The expectancy-confirming chameleon: Nonconscious behavioral mimicry and the behavioral confirmation process

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario P. Casa de Calvo ◽  
Darcy A. Reich
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maarten van Zalk ◽  
Steffen Nestler ◽  
Katharina Geukes ◽  
Roos Hutteman ◽  
Mitja Back

Empirical evidence suggests that people select friends whose extraversion is similar to their own (selection effects). However, little is known about whether friends influence extraversion development (influence effects) and about the interaction mechanisms that underlie friendship selection and influence effects. We examined whether selection and influence effects explain similarity in extraversion between friends in two independent samples. Similarity in extraversion predicted a higher likelihood of friendship selection across four years in Sample 1 (n = 1,698; Mage = 22.72, SD = 2.99; 49% female) and across a period of 16 weeks in Sample 2 (n = 131; Mage = 21.34, SD = 3.95; 77% female). Friends’ extraversion predicted increases in young adults’ extraversion in both samples. In Sample 2, we examined the interaction mechanisms underlying these selection and influence effects by combining event-based experience-sampling network dynamics with diary data on friendship network and extraversion dynamics. Findings showed that (a) similarity in extraversion predicted positive interaction quality changes and (b) positive interaction quality predicted friendship selection (bonding mechanism). In the same sample, (I) friends’ extraversion predicted friends’ sociable behavior changes, (II) friends’ sociable behavior predicted young adults’ sociable behavior changes, and (III) young adults’ sociable behavior predicted extraversion changes (behavioral mimicry mechanism). These findings provide unique insight into interaction mechanisms underlying longitudinal links between friendships and extraversion.


2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 360-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian P. Meier ◽  
Amanda J. Dillard ◽  
Eric Osorio ◽  
Courtney M. Lappas

Research reveals a biased preference for natural v. synthetic drugs; however, this research is based on self-report and has not examined ways to reduce the bias. We examined these issues in 5 studies involving 1125 participants. In a pilot study ( N = 110), participants rated the term natural to be more positive than the term synthetic, which reveals a default natural-is-better belief. In studies 1 ( N = 109) and 2 ( N = 100), after a supposed personality study, participants were offered a thank you “gift” of a natural or synthetic pain reliever. Approximately 86% (study 1) and 93% (study 2) of participants chose the natural v. synthetic pain reliever, which provides a behavioral choice confirmation of the natural drug bias. In studies 3 ( N = 350) and 4 ( N = 356), participants were randomly assigned to a control or experimental condition and were asked to consider a scenario in which they had a medical issue requiring a natural v. synthetic drug. The experimental condition included a stronger (study 3) or weaker (study 4) rational appeal about the natural drug bias and a statement suggesting that natural and synthetic drugs can be good or bad depending on the context. In both studies, the natural bias was reduced in the experimental condition, and perceived safety and effectiveness mediated this effect. Overall, these data indicate a bias for natural over synthetic drugs in preferences and behavioral choices, which might be reduced with a rational appeal.


Social Forces ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (4) ◽  
pp. 1578-1612
Author(s):  
James Chu ◽  
Guirong Li ◽  
Prashant Loyalka ◽  
Chengfang Liu ◽  
Leonardo Rosa ◽  
...  

AbstractStudies suggest that students’ prior performance can shape subsequent teacher evaluations, but the magnitude of reputational effects and their implications for educational inequality remain unclear. Existing scholarship presents two major perspectives that exist in tension: do teachers primarily use reputational information as a temporary signal that is subsequently updated in response to actual student performance? Or do teachers primarily use reputational information as a filter that biases perception of subsequent evidence, thus crystallizing student reputations and keeping previously poor-performing students stuck in place? In a field experiment, we recruited a random sample of 832 junior high school teachers from the second-most populous province of China to grade a sequence of four essays written by the same student, and we randomly assign both the academic reputation of the student and the quality of the essays produced. We find that (1) reputational information influences how teachers grade, (2) teachers rely on negative information more heavily than positive information, and (3) negative reputations are crystallized by a single behavioral confirmation. These results suggest that students can escape their prior reputations, but to do so, they must contradict them immediately, with a single confirmation sufficient to crystallize a negative reputation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document