are they really out to get us? examining interpersonal perceptions in an intergroup context

Are they really out to get us?

Examining Interpersonal Perceptions in an Intergroup

Context

Social Perceptions

Self-perception:Does Mr. Smoker think he

is smart?

Other perception:Is Mr. Smoker smart?

Metaperception: Does Dr. Nonsmoker think

that I am smart?

Usually predicted by self perception

Background Social Perceptions

What forms them? Are they accurate?

Intergroup perceptions Social identity differences

Why are intergroup perceptions special? In-group & out-group bias Social stigma Sources in perceptions

Who cares?

Mr. Smoker’s Metaperception

Dr. Nonsmoker’s Perception

?

Why SRM? Multiple sources in perceptions

Social context

Perceptions not independent Sources function at dyad and group level

Multiple Information Levels

Target

A B C D

Perceiver

A X X X

B X X X

C X X X

D X X X

Multiple Sources

Perceiver

Target

Relationship

Error

Social Category, Interpersonal Perception, & Interpersonal

Accuracy

Santuzzi (2007)

Smoking Stigma Stigma = negative evaluation

Identified by behavior

Relatively concealable

No history … yet

Research QuestionsDo smokers think nonsmokers see them

differently?

Do nonsmokers actually see smokers differently?

Are smokers accurate?

Social Category & SRM Smokers & Nonsmokers

4-person groups (g = 24) 3 group compositions Zero-acquaintance

Self-perception 9 evaluative adjectives 5-point response scale

10-minute interactions Evaluation & metaperception Round-robin

Social Interaction Structure

ADCBA

DCB

In-group Perceptions Out-group Perceptions

Data Structure

Target

A B C D

Perceiver

A Y Y Y

B X Y Y

C X X Y

D X X X

Target

A B C D

Perceiver

A - Y Y

B - Y Y

C X X -

D X X -

Asymmetric BlockRound-Robin

What I expected to see Perceiver and relationship variance

Evaluative ratings Zero-acquaintance

In-group v. out-group differences Biased perceptions & metaperceptions

Stigma is different

Smoking Attitudes

-0.44

-1.46

-2.9

-2.4

-1.9

-1.4

-0.9

-0.4

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6Sm

okin

g A

ttit

ude

Smokers Nonsmokers

Variance Partitioning: In-group Perceptions

Nonsmokers Smokers

Perceiver Target Relationship Perceiver Target Relationship

Evaluation .18*(.16)

.02(.04)

.06*(.06)

.13*(.07)

.07(.10)

.06*(.05)

Metaperception

.17*(.10)

.00(.02)

.02(.03)

.16*(.14)

.01(.04)

.04*(.02)

Variance Partitioning: Out-group Perceptions

Mixed

Nonsmokers Smokers

Perceiver Target Relationship Perceiver Target Relationship

Evaluation .30*(.28)

.08(.25)

.11*(.19)

.16*(.49)

.03(.23)

.10*(.16)

Metaperception .28*(.18)

.05(.09)

.04(.09)

.06(.34)

.03(.17)

.04(.09)

Meta-Accuracy: Sans SRM

Smokers Nonsmokers

Smokers .95* .28

Nonsmokers .87* .86*

TARGET EVALUATION

PE

RC

EIV

ER

M

ETA

PE

RC

ETIO

N

Meta-Accuracy Correlations

egbaY

egbaY

SxNNSMetaSmo

NxSSNEvalNonsmo

ker_

ker_

Do Smokers know how Nonsmokers actually view them?

a = perceiver effect

b = target effect

g = relationship effect

e = error

Meta-Accuracy Correlations: Generalized Accuracy

Smokers Nonsmokers

Smokers .18 -.83

Nonsmokers 1.00 .44

TARGET EVALUATION

PE

RC

EIV

ER

M

ETA

PE

RC

EPTIO

N

Conclusions Source patterns

Individual & relationship sources in evaluation Differences in metaperception (smokers)

Bias or Accuracy? Smokers less accurate ONLY in mixed groups

Why different pattern? Identity differences motivate? Concern directed toward me? Did self-perception do it?

Design Considerations Population base rate

Fewer (self-identified) smokers

Order of interactions

Shared v. unshared contexts

Inferences from mixed contexts Compare to homogeneous situations

Thanks!Janet Ruscher

Ron LandisEd O’Neal

David KennyNyla Branscombe

Reviewer 1Reviewer 2& the APA