Hypothesis theory of social perception

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The social perception hypothesis theory is a theory of general psychology. It was established by Jerome Bruner between 1951 (first published in 1951 with L. Postman) and 1957 and explains perceptions through the influence of expectations. Hypotheses (English technical terms: perceptual set or cognitive predisposition ) are perceptual expectations in this context that have formed through past experiences.

Summary of Bruner's theory of knowledge

According to Bruner, every process of perception begins with a hypothesis that includes predictions about which events will occur.

In a second step of perception, information from the environment is added. The expectations from the initial hypothesis are compared with the information from the environment. If the hypothesis is refuted, the process begins again, otherwise the process is complete. Because the hypothesis decides what attention should refer to, not only what is seen, but also the interpretation of what is perceived is influenced by the hypothesis. Therefore, hypotheses determine selection and inference processes in a decisive way and even guide action to a certain extent.

Hypothesis theory is a cognitive theory of social perception because it relates thinking, remembering and perceiving. The hypotheses are integrated into cognitive maps and are made up of experiences and previous perceptions.

The strength of the hypothesis is the central concept of the theory.

What does the strength of hypotheses do?

The following assumptions describe the strength of the hypothesis as an independent variable:

  1. The stronger a hypothesis, the greater the probability that it will be activated ( priming ) and have a dispositive effect on the behavior.
  2. The stronger a hypothesis, the lower the amount of supportive stimulus information needed to confirm it .
  3. The stronger a hypothesis, the greater the number of contradicting stimulus information must be for the hypothesis to be rejected ( change resistance ).

From this it can be concluded that the strongest hypothesis is used in the respective perceptual situation and weak hypotheses are suppressed. Because the state of agreement between stimulus information and expectation can be interpreted as equilibrium , aspects of consistency theories are taken into account by hypothesis theory . Until this state of equilibrium is reached, however, hypotheses may have to be changed or the information may be reevaluated. Generally, hypotheses are held on after they have been formed. Then there is a tendency to confirm hypotheses because people remember information better if it is consistent with the preconceived hypotheses (confirmatory compulsion).

Hypotheses that are ecologically valid (generally held to be true or at least accepted) can lead to misjudgments due to their dominance. This is also shown by an experiment by Bruner, Postman and Rodrigues (1950) in which the colors of fruits and vegetables were changed. The subjects shifted the colors in the direction of their experience.

How is hypothesis strength brought about?

In 1951 Bruner made five assumptions about the strength of the hypothesis as a dependent variable :

  1. The more often a hypothesis is confirmed, the stronger it becomes.
  2. The greater the number of available alternative hypotheses in the perceptual situation, the weaker the initial hypothesis.
  3. The greater the motivational support for a hypothesis, the stronger it is.
  4. The greater the cognitive support of the hypothesis, the stronger it is.
  5. The stronger the social support ( affirmation ) for a hypothesis, the more stable it is.

The following conclusions can be drawn from this:

  • A high number of competing hypotheses weakens the strength of the respective hypothesis. In this case, more stimulus information is needed to solidify a hypothesis.
  • Any motivational or emotional influence can have an impact. The meaning of these variables can hardly be narrowed down. Emotions can direct attention in a certain direction, but they can also distract attention from other things.
  • Within a hypothesis system there is a reasoning context, so that if a hypothesis is changed, the entire hypothesis system would have to be changed. The individual tries to avoid this by confirming the hypotheses. But it is also possible for the individual to give in to influences without changing his hypotheses. According to Festinger, dissonance , i.e. a stressful threat to self-worth , only arises when the person fails to justify the behavior from their hypothesis system.
  • Social influences can confirm a hypothesis, especially in the absence of information or evaluation standards. According to Festinger's theory of social comparison processes, individuals feel the need to compare their opinions with others. If no social comparisons are possible, unstable opinions arise.

literature

  • Lilli, W., & Frey, D. (1993). The hypothesis theory of social perception. Theories of Social Psychology, 1, 49-78.
  • Postman, L., & Bruner, JS (1982). The hypothesis theory of social perception. Cognitive Theories of Social Psychology, 19–48.
  • W. Lilli: The hypothesis theory of social perception. In: D. Frey (Ed.): Cognitive Theories of Social Psychology. Hans Huber, Bern 1979.
  • JS Bruner, Postman, L .: An approach to social perception. In W. Dennis & R. Lippitt (Eds.), Current trends in social psychology (pp. 71-118). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 1951
  • JS Bruner: On perceptual readiness. In: Psychological review. 1957.
  • JS Bruner: Personality dynamics and the process of perceiving. In RR Blake & GV Ramsey (eds.): Perception, an approach to personality. (pp. 121-147). The Ronald Press, New York 1951.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ W. Lilli: Hypothesis theory of perception. In: D. Frey & S. Greif (eds.): Social psychology. A manual in key terms. Urban & Schwarzenberg, Munich 1994.
  2. ↑ CF Graumann : Social perception: The motivation of perception in recent American studies. In: Journal for Experimental and Applied Psychology. 1956.
  3. ^ G. Wiswede: Social Psychology Lexicon. Oldenbourg, Munich 2004.
  4. ^ EC Tolman : Cognitive maps in rats and men. In: Psychological Review. 1948.
  5. ↑ (Lilli, 1978)
  6. ^ E. Cohen: The propaganda of saints in the middle ages. In: Journal of Communication. 1981.
  7. ^ JW Howard & M. Rothbart: Social categorization and memory for in-group and out-group behavior. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1980.
  8. ↑ W. Lilli & D. Frey: The hypothesis theory of social perception. Hans Huber. In: D. Frey & M. Irle (eds.): Theories of social psychology. (2 ed., Pp. 49-78). Bern 1993.
  9. ↑ L. Festinger: A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press 1957.
  10. ↑ L. Festinger: Conflict, decision, and dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press 1964.
  11. ^ L. Festinger : A theory of social comparison processes. In: Human Relations. 1954.