What does research suggest about peoples ability to form impressions of others?

Impression management[also called self-presentation involves the processes by which people control how they are perceived by others. People are more motivated to control how others perceived them when they believe that their public images are relevant to the attainment of desired goals, the goals for which their impressions are relevant are valuable, and a discrepancy exists between how they want to be perceived and how other people perceive them. When people are motivated to manage their impressions, the impressions that they try to convey are influenced by the roles that they occupy and the norms in the social context, the values of the individuals whose perceptions are of concern, how they think they are currently perceived, their self-concepts, and their desired and undesired selves. Research on impression management has developed along two distinct paths. One line of research focuses on factors that affect the kinds of impressions people try to convey, and the other line applies self-presentaional perspectives have been applied to the study of other psychological phenomena. Self-presentational perspectives have been applied to the study of topics such as conformity, aggression, prosocial behavior, leadership, negotiation, social influence, gender, stigmatization, close relationships, emotional experience, and mental and physical health.

Impression Management Styles [IMS] Scale

[Bolino & Turnley, 1999].

Internal Consistency

Cronbach alpha coefficients for the NIM scale score ranged from .63 in the college sample to .74 in the clinical sample. Alpha coefficients for the PIM scale score ranged less broadly, from .71 in the census-matched sample to .77 in the clinical sample. The manual cites eight other studies that report alpha coefficients for the NIM scale score ranging from .45 to .77 with a mean of .60, while alpha coefficients for the PIM scale score ranged from .58 to .80 [mean=.73]. The PIM and NIM scales are relatively short at nine items each, and have a diverse range of content.

Impression management and performance appraisal

The choice of IM tactics used to make a good impression for career advancement within an organization may depend on the type of organization employees evolve in. Drory and Zaidman [2006] found that employees evolving in mechanistic systems [highly centralized, strong hierarchical structure, high levels of formalization] use more IM tactics and direct them more often toward their superiors than toward their peers. The authors also found that the type of IM tactics most often used by employees evolving in mechanistic organizations was Ingratiation [complementing the interviewer/evaluator and opinion conformity]. On the other hand, employees in organic systems [lateral responsibilities, exchange of information] used IM tactics to a lesser extent, and they directed it more equally toward superiors and peers. The IM tactic most often used by employees in the organic system was Initiation [attempt to demonstrate dedication, initiative, and extra efforts beyond the call of duty]. The authors confirmed their assumption to the effect that “Through an assessment and learning process, organization members adopt the functional and appropriate impression management tactics, which will best serve their interests under the existing organizational system” [Drory & Zaidman 2007, p. 292]. While using some forms of IM tactics may help showcase one’s talents and hard work, IM tactics are also used in dysfunctional ways to lie and manipulate others. Drory and Zaidman are proposing that individuals in different types of organizations use different types of IM tactics.

The fact that employees in mechanistic organizations where power is centralized tend to use more IM tactics than employees in organizations where power is more evenly distributed is further proof of the importance of organizational culture in setting the tone for employee behaviors. Perhaps, as the authors mention, employees learn to adapt their IM tactics to the type of organization they evolve in, therefore referring to the notion of chameleon-like traits associated with corporate psychopaths. However, there is also the explanation that, perhaps, these two types of organizations hire different types of employees. An indication that this may be the case comes from results that I found when I looked at levels of corporate psychopathy in different types of organizations. Indeed, I found that employees and managers from nonprofit organizations present significantly lower scores on corporate psychopathy compared to private and public sector organizations. Therefore, it is quite possible that mechanistic, power-centralized organizations are more susceptible to attract, hire, and promote individuals who manipulate others to get what they want.

7.2 Instructional purpose

Goffman’s [1959] impression management theory is one of the most well-known theories in identity performances. Goffman argued that individuals present the self based on the perceived audience in their front stage. Identity presentations are constructed and prepared through the backstage. Impression management theory explains the face that individuals choose to present and also sheds insight into the preparation process. A plethora of research used, and continues to apply, impression management theory to a variety of contexts. This class activity uses impression management theory and applies its tenets and principles to a digital context. More specifically, this activity uses recent research on identity presentations to understand the archived nature of social media presentations [Hogan, 2010].

This student activity engages students in Goffman’s impression management theory by applying it to an online identity performance: the selfie. Hogan’s [2010] exhibition approach to identity performances and boyd’s [2006] collapsed context are two major conceptual areas that are discussed in this activity. This chapter delves into the student learning outcomes, preparation, class activity setup and steps, as well as other variations and observations of the activity.

Managing Impressions

Nonverbal communication is also critical in impression management. People can change their appearance, clothing, and grooming, and most importantly, their behavior, in order to create particular images or identities. In some cases, people invest considerable time, energy, and resources to modify their appearance. This might include plastic surgery, weight loss programs, exercise, hair replacement, and other interventions, all designed to fashion a more desirable appearance. Behavioral changes are more common as people routinely enter settings with conscious or unconscious goals of creating particular impressions in others. For example, in a job interview, applicants are likely to be more expressive, attentive, and responsive to the interviewer on the sending side of nonverbal communication, than they would be in casual conversation. In addition, on the receiving side of nonverbal communication, applicants will attend closely to any nonverbal signs of approval or disapproval from the interviewer, and they will adjust their behavior accordingly. Similar self-presentation efforts might be initiated on first dates, interacting with one's supervisor, and meeting important people.

Managing impressions is particularly important in politics, and election outcomes are often affected by the appearance and behavioral style of candidates. Actors and politicians are well known for hiring expensive media consultants to help them tailor and refashion their images. Defense attorneys in high-profile cases hire such consultants to “make over” their clients to increase the odds of acquittal. Sometimes impression management requires an accomplice in creating a pair or couple identity. For example, at a family gathering, a feuding couple might try to sustain the image of a happy marriage by being attentive and affectionate, even though they can barely stand one another.

Managing Impressions

Nonverbal communication is also critical in impression management. People can change their appearance, clothing, and grooming, and most importantly, their behavior, in order to create particular images or identities. In some cases, people invest considerable time, energy, and resources to modify their appearance. This might include plastic surgery, weight loss programs, exercise, hair replacement, and other interventions, all designed to fashion a more desirable appearance. Behavioral changes are more common as people routinely enter settings with conscious or unconscious goals of creating particular impressions in others. For example, in a job interview, applicants are likely to be more expressive, attentive, and responsive to the interviewer on the sending side of nonverbal communication, than they would be in casual conversation. In addition, on the receiving side of nonverbal communication, applicants will attend closely to any nonverbal signs of approval or disapproval from the interviewer, and they will adjust their behavior accordingly. Similar self-presentation efforts might be initiated on first dates, interacting with one's supervisor, and meeting important people.

Managing impressions is particularly important in politics, and election outcomes are often affected by the appearance and behavioral style of candidates. Actors and politicians are well known for hiring expensive media consultants to help them tailor and refashion their images. Defense attorneys in high-profile cases hire such consultants to ‘make over’ their clients to increase the odds of acquittal. Sometimes impression management requires an accomplice in creating a pair or couple identity. For example, at a family gathering, a feuding couple might try to sustain the image of a happy marriage by being attentive and affectionate, even though they can barely stand one another for the moment.

Body Image and the Media

The ultimate source of judgement and impression management is body image. Having or displaying an attractive body image will ensure that all aspects of the “halo effect” are achieved. It is important to remember that the current thin-ideal has not always been the culturally accepted standard of attractiveness. The ideal female body image has been everything from obesity [as evidenced from statues in prehistory], overweight [as evidenced from art of the Renaissance period] to the thin-ideal of today. The only consistent theme when judging the female form through the ages is that it is inconsistent with the environment. In times when calories were difficult to harvest, a preference for obesity was dominant. In our current calorie-dense environment, we have a thin-ideal. Why humans culturally elevate this contradiction of body image and environment is unknown; however, a sensible explanation would be having a body image that is contrary to the calorie density of their environment is a marker of social success or environmental competency. In contrast, ideal male body image does not appear to have altered throughout time. The general consensus for the ideal male form has always been muscular and tall. Although a slight tangent to eating behavior research, the understanding of body image is essential to understanding decision-making during a meal. The primary concern that governs eating is often the calorie content. Dieting is most frequently started due to body dissatisfaction or fear of gaining weight. Therefore, body image in combination with food choice, communicates our desired social impression.

Society and prominent commentators often lay blame of our arguably pathological views of body image, food choice, and even for promoting eating disorders on the media. There is very little evidence that the originators of these ideals are the media. The choice of models for products or images in the media appears to be an attempt to garner a positive perception for the products/ideas they wish to sell. Although frequent and consistent exposure to models with an ideal body image causes body dissatisfaction in the viewer, this is an inadvertent/unintended effect of the media. The primary method the media alters food choice is through altering attitudes about specific products. Using advertising strategies, companies seek to increase the use or to manipulate the viewer into trying their product. Research has shown that these advertising strategies have additional consequences beyond the intention. Showing potential customers images of the product does not necessarily mean that they will want to try the product; that is achieved through repeat exposure to the company, brand, or product. Instead, exposure to advertising material will act as an external cue to eat. Therefore, exposure to advertising material increases the desire to eat. The methods used to advertise have an inadvertent effect of causing body dissatisfaction all while the intention was to simply get the viewer to try the product. Interestingly, one prominent protective measure against the media bombardment of food advertisements and thin-ideal body imagery is religion. Adhering to a religion provides a protection from both the thin-ideal and social impressionism in social environments. This is probably due to an alternative explanation of the body within a religious rather than cultural context. Furthermore, the act of adhering to a religion often comes with dietary requirements. Therefore, the act of adherence can be viewed as a powerful form of social impression management that overrides all other considerations. Friendship groups that do not adhere to the mainstream ideals can also provide a source of protection from body dissatisfaction and the need to manage impressions through food choice; however, they can equally have a negative effect too that can be a risk for eating disorders.

The biological, developmental, cognitive, and social components to eating behavior each have their own identity and defining constructs that help explain the simple task of putting hand to mouth. Although they are often presented and researched in isolation, they are all part of the same jigsaw. Each piece is completely and seamlessly interconnected with one another to control what and when we eat. Although some commentators would argue that one aspect is dominant over another, often this is a misunderstanding or representation of the behavior. Eating is essential to life. As such, it contains a variety of redundancies and controls depending on the state, status, and environment the individual currently inhabits. It is true that social and cognitive components of eating behavior can override the biological urges; however, it is equally important to recognize our biological urges can commandeer our psychology in cases of self-preservation. It is for this reason that liking and wanting are separately “hard-wired” within our brains. In an energy replete state our frivolous desires are given free reign, allowing learning about food and how to use it as a mechanism to communicate with others. Skip a few meals and all social niceties and complex thought are stripped away and food becomes nothing more than energy. In such situations, everyone will contemplate eating any food items irrespective whether they like them or if they are sacrosanct.

The biopsychosocial interplay of eating behavior cannot be exemplified any better than when it goes wrong. Eating pathology may present as pathology of thought, but this belies the well-documented risk factors in genetic and familial/friendship interactions that appear to trigger eating disorders. Each of the eating disorders is detailed topics in isolation and appears to have received disproportionate amount of attention compared to their prevalence. Contrary to popular belief, the well-known eating disorders are rare. A large majority of people who believe they have an eating pathology frequently find that they do not. Even those who are referred to an eating disorder clinic rarely meet the diagnosis for what would be described as anorexia nervosa or bulimia nervosa. In the following section, a brief introduction to eating disorders will be offered.

4.2.2 Socially Desirable Responding in Self-Reports of Driving Behavior

In self-reports of traffic behavior, impression management may cause serious bias. The majority of studies concerning personality and motivational factors related to accident proneness use retrospective designs in which accident history and punishments are elicited by self-report and then correlated with personality and background variables. It can be hypothesized that this kind of design is extremely liable to deliberate impression management. In fact, earlier findings show that drivers tend to report speeding tickets honestly but “forget” their involvement in other types of traffic violations [Summala & Hietamaki, 1984]. In addition to impression management, the construct of self-deception can also be hypothesized as an important factor in driving behavior. Drivers’ sense of control in traffic and trust in their own capabilities as drivers also increase with driving experience and improvement in skills. An exaggerated sense of control and confidence in one’s judgment and skills constitutes a real risk factor in traffic, where proper alertness and anticipation of possible risks are essential for safety [Summala, 1988].

Lajunen and colleagues [1997] investigated the relationship between their DSDS and self-reported accidents as victim and as responsible party, number of tickets, speeding [100 km/h [62 mph] roads and 60 km/h [37 mph] roads, in general], overtaking, rule compliance, and the Driver Behavior Inventory scales [Glendon et al., 1993] dislike of driving, driver aggression, and driver alertness. The samples consisted of 203 Finnish and 201 Australian drivers. Correlation analyses also indicated that driver impression management [lying] was negatively related to the self-reported number of accidents and punishments, overtaking frequency, speeding, and driving aggression, and it was positively related to traffic rule compliance. Driver self-deception correlated positively with variables measuring sense of control in traffic [Lajunen et al., 1997].

Lajunen and Summala [2003] investigated the effects of socially desirable responding on self-reports of driving by recording self-reports of driving in both public and private settings. In public settings, 47 applicants for a driving instructor training course completed the DBQ and the BIDR as part of the entrance examination. In a private setting, 54 students in the training course completed the same questionnaires anonymously in the classroom. Comparisons showed a difference between the two settings in six DBQ item scores such that aberrant behaviors were reported less frequently in the public setting than in the private setting. The authors concluded that bias caused by socially desirable responding is relatively small in DBQ responses. Note, however, that the study was based on a between-subjects design [i.e., the same respondents were not followed] and that an entrance examination for a driving instructor training course hardly reflects ordinary drivers’ responses.

Sullman and Taylor [2010] replicated Lajunen and Summala’s [2003] study by using a repeated measures design. A sample of 228 undergraduate students completed the DBQ and a measure of socially desirable responding in class, which constituted a public place, and then did so again 2 months later in the privacy of their homes. As expected, participants demonstrated higher levels of general social desirability in the public setting than in the private setting. None of the DBQ items were significantly different across the two locations, and the authors concluded that the DBQ is not particularly vulnerable to socially desirable responding. Note, however, that the study was not counterbalanced, and that the difference in privacy in “private” and “public” settings was actually not maximized because in both conditions subjects’ names were asked.

Af Wåhlberg [2010] composed a questionnaire that included scales from several well-known driver inventories and distributed it three times to a group of young drivers in a driver education program and twice to a random group. The DIM scale from the DSDS [Lajunen et al., 1997] was used to control for socially desirable responding. Whereas in earlier studies only the correlations [Lajunen et al., 1997] or group differences in quasi-experimental settings were studied [Lajunen & Summala, 2003], Af Wåhlberg controlled the effects of impression management when calculating the predictive power of driver behavior inventories. All self-report instruments, including the DBQ, included in the study correlated negatively with impression management, indicating bias: The correlations between the DBQ violation scale and impression management were -0.51 and -0.45. Moreover, the predictive power was more than halved when social desirability was controlled for. Impression management also correlated with self-reported accidents and penalty points in both samples. Similar influence of impression management on self-reported accident involvement [but not official records] was also found in an earlier study [Af Wåhlberg, Dorn, & Kline, 2009]. The authors concluded that whenever self-reported accidents are used as an outcome variable and predicted by other self-report measures, a lie scale should be included and used for correcting the associations. The conclusion about self-report instruments was even more serious. According to Af Wåhlberg, even the most well-known psychometric scales used in driver research are susceptible to social desirability bias.

PAI

The PAI is a recent multiscale inventory with promising research on malingering. Its strengths include nonoverlapping scales, easy reading comprehension [fourth-grade], and shorter administration time [344 items]. Unlike research with the MMPI-2, feigning studies have typically utilized the standard cut scores, with promising results.

The PAI has three primary fake-bad indictors, namely negative impression management [NIM], the malingering index [MAL], and the Rogers' discriminant function [RDF]. NIM and MAL have received empirical support in both simulation and known-groups designs; however, Rogers cautions against the use of his RDF in forensic cases. Preliminary guidelines for the screening and detection of malingering have been offered:

Rule-out feigning: a NIM score