Abstract
In line with the principle of compatibility, when making social judgments, people tend to focus on personality attributes compatible with the trait under consideration. Better known, orenriched, personages are more likely to present attributes that are compatible with a particular trait than are personages about whom little is known. As a result, enriched personages are more likely to have various, sometimes even conflicting, traits attributed to them. This hypothesis is supported by a number of studies that compare the frequency with which some people are chosen as being better described by opposite trait adjectives than are others. Celebrities more often have both of a pair of opposing adjectives ascribed to them than do less well known figures. Similarly, subjects judge themselves to be better described by either of a pair of opposite adjectives than is a person who is relatively unknown in their lives. The implications for social judgment and for everyday decisions are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alicke, M. D., Klotz, M. L., Breitenbecher, D. L., Yurak, T. J., &Vredenburg, D. S. (1995). Personal contact, individuation, and the better-than-average effect.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,68, 804–825.
Asch, S. E., &Zukier, H. (1984). Thinking about persons.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,46, 1230–1240.
Beyth-Marom, R., Austin, L., Fischhoff, B., Palmgren, C., &Jacobs-Quadrel, M. (1994). Perceived consequences of risky behaviors: Adults and adolescents.Developmental Psychology,29, 549–563.
Brainard, R.W., Irby, T. S., Fitts, P. M., &Alluisi, E. (1962). Some variables influencing the rate of gain of information.Journal of Experimental Psychology,63, 105–110.
Houston, D. A., &Weeks, M. (1999).Should I decide which alternative I prefer … or which alternative I reject? Feature salience in choice dilemmas [Working paper]. University of Memphis, Department of Psychology.
Huber, V., Neale, M., &Northcraft, G. (1987). Decision bias and personal selection strategies.Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes,40, 136–147.
Jones, E. E., &Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.),Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79–94). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
Kihlstrom, J. F., &Klein, S. B. (1994). The self as a knowledge structure. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.),Handbook of social cognition (pp. 153–208). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Klar, Y., Medding, A., &Sarel, D. (1996). Nonunique invulnerability: Singular versus distributional probabilities and unrealistic optimism in comparative risk judgments.Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes,67, 229–245.
Neuthaler, H. (1992).Moral judgments and the compatibility principle. Unpublished undergraduate thesis, Department of Psychology, Princeton University.
Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., &Maracek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,27, 154–164.
Payne, J.W. (1982). Contingent decision behavior.Psychological Bulletin,92, 382–402.
Pennington, N., &Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: The effects of memory structure on judgment.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 521–533.
Prentice, D. A. (1990). Familiarity and differences in self- and other-representation.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,59, 369–383.
Proctor, R.W., &Reeve, T. G. (Eds.) (1990).Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Sande, G. N., Goethals, G. R., &Radloff, C. E. (1988). Perceiving one’s own traits and others’: The multifaceted self.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,54, 13–20.
Shafir, E. (1993). Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others.Memory & Cognition,21, 546–556.
Shafir, E. (1995). Compatibility in cognition and decision. In J. R. Busemeyer, R. Hastie, & D. L. Medin (Eds.),Decision making from the perspective of cognitive psychology (pp. 247–274). New York: Academic Press.
Shafir, E., Simonson, I., &Tversky, A. (1993). Reason-based choice.Cognition,49, 11–36.
Slovic, P. (1990). Choice. In D. Osherson & E. Smith (Eds.),An invitation to cognitive science (Vol. 3, pp. 89–116). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Slovic, P., Griffin, D., &Tversky, A. (1990). Compatibility effects in judgment and choice. In R. Hogarth (Ed.),Insights in decision making: Theory and applications (pp. 5–27). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Snyder, M., &Cantor, N. (1979). Testing hypotheses about other people: The use of historical knowledge.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,15, 330–342.
Snyder, M., &Swann, W. B. (1978). Hypothesis-testing processes in social interaction.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,36, 1202–1212.
Taylor, S. E., &Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health.Psychological Bulletin,103, 193–210.
Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social contingency model. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 331–376). New York: Academic Press.
Tversky, A., &Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging the frequency and probability.Cognitive Psychology,5, 207–232.
Tversky, A., &Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions.Journal of Business,59, 251–278.
Tversky, A., Sattath, S., &Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice.Psychological Review,95, 371–384.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by U.S. Public Health Service Grant 1-R29-MH46885 from the National Institute of Mental Health.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Downs, J.S., Shafir, E. Why some are perceived as more confident and more insecure, more reckless and more cautious, more trusting and more suspicious, than others: Enriched and impoverished options in social judgment. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 6, 598–610 (1999). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212968
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212968