Do Agency and Communion Explain the Relationship Between Perceiver and Target Effects in Interpersonal Perception? A Meta-Analysis on Generalized Reciprocity

This meta-analysis examines generalized reciprocity, that is, the relationship between how people perceive others and how they are perceived by others. It tests the hypothesis that generalized reciprocity varies as a function of the content domain under investigation. Generalized reciprocity for attributes with primarily communal content (e.g., friendliness) was hypothesized to be more positive than generalized reciprocity for attributes with primarily agentic content (e.g., assertiveness). Sixty-four primary studies reporting correlations between perceiver and target effects with a total number of 17,561 participants were included in the analysis. Results of a multilevel meta-analytical random effects model showed that reciprocity correlations were slightly negative, but around zero, for primarily agentic attributes (r = -.05) and became more positive with increasing communal content (up to r = .18 for primarily communal attributes). Generalized reciprocity thus varied depending on the extent to which the regarded attribute is agentic versus communal.

Shared reality through social tuning of implicit prejudice

Sharing reality with an interaction partner is a key element of social connections. One way in which shared reality can be formed in an interpersonal situation is through affiliative social tuning. Affliative social tuning occurs when individuals experience a desire to get along with their interaction partner and this affiliative motivation encourages the individual to spontaneously and genuinely align their attitudes and/or behaviors with their interaction partner to achieve a sense of shared reality. In this review, we examine when and how affiliative social tuning of implicit prejudice occurs. We also explore whether individuals garner shared reality by affiliating with ingroup members who seem to hold similar implicit beliefs.

Self-other agreement in personality traits and profiles across cultures: A multirater, multiscale study in Blacks and Whites in South Africa

OBJECTIVE

Despite the importance of self-other agreement for the validity of trait models, few studies have assessed cultural differences systematically. We examined self-other agreement in traits and profiles in the more collectivistic Black group and the more individualistic White group in South Africa.

METHOD

Participants were 172 Black and 198 White students, and one relative and one friend of each student. Participants completed a behavior-based and a trait-adjective-based inventory.

RESULTS

Aggregated across traits and raters, there were no cultural differences in trait agreement. However, agreement was stronger for social-relational concepts in Blacks and for personal growth concepts in Whites, providing moderate support for the hypothesis of stronger agreement on culturally more salient traits. Trait agreement was stronger in Blacks' relatives and Whites' friends, but there was no such interaction in profile agreement. The differences in profile agreement (higher in Whites than in Blacks) involved normative agreement and were mediated by dialecticism (higher in Blacks) and social desirability (higher in Whites). Results with the two inventories were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In the framework of trait consistency research, cultural differences in self-other agreement may be limited compared to differences in perceived trait consistency, although sizable compared to differences in actual behavior consistency.

The Correlates of Similarity Estimates Are Often Misleadingly Positive: The Nature and Scope of the Problem, and Some Solutions

Research on similarity constructs (e.g., dyadic similarity, personality stability, judgment agreement and accuracy) frequently find them to be associated with positive outcomes. However, a methodological pitfall associated with common "overall similarity" indices, which we term the normative-desirability confound(NDC), will regularly result in similarity constructs apparently having more positive effects than they do in reality. In essence, when an individual is estimated to be similar to another person by common indices, this will strongly indicate that the individual has desirable characteristics. Consequently, the correlates of overall similarity indices can often be interpreted as indicating the beneficial effects of having desirable characteristics, without needing to attribute any additional salutary effect to similarity. We show that this confound is present in overall similarity estimates for a wide range of constructs (e.g., personality traits, attitudes, emotions, behaviors, values), how it can be accounted for, and discuss larger implications for our understanding of similarity constructs.

A Review and Critique of Partner Effect Research in Small Groups

The purpose of this review is to discuss the ways in which partner effects are examined in group contexts. We focus on social influence, as it is a common theme in group research from cognate fields such as communication, psychology, family studies, social psychology, and business. We elaborate on different conceptions of partner effects in our discussion of the social relations model (SRM), the actor–partner interdependence model (APIM), and the group actor–partner interdependence model (GAPIM), and provide a comprehensive review of the studies that have utilized these models to study groups. Following that, we discuss the ways in which partner effects research can improve our theoretical and empirical understanding of group processes.

The Accuracy and Bias of Interpersonal Perceptions in Intergroup Interactions

Group membership can have a profound impact on perceptions of group characteristics; yet how group membership influences the accuracy of personality impressions for specific individuals remains unclear. In small groups, participants ( N = 519) formed impressions via naturalistic, dyadic interactions. We then investigated whether impressions of in-group members differed from out-group members based on participant’s ethnicity and acculturation (Euro-Canadian, Acculturated East Asian, or Semi-Acculturated East Asian). Impressions of in-group members were more distinctively accurate and individuated. Further, in-group members were viewed with greater distinctive assumed similarity in that perceivers used their own idiosyncratic traits more when forming impressions of in-group members. However, in-group members, despite being liked more, were viewed less socially desirable. Discussion focuses on cultural differences in impressions and implications for in-group favoritism, in-group self-anchoring, and the out-group homogeneity effect for North Americans and East Asians.