Misleading First Impressions

Todorov, Alexander; Porter, Jenny

doi:10.1177/0956797614532474

Cited by 144 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The variability of social evaluations across different images of a single person may introduce problems when studying social evaluation using only single images of a target, a widespread and commonplace approach. Together with recent work (Jenkins et al, 2011;Rule et al, 2013;Todorov & Porter, 2014), these findings highlight an important question facing a great deal of person perception research as to whether evaluations of targets reflect stable inferences of the target versus inferences that are highly susceptible to momentary changes across the target's photos due to dynamic features. When correlating evaluations supported by static cues with external variables (e.g., behavior, objective outcomes, personality), significant relationships might emerge with a fewer number of ratings or participants than evaluations supported by dynamic cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Static and Dynamic Facial Cues Differentially Affect the Consistency of Social Evaluations

Hehman

Flake

Freeman

2015

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals are quite sensitive to others' appearance cues when forming social evaluations. Cues such as facial emotional resemblance are based on facial musculature and thus dynamic. Cues such as a face's structure are based on the underlying bone and are thus relatively static. The current research examines the distinction between these types of facial cues by investigating the consistency in social evaluations arising from dynamic versus static cues. Specifically, across four studies using real faces, digitally generated faces, and downstream behavioral decisions, we demonstrate that social evaluations based on dynamic cues, such as intentions, have greater variability across multiple presentations of the same identity than do social evaluations based on static cues, such as ability. Thus, although evaluations of intentions vary considerably across different instances of a target's face, evaluations of ability are relatively fixed. The findings highlight the role of facial cues' consistency in the stability of social evaluations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Static and Dynamic Facial Cues Differentially Affect the Consistency of Social Evaluations

Hehman

Flake

Freeman

2015

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, recent studies have emphasized the important role of this natural variability in forming social impressions. Critically, ratings of attractiveness (Jenkins, White, Van Montfort, & Burton, 2011) and character traits (Hehman, Flake, & Freeman, 2015; Todorov & Porter, 2014; cf. McCurrie et al, 2016) can vary more across different images of the same person’s face, than they do across faces of different people.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Choosing face: The curse of self in profile image selection

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People draw automatic social inferences from photos of unfamiliar faces and these first impressions are associated with important real-world outcomes. Here we examine the effect of selecting online profile images on first impressions. We model the process of profile image selection by asking participants to indicate the likelihood that images of their own face (“self-selection”) and of an unfamiliar face (“other-selection”) would be used as profile images on key social networking sites. Across two large Internet-based studies (n = 610), in line with predictions, image selections accentuated favorable social impressions and these impressions were aligned to the social context of the networking sites. However, contrary to predictions based on people’s general expertise in self-presentation, other-selected images conferred more favorable impressions than self-selected images. We conclude that people make suboptimal choices when selecting their own profile pictures, such that self-perception places important limits on facial first impressions formed by others. These results underscore the dynamic nature of person perception in real-world contexts.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s41235-017-0058-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Todorov and Porter (Todorov & Porter, 2014) highlight significant differences in person impressions within multiple facial photos of the same person due to random variation and discuss how this can influence accuracy of personality inferences based on faces. Thus, it was important to select the most standardized stimuli.…”

Section: Methods Face Stimuli Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eyelid-openness and mouth curvature influence perceived intelligence beyond attractiveness.

Talamas¹,

Mavor²,

Axelsson³

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impression formation is profoundly influenced by facial attractiveness, but the existence of facial cues which affect judgments beyond such an “attractiveness halo” may be underestimated. Because depression and tiredness adversely affect cognitive capacity, we reasoned that facial cues to mood (mouth curvature) and alertness (eyelid-openness) affect impressions of intellectual capacity. Over 4 studies we investigated the influence of these malleable facial cues on first impressions of intelligence. In Studies 1 and 2 we scrutinize the perceived intelligence and attractiveness ratings of images of 100 adults (aged 18–33) and 90 school-age children (aged 5–17), respectively. Intelligence impression was partially mediated by attractiveness, but independent effects of eyelid-openness and subtle smiling were found that enhanced intelligence ratings independent of attractiveness. In Study 3 we digitally manipulated stimuli to have altered eyelid-openness or mouth curvature and found that each independent manipulation had an influence on perceptions of intelligence. In a final set of stimuli (Study 4) we explored changes in these cues before and after sleep restriction, to examine whether natural variations in these cues according to sleep condition can influence perceptions. In Studies 3 and 4 variations with increased eyelid-openness and mouth curvature were found to relate positively to intelligence ratings. These findings suggest potential overgeneralizations based on subtle facial cues that indicate mood and tiredness, both of which alter cognitive ability. These findings also have important implications for students who are directly influenced by expectations of ability and teachers who may form expectations based on initial perceptions of intelligence.

show abstract

Misleading First Impressions

Cited by 144 publications

References 37 publications

Static and Dynamic Facial Cues Differentially Affect the Consistency of Social Evaluations

Static and Dynamic Facial Cues Differentially Affect the Consistency of Social Evaluations

Choosing face: The curse of self in profile image selection

Eyelid-openness and mouth curvature influence perceived intelligence beyond attractiveness.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About