Evaluating First Impressions among Undergraduate Females Using Visual Stimuli - Case Study Example

Evaluating First Impressions Among Undergraduate Females Using Visual Stimuli ABSTRACT This study was conducted in a classroom setting utilizing ten undergraduate female participants in order to contribute to understanding how first impressions contribute to both positive and negative perception of an individual. First impressions were introduced via visual stimuli with both positive and negative actions associated with each stimulus. Stimuli were broken into two categories of alpha and beta with there being more alphas than betas. The ratio of positive and negative statements for each category was equivalent although the actual number alpha slides was higher to test the hypothesis that Betas will be perceived more negatively due to their being less Betas in the visual stimuli. The resulting data showed a significant difference between alphas and betas with alphas being perceived as more positive than betas all categories. Introduction Psychological typology has been an area of much debate and research over the past century, with alpha-beta typology and their subgroups gaining wide acceptance. Like many other categorical methods of classifying individuals, misinterpretation may occur because of bias based in differential perception discrepancies between members of the two groups. In general, individuals will tend to be more observant of distinctive events, or those that are statistically less common, which may lead to the formation of false associations. Understanding how co-occurrence of distinctive stimuli can create relationships is an important area of study because it can explain how an individual develops and applies stereotypes and judgments. In the previous research of Hamilton and Gifford in 1976, it was demonstrated through controlled experimentation that subjects develop correlations based on the co-occurrence of distinctive stimuli, even when such associations may not be valid. The studies were based on artificially established groups, and differences in perception were monitored in majority and minority groups. The study presented the concept of illusory correlation, in which distinctive items presented together were given unduly high correlation by observers where none or little was actually existent. The study is important because it examines the cognitive basis for understanding judgment formation and presents a method for exploring stereotype formation. Methods Participants The participants were 10 undergraduate female students were selected from the University of California Berkeley. Participants were all enrolled in the same Human Development course. There were no male participants due to their being none enrolled in the Human Development course. The ages of the undergraduate females ranged from 20 to 38 years old. The average age was 23. The participants were provided with participation waivers and were also compensated with 15 points course credit for participating in the experiment. Materials One power point presentation used visual stimuli consisting of 39 slides; each slide contains one torso shot picture, and the name of an individual with a caption describing a positive or negative statement attributed to an action the individual committed. The stimuli were broken into two distinct categories of Alphas and Betas. The number of Alpha slides outnumbered the Beta slides. The numbers of positive and negative statements were equally distributed between both Alpha and Betas giving an equivalent ratio of statements overall. For instrumentation and measure of perception there was one evaluations sheet with six evaluation categories and one question. The evaluation categories for rating were Popular, Lazy, Unhappy, Helpful, Irresponsible and Honest. Each category was rated on a scale of 1 to 7 with 7 being “strongly agree” and 1 being “strongly disagree”. Further the evaluation listed one question to assess the participant’s perception of the number of negative statements in the stimuli. Procedure The experiment was conducted inside a classroom. Instructions were read aloud for participants. They were informed of their right to participate or withdraw from participation at any time. They were asked to sign in, listing their name and age for data collection of the study. No consent forms were administered. Each participant was given one evaluations form. Participants were told they were involved in an experiment about making judgments about people based on first impressions. The verbal instructions were then read aloud by the experimenter. The participants were instructed to watch the power point presentation. At the end of the viewing they were asked to complete the evaluations form. They were given as much time as needed to complete this portion. The experimenter periodically observed the students to see if any individual student needed more time. During the debriefing of the study students were explained the rationale behind the data collection. Results The percentage of negative statements attributed to the Alphas was compared to the percentage of negative statements attributed to the Betas with a paired, one tailed t test within-participants design, where the same participants are used in each group. The statistical result for this test is t(9) = -5.85, p < 0.01. In 't(x) = y', x is the degrees of freedom and x is the t-metric. 'p' is the probability of a type-1 error and 'r' is the effect. In the t-test, the degrees of freedom is the sum of the persons (n) in both groups minus 2 (n-2). Figure 1: Positive Attribute Scatter plot Figure 1: Negative Attribute Scatter plot The mean number of Alpha positive attributes was 16.4, while the mean number of positive attributes for Betas was 14. A t-test yielded a statistically significant differences between the sample mean, where t = 2.4 and p> 0.01. Alphas have more positive attributes; however, in later groups the difference becomes less significant, as seen in Figure 1. The mean number of Alpha negative attributes was 9, while the mean number of negative attributes for Betas was 13.5. A t-test yielded a statistically significant differences between the sample mean, where t = -4.95 and p< 0.01. Betas have consistently more negative attributes, as seen in the scatter plot in Figure 1. Figure 3: Percentage of Negative Statements Scatter plot The mean percentage of negative statements for Alphas was 27, while the mean percentage of negative statements for Betas was 55. A t-test yielded significant differences between the sample mean, where t=-5.85 and p< 0.01. The percentage of negative statements about Betas remains consistently higher than Alphas throughout the study, but the discrepancy becomes slightly less in later groups, as seen in Figure 3. The mean number of Alpha positive attributes was 16.4, while the mean number of positive attributes for Betas was 14. A t-test yielded a statistically significant difference between the sample mean, where t = 2.4 and p> 0.01. Alphas have more positive attributes, as seen in Figure 2. Discussion The difference in perception is clear, with negative attributes consistently assigned to Beta types more than Alpha types in a group where Beta types outnumber Alpha types, which follows suit with the previous study by Hamilton and Gifford, showing that group members’ perceptions do indeed play a part in the development of illusory conceptions. For large scale implementation, this study could be improved by including a larger sampling size. Most importantly, finding could be improved by including a similar method that tested a group where Betas outnumbers Alpha, and a control group where Alphas were equal to Betas. More sample questions could also be used in order to get a broader picture of bias that may be forming between groups. The real-world implications of this experiment are related to how we perceive and prevent unfair bias in our own judgments and those of clients. Understanding how unfounded bias develops can help to raise awareness, and is the first step to offering solutions to problems generated by social stereotyping. References: Hamilton, D., Gifford, R. (1976). Illusory Correlation in Interpersonal Perception A Cognitive Basis of Stereotypic Judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 392-407. Read More