Social Perception

Seeking to understand others

Other People Are Not Easy To Figure Out.

Why are they the way they are?

Why do they do what they do?
• Were you ever deceived by someone?
• Someone whom you deeply trust lied to you, and you couldn’t recognize it?

• We all experience lies by others in our daily lives, and honestly, we sometimes
engage in deceptions ourselves.
• For instance, when a student is asked, “Did you do your homework?” he or
she may answer “yes” even though this is not true.
• Although many lies may seem trivial, they appear to occur frequently.
• If lying is so common, why don’t we easily recognize it for what it is?
• Why don’t we see through the dishonesty in others’ statements?
• In other words, why don’t we always perceive others accurately – for what
they are, rather than what we think they are?
• Perceiving others accurately is important for effective interaction.
• It is essential to know what they are really like beneath the public
mask presented to the world and determine whether they are being
honest with us about their motives.
• If we can’t successfully assess whether people are trying to mislead us
or not, we may find it difficult to interact effectively and build good
relationships with them.
• We all have a fundamental
fascination with explaining other
people’s behavior, but all we have
to go on is observable behavior:
• What people do
• What they say
• Facial expressions
• Gestures
• Tone of voice
• We can’t know, truly and
completely, who they are and what
they mean.
• Instead, we rely on our impressions
and personal theories, putting them
together as well as we can, hoping
they will lead to reasonably
accurate and useful conclusions.
 FOUR ASPECTS

Social Non-Verbal Communication

perception
Attribution
• The study of how we form impressions of
and make inferences about other people.
• The Process through which we seek to Impression Formation
understand other people.

Impression Management
communication

Process through which an exchange of information, ideas, concepts, or messages takes place
between two or more persons.
communication
• Communication can broadly be defined as exchange of ideas,
messages and information between two or more persons, through a
medium, in a manner that the sender and the receiver develop
common understanding of the message.
• The word communication is derived from the Latin word
‘communicare’, which means to share, impart, participate, exchange,
transmit or to make common. It emphasises on sharing common
information, ideas and messages.
Nature of communication
• Communication is a process of transmitting and receiving verbal and
non-verbal messages.
• It is a two way process of exchanging ideas or information. One
person alone cannot carry out communication. When you
communicate, there has to be a receiver or an audience that would
reciprocate. Only then can your communication be complete.
• It is considered effective only when it achieves the desired reaction or
response from the receiver. The response may be positive or negative.
In case of absence of any response, communication is incomplete.
 Process of communication
I. Idea: Every message, has its origin in an idea that Idea
germinates in the mind of the sender of the message.
II. Sender: Sender is the person who identifies the need to
communicate and initiates the process of
communication.
III. Encoding: The process of converting the message into
Sender/Encoder Encoding
words, symbols, pictures, etc. is called encoding
IV. Message: Message is an idea transformed into the
content to be communicated.

Feedback Message
V. Channel: The medium/vehicle through which the
message is sent. It may be a speech, a letter, an e-mail, Noise
SMS, gesture, sound, etc.
VI. Receiver: The person who receives and decodes the
message sent.
VII. Decoding: Process by which the receiver interprets the
message and translates it into meaningful information.
VIII. Feedback: The reaction or response given by the receiver
Decoding Reciever/Decoder Channel/Medium
of the message to the sender.
IX. Noise : Any disturbance, hurdle or barrier to
communication is the notice.
 Types of communication
Verbal Communication Non-Verbal Communication
• In verbal communication words and language are used to • Communication between individuals that does not involve
convey the message. the content of spoken language, relies on unspoken
language, facial expression, eye contact and body
• It is the easiest and fastest form of communication. language.
• Even then it constitutes a very small part (about 7 per cent) • Non-verbal communication may take the following forms:
of all human interactions.
• Body Language : Communication through facial
• Verbal communication is of two types: expressions, gestures, stance, touch and other
• Oral Communication: It means communication physical signs is called body language.
through spoken words. It may be face-to-face • Paralanguage : Pitch, tone, quality, etc. of voice is
(lecture, seminar, conference, meeting, informal known as paralanguage. The way one speaks, rather
conversation, gossip, or telephone). Clear voice and than words, reveal the intent of the speaker.
tone are necessary for effective oral communication. • Aesthetics : Music, dancing, painting sculpture and
Speaking at too fast/slow speed or two high/low other forms of art serve as means of communication.
volume impairs oral communication. These convey the feelings and thoughts of artists.
• Written Communication: Communication via SMS, e- • Appearance : Dress and grooming create the first
mail, letter, brochure, proposal, contract, memo, impression.
report, etc. is written communication. Such
communication is essential in case of formal business • Symbols : Symbols may relate to religion, status, ego,
interactions and legal documentation. Grammar, etc. These convey the special meaning. For example,
vocabulary, writing style, etc. determine the the number of stars on the shirt of a police officer
effectiveness of written communication. reveal his/ her status.
Patterns of communication
• https://www.taxmann.com/bookstore/bookshop/bookfiles/Business%20Correspondence%20and%20reportingchapter1.pdf
• https://www.communicationtheory.org/patterns-of-communication/
• https://www.businesstopia.net/communication/communication-patterns
• https://studymasscommunication.wordpress.com/2019/09/06/patterns-of-communication/
 7 C’s of Effective Communication

1. Clear: One must be clear about the goal and purpose of

Clear communicating with the other person, without having too
many ideas in a statement.
2. Concise: Stick to the point and keep it brief. Do not elongate
Courteous Concise and get fuzzy and general.
3. Concrete: When your message is concrete, then your
audience has a clear picture of what you're telling them.
There are details (but not too many!) and vivid facts, and
7 C’s of Effective there's laser-like focus. Your message is solid.
4. Correct: Implies that communication should be error-free and
Communiccation fit/match your audience.
Complete Concrete 5. Coherent: When your communication is coherent, it's logical.
All points are connected and relevant to the main topic, and
the tone and flow of the text is consistent.
6. Complete – In a complete message, the audience has
everything they need to be informed and, if applicable, take
Coherent Correct action.
7. Courteous: Courteous communication is friendly, open, and
honest. There are no hidden insults or passive aggressive
tones. Respect the receiver’s and be empathetic to their
needs.
Barriers to effective communication
Physiological Physical and Psychological Cultural
Environmental Social Barriers
Barriers Barriers Barriers Barriers
•Related with the •The physical things •Psychological •Include the social •Culture shapes the
limitations of the that get in the way factors such as psychological way we think and
human body and of communication. misperception, phenomenon of behave.
the human mind •Background noise, filtering, distrust, conformity, a •Culture becomes a
(memory, attention, mobile phone, poor unhappy emotions, process in which barrier when
and perception). lighting, and people’s state the norms, values, individuals in one
•Poor listening skills, uncomfortable of mind can and behaviours of social group have
information sitting, unhygienic jeopardise the an individual begin developed different
overload, room, and process of to follow those of norms, values, and
inattention, uncomfortable communication. the wider group. behaviours
emotional state, environment (too •Social factors such associated with
poor retention. hot or too cold) as age, gender, another group.
socio-economic •Cultural difference
status, and marital leads to difference
status may act as a in interest,
barrier to knowledge, value,
communication in and tradition.
certain situations.
 Semantic and Message- Some other
Linguistic Past Organizational blocks to
Experiences Barriers related Barriers
Barriers •Unclear messages
communication
•Terrible or awful •Unclear planning, in terms of
•Different languages complexity in •Failure to listen
across different experiences in the meaning, grammar, carefully,
past related to a organizational and words,
regions, individual structure, time conflicting verbal
linguistic ability, use particular situation stereotypical and non-verbal
can prevent the pressure, beliefs, choosing of
of jargon, slang, information messages, failure to
difficult or individual to an inappropriate interpret with
communicate in overload, channel of
inappropriate technological knowledge,
words can lead to that situation. communication, diversion of topic,
failure, hierarchy and lack of
communication levels and status and inappropriate
breakdown through feedback withing comments and
difference may act the process of
wrong perception as barriers to questions are some
of the meaning of communication other blocks to
communication. can become as
the message by the communication.
receiver. barriers.
 • The field of social psychology includes the study
of persuasion, and includes many theories and approaches
to understanding persuasion.
• For example, communication theory points out that people
can be persuaded by the communicator's credibility,
expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness.
• The elaboration likelihood model, as well as heuristic models
of persuasion, suggest that a number of factors (e.g., the

Propaganda
degree of interest of the recipient of the communication),
influence the degree to which people allow superficial
factors to persuade them.
• Propaganda refers to dissemination of information — facts,
arguments, rumours, half-truths, or lies - to influence public
opinion.
• It is more or less a systematic effort to manipulate other
people’s beliefs, attitudes, or actions by means of symbols
(words, gestures, banners, monuments, music, clothing,, etc.).
• Propaganda can be found in news and journalism,
government, advertising, entertainment, education, and
activism.
• The word propaganda is derived from the Latin word. ’propagare’, which means to
propagate, spread, generate or to reproduce in an artificial manner. This suggests
that propaganda does not take place in itself spontaneously. It has to be produced
or generated by someone.
• Harold Lasswell provided a broad definition of the term propaganda, writing it as:
“the expression of opinions or actions carried out deliberately by individuals or
groups with a view to influencing the opinions or actions of other individuals or
groups for predetermined ends and through psychological manipulations.”
• Deliberateness and a relatively heavy emphasis on manipulation distinguish
propaganda from casual conversation or the free and easy exchange of ideas.
• Propagandists have a specified goal or set of goals.
• To achieve these, they deliberately select facts, arguments, and displays of symbols
and present them in ways they think will have the most effect.
• To maximize effect, they may omit or distort pertinent facts or simply lie, and they
may try to divert the attention of the reactors (the people they are trying to sway)
from everything but their own propaganda.
• According to William W. Biddle’s 1931 article "A psychological
definition of propaganda", four principles followed in
propaganda are:
i. rely on emotions, never argue;
ii. cast propaganda into the pattern of "we" versus an "enemy";
iii. reach groups as well as individuals;
iv. hide the propagandist as much as possible.
• Thus, propaganda always aims at moulding people’s attitudes
and behaviour in the direction of the propagandist by impressing
upon the mass through various methods, techniques and
strategies.
Need for Propaganda
• Propaganda is an important aspect in our living. It cannot be eliminated, and no one can completely withdraw from it.
• In spite of the stigma attached to the concept of propaganda, it has a lot of practical importance.
• Propaganda cannot be said to be only commercial or religious or political.
• Propaganda is necessary to bring social change to eradicate social evils, poverty and illiteracy.
• Propaganda is essential for eradication of social evils like dowry, child marriage, gender, bias and prejudice towards minority groups, SC and ST
and socially and economically disadvantaged persons.
• To build casteless and classless societies, propaganda in the right direction is essential.
• Radios and TVs. broadcast and telecast respectively various propaganda related materials to increase the consciousness of people and change their
attitude.
• These types of propaganda are not based on ulterior and selfish motives and hence cannot be said to have bad aims.
• They are, indeed, essential for the progress and prosperity of the society and mankind.
• Thus, it is found that only through propaganda, the idea of democracy, the dreams of our planners, social reformers and policy makers can be
made known to the public.
Rumours
• A rumour, derived from the Latin word ’rumorem’, meaning noise, is "a tall tale of explanations of events circulating from
person to person and pertaining to an object, event, or issue in public concern.
• In the social sciences, a rumour involves a form of a statement whose veracity is not quickly or ever confirmed.
• Rumours are often discussed with regard to "misinformation" and "disinformation" (the former often seen as simply false
and the latter seen as deliberately false, though usually from a government source given to the media or a foreign
government).
• Rumours thus have often been viewed as particular forms of other communication concepts.
• A rumour has been identified as a subset of propaganda.
• ‘A Psychology of Rumour’ was published by Robert H. Knapp in 1944, in which he identified three basic
characteristics that apply to rumour:
• they're transmitted by word of mouth;
• they provide information about a ‘person, happening, or condition’; and
• they express and gratify "the emotional needs of the community.
• Based on his study, Knapp divided those rumours into three types:
• Pipe dream rumours: reflect public desires and wished-for outcomes (e.g. Japan's oil reserves were low and thus World War II
would soon end).
• Bogie or fear rumours: reflect feared outcomes (e.g. An enemy surprise attack is imminent).
• Wedge-driving rumours: intend to undermine group loyalty or interpersonal relations (e.g. American Catholics were seeking to
avoid the draft; German-Americans, Italian-Americans, Japanese-Americans were not loyal to the American side).
• Knapp also found that negative rumours were more likely to be disseminated than positive rumours.
• These types also differentiate between positive (pipe dream) and negative (bogie and wedge-driving) rumours.
• In the 1947 study, The Psychology of Rumour, Gordon Allport and Leo Postman concluded that, "as rumour
travels it.. grows shorter, more concise, more easily grasped and told.”
• This conclusion was based on a test of message diffusion between persons, which found that about 70% of
details in a message were lost in the first 5-6 mouth-to-mouth transmissions.
• Allport and Postman used three terms to describe the movement of rumour. They are: levelling, sharpening,
and assimilation.
• Levelling refers to the loss of detail during the transmission process; sharpening to the selection of certain
details of which to transmit; and assimilation to a distortion in the transmission of information as a result
of subconscious motivations.
Non-verbal cues
in social life
• It is often suggested that “a picture is
worth a thousand words” or actions speak
volumes”.
• Applied to interpersonal communication,
these sayings suggest that we can learn
more from people’s non-verbal cues than
from their words.
• Although verbal communication – spoken
and written words – is very important, in
this section we’ll examine ways that non-
verbal cues are perhaps for revealing
than words.
Non-verbal
communication
• Temporary states exert
important effects on people’s
behaviour and social thought.
Hence, recognizing and
understanding these conditions
is often very useful.
• Sometimes, this is a relatively
easy task – we ask others how
they are feeling, or what kind
of mood they are in, and they
tell us.
• At other times, however, people
are unwilling to reveal their
inner feelings.
• In situations when it is inappropriate or impossible
to ask others how they are feeling, we can pay
careful attention to non-verbal cues provided by
changes in their facial expressions, eye-contact,
posture, body movements, and other expressive
actions.
• Infact, such beahviour is relatively irrepressible
(difficult to control) – so even when others try to
conceal their inner feelings from us, those emotions
often ‘leak out’ in many ways through non-verbal
cues.
• Information conveyed by cues, other than the
content of spoken language, as well as our efforts
to interpret it, is often described by the term non-
verbal communication.
Basic channels of non-
verbal communication
There are five basic channels through which non-verbal communication
takes place:
1. Facial expressions
2. Eye-contact
3. Body movements
4. Posture
5. Touching
Facial Expressions
• Human feelings and emotions
are often reflected in the face.
• Cicero, a Roman orator, rightly
said “the face is a picture of
the mind with the eyes as its
interpreter.”
• We do learn much about
others’ current moods and
feelings from their facial
expressions.
• There are 6 basic emotions that are
clearly represented on the human
face:
• Anger
• Fear
• Happiness
• Sadness
• Disgust
• Surprise
• However, this does not imply that
humans can show only a small no. of
facial expressions.
Emotions occur in many
combinations (for ex:
joy together with
sorrow, and fear
combined with anger)
and each of these
reactions can vary There may only be a small no. of basic facial expressions, but
greatly in strength. the no. of variations on these themes is immense.
 • If you travelled to a remote part of the world and visited a group of people who
Are facial expressions had never met an outsider before, would their facial expressions in various situations
resemble your own?

universal? • Would they smile in reaction to events that made them happy, frown when exposed to
conditions that made them angry, and so on?
• Would you be able to recognize their emotional expressions as readily as ones shown
by persons belonging to your own culture?
• Early research seemed to suggest that facial expressions are universal in both their use and recognition.
• Subsequent research (conducted by Paul Ekman and others) indicates that the ability to interpret at least the six
major emotion is cross-cultural—part of being human and not a product of people’s cultural experience. Other
emotions such as guilt, shame, embarrassment, and pride occur later in human development and show less
universality.
• Numerous studies have clearly shown that people are a great deal more accurate in recognizing the facial
expressions of members of their own national group than facial expressions of members of another national
group.
• Cultural differences also exist with respect to the precise meaning of various cultural expressions.

Examples of display rule differences:

• American cultural norms discourage emotional displays in men, such as grief or crying, but allow the facial display of such emotions in women.
• Japanese women will often hide a wide smile behind their hands, whereas Western women are allowed—indeed, encouraged—to smile broadly and often.
• Japanese norms lead people to cover up negative facial expressions with smiles and laughter and to display fewer facial expressions in general than is true in the
West.
• Research findings also indicate that large individual differences exist in recognizing others’ facial expressions.
Some people are better at recognizing facial expressions than others.
Have you ever had a conversation
with someone who was wearing
very dark or mirrored sunglasses?
If so, you may have felt uncomfortable because
you couldn’t see the other person’s eyes and
therefore were uncertain about how he or she is
reacting.
Eye Contact as a Non- • Eyes are the ‘windows to the soul’.
• We often learn much about others’ feelings from their eyes.

verbal Cue • For example, we interpret a high level of gazing from another person
as a sign of liking or friendliness. In contrast, if they avoid eye-contact,
we may conclude they are unfriendly, they don’t like us, or they are
simply shy.
• While a high level of eye-contact is
usually interpreted as a sign of liking
or positive feelings, there is one
exception to this general rule.
• If someone gazes at us continuously
and maintains eye-contact regardless
of what we do, he or she can be said
to be staring.
• A stare is often interpreted as a sign
of anger or hostility – as in a cold
stare – and most people find this
particular non-verbal cue disturbing.
• Infact, we may quickly terminate
social interaction with someone who
stares at us and may even leave the
scene.
TRY this

Remember some incident that made you

angry – the angrier the better!
Think about it for a minute
Now, try to remember another incident,
one that made you feel sad – again, the
sadder the better.
• As you were remembering, did
you change your posture or
move your hands, arms, or legs
as your thoughts shifted from
the first event memory to the
second?
• There is a good chance you
did, because our current
moods or emotions are often
reflected in the positions,
postures, and movements of
our bodies. Together, these
non-verbal behaviours are
termed body-language.
 • Body Language often reveals others’
emotional state.

Body Language: • Large no. of movements – especially ones in

which one part of the body does something
to another part (touching, rubbing,

Gestures, scratching) – suggest emotional arousal.

• The greater the frequency of such

Postures, and
behaviour, the higher is the level of arousal
or nervousness.
• Understanding body language is important,

Movements but it is also essential to pay attention to

other cues such as context. In many cases,
you should look at signals as a group rather
than focusing on a single action.
 • Crossed arms might indicate that a person feels
Arms and Legs defensive, self-protective, or closed-off.
• Wide open arms may be an attempt to seem larger
The arms and legs can also be useful in conveying nonverbal information.
When you are evaluating body language, or more commanding.
pay attention to some of the following • Arms close to the body may be an effort to
signals that the arms and legs may convey:
minimize oneself or withdraw from attention.
• Standing with hands placed on the hips can be an
indication that a person is ready and in control, or it
can also possibly be a sign of aggressiveness..
• Clasping the hands behind the back might indicate
that a person is feeling bored, anxious, or even
angry.
• Rapidly tapping fingers or fidgeting can be a sign
that a person is bored, impatient, or frustrated.
• Crossed legs can indicate that a person is feeling
https://www.verywellmind.com/understand-body-language-and-facial-expressions-4147228 closed off or in need of privacy.
 Posture
• How we hold our bodies can also serve as an
important part of body language.
• The term posture refers to how we hold our
bodies as well as the overall physical form of an
individual..
• Posture can convey a wealth of information about
how a person is feeling as well as hints about
personality characteristics, such as whether a When you are trying to read body language, try to
person is confident, open, or submissive. notice some of the signals that a person's posture can
• Sitting up straight, for example, may indicate that send.
a person is focused and paying attention to what's • Open posture involves keeping the trunk of the body open and
going on. Sitting with the body hunched forward, exposed. This type of posture indicates friendliness, openness, and
on the other hand, can imply that the person is willingness.
bored or indifferent. • Closed posture involves hiding the trunk of the body often by hunching
forward and keeping the arms and legs crossed. This type of posture
can be an indicator of hostility, unfriendliness, and anxiety.
 Gestures The following examples are just a few common gestures and their
• Gestures can be some of the most direct and obvious body possible meanings:
language signals.
• These fall into several categories, but perhaps the most important
• A clenched fist can indicate anger in some situations or
are emblems – body movements that carry specific meanings in a solidarity in others.
given cultures.
• A thumbs up and thumbs down are often used as gestures of
• For example, giving a thumbs-up or a peace sign in another
country might have a completely different meaning than it does approval and disapproval.10
in the United States. • The "okay" gesture, made by touching together the thumb and
• Waving, pointing, and using the fingers to indicate numerical
amounts are all very common and easy to understand gestures. index finger in a circle while extending the other three fingers
can be used to mean "okay" or "all right."10 In some parts of
Europe, however, the same signal is used to imply you are
nothing. In some South American countries, the symbol is actually
a vulgar gesture.
• The V sign, created by lifting the index and middle finger and
separating them to create a V-shape, means peace or victory in
some countries. In the United Kingdom and Australia, the symbol
takes on an offensive meaning when the back of the hand is
facing outward.
Touching - what it tells about
people

• Touching can serve as another source of

non-verbal communication.
• The meaning of touch depends on various
factors:
• Who does the touching (friend or
stranger, male or female);
• The nature of physical contact (brief or
prolonged, gentle or rough, area of the
body touched); and
• The context in which the touching takes
place (business or social settings, doctor’s
office).
• Depending on the combination of these
factors, touch can suggest friendliness,
affection, sexual interest, dominance,
caring, or aggression.
• When touching is considered as
appropriate, it often elicits
positive reactions.
• However, if it is viewed as
inappropriate, the person doing
the touching is usually perceived
negatively.
• The handshake is one acceptable
way that people in many different
cultures touch strangers (although it
is not the norm in many Asian
societies).
• Handshakes reveal much about
people’s personalities.
• Research findings confirm that
firmer, longer, and more vigorous
others’ handshakes are, the higher
we rate them in terms of • Another research found that a light, comforting pat on the
extraversion and openness to arm can induce feelings of security among both women and
experience, and the more
men – but only if the touching is performed by a woman.
favourable our first impression of
them tend to be. • Such feelings of security in turn, influence actual behaviour.
 paralanguage
• Paralanguage is a type of nonverbal communication involving
vocal effects other than speech, such as
• tone (an attitude or feeling conveyed through sound);
• volume (loudness or quietness of speech);
• pitch (highness or lowness of sound);
• rate (speed at which you speak).

• Research studies have found that the sounds that occurred during speech and the facial expressions
were more accurate guides to emotions underlying people’s statements than the spoken words
themselves.
• Many people often express emotions through the quality or specific sound of their voices, that is
independent of the words they are using to speak.
• For instance, someone may not overtly say that they are angry, but we can sometimes ‘hear it’ in
their voices. Their irritation and annoyance shows through tone, volume, and/or other sound related
aspects. https://youtu.be/tJ97gL9kQGI
Can our facial expressions influence our emotions?
How we feel?
 Let’s try something
Grab and Pencil or Pen and try to imitate as shown in the pictures above.
First, hold the pencil between your teeth, and next only with the support of your lips.
The facial feedback hypothesis
• Our nonverbal behaviours can influence our feelings. In other words, not only do our
emotions influence our non-verbal cues, the cues themselves influence our internal feelings.
• The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that we not only show what we feel in our facial
expressions; those expressions can also influence our own emotional states.
• Many studies offer support to this view that facial expressions can actually trigger
emotions.
• Findings suggest that feedback from the facial muscles to the brain plays a key role in
shaping and determining the nature and intensity of emotions that we experience.
• Holding a pencil in the teeth activates the muscles used in smiling, and thus evokes more
pleasant feelings than holding the pencil in one’s lips.
It has been suggested that people who are successful at lying are
able to conceal their deception by managing their non-verbal cues.

Recognizing deception
When attempting to detect deception, people focus
on information that are not valid indicators of whether
others are lying or telling the truth.
• We are generally not very accurate at recognizing deception for many reasons, such as
our tendency to perceive others as truthful and our desire to be polite. As a result, we
don’t typically search for clues of deception.
• However, research indicates that we are more successful at detecting liars when in a sad
mood than in a happy mood. This may be because people experiencing negative feelings
pay more attention to the content of the message – its words and meaning, while people
who are happy tend to get distracted by cues unrelated to the message.
Increased attention to cues
unrelated to the message
content. Reduced ability to
Happy Mood recognize deception
in the message.
Decreased attention to
message content.

Increased attention to
message content.
Increased ability to
Sad Mood detect deception in
Decreased attention to cues the message.
unrelated to the message
content.
 • People who are lying find it difficult to control
all channels of communication at once.
• There are a few nonverbal cues that are
moderately revealing of deception.
• However, these cues tend to go unnoticed
because most people are not looking for them.

• These cues include microexpressions – fleeting facial expressions

lasting only a few tenths of a second. Such reactions appear on the
face very quickly an emotion-provoking event and are difficult to
suppress.
• Another valid predictor of deception is interchannel discrepancies –
for example, discrepancies between people’s facial expressions and
their body language.
• Lastly, exaggerated facial expressions – smiling more frequently than
usual or showing an exaggerated level of interest in what we are
saying.
• In addition to these, other signs include certain elements of linguistic
style – aspects of speech apart from the meaning of words, such as
pitch, speed, or pattern (rhythm) – may also indicate deception.
• When people are lying, the pitch of their voice often rises, they often
take longer to respond to a question or are slower in describing
events, and may tend to start statements, stop them, and begin again.
Attribution
Understanding the causes of behaviour
 We want to know why someone says or does certain things, and
further, what kind of person they really are – what are their traits,
motives, and goals?

Social psychologists believe that our interest in such questions stems,

from our basic desire to understand cause-and-effect relationships in
the social world.

attribution We don’t simply want to know how others have acted – that’s
something we can readily observe. We also want to know why,
because that knowledge can help us understand them better and also
help us predict their future actions.
The process through which we seek to identify the
causes of others behaviour and so gain knowledge of The process through which we seek such information and draw
inferences is known as attribution.
their stable traits and dispositions.

This process not only concerns our efforts to understand the causes
behind others’ behaviours, but on some occasions, to understand the
causes behind our own behaviour.
 1. Heider’s Common Sense Theory
• Fritz Heider is an Austrian-American
Theories of psychologist who developed concept of
attribution theory.

attribution - • Heider adopted the concept of what he

called "common-sense" or "naïve" psychology,
referred every individual to be a ‘naïve
How we attempt to make sense of the social world.
scientist’.
Because attribution process is complex, • In his 1958 book, "The Psychology of
many theories have been proposed to Interpersonal Relations," Fritz Heider
explain its operation – when, why, and how suggested that people observe others,
do we do so. analyze their behavior, and come up with
their own common-sense explanations for such
actions.
• Heider’s attribution theory explains the means people use to attribute the
behaviour of others.
• He grouped these explanations into either external attributions or internal
attributions.
• Sometimes, behaviour is attributed to disposition. Other times, behave our can
be attributed to situations.
Dispositional (Internal) Attribution
1. Abilities
2. Motives - intent and exertions
Attribution Choice
Situational (External) Attribution
1. Task difficulty
2. Luck
Internal Attribution
• The process of assigning the cause of behaviour to some internal
characteristic, rather than to outside forces. When we explain the
behaviour of others we look for enduring internal attributions, such as
personality traits.
• For example, we attribute the behaviour of a person to their personality,
motives or beliefs.

External Attribution
• The process of assigning the cause of behaviour to some situation or event
outside a person's control rather than to some internal characteristic.
• When we try to explain our own behaviour we tend to make external
attributions, such as situational or environment features.
https://study.com/academy/lesson/attribution.html
• Heider believed that people generally tended to give more
attribution than they should to personality, and, conversely, less
than they should to situations.
• In other words, personality is not as consistent an indicator of
behaviour as people tend to believe.
• Through his theory, Heider gave two important contributions
i. Proposed the idea of internal & external causes of behaviour
ii. Perceivers ignore part or all situational factors when
explaining behaviour (Personal Causation).

• Later theorists who expanded on and developed Heider’s ideas:

Kelley,1967; Jones & Davis,1965; Weiner, 1979).
2. jones & Davis’s correspondence inference theory
• Jones and Davis’s (1965) theory of correspondent inference—asks how we use information
about others’ behaviour as a basis for inferring their traits.
• The theory is concerned with how we decide, on the basis of others’ overt actions, whether
they possess specific traits or dispositions likely to remain fairly stable over time.
• At first glance, this process might seem to be a simple task.
• Others’ behaviour provides us with a rich source on which to draw, so if we observe it
carefully, we should be able to learn a lot about them. Up to a point, this is true.
• The task is complicated, however, by the following fact: Often, individuals act in certain
ways not because doing so reflects their own preferences or traits, but rather because
external factors leave them little choice.
Consider this……
Suppose you go to a restaurant and the receptionist who greets you smiles and acts in a friendly manner.
Does this mean that the receptionist is a friendly person who simply “likes people”?
It’s possible, but perhaps he/she is acting in this way because that is what the job requires.
Situations like this are common, so using others’ behavior as a guide to their lasting traits or motives can be
very misleading.
• According to Jones and Davis’s theory, we accomplish this task by focusing
our attention on certain types of actions—those most likely to prove
informative.
• First, we are likely to consider behaviour as corresponding a person’s traits
when the behaviour seems freely chosen. In contrast, if behaviour appears to
be somehow forced on the person in question, we tend to see it as less
indicative of that person’s traits.
• Second, we pay careful attention to actions that show what Jones and Davis
called noncommon effects — conditions that can be caused by one specific
factor, but not by others. (Don’t confuse this word with uncommon, which
means infrequent.)
• Actions that produce noncommon effects are informative, because they rule
out other possible causes and allow us to zero-in on the specific reason for
another’s behaviour.
For example, imagine that one of your friends has just gotten engaged. Her future spouse is very attractive, has a warm personality, appears to love
your friend, and is very rich. What can you learn about your friend from his decision to marry this woman? Not much.
There are so many good reasons to select such a person, that it is difficult to choose among them.
In contrast, imagine that your friend’s fiancé is very rich, but is not very attractive, he often treats her disrespectfully,, and is known to be
extremely boring,. Does the fact that your friend is marrying this man tell you anything about her under these conditions?
Definitely. You can probably conclude that she cares more about wealth than about his personality or physical appearance.
As you can see from this example, then, we can usually learn more about others from actions on their part that yield noncommon effects than
from ones that do not.
This example also illustrates how expectations can affect the inferences we draw about another persons’ behaviour. We usually expect a person to
marry someone who obviously loves him or her. In this case, when your friend violates that expectancy by selecting a partner who appears not to
act ‘normally’, then we are more certain her decision reveals a great deal about her.
• Finally, Jones and Davis suggest that we also pay more attention to others’
actions that are low in social desirability, than to actions that are high on this
dimension.
• In other words, we learn more about others’ traits from actions they perform
that are somehow out of the ordinary, than from actions that are very much
like those of most other people.
• For instance, if we see someone raise his/her to hit a small child or pet
animal, we are likely to assume that behaviour tells us something about the
person’s traits – in this case, that the person maybe typically angry or
aggressive.
• On the other hand, if we see someone act in a socially desirable way – such
as treating a child ore pet gently – then we don’t learn much that is unique
about that person since most people would act in a similar manner.
In summary, according to the theory proposed by Jones and Davis,
we are most likely to conclude that others’ behaviour reflects their
stable traits (i.e., we are likely to reach correspondent inferences
between their behaviour and their personal qualities), when that
behaviour -
1. is freely chosen;
2. yields distinctive, noncommon effects; and
3. is low in social desirability
3. Kelly’s co-
variation theory
• Kelley’s (1967) co-variation model is the best-
known theory of causal attribution.
• He developed a logical model for judging
whether a particular action should be attributed
to some characteristic of the person (internal) or
the environment (external), or from a combination
of the two.
• The term covariation simply means that a person
has information from multiple observations, at
different times and situations, and can perceive
the covariation of an observed effect and its
causes.
• According to Kelley’s covariation theory, in our
attempts to answer the question ‘why?’ about
others’ behaviour, we focus on three major types
of information.
First, we consider consensus — the extent to which other people react to a given stimulus or event in the same manner as the person we are considering. The
higher the proportion of people who react in the same way, the higher the consensus.
E.g., Alison smokes a cigarette when she goes out for a meal with her friend. If her friend smokes along with her too, then Alison’s behaviour is high in
consensus. If only Alison smokes, then it is low in consensus.

Second, we consider consistency — the extent to which the person in question reacts to the stimulus or event in the same way on other occasions, over time.
E.g., If Alison only smokes every time she is out with friends, consistency is high. If she only smokes rarely on on some special occasions whenever she is with
her friends, consistency is low.

And third, we examine distinctiveness — the extent to which this person reacts in the same manner to other, different stimuli or events
E.g., If Alison only smokes when she is out with friends, her behaviour is high in distinctiveness. If she smokes at any time or place and with people other than
her friends, then distinctiveness is low.
Let’s look at another example to help understand this particular attribution theory.

Our subject’s name is Tom. His behaviour is laughter. Tom is laughing at a comedian.

Consensus
• If everybody in the audience is laughing, the consensus is high. If only Tom is laughing
consensus is low.
Distinctiveness
• If Tom only laughs at this comedian, the distinctiveness is high. If Tom laughs at
everything, then distinctiveness is low.
Consistency
• If Tom always laughs at this comedian the consistency is high. If Tom rarely laughs at this
comedian, then consistency is low.
• According to Kelley’s theory, we are most likely to attribute
another’s behaviour to internal causes under conditions in which
consensus and distinctiveness are low, but consistency is
high (consensus + distinctiveness is ⬇; consistency ⬆ = internal).

• In contrast, we are most likely to attribute another’s behaviour to

external causes when consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness are
all high (consensus + distinctiveness + consistency ⬆ = external).

• Finally, we usually attribute another’s behaviour to a combination

of internal and external factors when consensus is low, but
consistency and distinctiveness are high (consensus ⬇; distinctiveness +
consistency ⬆ = combination).
To illustrate these ideas, imagine that you see a server in a restaurant flirt
with a customer.
This behaviour raises an interesting question: Why does the server act this
way? Because of internal causes or external causes?
Is he simply someone who likes to flirt (an internal cause)?
Or is the customer extremely attractive—someone with whom many people
flirt (an external cause)?

According to Kelley’s theory, your decision (as an observer of this scene)

would depend on information relating to the three factors mentioned above.
First, assume that the following conditions prevail:
1. You observe other servers flirting with this customer (consensus is
high);
2. You have seen this server flirt with the same customer on other
occasions (consistency is high); and
3. You have not seen this server flirt with other customers
(distinctiveness is high).

Under these conditions - high consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness -

you would probably attribute the server’s behaviour to external causes.
In other words, you would probably conclude that this customer is very
attractive and that is why the server flirts with her
 Many other servers
also flirt with the
customer
(Consensus is high)

The server also flirts The server’s behaviour

is attributed to
Server flirts with the with this customer at
external causes (e.g.
customer other times the customer’s
(Consistency is high) attractiveness)

This server does not

flirt with other
customers
(Distinctiveness is high)
Now, in contrast, assume these conditions exist:
1. No other servers flirt with the customer (consensus is low);
2. You have seen this server flirt with the same customer on other
occasions (consistency is high); and
3. You have seen this server flirt with many other customers, too
(distinctiveness is low).

In this case, Kelley’s theory suggests that you would attribute the
server’s behaviour to internal causes - the server is simply a person who
likes to flirt.
 No other servers
flirt with the
customer
(Consensus is low)

This server also flirts The server’s behaviour

Server flirts with the with this customer at is attributed to internal
customer other times causes (e.g. this server
(Consistency is high) likes to flirt)

This server also flirts

with other customers
(Distinctiveness is low)
 4. Weiner’s three-dimensional model
• While we are often very interested in knowing whether others’ behaviour stemmed mainly from
internal or external causes, this is not the entire story.
• In addition, we are also concerned with two other questions:
• Are the causal factors that influenced their behaviour likely to be stable over time, or likely to change?
• Are these factors controllable—can the individual change or influence them if he or she wishes to do so?
• Some internal causes of behaviour tend to be quite stable over time, such as personality traits or
temperament.
• In contrast, other internal causes can, and often do, change greatly—for instance, motives, health,
and fatigue.
• Similarly, some internal causes are controllable. For example, individuals can, if they wish,
learn to hold their tempers in check.
• Other internal causes, such as chronic illnesses or disabilities, are nearly impossible to control.
• The same is true for external causes of behaviour: some are stable over time (e.g., laws or
social norms telling how we should behave in various situations) while others are not stable
(e.g., encountering someone in a bad mood).
• A large body of evidence indicates that in trying to understand the causes behind others’
behaviour, we do take note of all three of these dimensions –
• internal–external;
• stable–unstable;
• controllable–uncontrollable.
• Bernard Weiner proposed an attribution theory along these three causal dimensions: locus of
control, stability, and controllability, reason for Weiner’s Attribution model being called
the Three-Dimensional Model.
 three-dimensions
Locus of Control Stability Controllability

• refers to the perception of the • refers to whether the cause of • refers to whether or not the
cause of any event as internal the event is stable or unstable cause of any event is under
or external across time and situations. the individual’s control.
• E.g., If a learner believes that • If she believes that she failed • If she believes that she could
she failed her math test her math exam because of her have done better in the test
because she lacked inability, inability in math, the cause is had she practiced more, the
she is referring to her internal stable. The cause is more cause is controllable. On the
attribution. On the other hand, stable if she believes that her other hand, if she doubts her
if she blames the teacher to lack of ability is permanent. ability in math, the cause is
be incompetent, she is On the other hand, if she uncontrollable. Environmental
referring to the external believes that had she not been or external attributions cannot
attribution. sick, she could have aced the be considered as controllable.
test, the cause is unstable, as
illness is a temporary factor.
Where attribution is concerned, it is
not simply what other people do that
helps shape our perception of them,
but our interpretation of their actions
is crucial too.
Basic sources of
error in attribution
• Although we do a good job of evaluating the social
world, we are far from perfectly accurate.
• In fact, our efforts to understand other people, and
ourselves, are subject to several types of biases.
• Attribution ‘errors’ can lead us to false conclusions
about why others acted as they did and also
influence our predictions of how they will act in the
future.
Imagine that you witness the following scene…..
• A man arrives at a meeting 1 hour late. Upon entering, he drops his notes on the floor. While
trying to pick them up, his glasses fall off and break. Later, he spills coffee all over his tie.
• How would you explain these events?
• The chances are good that you would reach conclusions such as “This person is disorganized
and clumsy.”
• Are such attributions accurate?
• Perhaps, but it is also possible that the man was late because of unavoidable delays at the
airport, he dropped his notes because they were printed on slick paper, and he spilled his coffee
because the cup was too hot to hold.
 Correspondence bias – the fundamental attribution error
• The inclination to overlook potential external causes of one’s behaviour illustrates
correspondence bias — the tendency to explain others’ actions as stemming from
(corresponding to) dispositions even in the presence of clear situational causes.
• This bias seems has been observed so frequently that social psychologists refer to it as the
fundamental attribution error.
• In short, we tend to perceive others as acting as they do because they are “that kind of
person,” rather than because of the many external factors that may influence their behaviour.
• This tendency occurs in a wide range of contexts, but appears to be strongest in situations
where both consensus and distinctiveness are low, and when we are trying to predict others’
behaviour in the far-off future rather than the immediate future.
• Why? When we think of far-off future, we tend to think about others in terms of their traits,
overlooking potential external causes of their behaviour.
 • The fundamental attribution error, powerful as it is, applies mainly to
attributions we make about others - we don’t tend to “overattribute” our
own actions to internal causes.

Actor-observer effect
• This fact helps explain another and closely related type of attributional
bias known as the actor-observer effect, the tendency to attribute our
own behaviour to situational (external) causes but that of others to
dispositional (internal) causes.
• Thus, when we see another person trip and fall, we tend to attribute this
event to his or her clumsiness. If we trip, however, we are more likely to
attribute this event to situational causes, such as ice on the sidewalk.
• The actor–observer effect occurs partly because we are quite aware of
the many external factors affecting our own actions, but are less aware
of such external factors when we focus on the actions of other people.
• Thus, we tend to perceive our own behaviour as arising largely from
situational causes, but that of others as deriving mainly from their traits.
• Example: Sammy falls asleep in class. Sean attributes her behaviour to
laziness. But when he fell asleep in class last week, however, he
attributed his own behaviour to the all-nighter he pulled finishing a term
paper.
Suppose you wrote a paper and submitted for a
class.
When you received it back, you found the
following comment: “An outstanding paper - one
of the best I’ve seen in years. A+.”
To what would you attribute this success?
Probably, you would explain it in terms of
internal causes - your high level of talent, the
effort you invested in writing the paper, and so
on.
Now, in contrast, imagine that when you got the
paper back, these comments were written on it:
“Unsatisfactory paper — one of the worst I’ve
seen in years. F.”
How would you interpret this outcome? The
chances are good that you would be tempted to
focus mainly on external (situational factors) -
the difficulty of the task, your professor’s
unfairly harsh grading standards, the fact that
you didn’t have enough time to do a good job,
and so on.
Self-serving bias
• This tendency to attribute our own positive
outcomes (or success) to internal causes but
negative ones (or failure) to external factors is
known as the self-serving bias.
• Two explanations why this bias occurs –
• motivational view (to protect and enhance our
self-esteem); and
• cognitive view (because we expect to succeed)
• Example: Chad wins a poetry competition but
fails to get the poem published in a magazine he
sent it to. He attributes his success in the
competition to his talent. He attributes his failure
to get it published to bad luck.
 Application of To Understand Depression
• Many factors play a role in depression, including what might

attribution
be termed a self-defeating pattern of attributions.
• Depressed individuals tend to adopt the opposite pattern of
self-serving bias.

theory • They attribute negative outcomes to lasting, internal causes

such as their own traits or lack of ability, but attribute
positive outcomes to temporary, external causes such as
good luck or special favours from others.
• As a result, such people perceive that they have little or no
control over what happens to them.
• As depression deepens, the tendency to engage in this self-
defeating pattern of attribution is strengthened.
• Several forms of therapy based on attribution theory have
been developed and appear to be quite successful.
As basic knowledge about attribution has grown, so too has • They focus on helping depressed people to change their
the range of practical problems to which such information attributions –
• to take personal credit for successful outcomes,
has been applied, beyond our interpretations of day-to-day • to stop blaming themselves for negative outcomes (especially
interactions with others. ones that can’t be avoided), and
• to view at least some failures as the result of external factors.
Impression formation and
management
• When we meet another person for the first time, we
are - quite literally - flooded with information.
• We can see, at a glance, how they look and dress,
how they speak, and how they behave.
• Although the amount of information reaching us is
large, we somehow manage to combine it into an
initial first impression of this person - a mental
representation that is the basis for our reactions to
him or her.
• Let’s explore how these impressions develop and
what we do to maintain favourable impressions.
• Impression formation is the process through
which we develop our views of others.
• As we have already seen, some aspects of
social perception, such as attribution,
require lots of hard mental work: It’s not
always easy to draw inferences about
others’ motives or traits from their
behaviour.
• In contrast, forming first impressions seems
to be relatively effortless.
• Solomon Asch, one of the founders of
experimental social psychology, put it, “We
look at a person and immediately a certain
impression of his character forms itself in
us. A glance, a few spoken words are
sufficient to tell us a story about a highly
complex matter . . .”
• Asch applied these ideas to understanding
impression formation, suggesting that we do
not form impressions simply by adding
together all of the traits we observe in other
people.
• Rather, we perceive these traits in relation to
one another, so that the traits cease to exist
individually and become, instead, part of an
integrated, dynamic whole.
• Asch’s explanation was that we form
impressions using some kind of gestalt or
‘whole picture’, with each piece of information
influencing the others.
• To test these ideas, Asch came up with an
ingenious approach.
• He gave individuals lists of traits supposedly
possessed by a stranger, and then asked
them to indicate their impressions of this
person.
 Positive
Intelligent Warm Determined
Impression

Negative
Intelligent Cold Determined
Impression
• The lists differ only with respect to two words: warm and cold.
• If people form impressions merely by adding together individual traits, the
impressions formed by people exposed to these two lists shouldn’t differ very much.
• But people who read the list containing warm were much more likely to view the
stranger as generous, happy, good-natured, sociable, popular, and altruistic than
were people who read the list containing cold.
• The words warm and cold, Asch concluded, were central traits - ones that strongly
shaped overall impressions of the stranger and coloured the other adjectives in the
lists.
• Asch obtained additional support for this view by substituting the words polite and
blunt for warm and cold. When he did this, the two lists yielded highly similar
impressions of the stranger. So, polite and blunt were not central traits that
coloured the entire impressions of the stranger.
 Asch concluded that forming impressions of others involves more than simply
combining individual traits.
As he put it: “There is an attempt to form an impression of the entire person . . .
. As soon as two or more traits are understood to belong to one person they
cease to exist as isolated traits, and come into immediate . . . interaction . . . .
The subject perceives not this and that quality, but the two entering into a
particular relation . . .”

In other words, Asch’s classic research on impression formation indicates that

impressions of others involve more than simple summaries of their traits. Some
traits (central traits) can influence the interpretation of other traits.
 First impressions are Although some studies show The accuracy of first impression Once they are formed, first
formed very quickly – that even thin slices of depends on several factors such as impressions can be changed
within seconds or less information about others the format in which information when new information is
– but speed does not produce reasonably accurate about others is encountered (face- acquired. This occurs primarily
necessarily equal perceptions, other studies to-face meetings, photos, videos of when new information causes us
accuracy. indicate that first impressions others), and the dimensions along to reinterpret or reject the
are above chance in accuracy which these ratings are made. previous information, and the
for only some attributes (e.g. new information is relevant to
threat). the situation being judged.
Impression
management
• In order to make good impression on others, individuals often
engage in impression management or self-presentation tactics.
• Impression management refers to one’s efforts to make a desirable,
favourable impression on others.
• People who engage in impression management successfully often
gain important advantages in many situations.
• Most techniques used for this purpose fall into two major
categories:
• self-enhancement: efforts to increase our appeal to others;
and
• other-enhancement: efforts to make the target person feel
good in various ways.
• With respect to self-enhancement, specific strategies include efforts to boost one’s appearance - either physical or
professional.
• Physical appearance relates to the attractiveness and physical appeal of the individual, while professional appearance relates
to personal grooming, appropriate dress, and personal hygiene.
• Additional tactics of self-enhancement involving efforts to appear competent and accomplished through such steps as
• describing past achievements,
• describing positive qualities one possesses (“I’m very easygoing,” “I’m organized and get things done on time”),
• taking responsibility for positive events in one’s life that occurred in the past (“I graduated early because I really worked hard . . .”), or
• explaining how they (the person engaging in impression management) overcame daunting obstacles.
• Coming to other-enhancement strategies, individuals basically
seek to induce positive moods and reactions in others through
the use of a variety of tactics.
• Perhaps the most commonly used tactic of this type is
ingratiation - flattering others in various ways.
• Additional tactics of other-enhancement involve -
• expressing agreement with the target person’s views,
• showing a high degree of interest in this person,
• doing small favours for them,
• asking for their advice and feedback in some manner, or
• expressing liking for them nonverbally (e.g., through
high levels of eye contact, nodding in agreement, and
smiling).
How well do impression management
tactics work? Does it really boost
impressions of people using it?
• The answer provided by a growing body of literature is clear: yes, our efforts to ‘put our best foot forward’ do result in a
positive first impression, provided they are used with skill and care.
• If others perceive that we are trying to fool them by portraying a false image of us, they may react negatively.
• Such effects are clearly visible in job interviews.
• According to a study, beyond some point, the more the interviewers engaged in in impression management, the lower
they were rated by the panel.
• It’s okay to use impression management tactics to make a good first impression on others, but excessive use or
overdoing them will likely produce negative rather than positive results.
The end