Article

Thin Slices of Expressive Behavior as Predictors of Interpersonal Consequences: A Meta-Analysis

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

A meta-analysis was conducted on the accuracy of predictions of various objective outcomes in the areas of clinical and social psychology from short observations of expressive behavior (under 5 min). The overall effect size for the accuracy of predictions for 38 different results was .39. Studies using longer periods of behavioral observation did not yield greater predictive accuracy; predictions based on observations under 0.5 min in length did not differ significantly from predictions based on 4- and 5-min observations. The type of behavioral channel (such as the face, speech, the body, tone of voice) on which the ratings were based was not related to the accuracy of predictions. Accuracy did not vary significantly between behaviors manipulated in a laboratory and more naturally occurring behavior. Last, effect sizes did not differ significantly for predictions in the areas of clinical psychology, social psychology, and the accuracy of detecting deception. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

... We express emotions mostly in a simultaneous way through voice, face, posture, and gesture (Lhommet & Marsella, 2015). An early study showed that humans use combined information from face and body during their judgments of human communicative behavior (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992). The importance of body parts and their movements in both emotion expression and perception was also demonstrated in some other fields such as dance (Dittrich et al., 1996;Sawada et al., 2003) and psychiatry (Hall et al., 1995;Wallbott, 1985). ...
Article
Full-text available
We communicate emotions in a multimodal way, yet non-verbal emotion communication is a relatively understudied area of research. In three experiments, we investigated the role of gesture characteristics (e.g., type, size in space) on individuals’ processing of emotional content. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to rate the emotional intensity of emotional narratives from the videoclips either with iconic or beat gestures. Participants in the iconic gesture condition rated the emotional intensity higher than participants in the beat gesture condition. In Experiment 2, the size of gestures and its interaction with gesture type were investigated in a within-subjects design. Participants again rated the emotional intensity of emotional narratives from the videoclips. Although individuals overall rated narrow gestures more emotionally intense than wider gestures, no effects of gesture type, or gesture size and type interaction were found. Experiment 3 was conducted to check whether findings of Experiment 2 were due to viewing gestures in all videoclips. We compared the gesture and no gesture (i.e., speech only) conditions and showed that there was not a difference between them on emotional ratings. However, we could not replicate the findings related to gesture size of Experiment 2. Overall, these findings indicate the importance of examining gesture’s role in emotional contexts and that different gesture characteristics such as size of gestures can be considered in nonverbal communication.
... In making assessments about others' moods, personality traits, and relationships, we are able to make relatively reliable decisions based on a small amount of information [1,2]. This ability has been deemed 'thin slicing' and involves using cognitive and social heuristics to assess such traits and has been researched extensively. ...
Article
Full-text available
Research focusing on “thin slicing” suggests in making judgements of others’ moods, personality traits, and relationships, we are able to make relatively reliable decisions based on a small amount of information. In some instances, this can be done in a matter of a few seconds. A similar result was found with regard to the judgement of musical quality of ensemble performances by Tsay (2014), wherein musical novices were able to reliably choose the winner of a music competition based on the visual information only (but not auditory or audiovisual information). Tsay argues that this occurs due to a lack of auditory expertise in musical novices, and that they are able to extract quality information based on visual movements with more accuracy. As part of the SCORE project (OSF, 2021), we conducted a direct replication of Tsay (2014). Findings showed that musical novices were unable to judge musical quality at a level greater than chance, and this result held for auditory, visual, and audiovisual presentation. This suggests that 6 s is not a sufficient amount of time for novices to judge the relative quality of musical performance, regardless of the modality in which they were presented.
... The present study investigated parents' perceptions of empathy after viewing a 62-second, standardized clinical encounter with only one paraphrased statement. While previous research suggests that observer judgments following brief exposures to behavior (e.g., under half a minute) may be as accurate as longer exposures to behavior (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992), understanding parents' perceptions of empathy following longer exposures to the clinician's behavior, including increased use of paraphrasing both in the initial assessment and throughout the therapeutic process (e.g., after engaging in treatment for a given period of time) warrants further study. Further, the present study assessed perceived empathy from an observer perspective; future studies should assess perceived clinical empathy in first-person contexts to assess the degree of alignment or divergence. ...
Article
Purpose: The primary purpose of this preliminary study was to explore whether a clinician's use of active listening skills (i.e., client-directed eye gaze and paraphrasing) influenced parents' perceptions of clinical empathy in a stuttering assessment. A secondary purpose was to determine whether parent age, education, or parent concern predicted perceived clinical empathy. Method: Participants (n = 51 parents/guardians of children who stutter) watched two counterbalanced videos of a clinician demonstrating either high or low frequency use of active listening skills during the clinician's initial assessment with a standardized patient actor portraying a parent of a child who stutters. After each video, parents rated the clinician's empathy and active listening skills via the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy for Observers (JSPEO; Hojat et al., 2017) and the Counselor Activity Self-Efficacy Scales-Modified (Victorino & Hinkle, 2018). Participants then completed a demographic questionnaire and rated their concern about their child's stuttering. Results: Paired t-tests demonstrated significantly higher ratings of perceived clinical empathy in the high frequency active listening condition compared to the low frequency condition (d = 0.548). Simple linear regression analyses indicated parent age or level of education did not predict perceived clinical empathy. An independent samples t-test indicated that parent concern about stuttering did not predict perceived clinical empathy. Conclusions: Preliminary findings suggest that the clinician was viewed as significantly more understanding, concerned, and caring (i.e., perceived as empathic) when active listening skills were used. Parents' ratings of empathy on the JSPEO, based on high levels of active listening by the clinician, were not associated with parents' ages, education levels, or concern about their children's stuttering. This may reflect the value of active listening in clinical relationships regardless of variables specific to the recipient (e.g., parent of a child who stutters). Given that parents are more apt to share thoughts and emotions about their child's communication with clinicians who demonstrate empathic qualities, this preliminary study suggests that the use of active listening skills warrant emphasis in clinical training.
... El rostro es un importante canal de comunicación no verbal (Baltrusaitis,2018), existen regiones muy significativas cuando se muestran emociones: la boca, las cejas y los ojos (Bettadapura, 2012). Las expresiones faciales revelan la intención, muestran afecto, expresan emoción y ayudan a regular los turnos durante la conversación (Ambady, 1992) (Ekman, 1982). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
1. Resumen El trabajo propuesto presenta el levantamiento y análisis de cuatro emociones de personas con Síndrome de Down (SD), disgusto, felicidad, tristeza y sorpresa, en función de sus expresiones faciales, tomando como referencia el Sistema de Código de Unidades Faciales, planteado por Paul Ekman, el cual se basa en el estudio universal de los movimientos de los músculos del rostro, conocidos como Unidades de Acción (AUs). Para el presente estudio se levantó una base de datos de imágenes de personas con SD, tomadas de la web con acceso libre. La herramienta utilizada para realizar la obtención de características fue Open Face 2.0, la que dispone de código abierto para desarrollo de temas de investigación. Se analizó la estadística de activación de 18 AUs a través de la función densidad de probabilidad (PDF) para obtener la aproximación teórica existente a través de la relación Kullback Leibler Divergence (KLD), tomando en cuenta que una emoción está formada por una o varias AUs. Fueron obtenidos histogramas de frecuencia relativa de la activación de cada AU y se realizó su evaluación estadística para determinar la PDF teórica a la que corresponde, lo que permite disponer una base de datos para el estudio de emociones de personas con SD en futuros trabajos que utilizan inteligencia computacional. 2. Introducción Para que los seres humanos se desarrollen en cualquier actividad, necesitan comunicarse e interactuar con el mundo que los rodea, siendo las emociones un medio que permite establecer y mantener relaciones sociales. El rostro es un importante canal de comunicación no verbal (Baltrusaitis,2018), existen regiones muy significativas cuando se muestran emociones: la boca, las cejas y los ojos (Bettadapura, 2012). Las expresiones faciales revelan la intención, muestran afecto, expresan emoción y ayudan a regular los turnos durante la conversación (Ambady, 1992)(Ekman, 1982). Al hablar de sistemas automáticos de reconocimiento de expresiones faciales, podemos mencionar las siguientes etapas: detección de cara, extracción de características, aprendizaje del sistema y clasificación de la expresión (Wu, Fu, Yang, 2012). En 1998 T. Kanade y H. Schneiderman desarrollaron un algoritmo de detección de objetos usando métodos estadísticos, que permitieron la detección del rostro, independientemente de su posición es decir podía estar de frente, hacia la izquierda o derecha, etc) (Schneriderman, Kanade, 2004). En el 2001 P. Viola y M. Jones desarrollaron un método que permite detectar objetos en tiempo real, basado en un algoritmo de aprendizaje en cascada (Viola, 2001). En la actualidad se está utilizando modelos parametrizados, que usan un conjunto de polígonos para formar una malla que se superpone a las caras y se adapta a ellas. Paul Ekman y Wallace V. Friesen desarrollaron en 1978 el Sistema de Codificación de Acción Facial (FACS), una herramienta que permite la descripción objetiva de las expresiones faciales características para cada emoción (6 emociones básicas o también llamadas primarias: alegría, tristeza, miedo, disgusto, asco, sorpresa), pues cada una tiene un patrón de respuesta fisiológico específico y reconocido en todas las culturas y por todas las personas. Basado en la detección de cambios que se producen en el rostro con las acciones de los músculos faciales, a estas acciones se les denomina AUs (Ekman, 2006), y se definieron 46 AUs basados en estudios psicológicos. Dentro de FACS también se puede hablar de 5 niveles de intensidad para la emoción. Cada emoción está formada por una combinación de AUs. 3. Metodología La información obtenida para realizar el levantamiento de imágenes de emociones de personas con SD, fue extraída de la web, tomando en cuenta que sean de libre acceso. Para el procesamiento de los datos con el objetivo de extraer características se utilizó la herramienta Open Face 2.0, capaz de detectar hitos faciales con precisión, reconocer unidades de acción facial, estimar la postura de la cabeza y la posición de la
... L'analyse des expressions faciales offre la possibilité d'éclairer des phénomènes comportementaux importants comme les émotions lors des interactions sociales (Cosnier, 1987 (Cunningham et al., 2004), d'états psychologiques, de comportements sociaux tels que l'entente et le rapport (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992), et de traits de personnalité comme l'extraversion et le tempérament (Riggio & Riggio, 2002). Les émotions affichées par le patient permettent également aux professionnels de santé d'avoir les réactions adaptées comme par exemple si le professionnel perçoit que le patient est stressé, il peut alors le rassurer (Tivatansakul et al., 2014 (Fonte et al., 2014;Persais, 2004). ...
Thesis
Cette thèse répond à la demande issue d’un projet ANR (Agence Nationale de la Recherche) qui vise à doter un Robot d’Assistance Sociale (RAS) de compétences le rendant capable de procéder à un dépistage précoce de troubles neurocognitifs. Ce travail doctoral a deux objectifs. Le premier correspond à l’identification, la catégorisation et l’opérationnalisation des compétences que le psychologue mobilise lors de l’évaluation des capacités cognitives de personnes âgées. Le deuxième objectif vise à objectiver la qualité de l’alliance de travail entre le psychologue et la personne âgée dans le contexte de la passation évaluative. Dans les deux cas, une analyse du processus de leur mise en œuvre a été menée.À cette fin, un corpus multimodal a été créé à partir de l’enregistrement audio-visuel de 11 psychologues filmés dans un living-lab pendant qu’ils évaluaient les capacités cognitives de 64 personnes âgées à l’aide de deux tests évaluatifs (i.e., MMSE et RL/RI-16). Basée sur le relevé des actions verbales, une grille d’analyse des compétences du psychologue en contexte évaluatif a été élaborée à partir de ce corpus audio-visuel, selon une approche inductive en trois étapes. Cette grille inventorie 15 compétences, dont 9 compétences centrées test et 6 compétences centrées relation, nécessaires aux psychologues dans la réalisation de la tâche d’évaluation des troubles neurocognitifs.Les résultats montrent que les psychologues verbalisent davantage lorsque les personnes âgées présentent des capacités cognitives faibles, sans pour autant être en mesure de préciser à quel type de compétences le psychologue a recours (i.e., compétences centrées test ou centrées relation). La qualité de l’alliance de travail de la dyade a été analysée en mesurant la synchronie interactionnelle non verbale (SINV). Les résultats montrent que la SINV est significativement prédite par le taux de compétences centrées relation mobilisées par le psychologue.Ce travail doctoral apporte des éléments de réponse sur les déterminants de l’interaction psychologue – personne âgée en contexte évaluatif. Par ailleurs, les résultats concernant l’identification, la catégorisation et l’opérationnalisation des compétences du psychologue en contexte évaluatif tentent de pallier certains problèmes théoriques liés aux compétences. De plus, dans ce contexte spécifique, la SINV semble être une mesure prometteuse de la qualité de l’alliance de travail de la dyade. Pour finir, cette thèse apporte un éclairage théorique et méthodologique sur la conception ergonomique d’un RAS dont l’objectif est de dépister précocement les troubles neurocognitifs de personnes âgées.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Article
This article investigates the individual psychological characteristics of an observer evaluating a stranger for trust/distrust in him from video clips. The perceived person participates in various communicative situations: 1) passing; 2) exam; 3) psychological counselling. 128 people took part in the study, students of MIP and GAUGN, 8 people acted as models. The subjects were consistently shown all three communicative situations. The overall evaluation of trust/distrust in them was measured. As a result of the study, it was shown that a third of the psychological characteristics of the observer, measured by the “personal differential” method, affect the parameter of trust/distrust in a stranger. Those who evaluate themselves more conscientiously, more fairly, friendlier, stronger, more determined, more confident, more sociable, more open, active, calm, relaxed and independent, trust more.
Chapter
How can we get the most out of our close relationships? Research in the area of personal relationships continues to grow, but most prior work has emphasized how to overcome negative aspects. This volume demonstrates that a good relationship is more than simply the absence of a bad relationship, and that establishing and maintaining optimal relationships entails enacting a set of processes that are distinct from merely avoiding negative or harmful behaviors. Drawing on recent relationship science to explore issues such as intimacy, attachment, passion, sacrifice, and compassionate goals, the essays in this volume emphasize the positive features that allow relationships to flourish. In doing so, they integrate several theoretical perspectives, concepts, and mechanisms that produce optimal relationships. The volume also includes a section on intensive and abbreviated interventions that have been empirically validated to be effective in promoting the positive features of close relationships.
Chapter
We are constantly forming impressions about those around us. Social interaction depends on our understanding of interpersonal behavior - assessing one another's personality, emotions, thoughts and feelings, attitudes, deceptiveness, group memberships, and other personal characteristics through facial expressions, body language, voice and spoken language. But how accurate are our impressions and when does such accuracy matter? How is accuracy achieved and are some of us more successful at achieving it than others? This comprehensive overview presents cutting-edge research on this fast-expanding field and will be essential reading for anyone interested in the psychology of interpersonal perception. A wide range of experts in the field explore topics including age and gender effects, psychopathology, culture and ethnicity, workplaces and leadership, clinicians' skills, empathy, meta-perception, and training people to be more accurate in their perceptions of others.
Article
Faces and bodies spontaneously elicit personality trait judgments (e.g., trustworthy, dominant, lazy). We examined how trait information from the face and body combine to form first impressions of the whole person and whether trait judgments from the face and body are affected by seeing the whole person. Consistent with the trait-dependence hypothesis, Experiment 1 showed that the relative contribution of the face and body to whole-person perception varied with the trait judged. Agreeableness traits (e.g., warm, aggressive, sympathetic, trustworthy) were inferred primarily from the face, conscientiousness traits (e.g., dependable, careless) from the body, and extraversion traits (e.g., dominant, quiet, confident) from the whole person. A control experiment showed that both clothing and body shape contributed to whole-person judgments. In Experiment 2, we found that a face (body) rated in the whole person elicited a different rating than when it was rated in isolation. Specifically, when trait ratings differed for an isolated face and body of the same identity, the whole-person context biased in-context ratings of the faces and bodies towards the ratings of the context. These results showed that face and body trait perception interact more than previously assumed. We combine current and established findings to propose a novel framework to account for face–body integration in trait perception. This framework incorporates basic elements such as perceptual determinants, nonperceptual determinants, trait formation, and integration, as well as predictive factors such as the rater, the person rated, and the situation.
Article
Drinking and drinking problems are complex phenomena. Understanding the etiology of alcohol use disorder requires consideration of biological, psychological, and social processes. It is our view that the last of these dimensions is just beginning to receive adequate scrutiny. In this selective review, we discuss the concept of a biopsychosocial analysis of the effects of alcohol. After briefly addressing biological and psychological research on alcohol's emotional effects, we bid to make a case for the vital role that social processes play in understanding why people drink. The bulk of the paper describes research illustrating the contributions that a social psychological perspective can make to advance understanding of the rewarding effects of alcohol. Overall, studies incorporating social contexts have revealed reliable evidence that alcohol enhances emotional experience in many social environments and have identified socio-contextual variables that moderate responses to alcohol. Further, these studies have broadened the scope of constructs thought to be socially rewarding, including social bonding, relationship functioning, and humor enjoyment. Our analysis concludes by identifying research areas we believe would profit from additional research.
Article
We develop and test a holistic model of how team members’ swift judgments about a prospective team member impact their selection decisions and how accurate those judgments are in predicting the prospective member’s performance. Applying the social psychology literature on person perception to the organizational literature on team member selection, we argue that team members’ perceptions of the prospective member’s competence primarily shape their predictions about the prospective member’s task-related performance in the team, whereas perceptions of warmth primarily shape predictions about the prospective member’s interpersonal contextual performance in the team. We further propose that, although team members rely on both performance predictions when choosing a prospective member, predicted task-related performance receives more weight than predicted interpersonal contextual performance, and that the importance of predicted interpersonal contextual performance is elevated when team task interdependence is high. Importantly, we theorize that the predictions about task-related performance show good accuracy, whereas the predictions about interpersonal contextual performance do not, which makes the reliance on the latter erroneous. Across two studies utilizing prospective members’ actual task-related and interpersonal contextual performance (objective and peer-rated), as well as team members’ predictions about such performances, we found support for our predictions. Our research resolves several outstanding puzzles in the literature on person perception, integrates it into organizational research, and offers novel and actionable insights for selecting prospective team members.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Chapter
This interdisciplinary work is a collection of major essays on reasoning: deductive, inductive, abductive, belief revision, defeasible (non-monotonic), cross cultural, conversational, and argumentative. They are each oriented toward contemporary empirical studies. The book focuses on foundational issues, including paradoxes, fallacies, and debates about the nature of rationality, the traditional modes of reasoning, as well as counterfactual and causal reasoning. It also includes chapters on the interface between reasoning and other forms of thought. In general, this last set of essays represents growth points in reasoning research, drawing connections to pragmatics, cross-cultural studies, emotion and evolution.
Article
Examined the validity of the distraction hypothesis (Maier & Thurber, 1968). Ss were undergraduate students who watched a videotaped interview and rated the veracity of an actress who played the role of a college student. Study 1 disconfirmed the distraction hypothesis. Ss relied on nonverbal cues to make judgments of veracity, but the presence of nonverbal cues did not distract Ss from processing verbal content. Study 2 tested an alternate explanation, the situational familiarity hypothesis. Study 2 found that judgments in familiar situations were influenced primarily by verbal content cues, whereas those in unfamiliar situations were influenced by both verbal and nonverbal cues. Findings indicate that situational factors influence information processing and affect the relative importance of verbal and nonverbal cues in judgments of veracity. Generalizability of prior deception research is questioned.
Article
Examined the degree to which Anglo- and Mexican-American 1st-grade teachers can accurately decode nonverbal indicants of comprehension and noncomprehension in young children. 16 teachers from each group viewed silent videotapes (visual cues only) of 3 groups of 1st graders—Anglo-American, proficient bilingual, and limited English-speaking Mexican-American—while the children listened to an easy or difficult lesson on animal habitats. There were 24 boys and 24 girls, and 16 Ss in each linguistic grouping. The Ss estimated the students' level of understanding on the basis of their nonverbal responses. Degree of accuracy was assessed by comparing Ss' ratings of comprehension with the children's actual posttest comprehension scores. No differences in decoding accuracy between S groups were found. Ss perceived boys as understanding more than girls, particularly in the Anglo-American and limited English-speaking groups. Training raters improved overall decoding accuracy. Slight cultural differences were found in children's nonverbal behavior, but it did not appear that the behavior was misinterpreted by either group of Ss. (45 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Comments on the contention of T. A. Ryan (see record 1985-21808-001) that the purpose of statistics is to establish new facts that will contribute to the development of theory. It is argued that the primary role of statistical analysis is summarizing the current state of knowledge about scientific questions under study. The present authors do not share the following views expressed by Ryan: (1) Nonsignificant results should not be published; (2) the importance of Type II errors has been overemphasized relative to Type I; and (3) avoiding consideration of importance and interest in the weighting of contrasts is possible. The reasons for the disagreements are discussed. (7 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Tested and confirmed the hypothesis that attributions of causality mediate influence patterns in verbal and vocal channels. Communication assertiveness was independently measured for verbal content and vocal intonation (filtered speech) during both free interaction and a structured counselor supervision task. Participants were 44 adult students in a counselor training program. In the free-interaction situation, Ss who expressed internal attributions demonstrated significantly greater assertion in vocal intonation than in verbal content; Ss who made high external attributions demonstrated significantly greater assertion in content than in intonation. No significant differences were found in the counselor supervision situation. Verbal content, which provides high internal feedback to the speaker, is interpreted as reflecting the degree of assertiveness intended or thought appropriate by the participants. In contrast, vocal intonation provides low internal feedback to the speaker and is viewed as "leaking" expectations of one's own influence capabilities. (30 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)