A judgement analysis of social perceptions of attitudes and ability

Abstract

A judgement analysis of people's social inferences of attitudes and ability was conducted. University students were asked to infer the liberalness (N ¼ 60; Study 1) or intelligence (N ¼ 40; Study 2) of targets seen in pictures. Multiple regression analyses revealed that attractiveness was the most important cue for predicting inferences of liberalness, while an ethnic cue (i.e., being Asian) was the most important cue for judgements about intelligence. Results also showed that a single-cue model was less susceptible to overfitting, but significantly less accurate than a multiple-cue model in predicting participant's intelligence judgements. Although the multiple regression models suffered a degree of overfitting, cross validation showed that they continued to have significant predictive value when applied to new data. Furthermore, a ''random partner'' method (comparing each participant's own regression equation with that of another, randomly selected, participant) provided evidence of significant idiosyncratic variation in the way intelligence judgements were made.

A Lesson on Interrogations From Detainees

“…In this equation, R 2 is the sample multiple squared correlation coefficient, N is the number of cases, and K is the number of predictors. The more predictors there are in the model, relative to the number of cases, the more unreliable the model and the smaller the value of Rozeboom's R 2 (to be interpreted like R 2 values from a standard least squares multiple regression; see Snook, Grant, & Button, 2009). In the present study, Rozeboom's R 2 was .15, which suggests that the ability of the original regression model to predict cooperation for a new set of data would shrink substantially (by 50%).…”

Unveiling the truth: The effect of Muslim garments and face covering on the perceived credibility of a victim’s court testimony.

“…Studies have found that children also use facial cues to infer emotions (e.g., Gnepp, 1983), and that their accuracy in doing so improves as they become older (Camras & Allison, 1985). Adults continue to use facial cues to make a range of judgments about people such as their political orientation (e.g., Snook, Grant, & Button, 2009), personality (e.g., Penton-Voak, Pound, Little, & Perrett, 2006), trustworthiness (e.g., Zebrowitz, Voinescu, & Collins, 1996), and truthfulness (e.g., Akehurst, Köhnken, Vrij, & Bull, 1996).…”