake." An error is a judgment of an experimental stimulus that departs from a model of the judgment process. If this model is normative, then the error can be said to represent an incorrect judgment. A mistake, by contrast, is an incorrect judgment of a real-world stimulus and therefore more difficult to determine. Although errors can be highly informative about the process of judgment in general, they are not necessarily relevant to the content or accuracy of particular judgments, because errors in a laboratory may not be mistakes with respect to a broader, more realistic frame of reference and the processes that produce such errors might lead to correct decisions and adaptive outcomes in real life. Several examples are described in this article. Accuracy issues cannot be addressed by research that concentrates on demonstrating error in relation to artificial stimuli, but only by research that uses external, realistic criteria for accuracy. These criteria might include the degree to which judgments agree with each other and yield valid predictions of behavior. The accuracy of human social judgment is a topic of obvious interest and importance. It is only natural to wonder to what degree the judgments we make of the personalities of ourselves and others might be right or wrong, and to desire to improve our accuracy. Nonpsychologists are often surprised and disappointed, therefore, when they begin to take psychology courses and discover that the field has largely foresworn interest in the accuracy issue. The discipline's early, direct interest in accuracy (e.g., Estes, 1938; Taft, 1955; Vernon, 1933) was all but completely stifled some years ago by the publication of a series of methodological critiques by Cronbach (1955), Hastorf and Bender (1952), and others. As a result, according to one authoritative textbook: The accuracy issue has all but faded from view in recent years, at least for personality judgments. There is not much present interest in questions about whether people are accurate... . There is, in short, almost no concern with normative questions of accuracy. On the other hand, in recent years there has been a renewed interest in how, why, and in what circumstances people are inaccurate. (Schneider, Hastorf, & Ellsworth, 1979, p. 224; see also Cook, 1984)' Specifically, the psychology of social judgment has been dominated in recent years by a flood of research on the subject of "error." Studies of error appear in the literature at a prodigious rate, are disproportionately likely to be cited (Christensen-Sza

show abstract

Social roles, social control, and biases in social-perception processes.

Cited by 459 publications

References 11 publications

Intuitions about situational correction in self and others.

Intuitions about situational correction in self and others.

A New Perspective on Perspective Taking: A Multidimensional Approach to Conceptualizing an Aptitude

Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About