Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 167–198 | Cite as

Judging others in the shadow of suspicion

  • Steven Fein
  • James L. Hilton
Article

Abstract

Previous research has found that when perceivers have reason to be suspicious of the motives underlying an actor's behavior, they are likely to draw inferences about the actor's true disposition that reflect a relatively sophisticated style of attributional processing. The present research was designed to examine some of the negative consequences that suspicion can have on perceivers' judgments. In each of the three studies reported, some subjects were made suspicious about the motives of an actor on the basis of contextual information surrounding the actor's behavior, rather than the behavior itself. Results of these studies suggest that, particularly when perceivers believe that the actions or motives of the actor could affect them, suspicion may cause perceivers to see the actor in a more negative light, even if the perceivers are not convinced that the actor's behavior was indeed affected by ulterior motives.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allison, S. T., Mackie, D. M., Muller, M. M., & Worth, L. T. (1993).Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 151–157.Google Scholar
  2. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Crocker, J., & Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma.Psychological Review, 96, 608–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eagly, A. H. (1987).Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Fein, S. (1991). The suspicious mind (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1991).Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(7-B).Google Scholar
  6. Fein, S., Hilton, J. L., & Miller, D. T. (1990). Suspicion of ulterior motivation and the correspondence bias.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 753–764.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gilbert, D. T., & Jones, E. E. (1986). Perceiver-induced constraint: Interpretations of self-generated reality.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gilbert, D. T., Krull, D. S., & Pelham, B. W. (1988). Of thoughts unspoken: Social inference and the self-regulation of behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 685–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gilbert, D. T., Pelham, B. W., & Krull, D. S. (1988). On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 733–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hastie, R. (1984). Causes and effects of causal attribution.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heider, F. (1958).The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Hilton, J. L., & Darley, J. M. (1991). The effects of interaction goals on person perception. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 24, pp. 235–267). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hilton, J. L., Fein, S., & Miller, D. T. (1993). Suspicion and dispositional inference.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 501–512.Google Scholar
  14. Hilton, J. L., Miller, D. T., Fein, S., & Darley, J. M. (1990). When dispositional inferences are suspended: Diagnosing and calibrating traits.Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 4, 519–537.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, E. E. (1964).Ingratiation: A social psychological analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  16. Jones, E. E. (1979). The rocky road from acts to dispositions.American Psychologist, 34, 107–117.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2), pp. 283–330. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Jones, E. E., Davis, K. E., & Gergen, K. (1961). Role playing variations and their informational value for person perception.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 302–310.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jones, E. E., Worchel, S., Goethals, G. R., & Grumet, J. (1971). Prior expectancy and behavioral extremity as determinants of attitude attribution.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 59–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology.Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 192–238.Google Scholar
  21. Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution.American Psychologist, 28, 107–128.Google Scholar
  22. Kruglanski, A. W. (1970). Attributing trustworthiness in supervisor-worker relations.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6, 214–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kruglanski, A. W., Webster, D. M., & Klem, A. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 861–876.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Major, B., & Crocker, J. (1993). Social stigma: The consequences of attributional ambiguity. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.),Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 345–370). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. McCornack, S. A. & Levine, T. R. (1990). When lies are uncovered: Emotional and relational outcomes of discovered deception.Communication Monographs, 57, 119–138.Google Scholar
  26. Messick, D. M., & Reeder, G. D. (1972). Perceived motivation, role variations, and the attribution of personal characteristics.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8, 482–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Messick, D. M., & Reeder, G. D. (1974). Roles, occupations, behaviors, and attributions.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 126–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller, D. T., Turnbull, W., & McFarland, C. (1989). When a coincidence is suspicious: The role of mental simulation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 581–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Miller, J. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961–978.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Neuberg, S. L. (1989). The goal of forming accurate impressions during social interactions: Attenuating the impact of negative expectancies.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 374–386.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Neuberg, S. L., Judice, T. N., Virdin, L. M., & Carrillo, M. A. (1993). Perceiver self-presentational goals as moderators of expectancy influences: Ingratiation and the disconfirmation of negative expectancies.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 409–420.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Reeder, G. D. (1993). Trait-behavior relations and dispositional inference.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 586–593.Google Scholar
  33. Reeder, G. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1979). A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception.Psychological Review, 86, 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reeder, G. D., Messick, D. M., & Van Avermaet, E. (1977). Dimensional asymmetry in attributional inference.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 46–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Snyder, M. (1987).Public appearances/private realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  36. Snyder, M. L., & Jones, E. E. (1974). Attitude attribution when behavior is constrained.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 585–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Strickland, L. H. (1958). Surveillance and trust.Journal of Personality, 26, 200–215.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Strickland, L. H., Barefoot, J. C., & Hockenstein, P. (1976). Monitoring behavior in the surveillance and trust paradigm.Representative Research in Social Psychology, 7, 51–57.Google Scholar
  39. Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution error.Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 227–236.Google Scholar
  40. Trope, Y., Cohen, O., & Maoz, Y. (1988). The perceptual and inferential effects of situational inducements on dispositional attribution.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Weiner, B. (1985). “Spontaneous” causal thinking.Psychological Bulletin, 97, 74–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Word, C. O., Zanna, M. P., & Cooper, J. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies in interracial interaction.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Fein
    • 2
  • James L. Hilton
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MichiganUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, Bronfman Science CenterWilliams CollegeWilliamstown

Personalised recommendations