Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Looking at the same interaction and seeing some...

Electronic data

  • 2018 - JID Wall et al.

    Rights statement: This article does not exactly replicate the final version published in the journal "Journal of Individual Differences". It is not a copy of the original published article and is not suitable for citation.

    Accepted author manuscript, 657 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Looking at the same interaction and seeing something different: The role of information, judgment perspective and behavioral coding on judgment 'accuracy'

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Looking at the same interaction and seeing something different : The role of information, judgment perspective and behavioral coding on judgment 'accuracy'. / Wall, Helen; Taylor, Paul Jonathon; Campbell, Claire; Heim, Derek ; Richardson, Beth.

In: Journal of Individual Differences, Vol. 39, 2018, p. 123-141.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Wall, Helen ; Taylor, Paul Jonathon ; Campbell, Claire ; Heim, Derek ; Richardson, Beth. / Looking at the same interaction and seeing something different : The role of information, judgment perspective and behavioral coding on judgment 'accuracy'. In: Journal of Individual Differences. 2018 ; Vol. 39. pp. 123-141.

Bibtex

@article{506e4cf3d6e94472b57905a986cdfe81,
title = "Looking at the same interaction and seeing something different: The role of information, judgment perspective and behavioral coding on judgment 'accuracy'",
abstract = "The role of information context, judgment perspective and cue type on the “accuracy” of first impressions of another{\textquoteright}s Big5 personality was studied in three phases of data collection (n = 173). Accurate judgments were defined as the level of agreement between a target person{\textquoteright}s aggregated personality score (i.e., average of self and informant ratings of personality) and a personality judgement about the target, indexed using item correlations. Results for Phase 1 found that completing a different task with the same partner improved accuracy for conscientiousness. Phase 2 investigated the relationship between a person{\textquoteright}s role (judgment perspective) within an interaction (interactants, observers) and showed that Observers were better at judging the less interpersonal traits of conscientiousness and openness relative to Interactants. Finally, Phase 3 examined the types of cues that people used when rating another{\textquoteright}s personality. Although Observers and Interactants had access to the same interaction, analyses revealed that they employed different types of cues when judging others. Findings are discussed in terms of Funder{\textquoteright}s Realistic Accuracy Model (1995, 1999) along with practical implications, limitations and suggestions for future research.",
author = "Helen Wall and Taylor, {Paul Jonathon} and Claire Campbell and Derek Heim and Beth Richardson",
note = "This article does not exactly replicate the final version published in the journal {"}Journal of Individual Differences{"}. It is not a copy of the original published article and is not suitable for citation.{"}",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1027/1614-0001/a000257",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "123--141",
journal = "Journal of Individual Differences",
issn = "1614-0001",
publisher = "Hogrefe Publishing",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Looking at the same interaction and seeing something different

T2 - The role of information, judgment perspective and behavioral coding on judgment 'accuracy'

AU - Wall, Helen

AU - Taylor, Paul Jonathon

AU - Campbell, Claire

AU - Heim, Derek

AU - Richardson, Beth

N1 - This article does not exactly replicate the final version published in the journal "Journal of Individual Differences". It is not a copy of the original published article and is not suitable for citation."

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - The role of information context, judgment perspective and cue type on the “accuracy” of first impressions of another’s Big5 personality was studied in three phases of data collection (n = 173). Accurate judgments were defined as the level of agreement between a target person’s aggregated personality score (i.e., average of self and informant ratings of personality) and a personality judgement about the target, indexed using item correlations. Results for Phase 1 found that completing a different task with the same partner improved accuracy for conscientiousness. Phase 2 investigated the relationship between a person’s role (judgment perspective) within an interaction (interactants, observers) and showed that Observers were better at judging the less interpersonal traits of conscientiousness and openness relative to Interactants. Finally, Phase 3 examined the types of cues that people used when rating another’s personality. Although Observers and Interactants had access to the same interaction, analyses revealed that they employed different types of cues when judging others. Findings are discussed in terms of Funder’s Realistic Accuracy Model (1995, 1999) along with practical implications, limitations and suggestions for future research.

AB - The role of information context, judgment perspective and cue type on the “accuracy” of first impressions of another’s Big5 personality was studied in three phases of data collection (n = 173). Accurate judgments were defined as the level of agreement between a target person’s aggregated personality score (i.e., average of self and informant ratings of personality) and a personality judgement about the target, indexed using item correlations. Results for Phase 1 found that completing a different task with the same partner improved accuracy for conscientiousness. Phase 2 investigated the relationship between a person’s role (judgment perspective) within an interaction (interactants, observers) and showed that Observers were better at judging the less interpersonal traits of conscientiousness and openness relative to Interactants. Finally, Phase 3 examined the types of cues that people used when rating another’s personality. Although Observers and Interactants had access to the same interaction, analyses revealed that they employed different types of cues when judging others. Findings are discussed in terms of Funder’s Realistic Accuracy Model (1995, 1999) along with practical implications, limitations and suggestions for future research.

U2 - 10.1027/1614-0001/a000257

DO - 10.1027/1614-0001/a000257

M3 - Journal article

VL - 39

SP - 123

EP - 141

JO - Journal of Individual Differences

JF - Journal of Individual Differences

SN - 1614-0001

ER -