Perceptions of intelligence in leaderless groups: The dynamic effects of shyness and acquaintance.

Abstract

Perceptions of intelligence were investigated in 2 longitudinal studies of leaderless discussion groups (LDGs). In Study 1 (N = 87), students completed trait-shyness questionnaires and met 7 times in groups of 4-5. After Meetings 2 and 7, participants rated all group members on state shyness and intelligence. Trait-shy participants were initially judged to be less intelligent on both self-and peer ratings. At Time 2, however, trait-shy participants were no longer derogated by peers. Study 2 (N = 103) replicated the same pattern of shy derogation while demonstrating no actual relation between IQ and trait shyness. Again, trait-shy derogation disappeared by Time 2, but state-shy derogation continued, The state shy were now the low-IQ participants, who had begun to talk less. Thus, the bias against quiet individuals, originally inappropriate, gradually became a valid cue for low intelligence. Results were traced to overlapping cues for intelligence and shyness in LDGs. Shyness I has been linked to a cascade of negative consequences. These include low self-esteem (Cheek & Buss, 1981), loneliness (Jones & Carpenter, 1986), depression (Traub, 1983), and overconformity (Santee & Maslach, 1982). Moreover, shyness is inversely related to such positive sequelae as dating frequency and satisfaction, number of friends, and level of self-disclosure to friends (Jones & Briggs, 1984). In a longitudinal study, Caspi, Elder, and Bem(1988) found that shy men married later, had less stable marriages, and became parents later than nonshy men; they were also delayed in settling into a career, which limited their overall career achievement. In short, trait shyness is associated with impairments in selfconcept, personal relationships, and career success. There is reason to believe that the plight of shy people is due, at least in part, to unwarranted negative perceptions of their intellectual abilities. Little is known, however, about which abilities are derogated and why. In this report, we pursued the possibility that this ability derogation of shy persons is limited to unfamiliar perceivers in socially demanding contexts. To this end, we examined perceptions of shy persons' abilities in a demanding social situation, namely, leaderless discussion groups. Perceptions of Shy Persons' Intellectual Abilities Although there is some evidence to justify a negative view of their social skills (e.g., Meleshko & Alden, 1993), the derogation of shy individuals appears to overgeneralize to other evaluative domains. Of particular interest here are several studies

Keeping up impressions: Inferential rules for impression change across the Big Five

“…In particular, much remains to be learned about how and why certain impressions change as they mature (for exceptions see Felmlee, 1995;Paulhus & Morgan, 1997;Rydell & McConnell, in press;Swann, Milton, & Polzer, 2000). Current explanations for impression stability and instability in Big Five domains have focused on the abundance of behavioral cues readily available to the perceiver (John & Robins, 1993).…”

Towards a second-person neuropsychiatry

“…As with other psychiatric disorders, social phobia-related difficulties extend beyond the individual: while it has been stressed that social anxiety may arise from the reactivation of relational knowledge based on negative experiences with significant others, it has also been shown that social anxiety, in turn, impairs interpersonal relationships and that it is, therefore, associated with fewer and more negative social relationships at all stages of life. For instance, shy individuals are seen as less intelligent than non-shy people during initial interactions, even though there is no actual association between social anxiety and intelligence [116]. Apart from negative responses by others' towards individuals with social anxiety, it is a matter of some debate whether interpersonal problems on the side of the patient are primarily related to social skill deficits or constitute self-protective strategies [117].…”

Accuracy and Bias in Perceptions of Political Knowledge

“…What are the cues people are using to ascertain how much information someone knows about politics? Research on perceptions of intelligence suggests individuals use very basic cues-sometimes as simple as whether an individual wears glasses-to determine who is and who is not an expert (Murphy et al 2003;Paulhus and Morgan 1997;Zebrowitz et al 2002).…”