Interpersonal attraction as a function of the accuracy of personal evaluations

SPLNl'L K. W. A theory of emotionally based drive I D land ib relation to performance in ~impk karning situations. Amcrkan Psyehologist.1958.13,131-141. van KREVELD. D., & ZAJONC, R. B. Thc learning of influcnce structures. Journal of Pcrsonality, 1966.34,205-223. ZAJONC, R. B. Cognitive theories in soeial psyehology. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology. (2nd himself (accurate evaluation) or was not based on this information (inaccurate evaluation). Rcgardless of whether the evaluation was favorable or unfavorable, it was predicted that the S would be more attracted to his evaluator when the evaluation was accurate than when it was NOTE I. This research was supported by Grant M4164 inaccurate. from the National Institute ofMentaI HeaJth. METHOD The Ss consisted of 12 male undergraduates recTUited from an introductory psychology class. At each experimental session, two Ss were TUn simultaneously (although neither was aware ofthe other's presence). Upon arriving for the experiment, the S was seated in a sma11, soundproof cubicle and handed two Iists of· adjectives, one marked "desirable characteristics" and one marked "undesirable characteristics." On 1 the first list, the S was asked to put a checkmark beside the five words that best described his desirable characteristics and, someone with a low opinion ofhimselfthan . on the second list, the five words that best with the self-perception of someone with a described his undesirable characteristics. high opinion ofhimself. If this assumption is Each list contained 40 personality-trait correct, people who .receive an unfavorable adjectives (cf. Anderson, 1968), half of evaluation should be more attracted to their which were high in "desirability" (e.g., evaluator if they have a low opinion of sincere, good-humored, intelligent) and half themselves than if they have a high opinion of which were low in "desirability" (e.g., antisocial, immature, self-centered). of themselves. After the S had described his desirable Support for the above predictions has been obtained when the evaluations concern and undesirable characteristics, he was the S's ability to succeed on a particular task (erroneously) informed that there were four (Deutsch & Solomon, 1959). Consistency other people participating in the theory has not been supported when the experiment, Ss A, B,C, and D. (In reality,A, evaluations concern the more enduring B, C, and D were confederates.) The S was characteristics of the S's personality. Under then handed a sheet which summarized the these conditions, Ss with low self-esteem are procedure. The sheet contained the more attracted to people who evaluate them fo11owing information. In the first phase of favorably (Walster, 1965) and are more the experiment, the other participants (A, B, hostile to people who evaluate them C, and D) would listen while E (the S) unfavorably (Dittes, 1959) than are people described himself. A, B, C, and D would then be asked to give their impression ofE. Since with high self-esteem. One problem with the first experimental a11 the rooms were equipped with intercoms, design is that consistency is confounded A, B, C, and I).,would be able to hear E's with self-esteem. An evaluation that is self-description and E would be able to listen consistent with the self-perception of while A, B,C, and D gave their impression of someone with high self-esteem is him. (However, A, B, C,andD would not be inconsistent for someone with low able to hear one another's evaluation of E.) self-esteem and vice versa. The failure of After the procedure had been explained, the studies employing this design to support S was handed four identical lists of consistency theory may reflect not so much adjectives, informed that each evaluation the inadequacy of consistency theory as the -would consistof three adjectives, and more powerful effects of self-esteem. requested to put a checkmark beside the The purpose of the present study was to adjectives comprising each evaluation (the demonstrate that consistency theory does first list being used to record A's impression, hold when the evaluations concern the more the second list being used to record B's e n during characteristics of the S's impression, etc.). personality. To avoid the problems of' After the first S had received the confounding consistency with self-esteem, preliminary instTUctions, the procedure was an alternative experimental design was repeated with the second S (who was in a employed. In this design, consistency was different room). The experimenter then manipulated by varying the content of the retired to an adjoining room, taking with evaluations. The evaluation was either based him the sheets on which the Ss had indicated on what the S had previously said about their desirable and undesirable cd.) Vol. I. Reading. Mass.: Addison-Wesley. 196H. ZAJONC. R. B., & BCRNSTEIN. E. Structural balance. rc,·iprocity. and positivity as sourees of eognitivc bias. Journal ofPersonality, 1965, 33. 570-583. Interpersonal attractlon as a functlon of the accuracy of personal evaluatlons JA Y HEWITT, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C., Canada Each S was evaluated by four confederates. One evaluation was favorable and accurate, one was favorable and inaccurate, one unfavorable and accurate, and one was unfavorable and inaccurate. After recelVlng these evaluations, the S rated his attraction to each of the confederates. Attraction was greater when the evaluation was favorable than when it was unfavorable and attraction was greater when the evaluation was accurate than when it was inaccurate. ms According to the cognitive consistency theory of interpersonal attraction, the attraction of one person (P) to another person (0) is a function of the similarity between O's perception of P and of P's perception of himself (Deutsch & Solomon, 1959). Two major experimental designs can be employed to test this theory. In the first design, consistency is varied by manipulating the S's opinion of himself. Two groups of Ss are employed, one with a favorable opinion of themselves and one with an unfavorable opinion. Each S is evaluated favorably or unfavorably by someone else. It is assumed that a favorable evaluation will be more consistent with the self-perception of someone with a high opmlOn of himself than with the self-perception of someone with a low opinion of himself. If this assumption is correct, people who receive a favorable evaluation should be more attracted to their evaluator if they have a high opinion of themselves than if they have a low opinion of themselves. It is also assumed that an unfavorable evaluation will be more consisten t with the self-perception of Psychon. Sci .. 1969, Vol. 17 (2) 9S Table I 'Iean Altraction tu fad, 01' the FOllr Conl'ederates as a Function 01' the Accuracy and Favorability 01' the Confederate's Evaluation 01' S same evaluatlollS would be prediction. Six Ss were more attracted to thc fa v 0 rabl (...truncated)