When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Jerónimo, R.
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Gracia-Marques, L., Ferreira, M. B, Macrae, C. N.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/9750
Resumo: We explored the possibility that the encoding flexibility processes postulated by Sherman and colleagues (1998) may also apply to intentional impression formation settings, even when cognitive resources are available to conceptually encode all of the behavioral information regardless of the relation of that information to the initial stereotypical expectancies. Three experiments offer evidence for the lower conceptual fluency for expectancy-incongruent behaviors, compared with congruent behaviors, as well as for the consequences of that difference for impression formation. Experiment 1 shows that incongruent behaviors are perceived as more difficult to understand in meaning. Experiment 2 links this lower conceptual fluency with a better discrimination of the specific trait implications of the behaviors. We further explore the role of conceptual encoding difficulty for developing personality impressions (Experiment 3). These studies reveal the implications of initial expectancies for the differential conceptual encoding of congruent and incongruent behaviors, even when the availability of cognitive resources is high, such as when forming an intentional impression about a person's personality. The link between this process and encoding the trait implications of behaviors may shed new light on impression formation processes and demand a revision of some of the assumptions that were made by the classical person memory model. We contend that behavior encoding in impression formation is likely to begin with default trait encoding but will be inhibited when the implications of the behavior conflict with previous trait expectancies (see also Wigboldus, Dijksterhuis, & van Knippenberg, 2003). (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
id RCAP_a999a5b16107236e40bc131088a181ee
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/9750
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formationEncoding flexibilityImpression formationTrait inferencesExpectanciesWe explored the possibility that the encoding flexibility processes postulated by Sherman and colleagues (1998) may also apply to intentional impression formation settings, even when cognitive resources are available to conceptually encode all of the behavioral information regardless of the relation of that information to the initial stereotypical expectancies. Three experiments offer evidence for the lower conceptual fluency for expectancy-incongruent behaviors, compared with congruent behaviors, as well as for the consequences of that difference for impression formation. Experiment 1 shows that incongruent behaviors are perceived as more difficult to understand in meaning. Experiment 2 links this lower conceptual fluency with a better discrimination of the specific trait implications of the behaviors. We further explore the role of conceptual encoding difficulty for developing personality impressions (Experiment 3). These studies reveal the implications of initial expectancies for the differential conceptual encoding of congruent and incongruent behaviors, even when the availability of cognitive resources is high, such as when forming an intentional impression about a person's personality. The link between this process and encoding the trait implications of behaviors may shed new light on impression formation processes and demand a revision of some of the assumptions that were made by the classical person memory model. We contend that behavior encoding in impression formation is likely to begin with default trait encoding but will be inhibited when the implications of the behavior conflict with previous trait expectancies (see also Wigboldus, Dijksterhuis, & van Knippenberg, 2003). (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Academic Press/Elsevier2015-09-14T17:22:07Z2015-01-01T00:00:00Z20152019-05-09T10:22:12Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/9750eng0022-103110.1016/j.jesp.2015.07.007Jerónimo, R.Gracia-Marques, L.Ferreira, M. BMacrae, C. N.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-09T17:54:40Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/9750Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T22:27:39.894444Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
title When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
spellingShingle When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
Jerónimo, R.
Encoding flexibility
Impression formation
Trait inferences
Expectancies
title_short When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
title_full When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
title_fullStr When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
title_full_unstemmed When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
title_sort When expectancies harm comprehension: encoding flexibility in impression formation
author Jerónimo, R.
author_facet Jerónimo, R.
Gracia-Marques, L.
Ferreira, M. B
Macrae, C. N.
author_role author
author2 Gracia-Marques, L.
Ferreira, M. B
Macrae, C. N.
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Jerónimo, R.
Gracia-Marques, L.
Ferreira, M. B
Macrae, C. N.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Encoding flexibility
Impression formation
Trait inferences
Expectancies
topic Encoding flexibility
Impression formation
Trait inferences
Expectancies
description We explored the possibility that the encoding flexibility processes postulated by Sherman and colleagues (1998) may also apply to intentional impression formation settings, even when cognitive resources are available to conceptually encode all of the behavioral information regardless of the relation of that information to the initial stereotypical expectancies. Three experiments offer evidence for the lower conceptual fluency for expectancy-incongruent behaviors, compared with congruent behaviors, as well as for the consequences of that difference for impression formation. Experiment 1 shows that incongruent behaviors are perceived as more difficult to understand in meaning. Experiment 2 links this lower conceptual fluency with a better discrimination of the specific trait implications of the behaviors. We further explore the role of conceptual encoding difficulty for developing personality impressions (Experiment 3). These studies reveal the implications of initial expectancies for the differential conceptual encoding of congruent and incongruent behaviors, even when the availability of cognitive resources is high, such as when forming an intentional impression about a person's personality. The link between this process and encoding the trait implications of behaviors may shed new light on impression formation processes and demand a revision of some of the assumptions that were made by the classical person memory model. We contend that behavior encoding in impression formation is likely to begin with default trait encoding but will be inhibited when the implications of the behavior conflict with previous trait expectancies (see also Wigboldus, Dijksterhuis, & van Knippenberg, 2003). (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-09-14T17:22:07Z
2015-01-01T00:00:00Z
2015
2019-05-09T10:22:12Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10071/9750
url http://hdl.handle.net/10071/9750
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 0022-1031
10.1016/j.jesp.2015.07.007
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Academic Press/Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Academic Press/Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799134839498080256