The Role of Contextual Constraints and Chronic Expectancies on Behavior Categorizations and Dispositional Inferences

Abstract

The authors examined the roles of chronic expectancies and other contextual information in the dispositional inference process within the domain of ability judgments. Prior to viewing a vid- Whenextractinginformationaboutothers'enduringdispositions from their behavior, perceivers may have access to a vast array of contextual cues, including prior information about the target, situational information, and event-outcome information. Perceivers also have at their disposal knowledge structures, such as schemas and stereotypes, as well as naïve theories about such things as the malleability of traits (Dweck, Chiu, & Hong, 1995) and trait-behavior relations (Reeder & Brewer, 1979). With so many potential influences on the social inference process, researchers are faced with the intriguing and complicated task of trying to determine how these factors interact to influence the dispositional inferences perceivers make about others.One of the most frequently rendered and consequential dispositional judgments we make about others concerns their levels of ability. In the current research, we explored the impact of prior behavior category information and chronic expectancies, the use of situational information, and the mediational role of behavior categorizations in the process of drawing inferences about another's ability. We especially were interested in examining the mechanisms through which chronic expectancies exert their biasing impact on dispositional inferences (Reich & Weary, 1998). Do chronic, generalized future-event expectancies guide dispositional inferences by first steering perceivers toward a particular initial interpretation of another's behavior? If so, are perceivers able to fully correct both their categorizations of the behavior and their dispositional inferences for the effects of such expectancies when they have the cognitive resources and motivation necessary to do so? 62

Chronic and temporary distinct expectancies as comparison standards: Automatic contrast in dispositional judgments.

“…Pilot testing for an earlier study (Weary, Reich, & Tobin, in press) demonstrated that this manipulation results in negative expectancies ( M s = 4.81 and 5.69 on 9-point scales of performance and intellectual expectancies, respectively, compared with 7.35 and 6.85 for a positive expectancy condition, p s < .001) comparable to those that result from the manipulation of distinct negative expectancies (see Footnote 8).…”

“…The other participants were given instructions designed to suggest that the level of the target's general performance had been unsuccessful. This procedure has been used in two other studies (Weary, Reich, & Tobin, in press) to create negative expectancies that are, by definition, not separable from the actual performance information. The theoretical rationale underlying the predictions for the current Studies 1 and 2 suggests that such nondistinct expectancies would be used as interpretation frames and would result in assimilation of perceivers' relatively automatic behavior categorizations and target characterizations to them.…”

Inclusive Foreign Language Assessment in Trying Times: Pre-service Teachers’ Attribution Mechanisms and Their Implications for Inclusive Emergency Remote Teaching

“…In fact, it is expected that if teachers are not provided with sufficient time to reflect on their assessment and evaluation of students or of their work, they may be prone to ignore situational constraints in their judgment of students (cf. Chun et al 2002;Tetlock, 1985;Weary et al 2001). In a similar vein, stress or cognitive load can contribute to an increased ignorance of contextual factors (cf.…”

“…Interestingly enough, given the chance to reflect on their choices in the debriefing following the questionnaire, some of the participants report the tendency to minimize unnecessary jumps to dispositional conclusions through self-imposed self-reflection (cf. Weary et al 2001). The debriefing phase also addressed the importance of fair and inclusive diagnostic processes in (foreign language education) and drew on the direct experience from everyday school life (e.g.…”

“…In this sense, fundamental attribution error depends on whether the observer reflects on the meaning of the observed behavior. If the observer engages in such an action, individuals tend to adjust the dispositional inferences that they make to situational constraints (Weary et al 2001).…”