First impression

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In psychology , one speaks of a first impression when a person forms a pictorial image of another person or a new situation when they first encounter it. The accuracy of the impression varies depending on the observer and the target (person, object, scene, ...) which is being viewed. First impressions of people are based on various characteristics: age, ethnicity, culture , language , gender, appearance , accent, posture, voice , number of people present and the time available for processing . Dealing with a person in many areas of everyday life can be strongly influenced by the first impression assigned to them.

Speed ​​and accuracy

It only takes a tenth of a second to assess someone and get a first impression. Studies show that the more time test subjects are given to gain impressions, the more certain they are in their assumption. People not only make a first impression very quickly, they are usually correct in their assessment, provided the target person presents himself authentically. People are not good at recognizing fake emotions and lies for what they are. Test subjects who stated that they made accurate impressions of target persons tend to have a more precise perception of target persons that is consistent with the reports of others. Individuals usually know what first impression they are giving other people of themselves.

The speed with which different properties are recognized on first impression may be evolutionary. For example, trustworthiness and attractiveness were the two most quickly identified and rated properties in a study of human faces. People are generally good at assessing personality traits, but the assessments of younger and older adults differ based on first impressions. Older adults judged images of younger adult targets to be healthier, more trustworthy, and less hostile, but more aggressive than younger adults who were shown the same images. The older adults were slower to respond to negative signals due to the slower processing speed, which led them to see facial features as more positive than young adults, who have a faster processing speed.

Number of observers

The first impression is influenced by the number of people who are present in forming the impression. Common experiences are processed more globally, as is also the case in collectivist cultures. Global processing makes first impressions more prominent as the collective first impression tends to be stable over time. Experiences made alone enable local processing, which leads the observer to take a more critical look at the target person. As a result, individuals are more likely to have a negative first impression than groups of two or more observers of the same target. At the same time, individuals believe that they are experiencing an upward trend, i.e. an increase in the course of a series of several impressions. For example, an individual viewer will like the last episode of a TV series better than the first episode, even though it is of the same quality.

In one experiment, subjects outside a group rated works of art that were shown in a qualitatively increasing order as significantly better than those presented in reverse order. Participants who were in a group rated the first and last work as equivalent. The feeling of being in a group or being alone, generated analytically or holistically, generated solely by priming , was sufficient to produce the same observation effects.

Cultural influences

Individualism versus collectivism

Similar to the number of observers, collectivism and individualism can also influence the formation of an impression. Collectivists feel comfortable when their impressions essentially coincide with the impressions of the group. If a collectivist wants to change his impressions, he may be forced to change the views of all other group members. However, this can be a challenge for collectivists who are less provocative than individualists. Individualists can change their point of view at will and are generally more comfortable with volatility, which is why they are more willing to change their impressions.

Influence of media richness

Researchers disagree on whether national culture mediates the relationship between media richness and prejudice in impression formation. Some studies that manipulated media richness found that information presented in text form creates similar impressions across cultures. Other studies, however, show that richer forms of information, such as videos , reduce intercultural prejudices more effectively. The latter supports the media richness theory .

Accents and language

Accents and unique language patterns can influence how people are perceived by other people. For example, subjects rated in a fictitious interview candidates with the same accent as the subject (accent from the middle Western US) due to perceived similarity positive than applicants with other accents ( Colombian or French accent). However, the ratings of applicants with a Colombian accent did not differ significantly from the ratings of those with the other accents. First impressions can be strongly influenced by a similarity-attraction hypothesis: The observer immediately divides people into the categories “similar” and “dissimilar” and assesses them accordingly.

Physical characteristics and personality

Although different cultures can quickly judge one another as "different", there are some characteristics of the first impression that are present in all cultures. When comparing the impressions of characteristics of the faces of US citizens and of the faces of the culturally isolated Bolivian Tsimané, intercultural matches were found in the assignment of certain physical characteristics to descriptive characteristics such as attractiveness , intelligence , health and warmth . Both cultures show a strong halo of attractiveness when forming an impression . Attractive people are judged to be more competent, more social, more intelligent and healthier.

outer appearance

Faces and features

A person's appearance gives us clear indications of their personality without them moving or talking. Women are usually better at assessing non-verbal behavior than men. People were able to judge the extent of extraversion , emotional stability, openness, self-esteem and religiosity very precisely on the basis of photos in which people were depicted in a neutral position and in a self-chosen position . The combined impression of physical characteristics, posture, facial expression and clothing style enables the observer to have a precise idea of ​​the personality of the target person, as long as the target person presents himself authentically. However, there are contradicting data in this area. Other scientific evidence suggests that observers often rely too much on the appearance of the target rather than on actual information. When subjects are given descriptive information about a target person, they still rely on the person's appearance when assessing personality and skills. People find it difficult to ignore physical appearance, even when they are given information that is contrary to their initial assessment. For example, politicians' judgments are based, among other things, on very brief observations of their pictures. Perceived competence of a candidate, measured by the first impression (based on facial features), enables a direct prognosis of the election result.

The “What is beautiful is good” effect is a very present phenomenon when dealing with first impressions. Attractive target persons are rated more positively and are assigned more unique characteristics than unattractive persons. Since beauty is in part subjective, targets who are not generally considered attractive can also benefit from this effect if the observer feels drawn to them.

In a 2014 study at the University of York , Hartley and his colleagues showed that impressions of accessibility, youthfulness / attractiveness and dominance can be formed in less than 100 milliseconds through measurable characteristics such as the shape of the eyes, nose and mouth area . First impressions of social characteristics, such as trustworthiness or dominance, can be reliably obtained using various facial features. A neural network was used to simulate the factor dimensions of accessibility, youthfulness / attractiveness and dominance. 58% of the variance of the assessment impressions can be explained by a linear model.

Clothing and cosmetics

The use of cosmetics is an important part of creating an impression, especially in women. Women who wear a lot of makeup are seen to be significantly more feminine than those with moderate or no makeup. A lot of make-up is (moderately) more attractive than none. A woman without makeup is perceived as more moral, but there are no differences in the assessment of personality and personal temperament.

The formation of the first impression is influenced by the use of mental abbreviations, such as stereotypes and the representativeness heuristic . When assessing socioeconomic status (SoS) and the level of interest in friendship with African-American and Euro-American female models wearing either Kmart , Abercrombie & Fitch, or unlabeled sweatshirts , white models were rated more positively than dark-skinned models. Persons wearing Abercrombie & Fitch sweatshirts were assigned a higher SoS. Interestingly, most of the time, subjects wanted to be friends with the fair-skinned model with a no- logo sweatshirt and with an African-American model when she wore a Kmart sweatshirt or one without a logo. It is unclear why the no-logo sweatshirt was most associated with friendship. But the general results suggest that the appeal of friendship with the models is diminished by a mismatch of class and ethnicity.

Special contexts

Internet

Online profiles and communication channels such as e-mail make it more difficult to analyze target persons than in face-to-face interactions, as less information is transmitted. When assessing the attractiveness of a person's face and perceived ambition based on an online dating profile, there were differences in the impression made by the test subjects due to the time available to process and report the assessment. Spontaneous evaluations were based almost exclusively on physical attractiveness, while conscious evaluations took into account both types of information (physical attractiveness and ambition of the target person). Although both types of information were generally used when deliberately judged, the specific influence of each type of information seemed to depend on the consistency between them. A significant influence of attractiveness on conscious assessments only occurred if the perceived ambition coincided with the perceived level of attractiveness. The consistency in profiles appeared to influence the conscious judgments in particular.

In an online first impression study, participants who were socially expressive and who revealed a lot about themselves on their website and as a person were more popular than those who were less open. Social expressivity includes a lively voice, smile, etc.

Dating and Sexuality

Study participants were able to distinguish heterosexual from homosexual persons using pictures of their faces using the random level, bisexual persons could only be identified by chance. These data suggest that people do not distinguish between bisexual and homosexual people, but can determine a difference between heterosexual and bisexual or homosexual people.

The longer test subjects have time to judge a person, the more they base their judgment on information rather than on the person's appearance. In studies on this, men were identified as homosexual or heterosexual and people as trustworthy or untrustworthy. A study on speed dating examined the possible influence on the ratings of speed dating participants by the types of media used for their presentations. There were no significant differences in the accuracy of the impression when a participant was presented in person or in a video. However, the impressions of potential dating partners presented via video were more negative than those who introduced themselves personally. The results of a study on the characterization of a romantic partner indicate that people often rely on their “gut instinct” when meeting in person, but there is insufficient information as to whether this is also the case on the Internet.

Professional context

Above all, non-verbal behavior plays an important role in gaining the first impression, for example when meeting a business partner. In particular, components of social expressivity such as smile, position of the eyebrows, emotional expression and eye contact are taken into account. Bending slightly forward and greeting with a firm handshake, as well as an upright posture, promotes a favorable first impression in an (American) business context. Other tactics to promote a positive first impression include, for example, researching the company / organization early on and preparing questions for the interview leader, exuding self-confidence and dressing appropriately.

A qualitative review , based on self- report data from previous literature, indicates that men and women in the corporate world use impression management techniques for self-presentation that correspond to gender stereotypes. According to this research, women are faced with a dilemma: if they portray themselves as more collaborative and obedient, they will be passed over for leadership positions. On the other hand, women who try to use male tactics (such as being more aggressive) experience negative consequences due to a violation of normative gender role expectations. To change this dynamic, the authors suggest that leadership positions should be recruited by highlighting the female characteristics required for the position. In addition, the employee training should include a part that highlights gender issues in the office in order to sensitize employees to possible discrimination.

Data collected from conversations with doctors differentiate between first impressions and intuition and help to understand the occurrence of gut feelings in the medical field. Gut feelings go beyond first impressions: Doctors doubted their first impressions as they gathered more information about their patients. More experienced doctors reported more gut instincts than less experienced doctors, but the quality of intuition generally depended on the quality of feedback they received from the information-gathering process. Emotional attachment improved learning, as it does with first impressions.

Evolutionary basis

A direct confrontation with the intentions of an emerging person or subject, based on optical clues, could be very closely related to the beginnings of biological evolution . That this happens so quickly in our brains has to do with the risks and benefits of a person we meet for the first time. The latency of an entire evaluation process indicates an extremely important adaptation of prehistoric creatures based on their initial experiences with encounters with strangers. The less time the evaluation takes, the higher the chances of survival in the event of a risk.

According to a hypothesis by Sachchidanand Swami (a self-employed Indian human behaviorist and researcher of non-verbal communication), the development of direct visual cue-based assessment of persons or subjects began with the onset of eye evolution . Living things that existed in prehistoric oceans, with their primeval eyesight and small brains, could have been the cornerstone of this development process. This “seeing is believing” neurological effect may have evolved primarily to identify predators as quickly as possible.

According to Sachchidanand Swami, judgments of intentions of persons or subjects based on appearance may have further developed and enhanced trustworthiness, which is a crucial factor in interpersonal relationship. He sent the concept behind this hypothesis to more than 100 other scientists at renowned universities, research laboratories and institutions via email. It is still being tested in scientific circles, but has not yet been confirmed or refuted.

Neuroscience

First impressions emerge within milliseconds of the optical perception of a target. The encoding of the conscious formation of the first impression takes place in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC). Evaluations of fMRIs from test persons show a higher activation of the DMPFC when processing diagnostic information (e.g. special features) than with neutral information.

In general, participants gained more negative impressions from faces showing negative emotions than from neutral facial expressions. Results of studies show that the DMPFC and the amygdala play a major role in the formation of negative impressions. When one forms immediate impressions based on emotions, the stimulus can bypass the neocortex in the form of an "amygdala hijack".

familiarity

Research shows that people are efficient evaluators when they form impressions based on prejudice. The posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), the amygdala and the thalamus separate the information into relevant and irrelevant according to the prejudices. The DMPFC is also involved in the process of impression formation, especially in the case of personal descriptive information.

When identifying previously seen faces that were encoded as “friends” or “enemies”, the fMRI results of individuals show activation of the fusiform cortex, posterior cingulate gyrus, and amygdala. In addition, the activation of the caudal and anterior cingulate cortex is higher when looking at the faces of “enemies” than when looking at the faces of “friends”. These results suggest that quick first impressions of hostility or support from unknown people can lead to long-term effects in the memory that are later associated with the person.

Alcohol and impressions

The consumption of alcohol or placebo alcohol influenced the emotion recognition in ten-second video clips. Participants who thought they had had an alcoholic beverage rated an additional facial expression (approximately 3% of the facial expressions seen) in each video clip as happy compared to the control group. Consequently, the impression formation can even be influenced by the assumption that you have drunk an alcoholic beverage.

Cross-cultural differences

There seem to be intercultural similarities in brain response in forming first impressions. In a simulated election, American and Japanese people voted for the candidate who elicited the strongest response in their bilateral amygdala, regardless of the candidate's culture. Subjects also showed a stronger response in the out-group belonging to faces than to cultural ingroup assigned faces. This is because the amygdala is believed to be more sensitive to new stimuli. However, these findings did not correspond to the actual voting decisions.

Stability from first impressions

First impressions once formed tend to be stable. According to a review of literature on the accuracy and influence of first impressions on assessments, the first impressions of the assessors correlate strongly with later assessments, but it is unclear exactly why this is the case. In a study that examined this stability, participants were asked to form impressions using only photos. The subjects rated the people depicted in the photos not significantly differently after interacting with the person a month later. One possible reason for this stability is that first impressions serve as a guide for the following process, such as what questions are asked and how evaluators approach assessments. More research into first impression stability is needed to fully understand how first impressions determine subsequent treatment, self-fulfilling prophecies, and the halo effect . Assessment grids can also influence impressions, for example if questions only provide dichotomous “yes” or “no” answers or if the evaluator uses a (ratio) scale. Although this study was conducted with the intention of improving assessment methods in medical education, the literature review was broad enough to generalize.

The first impression can overlay later perceptions and act as an assessment error.

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ^ A b Eliot R. Smith, Diane M. Mackie: Social Psychology. 3. Edition. Psychology Press, Hove 2007, ISBN 1-84169-409-6 .
  2. ↑ a b c d Carlin Flora: The First Impression. ( Memento from February 20, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) In: Psychology Today . May 14, 2004, accessed February 20, 2011.
  3. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Elliot Aronson, Timothy D. Wilson, Robin M. Akert: Social Psychologie. 6th edition. Pearson Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River 2007, ISBN 0-13-238245-8 .
  4. ↑ a b c Jeremy C. Biesanz, Lauren J. Human, Annie-C. Paquin, et al. a .: Do We Know When Our Impressions of Others Are Valid? Evidence for Realistic Accuracy Awareness in First Impressions of Personality. In: Social Psychological and Personality Science . Volume 2, No. 5, 2011, pp. 452-459, doi: 10.1177 / 1948550610397211 .
  5. ↑ a b c d e Rajesh Bhargave, Nicole V. Montgomery: The social context of temporal sequences: Why first impressions shape shared experiences. In: Journal of Consumer Research. Volume 40, No. 3, 2013, pp. 501-517, doi: 10.1086 / 671053 .
  6. ↑ a b c Jonathan YC Ding, Nicholas O. Rule: Gay, Straight, or Somewhere in Between: Accuracy and Bias in the Perception of Bisexual Faces . In: Journal of Nonverbal Behavior . Volume 36, No. 2, 2012, pp. 165-176, doi: 10.1007 / s10919-011-0129-y .
  7. ↑ a b c d Laura P. Naumann, Simine Vazire, u. a .: "Personality Judgments Based on Physical Appearance". In: "Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin". Volume 35, No. 12, 2009, pp. 1661-1671, doi: 10.1177 / 0146167209346309 .
  8. ↑ Michelle Trudeau: You Had Me At Hello: The Science Behind First Impressions. In: NPR . National Public Radio, May 5, 2014, accessed May 6, 2014.
  9. ↑ a b c d Rosanna E. Guadagno .; Robert B. Cialdini: Gender Differences in Impression Management in Organizations: A Qualitative Review. In: Sex Roles. Volume 56, No. 7-8, March 21, 2007, pp. 483-494, doi: 10.1007 / s11199-007-9187-3 .
  10. ↑ a b Timothy J. Wood: Exploring the role of first impressions in rater-based assessments. In: Advances in Health Sciences Education. Volume 19, No. 3, August 2014, pp. 409-427. doi: 10.1007 / s10459-013-9453-9 .
  11. ↑ a b c d Janine Willis, Alexander Todorov: First impressions: Making up your mind after 100 ms exposure to a face. In: Psychological Science. Volume 17, No. 7, 2006, pp. 592-598, doi: 10.1111 / j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x .
  12. ↑ a b c Eric Wargo: How many seconds to a first impression? In: Observer. Volume 19, No. 7, July 2006.
  13. ↑ Erica N. Carlson, Michael R. Furr, Simine Vazire: Do We Know the First Impressions We Make? Evidence for Idiographic Meta-Accuracy and Calibration of First Impressions . In: Social Psychological and Personality Science . Volume 1, No. 1, January 1, 2010, pp. 94-98. doi : 10.1177 / 1948550609356028 .
  14. ↑ a b Leslie A. Zebrowitz, Robert G. Franklin, Suzanne Hillman, Henry Boc: Older and younger adults' first impressions from faces: Similar in agreement but different in positivity . In: Psychology and Aging . Volume 28, No. 1, September, pp. 202-212. doi : 10.1037 / a0030927 .
  15. ↑ a b c Xiang Fang, TM Rajkumar: The Role of National Culture and Multimedia on First Impression Bias Reduction: An Experimental Study in US and China . In: IEEE Transactions On Professional Communication . Volume 56, No. 4, 2013, pp. 354-371. doi : 10.1109 / TPC.2013.2251503 .
  16. ↑ a b Kai H. Lim, Izak Benbasat, Lawrence M. Ward: The role of multimedia in changing first impression bias . In: Information Systems Research . Volume 11, No. 2, 2000, pp. 115-136. doi : 10.1287 / isre.11.2.115.11776 .
  17. ^ A b Anne-Sophie Deprez-Sims, Scott B. Morris: Accents in the workplace: Their effects during a job interview . In: International Journal of Psychology . Volume 45, No. 6, September, pp. 417-426. doi : 10.1080 / 00207594.2010.499950 .
  18. ↑ a b Leslie A. Zebrowitz, Ruoxue Wang u. a .: First Impressions From Faces Among US and Culturally Isolated Tsimane 'People in the Bolivian Rainforest . In: Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology . Volume 43, No. 1, December 19, 2011, pp. 119-134. doi : 10.1177 / 0022022111411386 .
  19. ^ A b c Jane E. Workman, Kim KP Johnson: The Role of Cosmetics in Impression Formation . In: Clothing and Textiles Research Journal . Volume 10, No. 1, September 1, 1991, pp. 63-67. doi : 10.1177 / 0887302X9101000109 .
  20. ↑ a b Christopher Y. Olivolaa, Alexander Todorov: Fooled by first impressions? Reexamining the diagnostic value of appearance-based inferences . In: Journal of Experimental Social Psychology . Volume 46, No. 2, September, pp. 315-324. doi : 10.1016 / j.jesp.2009.12.002 .
  21. ↑ a b c Alexander Todorov: Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes . In: Science . Volume 308, No. 5728, June 10, 2005, pp. 1623-1626. doi : 10.1126 / science.1110589 .
  22. ^ A b Genevieve L. Lorenzo, Jeremy C. Biesanz, Lauren J. Human: What Is Beautiful Is Good and More Accurately Understood: Physical Attractiveness and Accuracy in First Impressions of Personality . In: Psychological Science . Volume 21, No. 12, November 4, 2010, pp. 1777-1782. doi : 10.1177 / 0956797610388048 .
  23. ^ Sara Cheshire: Your face matters for first impressions . In: CNN . Cable News Network, July 29, 2014; accessed August 1, 2014.
  24. ↑ Richard JW Vernon, Clare AM Sutherland et al. a .: Modeling first impressions from highly variable facial images. In: PNAS . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , Volume 111, No. 32, August 12, 2014, pp. 3353-3361, doi: 10.1073 / pnas.1409860111 .
  25. ^ A b Lauren A. McDermott, Terry F. Pettijohn II: The influence of clothing fashion and race on the perceived socioeconomic status and person perception of college students . In: Psychology & Society . Volume 4, No. 2, 2011, pp. 64-75.
  26. ↑ a b Rajees Sritharan, Kimberly Heilpern u. a .: I think I like you: Spontaneous and deliberate evaluations of potential romantic partners in an online dating context . In: European Journal of Social Psychology . Volume 40, 2010, pp. 1062-1077. doi : 10.1002 / ejsp.703 .
  27. ↑ a b Max Weisbuch, Zorana IvcevicWeisbuch u. a .: On being liked on the web and in the 'real world': Consistency in first impressions across personal web pages and spontaneous behavior . In: Journal Of Experimental Social Psychology . Volume 45, No. 3, 2009, pp. 573-576. doi : 10.1016 / j.jesp.2008.12.009 .
  28. ^ A b c Janice Wood: The Power of a First Impression . In: PsychCentral . February 15, accessed May 6, 2014.
  29. ^ A b c Carol K. Goman: The nonverbal advantage: secrets and science of body language at work . Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco 2008, ISBN 978-0-9625435-1-7 .
  30. ↑ Mark Rowh: First impressions count . In: gradPSYCH. American Psychological Association Magazine , Volume 10, No. 4, 2012, p. 32.
  31. ↑ a b Amanda Woolley, Olga Kostopoulou: Clinical intuition in family medicine: More than first impressions . In: Annals of Family Medicine . Volume 11, No. 1, 2013, pp. 60-66. doi : 10.1370 / afm.1433 .
  32. ↑ Sachchidanand Swami
  33. ↑ a b Roee Gilron, Angela H. Gutchess: Remembering first impressions: Effects of intentionality and diagnosticity on Subsequent memory . In: Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience . Volume 12, No. 1, 2012, pp. 85-98. doi : 10.3758 / s13415-011-0074-6 .
  34. ↑ Tetsuya Iidaka, Tokiko Harada, Norihiro Sadato: Forming a negative impression of another person correlates with activation in medial prefrontal cortex and amygdala . In: Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience . Volume 6, No. 4, 2011, pp. 516-525. doi : 10.1093 / scan / nsq072 .
  35. ^ Daniel Goleman: Working with Emotional Intelligence. 1st edition. Bloomsbury Publishing, Bloomsbury 1999, ISBN 978-0747543848
  36. ↑ a b Daniela Schiller, Jonathan B Freeman u. a .: A neural mechanism of first impressions . In: Nature Neuroscience . Volume 12, 2009, pp. 508-514. doi : 10.1038 / nn.2278 .
  37. ↑ a b Pascal Vrticka; Frédéric Andersson et al. a .: Memory for friends or foes: The social context of past encounters with faces modulates their subsequent neural traces in the brain . In: Social Neuroscience . Volume 4, No. 5, September, pp. 384-401. doi : 10.1080 / 17470910902941793 .
  38. ↑ a b Nora T. Walter, Smiljana Mutic u. a .: The Influence of Alcohol Intake and Alcohol Expectations on the Recognition of Emotions . In: Alcohol and Alcoholism . Volume 46, 2011, pp. 680-685. doi : 10.1093 / alcalc / agr082 .
  39. ↑ a b c Nicholas O. Rule, Jonathan B. Freeman et al. a .: Voting behavior is reflected in amygdala response across cultures . In: Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience . Volume 5, No. 2-3, December 5, 2009, pp. 349-355. doi : 10.1093 / scan / nsp046 .