Perspective-Taking, Self-Consciousness, and Accuracy in Person Perception

Bernstein, W. M.; Davis, Mark H. A.

doi:10.1207/s15324834basp0301_1

Cited by 125 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bernstein and Davis (1982) found a trend in this direction using a video-tape procedure to assess SPT ability. When perspective takers viewed a longer tape (about 7:30 minutes) they tended to be more accurate than when viewing a shorter tape (about 4:00 minutes), although their results did not achieve statistical significance (p < .20).…”

Section: Decipherabilitymentioning

confidence: 85%

“…However, she examined helping behavior as an outcome rather than SPT accuracy. In one of the few examples of research that investigated accuracy and characteristics of targets, Bernstein and Davis (1982) found that highly self-conscious targets were easier perspective taking targets than minimally self-conscious targets in a study where subjects had to match individuals seen in a video to their self-descriptions. However, the authors noted that this result may stem from highly self-conscious targets producing more accurate selfdescriptions.…”

Section: Decipherabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A New Perspective on Perspective Taking: A Multidimensional Approach to Conceptualizing an Aptitude

Gehlbach

2004

Educational Psychology Review

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social perspective taking (SPT) is thought to be important in its own right and is often associated with other important skills, such as interpersonal conflict resolution.Thus, it is critical for researchers to systematically understand SPT and how it relates to other valued educational outcomes. In particular, a complete understanding of SPT might assist educational psychologists to apply this knowledge in school settings to improve the effectiveness of students' social interactions. Previous research on SPT, however, has conceptualized it as a unidimensional construct leaving scholars with an insufficient understanding of this aptitude. To best understand SPT, a multidimensional approach should include assessments of personal characteristics (including the propensity and the ability to engage in SPT) and features of the situation (including features of the SPT task and the larger context). Using Snow's conceptualization of aptitudes as a framework, this article illustrates the problems with treating SPT as a unidimensional construct, defines SPT as a complex aptitude, and provides a taxonomy to develop our understanding of SPT and to guide future research in this area. The taxonomy organizes and reviews the existing literature that relates personal and situational characteristics to SPT aptitude. Where research has not yet been conducted, this article hypothesizes how these characteristics will relate to SPT aptitude.

show abstract

Section: Decipherabilitymentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Decipherabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Perspective on Perspective Taking: A Multidimensional Approach to Conceptualizing an Aptitude

Gehlbach

2004

Educational Psychology Review

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Examinations of the effects of interpersonal differences in human interactions widely accept the perspective of empathy as an ability or personal trait (Duan and Hill 1996). Emphasizing a cognitive view, several scholars refer to empathy as a person's intellectual understanding of the internal state of another person (Hogan 1969;Lamont and Lundstrom 1977;Pilling and Eroglu 1994), and describe cognitive efforts to recognize and understand someone else's mind and thoughts as ''perspective-taking'' (Barrett-Lennard 1981;Bernstein and Davis 1982;Dymond 1949). Perspective-taking enables an individual to understand the role or point of view of another person, to anticipate the reactions of the other, and to address the other's perceived needs, motivations, or opinions (Devoldre et al 2010).…”

Section: Conceptualizing Employee and Customer Empathymentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Role of Empathy in Customer-Employee Interactions

Wieseke

Geigenmüller

Kraus

2012

Journal of Service Research

272

211

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the service literature repeatedly emphasizes the role of empathy in service interactions, studies on empathy in customeremployee interactions are nearly absent. This study defines and conceptualizes employee and customer empathy as multidimensional constructs and empirically investigates their impact on customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. A quantitative study based on dyadic data and a multilevel modeling approach finds support for two effects of empathy in service interactions. The study reveals that customer empathy strengthens the positive effect of employee empathy on customer satisfaction, leading to more ''symbiotic interactions.'' The findings also indicate that empathic customers are more likely to respond to a dissatisfying encounter with ''forgiveness,'' in the sense that customer empathy is able to mitigate negative effects of customer dissatisfaction on customer loyalty. From these empirical results, the authors derive several implications for service research and the management of service encounters. In particular, the present study provides a valuable basis for strategies of ''interaction routing,'' that is, matching customers and employees on the basis of their psychological profiles to create smooth and satisfying service interactions. The authors elaborate on approaches to implement this strategy in service organizations.

show abstract

“…Other studies were contributed over the years by Bernstein and Davis (1982), DePaulo (1978), Harackiewicz and DePaulo (1982), Jackson (1982), and Pryor, Gibbons, Wicklund, Fazio, and Hood (1977).…”

Section: Evolution Of Research On Accuracy and Errormentioning

confidence: 99%

Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment.

Funder¹

1987

Psychological Bulletin

799

461

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

research on "error" in social judgment has largely supplanted research that addresses accuracy issues more directly. Moreover, this research attracts a great deal of attention because of what many take to be its dismal implications for the accuracy of human social reasoning. These implications are illusory, however, because an error is not the same thing as a "mistake." An error is a judgment of an experimental stimulus that departs from a model of the judgment process. If this model is normative, then the error can be said to represent an incorrect judgment. A mistake, by contrast, is an incorrect judgment of a real-world stimulus and therefore more difficult to determine. Although errors can be highly informative about the process of judgment in general, they are not necessarily relevant to the content or accuracy of particular judgments, because errors in a laboratory may not be mistakes with respect to a broader, more realistic frame of reference and the processes that produce such errors might lead to correct decisions and adaptive outcomes in real life. Several examples are described in this article. Accuracy issues cannot be addressed by research that concentrates on demonstrating error in relation to artificial stimuli, but only by research that uses external, realistic criteria for accuracy. These criteria might include the degree to which judgments agree with each other and yield valid predictions of behavior. The accuracy of human social judgment is a topic of obvious interest and importance. It is only natural to wonder to what degree the judgments we make of the personalities of ourselves and others might be right or wrong, and to desire to improve our accuracy. Nonpsychologists are often surprised and disappointed, therefore, when they begin to take psychology courses and discover that the field has largely foresworn interest in the accuracy issue. The discipline's early, direct interest in accuracy (e.g., Estes, 1938; Taft, 1955; Vernon, 1933) was all but completely stifled some years ago by the publication of a series of methodological critiques by Cronbach (1955), Hastorf and Bender (1952), and others. As a result, according to one authoritative textbook: The accuracy issue has all but faded from view in recent years, at least for personality judgments. There is not much present interest in questions about whether people are accurate... . There is, in short, almost no concern with normative questions of accuracy. On the other hand, in recent years there has been a renewed interest in how, why, and in what circumstances people are inaccurate. (Schneider, Hastorf, & Ellsworth, 1979, p. 224; see also Cook, 1984)' Specifically, the psychology of social judgment has been dominated in recent years by a flood of research on the subject of "error." Studies of error appear in the literature at a prodigious rate, are disproportionately likely to be cited (Christensen-Sza

show abstract

Perspective-Taking, Self-Consciousness, and Accuracy in Person Perception

Cited by 125 publications

References 22 publications

A New Perspective on Perspective Taking: A Multidimensional Approach to Conceptualizing an Aptitude

A New Perspective on Perspective Taking: A Multidimensional Approach to Conceptualizing an Aptitude

On the Role of Empathy in Customer-Employee Interactions

Errors and mistakes: Evaluating the accuracy of social judgment.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About