Bulletin Personality and Social Psychology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin http://psp.sagepub.com Accuracy in Judgments of Aggressiveness David A. Kenny, Tessa V. West, Antonius H. N. Cillessen, John D. Coie, Kenneth A. Dodge, Julie A. Hubbard and David Schwartz Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2007; 33; 1225 originally published online Jun 15, 2007; DOI: 10.1177/0146167207303026 The online version of this article can be found at: http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/9/1225 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc. Additional services and information for Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin can be found at: Email Alerts: http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://psp.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations (this article cites 34 articles hosted on the SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms): http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/33/9/1225 Downloaded from http://psp.sagepub.com at UNIV OF DELAWARE LIB on September 13, 2007 © 2007 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. Accuracy in Judgments of Aggressiveness David A. Kenny Tessa V. West Antonius H. N. Cillessen University of Connecticut John D. Coie Kenneth A. Dodge Duke University Julie A. Hubbard University of Delaware David Schwartz University of Southern California Perceivers are both accurate and biased in their under- inaccuracy of perception without examining a possible bias standing of others. Past research has distinguished as the culprit. Krueger and Funder (2004) reviewed the lit- between three types of accuracy: generalized accuracy, erature on biases and accuracy in social perception, and the a perceiver’s accuracy about how a target interacts with resulting impression is that person perception is fundamen- others in general; perceiver accuracy, a perceiver’s view tally flawed, “ludicrous” (Tversky & Kahneman, 1971, of others corresponding with how the perceiver is p. 109), and “self-defeating” (Tversky & Kahneman, 1971, treated by others in general; and dyadic accuracy, a p. 107). Following Krueger and Funder (2004) and Swann perceiver’s accuracy about a target when interacting (1984), such a characterization of human judgment is unde- with that target. Researchers have proposed that there served for several reasons. should be more dyadic than other forms of accuracy First, sometimes individuals make inaccurate judgments among well-acquainted individuals because of the prag- not because they are inept social perceivers but because matic utility of forecasting the behavior of interaction under certain circumstances biases that lead to inaccuracy partners. We examined behavioral aggression among are “more beneficial than irrational” (Krueger & Funder, well-acquainted peers. A total of 116 9-year-old boys 2004, p. 7). For example, research in the field of close rela- rated how aggressive their classmates were toward tionships has demonstrated that biased perceptions of one’s other classmates. Subsequently, 11 groups of 6 boys relationship partner are often beneficial both to the per- each interacted in play groups, during which observa- ceiver and to the target when the bias is positive, specifi- tions of aggression were made. Analyses indicated cally when the perceiver idealizes her or his partner (e.g., strong generalized accuracy yet little dyadic and per- Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996). It may be the case that ceiver accuracy. Keywords: accuracy; bias; aggression; social relations model; hostile attribution bias Authors’ Note: We thank Hunter Gehlbach, who provided us with helpful comments. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David A. Kenny, Department of Psychology U-1020, University of istorically, person-perception researchers have Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-1020; e-mail: david.kenny @uconn.edu. Hfocused on the finding that human perceivers make PSPB, Vol. 33 No. 9, September 2007 1225-1236 inaccurate judgments that are riddled with biases. In DOI: 10.1177/0146167207303026 fact, rarely does one encounter a study that discusses © 2007 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc. 1225 Downloaded from http://psp.sagepub.com at UNIV OF DELAWARE LIB on September 13, 2007 © 2007 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. 1226 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN having a negative bias, or perceiving another person as treating them as a dichotomy (Kenny & Albright, having more negative attributes or behaviors than he or 1987). The issue then is not whether perceivers are she actually has, can also be beneficial in navigating either accurate or inaccurate but rather the extent to one’s social world, particularly when judgments are which perceivers are accurate. made of targets who may be particularly threatening. Recent research in person perception has redefined The second general point is that biases do not always how accuracy is measured and has allowed for the pos- lead to inaccuracy; social judgments can be both biased sibility of both accurate and inaccurate judgments. One and accurate (Dawes & Mulford, 1966; Hoch, 1987). illustration is research using the thin-slices (Ambady & For example, Kenny and Acitelli (2001) found that Rosenthal, 1992, 1993) and the zero-acquaintance assumed similarity (i.e., assuming that oneself is similar (Albright, Kenny, & Malloy, 1988) paradigms, which to others) in the context of close relationships can lead do not encourage or discourage the uses of biases in to accurate judgments. Individuals who assume that social judgment. Such research has found that human close others are like them are often correct because close perceivers are often more accurate than chance, even others are indeed like them. In addition, Lee, Jussim, when they are given very little information about a tar- and McCauley (1995) argued that stereotypes very get. In thin-slices and zero-acquaintance studies, the often have a kernel of truth. When individuals make degree to which a perceiver is accurate is determined by judgments based on stereotypes, such biased judgments using a criterion for a target’s standing on a trait, such can be correct. A judgment’s being biased does not nec- as a behavioral measure, or self-reported individual dif- essarily make it an inaccurate one. ference variable (e.g., sexual orientation in Ambady, The idea that biases may potentially lead to accuracy Hallahan, & Conner, 1999). Current methods of study- leads us to an important point: It is crucial to make a ing accuracy contrast the traditional approach of many distinction between an error and a bias. The term error bias studies in which “nothing true can possibly be said implies an incorrect judgment, whereas a bias may lead about the target” (Krueger & Funder, 2004, p. 11). To to an incorrect or a correct judgment. Psychologists examine accuracy fairly, perceivers should be given the sometimes use the terms bias and error interchangeably. opportunity to be accurate or inaccurate, using a realis- In a critique of research on the fundamental attribution tic context in which perceivers should be particularly error, Harvey, Town, and Yarkin (1981) argued that motivated to be accurate rather than encouraged to be the fundamental attribution error reflects a tendency to biased. underestimate the importance of situational determi- nants and to overestimate the degree to which actions Types of Accuracy are determined by dispositional influences. However, the fundamental attribution error should not be charac- In addition to the complication of studying accu- terized as an error but rather a bias in that it may be racy in social perception, a further complication in correct, and indeed it often is correct. the study of accuracy is its definition. Funder (1997) There are additional methodological reasons to has distinguished between three major variants: con- believe that flawed social judgments are overrepre- structivist (Kruglanksi, 1989), realistic accuracy sented in the literature. Historically, research paradigms (Funder & West, 1993), and pragmatic accuracy used to examine social judgments were designed to (Swann, 1984). Kruglanski’s (1989) constructivist facilitate biases in perceptions, which ultimately lead to approach defines accuracy in terms of consensus; the inaccurate judgments (Krueger & Funder, 2004) rather degree to which acquaintances agree with strangers is than correct ones. There are several ways perception often assessed, and consensus then serves as the criterion studies encourage the view that human perceivers are for accuracy. biased. First, perception studies very often provide per- Once a researcher determines an appropriate defini- ceivers with very impoverished information, and the tion for accuracy, moderator variables of accuracy are most salient information given to perceivers is the bias often examined. For example, Funder (1995) discussed factor. It then is hardly surprising that perceivers use four possible moderators of accuracy: The “good this information (Schwarz, 1994) in making social judg- judge,” some individuals are better perceivers than oth- ments. Second, the stimuli being judged in many per- ers are, the “good target,” some individuals are easier to ception studies are artificial and, therefore, there is no judge than others are, the “good