Abstract
Personality differences in impression formation were investigated as a function of initial impression, or response dispositions. Ss emitting positive or negative traits in describing a generalized “other” (PI and NI Ss, respectively) rated likeability of persons described by sets of favorable (H) or unfavorable (L) traits of varying set size. As predicted by a model of information integration in which an impression is a weighted average of trait components and an initial impression, PI rated both H and L trait sets more positively than did NI. The prediction that personality differences would diminish with increased set size was not supported. It was suggested that redundancy is an important factor in determining the effect of increased information on personality differences in impression formation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
ANDERSON, N. H. Averaging model analysis of set-size effect in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 75, 158–165.
ANDERSON, N. H. Likableness ratings of 555 personality trait words. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1968a, 9, 272–279.
ANDERSON, N. H. A simple model for information integration. In R. P. Abelson, E. Aronson, W. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and P. H. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A source book. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1968b. Pp. 731–743.
FISHBEIN, M., & HUNTER, R. Summation vs balance in attitude organization and change. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 505–510.
GARSKOF, B. E., SHAPIRO, E. G., & BRANDSTADTER, J. Order of emission in continual association as a predictor of individual free recall. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 7, 209–210.
KAPLAN, K. J. A methodological comparison of two techniques of attitude measurement. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Illinois, 1966.
KAPLAN, M. F. Behavior prediction responses as a function of judge’s response hierarchy. Paper presented at meetings of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, 1968a.
KAPLAN, M. F. Differentiation among targets in social perception as a function of response hierarchy. Psychonomic Science, 1968b, 10, 227–228.
MAYO, C. W., & CROCKETT, W. H. Cognitive complexity and primacy-recency effects in impression formation. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 1964, 68, 335–338.
MANIS, M., GLEASON, T. C., & DAWES, R. M. Evaluation of complex social stimuli. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1966, 3, 404–419.
OSGOOD, C. E.. & TANNENBAUM, P. H. The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychological Review, 1955, 62, 42–55.
SHRAUGER, S., & ALTROCCHI, J. The personality of the perceiver as a factor in person perception. Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 62, 289–308.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Appreciation is extended to Ed Donnerstein for assistance in collecting data and to Norman Anderson for critical comments on a draft of this paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaplan, M.F. Forming impressions of personality: The effect of the initial impression. Psychon Sci 18, 255–256 (1970). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335765
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335765