The return of dispositionalism: On the linguistic consequences of dispositional suppression

Judd

2011

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

Research has found the dimensions of warmth and competence to be subject to a negative relation when two targets are compared, a phenomenon which has been called the compensation effect. However, all the available empirical evidence rests on direct traits ratings. The aim of the present work is to test whether compensation is merely a response strategy or whether it has larger implications. In two experiments, we show that the compensation effect is also obtained on indirect measures that rely on attribution theory (Experiment 1) and on implicit measures derived from the Linguistic Category Model (Experiment 2). Results are discussed in terms of the importance of the compensation effect and its consequences on the interpretation of newly acquired information about social targets.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When compensation guides inferences: Indirect and implicit measures of the compensation effect

Kervyn

Judd

2011

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

“…Recently Yzerbyt, Corneille, Dumont, and Hahn (2001) proposed that trying to avoid making dispositional inferences may in fact lead perceivers to exacerbate the role of these dispositional factors in subsequent judgments. When induced to correct their social judgment, observers were found to be judging a second target in more dispositional terms (Yzerbyt et al, 2001) or to use more abstract (i.e., disposition-laden) language to describe a series of behaviors (Geeraert, Yzerbyt, Corneille, & Wigboldus, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How fatiguing is dispositional suppression? Disentangling the effects of procedural rebound and ego‐depletion

Geeraert

2007

Euro J Social Psych

Self Cite

Recent work has shown that correcting a dispositional inference may lead social observers to overemphasize the role of dispositional factors in subsequent judgments. This effect has been explained as a procedural rebound following a phase of dispositional suppression. We conducted two experiments to test an alternative explanation in terms of ego-depletion. In Experiment 1, we compared the effects of ego-depletion and dispositional rebound by relying on the attitude attribution paradigm and the cookie paradigm. In Experiment 2, we turned to a difficult math task in order to induce fatigue. We were able to replicate the dispositional rebound and the ego-depletion effects but none of the experiments supported an ego-depletion explanation of post-suppression dispositional rebound.

“…This could imply that one single similarity process may play a central role in a number of seemingly unrelated cognitive tasks (Fodor, 1983). Building on research into postsuppressional rebound (Geeraert, Yzerbyt, Corneille, & Wigboldus, 2004;Wenzlaff & Wegner, 2000), we propose that suppression of similarity in one task will lead to rebound of similarity in a subsequent task, provided that both (unrelated) tasks draw upon the same basic cognitive process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…A robust phenomenon in the attribution literature is that observers tend to explain others' behaviour as being caused by their traits and personality characteristics rather than by situational constraints even when the latter should in fact be considered as providing an adequate account. Several studies have shown that participants initially led to suppress dispositional inferences in a typical attribution paradigm indeed made less strong dispositional judgements than control participants (Geeraert et al, 2004). Subsequently, however, suppressors made stronger dispositional attributions (Yzerbyt et al, 2001) or relied more on abstract, dispositional language to describe others' behaviour in an unrelated task (Geeraert & Yzerbyt, 2007;Geeraert et al, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have shown that participants initially led to suppress dispositional inferences in a typical attribution paradigm indeed made less strong dispositional judgements than control participants (Geeraert et al, 2004). Subsequently, however, suppressors made stronger dispositional attributions (Yzerbyt et al, 2001) or relied more on abstract, dispositional language to describe others' behaviour in an unrelated task (Geeraert & Yzerbyt, 2007;Geeraert et al, 2004). Thus far, postsuppressional rebound has been demonstrated mainly within the social cognition literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Similarity on the Rebound: Inhibition of Similarity Assessment Leads to an Ironic Postsuppressional Rebound

Geeraert

Boven

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

2011

Self Cite

A widely held but rarely tested assumption among cognitive scientists is that different cognitive tasks may rely upon a single basic cognitive process. Using an established methodology to examine the suppression and subsequent rebound of mental operations, the present research indicates that suppressing use of similarity in one domain results in the subsequent rebound of similarity assessment in a different domain, suggesting that both domains rely on the same underlying cognitive process. In two studies, we demonstrate that leading people to suppress natural similarity assessment in one task produces increased reliance on similarity in subsequent, different, and apparently unrelated tasks. In Experiment 1, participants led to suppress similarity in a concentration task subsequently made more errors in a false-memory paradigm than did control participants. In Experiment 2, participants suppressing similarity in a categorization task made more false-memory errors and perceived more similarity between word pairs than participants who did not suppress. The findings suggest that the cognitive process of similarity assessment may be a domain-general process, such that it is widespread across a number of different mental tasks.