The unique contributions of perceiver and target characteristics in person perception.

Abstract

Models of person perception have long asserted that our impressions of others are guided by characteristics of both the target and perceiver. However, research has not yet quantified to what extent perceivers and targets contribute to different impressions. This quantification is theoretically critical, as it addresses how much an impression arises from "our minds" versus "others' faces." Here, we apply cross-classified random effects models to address this fundamental question in social cognition, using approximately 700,000 ratings of faces. With this approach, we demonstrate that (a) different trait impressions have unique causal processes, meaning that some impressions are largely informed by perceiver-level characteristics whereas others are driven more by physical target-level characteristics; (b) modeling of perceiver- and target-variance in impressions informs fundamental models of social perception; (c) Perceiver × Target interactions explain a substantial portion of variance in impressions; (d) greater emotional intensity in stimuli decreases the influence of the perceiver; and (e) more variable, naturalistic stimuli increases variation across perceivers. Important overarching patterns emerged. Broadly, traits and dimensions representing inferences of character (e.g., dominance) are driven more by perceiver characteristics than those representing appearance-based appraisals (e.g., youthful-attractiveness). Moreover, inferences made of more ambiguous traits (e.g., creative) or displays (e.g., faces with less extreme emotions, less-controlled stimuli) are similarly driven more by perceiver than target characteristics. Together, results highlight the large role that perceiver and target variability play in trait impressions, and develop a new topography of trait impressions that considers the source of the impression. (PsycINFO Database Record

Dominance and competence face to face: Dissociations obtained with a reverse correlation approach

“…This pattern is consistent with findings by Hehman, Sutherland, Flake, and Slepian (2017) showing that competence-related judgments depend more on the perceiver's characteristics than on the target's facial features. Noticeably, the ICCs exhibit low values overall, possibly as the result of a guessing response strategy in trials where both target images were equivalent in signal strength (e.g., both high or low in signal).…”

Toward a comprehensive model of face impressions: What we know, what we do not, and paths forward

“…Remaining questions in this area are to what extent these findings generalize to other social categories and cultures. Furthermore, we note that estimates indicate that target appearance comprises only 15–25% of the overall variance in impressions (Hehman et al, ; Xie et al, in press), and therefore, there is a ceiling to how much variance target characteristics can explain overall. To fully understand impressions, we have to turn to other sources of variance.…”

“…Surprisingly, across all dimensions, early evidence suggests that impressions are more driven by perceiver characteristics (~23%) than target characteristics (~15%; Xie et al, in press). This is particularly the case regarding impressions of youthful/attractiveness relative to trustworthiness and dominance dimensions (Germine et al, ; Hehman et al, ; Hönekopp, ; Xie et al, in press).…”

The neural representational geometry of social perception

“…But much research has demonstrated that arrangements of facial features reliably relate to specific trait perceptions [34,35], a process requiring minimal visual exposure [36,37]. Popular models of face-based trait impressions focus exclusively on the role of bottom-up facial features [34,38].…”