Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 129–158 | Cite as

Victim Selection and Kinematics: A Point-Light Investigation of Vulnerability to Attack

  • Rebekah E. Gunns
  • Lucy Johnston
  • Stephen M. Hudson
Article

Abstract

Three experiments used a point-light methodology to investigate whether movement style specifies vulnerability to physical attack. Both female (Experiment 1) and male (Experiment 2) walkers could be differentiated according to ease-of-attack based solely on the kinematic information provided whilst walking. Specific walking style features predicted ease-of-attack and profiles of prototypically “easy to attack” and “difficult to attack” walkers were identified. Variations in walking style as a function of clothing and footwear style were also shown to predict differences in ease-of-attack ratings (Experiment 3). Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are considered.

kinematics point-light vulnerability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albright, L., Kenny, D.A., & Malloy, T.E. (1988). Consensus in personality judgments at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 387-395.Google Scholar
  2. Ambady, N., Hallahan, M., & Conner, B. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 538-547.Google Scholar
  3. Ambady, N., Hallahan, M. & Rosenthal, R. (1995). On judging and being judged accurately in zero acquaintance situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 518-529.Google Scholar
  4. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 431-441.Google Scholar
  5. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256-274.Google Scholar
  6. Amir, M. (1971). Patterns in forcible rape. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Archer, D., & Akert, R. (1977). Words and everything else: Verbal and non-verbal cues in social interpretation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 443-449.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, N.J., & Squire, L.R. (1980). Preserved learning and retention of pattern-analyzing skill in amnesia using perceptual learning. Cortex, 17, 273-278.Google Scholar
  9. Constanzo, M., & Archer, D. (1989). Interpreting the expressive behavior of others: The interpersonal perception task. Journal of Nonverbal Behvaior, 13, 225-245.Google Scholar
  10. Cutting, J. E., & Kozlowski, L. T. (1977). Recognising friends by their walk: Gait perception without familiarity cues. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 353-356.Google Scholar
  11. Farrell, G., Phillips, C., & Pease, K. (1995). Like taking candy. British Journal of Criminology, 35, 384-399.Google Scholar
  12. Fattah, E. A. (1991). Understanding criminal victimization: An introduction to theoretical victimology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  13. Feinberg, S. (1980). Statistical modelling in the analysis of repeat victimization. In S. Feinberg and A. Reiss (Eds.), Indicators of Crime and Criminal Justice: Quantitative Studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  14. Funder, D.C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 654-670.Google Scholar
  15. Gibson, E.J. (1969). Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  16. Gibson, J.J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  17. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw and J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  18. Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  19. Gottfredson, M. R. (1984). Victims of Crime: The dimensions of risk. Home Office Research Study 81. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  20. Graf, P., & Schacter, D.L. (1985). Implicit and explicit memory for new associations in normal and amnesic subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 164-178.Google Scholar
  21. Grayson, B., & Stein, M. I. (1981). Attracting assault: Victims' nonverbal cues. Journal of Communication, 31, 68-75.Google Scholar
  22. Gunns, R.E. (1998). Victim selection and kinematics: A dynamic point-light assessment of perceived vulnerability to attack. Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Cnaterbury.Google Scholar
  23. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Henley, N.M. (1977). Body politics: Power, sex and nonverbal communication. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  25. Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Perception and Psychophysics, 14, 201-211.Google Scholar
  26. Johnston, L., Hudson, S.M., Richardson, M.J., Gunns, R.E., & Garner, M. (2001). Changing kinematics as a means of reducing vulnerability to attack. Under review.Google Scholar
  27. Kenny, D.A., Horner, C., Kashy, D.A., & Chu, L. (1992). Consensus at zero acquaintance: Replication, behavioral cues and stability. Journal of Persoanlity and Social Psychology, 62, 88-97.Google Scholar
  28. Kozlowski, L. T., & Cutting, J. E. (1977). Recognising the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Perception and Psychophysics, 21, 575-580.Google Scholar
  29. Laban, R. (1972). The mastery of movement. Boston, MA: Plays, Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Laban, R., & Lawrence, F. C. (1967). Effort: Economy of body movement. London: McDonald and Evans.Google Scholar
  31. Lauritsen, J. L., & Davis Quinet, K. F. (1995). Repeat victimization among adolescents and young adults. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 11, 143-166.Google Scholar
  32. LeJeune, R. (1977). The management of a mugging. Urban Life, 6, 123-148.Google Scholar
  33. MacDonald, J. (1975). Rape: Offenders and their victims. Springfield, IL: Charles C. ThomasGoogle Scholar
  34. Marshall, W. L., & Barbaree, H. E. (1990). An integrated theory of sexual offending. In W. L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories and treatment of the offender (pp. 257-275). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  35. Massad, C.M., Hubbard, M., & Newtson, D. (1979). Selective perception of events. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 513-532.Google Scholar
  36. McArthur, L. Z., & Baron, R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215-238.Google Scholar
  37. Montepare, J. M., Goldstein, S. B., & Clausen, A. (1987). The identification of emotions from gait information. Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 11, 33-42.Google Scholar
  38. Montepare, J. M., & Zebrowitz-McArthur, L. A. (1988). Impressions of people created by age-related qualities of their gaits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 547-556.Google Scholar
  39. Murzynski, J., & Degelman, D. (1996). Body language of women and judgements of vulnerability to sexual assault. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1617-1626.Google Scholar
  40. Nakdimen, K. A. (1984). The physiognomic basis of sexual stereotyping. American Journal of Psychiatry, 141, 499-503.Google Scholar
  41. Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco: Freedman.Google Scholar
  42. Reiss, A. (1980). Victim proneness in repeat victimization by type of crime. In S. Feinberg and A. Reiss (Eds.), Indicators of crime and criminal justice: Quantitative studies. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  43. Runeson, S. (1985). Perceiving people through their movements. In B. D. Kirkcaldy (Ed.), Individual differences in movement. Lancaster, England: MTP Press Limited.Google Scholar
  44. Runeson, S. (1994). Perception of biological motion: The KSD principle and the implications of a proximal versus distal approach. In G. Jansson, S. S. Bergstrom, and W. Epstein (Eds.), Perceiving events and objects (pp. 383-405). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  45. Runeson, S., & Frykolm, G. (1983). Kinematic specification of dynamics as an informational basis for person-and-action perception: Expectation, gender recognition, and deceptive intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 585-615.Google Scholar
  46. Runeson, S., & Frykholm, G. (1986). Kinematic specification of gender and gender expression. In V. McCabe and G. J. Balzano (Eds.), Event cognition: An ecological perspective (pp. 259-273). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  47. Secord, P.F., Dukes, W.F., & Bevan, W. (1954). Personalities in faces: I. An experiment in social perceiving. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 49, 231-279.Google Scholar
  48. Secord, P.F., & Muthard, J.E. (1955). Personalities in faces: IV. A descriptive analysis of the perception of women's faces and the identification of physiognomic determinants. Journal of Psychology, 39, 269-278.Google Scholar
  49. Shaw, R., Turvey, M., & Mace, W. (1982). Ecological psychology: The consequences of a commitment to realism. In R. Shaw & D. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and symbolic processes (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  50. Sinclair, D. (1973). Human growth after birth. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Sparks, R. F. (1981). Multiple victimization: Evidence, theory, and future research. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 72, 762-778.Google Scholar
  52. UCSA. (1996). Act safe, walk tall. University of Canterbury Printery.Google Scholar
  53. van Dijk, J. J. M., Mayhew, P, & Killias, M. (1990). Experiences of crime across the world: Key findings from the 1989 International Crime Survey (pp. 59-65). Deventer, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers.Google Scholar
  54. Warren, W. H. (1984). Perceiving affordances: Visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 683-703.Google Scholar
  55. Waxer, P. (1976). Nonverbal cues for depth of depression: Set versus no set. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 493.Google Scholar
  56. Waxer, P. (1977). Nonverbal cues for anxiety: An examination of emotional leakage. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86, 306-314.Google Scholar
  57. Zebrowitz, L. A. (1997). Reading faces: Window to the soul? Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  58. Zebrowitz, L.A., & Collins, M.A. (1997). Accurate social perception at zero acquaintance: The affordances of a Gibsonian approach. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 204-223.Google Scholar
  59. Zebrowitz, L. A., Olson, K., & Hoffman, K. (1993). Stability of babyfaceness and attractiveness across the life span. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 453-466.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rebekah E. Gunns
    • 1
  • Lucy Johnston
    • 1
    • 2
  • Stephen M. Hudson
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CanterburyUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations