O slideshow foi denunciado.
Seu SlideShare está sendo baixado. ×

How Many Seconds to a First Impression?

Próximos SlideShares
Works Well with Others.pptx
Works Well with Others.pptx
Carregando em…3
×

Confira estes a seguir

1 de 88
1 de 88

Mais Conteúdo rRelacionado

Livros relacionados

Gratuito durante 30 dias do Scribd

Ver tudo

Audiolivros relacionados

Gratuito durante 30 dias do Scribd

Ver tudo

How Many Seconds to a First Impression?

  1. 1. 生第一印象產 需要多久?
  2. 2. 只是因為在人群中 多看了 一眼你 再也沒能忘掉 容顏你
  3. 3. 我們從小被教導 不要用封面來判斷一本書。
  4. 4. 但是根據普林斯頓大學的一項研究, 當我們看到一張新面孔時, 我們的大腦在十分之一秒內 決定這個人是否具有吸引力和 得信 。值 賴
  5. 5. 刊登於 2006 年 7 月《心理科學》期刊的一篇論文, 題目為 「第一印象:在面部暴露 100 毫秒後下定決心」。 Willis, J. & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions. Making up your mind after a 100-Ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17, 592-598.
  6. 6. 作者是 普林斯頓大學 心理學系的 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 (Alexander Todorov) 教授和 研究員學生 珍妮 · 威利斯 (Janine D. Willis) 。 Janine D. Willis
  7. 7. 研究簡介
  8. 8. 研究背景和目的 人們經常從他人的面部表情中得出特 的推論。徵 我們調 了人們做出這種推論的最低條件。查
  9. 9. 研究方法 在五個實驗中, 一個都專注於特定的特質判斷,每 我們操縱了不熟悉的面孔的曝光時間。
  10. 10. 研究結果 在 100 毫秒暴露之後做出的判斷 與在沒有時間限制的情況下作出的判斷高度相關, 這表明這種暴露時間足以讓參與者形成印象。
  11. 11. 研究結果 事實上,對於所有判斷 - 吸引力、可愛性、可信度、能力和積極性 – 加的曝光時間並沒有顯著 加相關性。增 增
  12. 12. 研究結果 當暴露時間從 100 毫秒 加到增 500 毫秒時, 參與者的判斷變得更加負面, 當判斷的響應時間減少,判斷的可信度 加。增
  13. 13. 研究結果 當暴露時間從 500 毫秒 加到增 1000 毫秒時, 特 判斷和響應時間沒有顯著變化徵 ( 有一個例外 ) , 但一些判斷的信心 加增 ; 這一結果表明, 額外的時間可能會 加對判斷的信心。增
  14. 14. 研究結果 但是, 曝光時間的 加會導致更多差異化的人物印象。增
  15. 15. First Impression
  16. 16. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 面部特 和個性之間的聯繫最多可能是微不足道的,徵 但這並不能阻止我們的思維一目了然地評估其他人,”
  17. 17. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 我們很快就決定一個人是否擁有我們認為重要的許多特 ,徵 例如受歡迎和能力,即使我們沒有與他們交談過。 我們似乎天生以快速、不反思的方式得出這些推論。“
  18. 18. 研究方法
  19. 19. 參與者 245 名來自普林斯頓大學的本科生參加了這項研究, 有些學生是因為收到經費 有些是這屬於部分課程學分。 128 名參加了一項初 研究,步 以便在沒有時間限制的情況下 從面部外觀中獲得特 推斷的測量。徵
  20. 20. 參與者 117 人參加了 5 項實驗研究。 實驗研究 人數 判斷項目 1 20 吸引力 (attractiveness) 2 25 喜歡度 (liking) 3 23 具有能力 (competence) 4 24 可信度 (trustworthiness) 5 25 侵略性 (aggressiveness)
  21. 21. 刺激物 在所有研究中,我們使用了 70 名業餘演員, 35 名女性和 35 名男性, 20 至 30 之間的照片歲 數據庫 (Lundqvist , Flykt ,& Öhman , 1998) 。 Lundqvist, D., Flykt, A., & Öhman, A. (1998). The Karolinska directed emotional faces. Psychology section, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 在照片中,所有演員都穿著灰色 T ,卹 沒有覆蓋了大部分臉的 子鬍 、嘴唇上邊的 子、鬍 戴耳環或者眼鏡或可見的化妝品。
  22. 22. Sample Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces (KDEF) pictures
  23. 23. 刺激物 我們使用了中性表達 (neutral expressions) 的 個體的正面頭部照片。 在 70 張照片中,由於質量太差, 兩張男性照片被排除在外。對於實驗, 我們還排除了 2 張女性照片, 以便獲得相同數量的男性和女性照片。
  24. 24. 刺激物 為了從面部外觀獲得可靠的特 推斷測量,徵 初 研究的參與者被提供照片步 並被要求做出一系列特質判斷。
  25. 25. 他們被要求判斷照片中的人是否具有: 項目 特質 1 吸引力 (attractive) 2 可愛 (likable) 3 有能力 (competent) 4 誠實 / 得信賴值 (honest/trustworthy) 5 具有侵略性 (aggressive) 6 外向 / 熱情 (extraverted/enthusiastic) 7 同情 / 溫暖 (sympathetic/warm) 8 可靠 / 自律 (dependable/self-disciplined) 9 冷靜 / 情緒穩定 (calm/emotionally stable) 10 對新體驗開放的程度 / 複雜 (open to new experience/complex) 11 雄心勃勃 (ambitious) 前 5 個項目的判斷為實驗研究提供了標準判斷。
  26. 26. 刺激物 個面孔都在一個單獨的問卷頁面上呈現,每 並且特 判斷的順序是固定的。徵 所有的判斷都是以 9 分制, 從 1( 完全不 ) 到 9 分 ( 極端 ) 。 將照片隨機分成三組, 組包含相同數量的男性和女性,每 並且對於 組照片,我們 生每 產 2 個隨機順序。
  27. 27. 刺激物 參與者被隨機分配到 6 組照片中的一組 (3 組 X 2 順 序 ) ,並按照自己的進度完成特質判斷任務。 張照片由每 42 至 43 名參與者評分。 特質判斷非常可靠。
  28. 28. 對於三組照片, 相應的克隆巴赫係數 (Cronbach's alpha) 分別為: 特質 克隆巴赫係數 吸引力 (attractiveness) .97, .96, and .95 可愛 (likeability) .94, .91, and .89 得信賴值 (trustworthiness) .92, .92, and .92 有能力 (competence) .85, .91, and .96 具有侵略性 (aggressiveness) .87, .75, and .89
  29. 29. 克隆巴赫係數 (Cronbach's alpha) 又稱 alpha 信度 (alpha reliability) ,是檢視信度的一種方法, 由李 · 克隆巴赫在 1951 年提出。它克服了部分折半法的缺點, 是目前社會科學研究最常使用的信度分析方法。 心理計量中,對於同一個構念經常存在多道不同的題目, 或甚至有多 不同的量表;份 不同題目或不同量表測出結果的一致性, 以相關係數之期望 表示,就是它們的「值 alpha 信度」。
  30. 30. 一般認為「 alpha 信度」的 具有下列意義:值 Cronbach's alpha Internal consistency α ≥ 0.9 Excellent 0.9 > α ≥ 0.8 Good 0.8 > α ≥ 0.7 Acceptable 0.7 > α ≥ 0.6 Questionable 0.6 > α ≥ 0.5 Poor 0.5 > α Unacceptable
  31. 31. 刺激物 參與者的平均特質判斷作為實驗的標準判斷。 如果面對有限的時間暴露足以讓人們形成特質印象,那 麼在時間限制下做出的實驗判斷 應該與標準判斷相關聯。
  32. 32. 刺激物 應該指出的是,這個程序低估了 在沒有時間限制的情況下作出的判斷與 時間限制判斷之間的真實相關性,原因有兩個: 判斷是在不同的尺度和不同條件下測量的 ( 用紙與鉛對比用計算 機控制的演示文稿 ) 。 然而,在時間約束判斷與標準判斷相關的程度上, 這些相關性可歸因於面部本身的感知, 而與測量程序無關。
  33. 33. 流程 所有五項研究都使用相同的程序。 與會者被告知,這是一項關於第一印象的研究, 他們應該盡快做出決定。 指示強調照片將在非常短的時間 呈現,而我們實驗者內 主要對第一印像或所 及的直覺感興趣。涉 該實驗從 3 個練習試驗開始,以使參與者熟悉該任務。
  34. 34. 流程 對於實驗性試驗, 66 個面孔 (33 個男性和 33 個女性 ) 是隨機分為 3 組, 組每 22 個, 組有相同數量的男性和女性面孔。每 使用這 3 組面, 我們通過平衡曝光時間 (100 、 500 或 1000 毫秒 ) 來創建 3 個實驗版本。
  35. 35. 流程 例如,第一組臉孔中的 個面在版本每 1 中呈現 100 毫秒, 在版本 2 中呈現 500 毫秒,在版本 3 中呈現 1000 毫秒。 因為我們對第一印象感興趣,所以 張臉只出現一次。每 因此,試驗總數為 66 。 試驗順序由計算機隨機分配給 個參與者,每 即暴露時間水平隨機混合。 參與者被隨機分配到 3 個實驗版本中的一個。 對於 個參與者,每 22 個面部呈現 100 毫秒, 22 個呈現 500 毫秒, 22 個呈現 1000 毫秒。
  36. 36. 流程 次試驗都以固定點每 (+) 開始,出現在屏幕中央顯示 500 毫秒。 然後呈現照片分別為 100 毫秒、 500 毫秒或 1000 毫秒。 參與者通過按下鍵盤上標有“是”的“ /”( 反斜杠 ) 鍵 或按鍵盤上標有“否”的“ Z” 鍵來響應。鑑於時間有限, 我們決定使用二分法特質判斷, 因為這種判斷比連續特質判斷更簡單。 在演示之後,在照片的位置出現了一個問題 ( 例如,“這個人是否具有能力?” ) 。研究之間的唯一區別 是參與者被要求做出不同的特質判斷。
  37. 37. 流程 此外,在相關性分析中,標準判斷與參與者之間的 特性歸因的比例或概率相關 ( 即,連續得分 ) 。 該判斷以 7 分製作出,範圍從 1( 最不自信 ) 到 7( 最自信 ) 。 參與者使用鍵盤頂部的數字鍵進行響應。 判斷間隔為 1500 毫秒。 在這個“是 / 否”判斷之後, 下一個屏幕要求參與者評估他們對自己的判斷有多自信。
  38. 38. 流程 為了測試在有限時間暴露下作出的判斷 是否與在沒有時間限制的情況下做出的判斷相關, 我們將 個面部每 ( 次暴露時每 ) 的特 歸因的比例徵 與面部的平均標準判斷相關聯。 此外,對於 個實驗,對性 歸因的比例每 狀 、性 判斷的響應狀 時間以及作為暴露時間的函數的判斷的平均置信度進行分析。 我們通過刪除比參與者平均 高值 3 個標準偏差的響應時間 來刪除響應時間異常 。值 在所有研究中,這影響了不到 2 %的試驗。
  39. 39. 結果和討論
  40. 40. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 如表 1 所示,即使在暴露於面部 100ms 後, 特質判斷與在沒有時間限制的情況下 做出的判斷高度相關。
  41. 41. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 雖然所有判斷的相關性除了吸引力 隨著暴露從 100 毫秒 加到增 1000 毫秒而 加,增 但這些變化都不顯著。 我們使用 Williams’s test 來測試依 相關性賴 (Steiger , 1980) 比較了 100 和 500 毫秒、 500 和 1000 毫秒、 以及 100 和 1000 毫秒的相關性。這些測試都沒有達到重要性。 Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245-251.
  42. 42. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 我們期望應該能找到吸引力判斷具有最高的相關性。畢 竟,吸引力是面部外觀的屬性。但是結果顯示, 可信度判斷的相關性略高。 我們還進行了淨相關分析,控制了吸引力的判斷, 排除了在有限時間曝光後做出的判斷 只是反映了吸引力光環效應的可能性。
  43. 43. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 雖然相關性降低(表 1 ), 但它們對所有判斷仍然高度可靠。 比較不同時間曝光水平下的零級和淨相關性之間 的差異表明,吸引力對特質判斷的影響 隨著面部暴露的 加而減少。增 淨相關性隨著面部暴露時間的 加而 加,增 增 但是在零階相關的情況下, 沒有一個變化達到顯著性。
  44. 44. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 為了估計在沒有時間限制的情況下所做的判斷中 所解釋的方差是否隨著時間暴露的變化而變化, 我們進行了 3 次回歸分析 ( 針對 個時間暴露水平每 ) , 其中時間不受約束的判斷 (5 種類型的判斷 X 66 面孔 ) 在時間約束的判斷和控制判斷類型 (4) 和 面部刺激 (65) 的 擬變量上進行回歸。虛
  45. 45. 如 Fig. 1 所示, 隨著曝光量從 100 毫秒 加到增 1000 毫秒, 計算方差僅 加增 2.2 %。
  46. 46. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 雖然我們沒有條件讓參與者暴露於面部的時間 超過 1000 毫秒,但可以合理地假設 通過較長時間曝光無法改善所解釋的方差。
  47. 47. 時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性 假設判斷的平均可靠性為 .90 , 則解釋方差的上限應平均為 81.0 %。 鑑於收集時間限制判斷的程序和 時間無限制 ( 標準 ) 判斷的程序不同, 並且這些差異會 加誤差方差,增 1000 毫秒暴露時的計算方差 (74.9 % ) 似乎非常接近可能的上限。
  48. 48. 實驗分析 所有判斷以時間曝光為函數都顯示出相同的模式。
  49. 49. 如 Fig. 2a 所示,當從 100 到 500 毫秒的暴露 加,增 判斷變得更負面 ( 對於所有判斷, p <.05 , p-rep> .91 , d> 0.85) 。
  50. 50. 面孔被認為不那麼有吸引力、不太可愛、 不太可靠、缺乏能力、更具攻 性。擊
  51. 51. 平均判斷水平穩定在 500 毫秒暴露, 之後沒有觀察到顯著變化。
  52. 52. 如 Fig. 2b 所示, 隨著暴露時間從 100 毫秒 加到增 500 毫秒, 所有五個判斷的響應時間都減少了 ( 對於所有判斷, p <.05 , p-rep> .93 , d> 0.91) 。
  53. 53. 與特 判斷一樣,隨著暴露時間徵 從 500 毫秒 加到增 1000 毫秒,幾乎沒有變化。
  54. 54. 雖然響應時間不斷減少, 但唯一顯著的影響是可信度判斷的響應時間, t ( 23 ) = 4.14 , p-rep = .99 , d = 1.73 。
  55. 55. 如 Fig. 2c 所示, 隨著 100 到 500 毫秒的曝光 加,增 對所有五個判斷的自信度 加。增
  56. 56. 沒有達到顯著性的唯一影響是對侵略性的判斷, t(24)= 1.47 , p-rep = .84 , d = 0.60( 對於其他 四個判斷, p <.05 , p-rep> .93 , d> 0.94 )。
  57. 57. 隨著曝光時間從 500 毫秒 加到增 1000 毫秒, 除了對具有能力判斷之外, 對判斷的信心不斷 強。增
  58. 58. 雖然這種信心的 加僅對吸引力判斷較為顯著,增 t(19)= 2.59 , p-rep = .95 , d = 1.19 , 並且接近可信度判斷的顯著性, t(23)= 1.94 , p-rep = .90 , d = 0.81 , 來自所有 5 項研究的組合 p 為值 0.028(z = 2.20) , 平均效應大小 d 為 0.41 。
  59. 59. 特質推理之間的關係 我們使用方差極大化旋轉 (varimax rotation), 進行了主成分分析,以測試人物印像 是否因面部時間 加而變得更加分化。增
  60. 60. 如 Table 2 所示, 100 和 500 毫秒暴露判斷的分析僅確定了 1 個因子, 表明粗略的正 / 負 視。歧
  61. 61. 所有正向特 都具有較高的正向負荷,徵 而且攻 性具有較高的負向負荷。擊 該因子佔 100 毫秒暴露後判斷的方差的 62.5 %, 以及在 500 毫秒暴露後作出的判斷方差的 58.3 %。
  62. 62. 解釋的方差的差異表明, 暴露 100 毫秒後做出的判斷 與 500 毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
  63. 63. 解釋的方差的差異表明, 暴露 100 毫秒後做出的判斷 與 500 毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
  64. 64. 與 100 和 500 毫秒的分析相反, 1000 毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子, 表明更加不同的個人印象。
  65. 65. 第一個因素 方差的佔 50.5 %,第二個因素佔 27.8 %。 第一個因素包括所有正向的特 ,徵 第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。
  66. 66. 在這個因素解決方案中, 吸引力和具有能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  67. 67. 結果和討論
  68. 68. 十分之一秒的最小時間曝光 足以讓人們從面部外觀做出特定的特 推斷。徵 額外的時間 加了對判斷的信心,增 並允許更多差異化的特質印象。 然而,判斷已經基於最初的推論。
  69. 69. 結合暗示面部外觀的推論 可能無法控制的其他研究 (Hassin & Trope , 2000 , Exp.4) , 我們的研究結果表明: 面部外觀的特 推斷可以描述為是徵 快速、直觀的系統過程。 Hassin, R. & Trope, Y. (2000). Facing faces: Studies on the cognitive aspects of physiognomy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 837-852.
  70. 70. Lavater 可能對一件事情是正確的: “無論人們是否理解它,所有男性 [ 和女性 ] 天都會受到相貌的影響”每 (1880 ,第 9 頁 ) 。 Lavater, J. C. (1880). Essays on physiognomy; for the promotion of the knowledge and the love of mankind. Abridged from Mr. Holcrofts translation. London. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale Group.
  71. 71. 對於面部外觀的特 輕易推斷的性質徵 可以是關於其他人的推論的一般特性。 (e.g., Todorov & Uleman, 2003; Uleman, Blader, & Todorov, 2005) Todorov, A., & Uleman, J. S. (2003). The efficiency of binding spontaneous trait inferences to actor’s faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 549-562. Uleman, J. S., Blader, S., & Todorov, A. (2005). Implicit impressions. In R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The New Unconscious (pp. 362-392). New York: Oxford University Press.
  72. 72. 通過最少的信息可以在線輕易的 建立對別人的印象。
  73. 73. 後語
  74. 74. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 我們發現,即使給予更多時間, 人們對面孔的基本判斷並沒有改變。 隨著持續時間的延長, 觀察者對他們的判斷只是變得更加自信。”
  75. 75. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: 為什麼大腦做出如此快速的判斷尚不完全清楚。 然而, 他經常使用一種先進的技術工具探測大腦活動, 稱為功能性磁共振成像儀 (fMRI) 。
  76. 76. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: 他的一些一般性研究表明 大腦中直接對恐懼作出反應的部分可能參與可信性的判斷。
  77. 77. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 恐懼反應 及杏仁核,這是大腦的一部分,涉 在前額葉皮層 ( 其中理性思維來源於此 ) 發育前數百年來 它就存在於動物體 。”內
  78. 78. 杏仁核
  79. 79. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 我們認為信任是一種相當複雜的反應, 但我們的觀察結果表明,信任可能是由低級別大腦結構 造成的高級判斷。 也許這個信號完全繞過了皮層。“
  80. 80. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 我們認為信任是一種相當複雜的反應, 但我們的觀察結果表明,信任可能是由低級別大腦結構 造成的高級判斷。 也許這個信號完全繞過了皮層。“
  81. 81. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: 這項研究探討了紐約記者 Malcolm Gladwell 最近暢銷書“ Blink” 中提到的一些相同的主題。
  82. 82. 這本書講述了我們的思想 在快速做出決策時所經 的快速認知,歷 特別是那些基於第一印象的 眼間。眨
  83. 83. 經常被稱為流行社會學家的格拉 威爾曾表示,德 他出書的推動力是 人們常因對他的長頭髮而做出快速的判斷。
  84. 84. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 這篇論文的結果 及到頭腦中的特定機制,涉 而 'Blink' 則更廣泛地概括,格拉 威爾的基本信息與我們的德 基本信息並無本質區別,儘管他認為快速判斷主要是理性的。 我們的研究發現,情況往往如此,但並非總是如此。“
  85. 85. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示:他的發現 並不意味著理性思維無法克服快速的第一印象。 “ 隨著時間的推移, 了解了人們, 當然會對他們你 你 形成更全面的概念。但是因為我們在沒有意識思考的情況下 作出這些判斷,所以當我們只是看到一個人的臉時, 我們應該知道發生了什麼。”
  86. 86. 亞 山大歷 · 托多羅夫 教授表示: “ 我們仍然不知道是甚麼臉部的有形特 導致特定特質的推斷。徵 我們知道通常是什麼讓臉部具有吸引力,例如它組成部分的 對稱性等。 但是,讓 認為它的擁有者是一個基本上有能力的你 人的臉是什麼? 這是 一項需要完成的研究的主題。“另
  87. 87. 生第一印象只需十分之一秒!產

Notas do Editor

  • How Many Seconds to a First Impression?
    產生第一印象需要多久?
  • We may be taught not to judge a book by its cover, but when we see a new face, our brains decide whether a person is attractive and trustworthy within a tenth of a second, according to recent Princeton research.
    我們從小被教導不要用封面來判斷一本書,但是根據普林斯頓大學最近的一項研究,當我們看到一張新面孔時,我們的大腦在十分之一秒內決定一個人是否具有吸引力和值得信賴。
  • People often draw trait inferences from the facial appearance of other people.
    人們經常從其他人的面部表情中得出特徵推論。
    We investigated the minimal conditions under which people make such inferences.
    我們調查了人們做出這種推論的最低條件。
  • In five experiments, each focusing on a specific trait judgment, we manipulated the exposure time of unfamiliar faces.
    在五個實驗中,每一個都專注於特定的特質判斷,我們操縱了不熟悉的面孔的曝光時間。
  • Judgments made after a 100-ms exposure correlated highly with judgments made in the absence of time constraints, suggesting that this exposure time was sufficient for participants to form an impression.
    在100毫秒暴露之後做出的判斷與在沒有時間限制的情況下作出的判斷高度相關,這表明這種暴露時間足以讓參與者形成印象。
  • In fact, for all judgments-attractiveness, likeability, trustworthiness, competence, and aggressiveness-increased exposure time did not significantly increase the correlations.
    事實上,對於所有判斷 - 吸引力,可愛性,可信度,能力和積極性 - 增加的曝光時間並沒有顯著增加相關性。
  • When exposure time increased from 100 to 500 ms, participants&amp;apos; judgments became more negative, response times for judgments decreased, and confidence in judgments increased.
    當暴露時間從100毫秒增加到500毫秒時,參與者的判斷變得更加消極,判斷的響應時間減少,判斷的可信度增加。
  • When exposure time increased from 500 to 1,000 ms, trait judgments and response times did not change significantly (with one exception), but confidence increased for some of the judgments; this result suggests that additional time may simply boost confidence in judgments.
    當暴露時間從500毫秒增加到1000毫秒時,特徵判斷和響應時間沒有顯著變化(有一個例外),但一些判斷的信心增加;這一結果表明,額外的時間可能會增加對判斷的信心。
  • However, increased exposure time led to more differentiated person impressions.
    但是,曝光時間的增加會導致更多差異化的人物印象。
  • “The link between facial features and character may be tenuous at best, but that doesn’t stop our minds from sizing other people up at a glance,” said Todorov, an assistant professor of psychology. “We decide very quickly whether a person possesses many of the traits we feel are important, such as likeability and competence, even though we have not exchanged a single word with them. It appears that we are hard-wired to draw these inferences in a fast, unreflective way.”
    “面部特徵和個性之間的聯繫最多可能是微不足道的,但這並不能阻止我們的思維一目了然地評估其他人,”心理學助理教授Todorov說。 “我們很快就會決定一個人是否擁有我們認為重要的許多特徵,例如受歡迎和能力,即使我們沒有與他們交談過。 我們似乎天生以快速、不反思的方式得出這些推論。“
  • “The link between facial features and character may be tenuous at best, but that doesn’t stop our minds from sizing other people up at a glance,” said Todorov, an assistant professor of psychology. “We decide very quickly whether a person possesses many of the traits we feel are important, such as likeability and competence, even though we have not exchanged a single word with them. It appears that we are hard-wired to draw these inferences in a fast, unreflective way.”
    “面部特徵和個性之間的聯繫最多可能是微不足道的,但這並不能阻止我們的思維一目了然地評估其他人,”心理學助理教授Todorov說。 “我們很快就會決定一個人是否擁有我們認為重要的許多特徵,例如受歡迎和能力,即使我們沒有與他們交談過。 我們似乎天生以快速、不反思的方式得出這些推論。“
  • Participants.
    參與者。
    A total of 245 undergraduate students from Princeton University participated in the studies either for payment or partial course credit. One-hundred and twenty eight participated in a preliminary study to obtain measures of trait inferences from facial appearance in the absence of time constraints.
    共有245名來自普林斯頓大學的本科生參加了這項研究,有些學生是因為收到經費有些是這屬於部分課程學分。128名參加了一項初步研究,以便在沒有時間限制的情況下從面部外觀中獲得特徵推斷的測量。
  • One-hundred and seventeen participated in the 5 experimental studies.
    117人參加了5項實驗研究。
    Twenty participants were asked to make attractiveness judgments, 25 to make liking judgments, 23 to make competence judgments, 24 to make trustworthiness judgments, and 25 to make aggressiveness judgments.
    其中20個參與者被要求做出吸引力判斷、25個做出判斷力判斷、23個做出判斷力判斷、24個做出可信度判斷、25個做出侵略性判斷。
  • Stimuli. 刺激物。
    In all studies, we used a database of photographs of 70 amateur actors, 35 females and 35 males, between 20 and 30 years of age (Lundqvist, Flykt, &amp; Öhman, 1998).
    在所有研究中,我們使用了70名業餘演員,35名女性和35名男性,20至30歲之間的照片數據庫(Lundqvist,Flykt,&Öhman,1998)。
    Lundqvist, D., Flykt, A., &amp; Öhman, A. (1998). The Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces—KDEF (CD ROM). Stockholm: Karolinska Institute, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychology Section.
    Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces (KDEF)
    4900 images of human facial expressions of emotion
  • In the pictures, all actors wore gray T-shirts and there were no beards, mustaches, earrings or eyeglasses, or visible make-up.
    在圖片中,所有演員都穿著灰色T卹,沒有鬍鬚,鬍鬚,耳環或者眼鏡或可見的化妝品。
    We used frontal head-shot photographs of individuals with neutral expressions.
    我們使用了具有中性表達的個體的正面頭部照片。
    Of the 70 photographs, two photographs of males were excluded due to poor quality.
    For the experiments, we also excluded 2 photographs of females in order to have an equal number of male and female photographs.
    在70張照片中,由於質量太差,兩張男性照片被排除在外。
    對於實驗,我們還排除了2張女性照片,以便獲得相同數量的男性和女性照片。
  • To obtain reliable measures of trait inferences from facial appearance, participants in the preliminary study were presented with the photographs and asked to make a series of trait judgments.
    為了從面部外觀獲得可靠的特徵推斷測量,初步研究的參與者被提供照片並被要求做出一系列特質判斷。
    They were asked to judge the degree to which the person in the picture was attractive, likable, competent, honest/trustworthy, aggressive, extraverted/enthusiastic, sympathetic/warm, dependable/self-disciplined, calm/emotionally stable, open to new experience/complex, and ambitious.
    他們被要求判斷照片中的人是否具有吸引力、可愛、稱職、誠實/值得信賴、具有攻擊性、外向/熱情、同情/熱情、可靠/自律、冷靜/情緒穩定、對新體驗開放的程度 /複雜、雄心勃勃。
    The judgments on the first 5 dimensions provided the criterion judgments for the experimental studies.
    前5個維度的判斷為實驗研究提供了標準判斷。
  • To obtain reliable measures of trait inferences from facial appearance, participants in the preliminary study were presented with the photographs and asked to make a series of trait judgments.
    為了從面部外觀獲得可靠的特徵推斷測量,初步研究的參與者被提供照片並被要求做出一系列特質判斷。
    They were asked to judge the degree to which the person in the picture was attractive, likable, competent, honest/trustworthy, aggressive, extraverted/enthusiastic, sympathetic/warm, dependable/self-disciplined, calm/emotionally stable, open to new experience/complex, and ambitious.
    他們被要求判斷照片中的人是否具有吸引力、可愛、稱職、誠實/值得信賴、具有攻擊性、外向/熱情、同情/熱情、可靠/自律、冷靜/情緒穩定、對新體驗開放的程度 /複雜、雄心勃勃。
    The judgments on the first 5 dimensions provided the criterion judgments for the experimental studies.
    前5個維度的判斷為實驗研究提供了標準判斷。
  • Each face was presented on a separate questionnaire page and the order of the trait judgments was fixed.
    每個面孔都在一個單獨的問卷頁面上呈現,並且特徵判斷的順序是固定的。
    All judgments were made on a 9-point scale, ranging from 1 (Not at all) to 9 (Extremely).
    The photographs were randomly divided into three groups, each one containing the same number of males and females, and for each group of photographs, we generated 2 random orders.
    所有的判斷都是以9分制,從1(完全不)到9分(極端)。
    將照片隨機分成三組,每組包含相同數量的男性和女性,並且對於每組照片,我們產生2個隨機順序。
    Participants were randomly assigned to one of the 6 sets of photographs (3 groups X 2 orders) and completed the trait judgment task at their own pace.
    參與者被隨機分配到6組照片中的一組(3組X 2順序),並按照自己的進度完成特質判斷任務。
  • Participants were randomly assigned to one of the 6 sets of photographs (3 groups X 2 orders) and completed the trait judgment task at their own pace.
    參與者被隨機分配到6組照片中的一組(3組X 2順序),並按照自己的進度完成特質判斷任務。
    Participants were randomly assigned to one of the 6 sets of photographs (3 groups X 2 orders) and completed the trait judgment task at their own pace.
    參與者被隨機分配到6組照片中的一組(3組X 2順序),並按照自己的進度完成特質判斷任務。
    Each photograph was rated by 42 to 43 participants. The trait judgments were highly reliable.
    每張照片由42至43名參與者評分。 特質判斷非常可靠。
  • For the three groups of photographs, the corresponding Cronbach alphas were .97, .96, and .95 for attractiveness; .94, .91, and .89 for likeability; .92, .92, and .92 for trustworthiness; .85, .91, and .96 for competence; and .87, .75, and .89 for aggressiveness.
    對於三組照片,相應的Cronbach alphas的吸引力分別為.97,.96和.95; .94,.91和.89的可愛性; .92,.92和.92的可信度; 能力為.85,.91和.96; 和.87,.75和.89的侵略性。
  • The mean trait judgments across participants served as the criterion judgments for the
    experiments. 參與者的平均特質判斷作為實驗的標準判斷。
    To the extent that limited time exposure to faces is sufficient for people to form trait impressions, the experimental judgments made under time constraints should correlate with the criterion judgments.
    如果面對有限的時間暴露足以讓人們形成特質印象,那麼在時間限制下做出的實驗判斷應該與標準判斷相關聯。
    It should be noted that this procedure underestimates the true correlation between judgments made in the absence of time constraints and time constrained judgments for two reasons: the judgments were measured on different scales (see below) and under different conditions (paper-and-pencil vs. computer controlled presentation).
    應該指出的是,這個程序低估了在沒有時間限制的情況下作出的判斷與時間限制判斷之間的真實相關性,原因有兩個:判斷是在不同的尺度(見下文)和不同條件下測量的(紙與鉛對比) 計算機控制的演示文稿)。
    However, to the extent that time constrained judgments correlate with the criterion judgments, these correlations can be attributed to the perception of the faces per se independent of the measurement procedures.
    然而,在時間約束判斷與標準判斷相關的程度上,這些相關性可歸因於面部本身的感知,而與測量程序無關。
  • It should be noted that this procedure underestimates the true correlation between judgments made in the absence of time constraints and time constrained judgments for two reasons: the judgments were measured on different scales (see below) and under different conditions (paper-and-pencil vs. computer controlled presentation).
    應該指出的是,這個程序低估了在沒有時間限制的情況下作出的判斷與時間限制判斷之間的真實相關性,原因有兩個:判斷是在不同的尺度(見下文)和不同條件下測量的(紙與鉛對比) 計算機控制的演示文稿)。
    However, to the extent that time constrained judgments correlate with the criterion judgments, these correlations can be attributed to the perception of the faces per se independent of the measurement procedures.
    然而,在時間約束判斷與標準判斷相關的程度上,這些相關性可歸因於面部本身的感知,而與測量程序無關。
  • Procedures. 流程。
    All five studies used the same procedures. Participants were told that this was a study about first impressions and that they should make their decisions as quickly as possible.
    The instructions emphasized that photographs would be presented for very brief periods of time and that we, the experimenters, were primarily interested in the first impression, or the gut feeling involved.
    The experiment started with 3 practice trials in order to familiarize participants with the task.
    所有五項研究都使用相同的程序。 與會者被告知,這是一項關於第一印象的研究,他們應該盡快做出決定。
    指示強調照片將在非常短的時間內呈現,而我們實驗者主要對第一印像或所涉及的直覺感興趣。
    該實驗從3個實踐試驗開始,以使參與者熟悉該任務。
  • For the experimental trials, the 66 faces (33 males and 33 females) were randomly divided into 3 sets of 22 such that each group had the same number of male and female faces.
    對於實驗性試驗,66個面孔(33個男性和33個女性)是隨機分為3組,每組22個,每組有相同數量的男性和女性面孔。
    Using these 3 sets of faces, we created 3 experimental versions by counterbalancing the sets with the exposure time (100, 500, or 1000 ms).
    使用這3組面,我們通過平衡曝光時間(100、500或1000毫秒)來創建3個實驗版本。
  • For example, each face from the first set of faces was presented for 100 ms in version 1, for 500 ms in version 2, and for 1000 ms in version 3.
    Participants were randomly assigned to one of the 3 experimental versions. For each participant, 22 of the faces were presented for 100 ms, 22 for 500 ms, and 22 for 1000 ms.
    Because we were interested in first impressions, each face was presented only once. Thus, the total number of trials was 66. The order of trials was randomized for each participant by the computer, i.e. the levels of exposure time were randomly intermixed.
    例如,第一組面中的每個面在版本1中呈現100毫秒,在版本2中呈現500毫秒,在版本3中呈現1000毫秒。
    參與者被隨機分配到3個實驗版本中的一個。 對於每個參與者,22個面部呈現100毫秒,22個呈現500毫秒,22個呈現1000毫秒。
    因為我們對第一印象感興趣,所以每張臉只出現一次。 因此,試驗總數為66.試驗順序由計算機隨機分配給每個參與者,即暴露時間水平隨機混合。
  • Each trial started with a fixation point (+) presented for 500 ms at the center of the screen. Then a photograph was presented either for 100 ms, 500 ms, or 1000 ms.
    每次試驗都以固定點(+)開始,出現在屏幕中央顯示500毫秒。然後呈現照片分別為100毫秒、500毫秒或1000毫秒。
    Immediately after the presentation, a question appeared in the location of the photograph (e.g., “Is this person competent?”).
    在演示之後,在照片的位置出現了一個問題(例如,“這個人是否具有能力?”)。
    The only difference between the studies was the trait judgment that participants were asked to make.
    研究之間的唯一區別是參與者被要求做出的特質判斷。
    Participants responded by pressing the “/” (backslash) key on the keyboard which was labeled “yes” or by pressing the “Z” key on the keyboard which was labeled “no.”
    參與者通過按下鍵盤上標有“是”的“/”(反斜杠)鍵或按鍵盤上標有“否”的“Z”鍵來響應。
    Given the limited time exposure, we decided to use a dichotomous trait judgment because this judgment is simpler than a continuous trait judgment.
    鑑於時間有限,我們決定使用二分法特質判斷,因為這種判斷比連續特質判斷更簡單。
    Further, in the correlation analyses (see below) the criterion judgments were correlated with the proportions or probability of trait attributions across participants (i.e., a continuous score).
    此外,在相關性分析(見下文)中,標準判斷與參與者之間的性狀歸因的比例或概率相關(即,連續得分)。
    Following this “yes/no” judgment, the next screen asked participants to rate how confident they were in their judgment. This judgment was made on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (least confident) to 7 (most confident).
    在這個“是/否”判斷之後,下一個屏幕要求參與者評估他們對自己的判斷有多自信。
    Participants responded by using the number keys at the top of the keyboard. The inter-trial interval was 1500 ms.
    該判斷以7分製作出,範圍從1(最不自信)到7(最自信)。參與者使用鍵盤頂部的數字鍵進行響應。審判間隔為1500毫秒。
  • Further, in the correlation analyses (see below) the criterion judgments were correlated with the proportions or probability of trait attributions across participants (i.e., a continuous score).
    此外,在相關性分析(見下文)中,標準判斷與參與者之間的性狀歸因的比例或概率相關(即,連續得分)。
    Following this “yes/no” judgment, the next screen asked participants to rate how confident they were in their judgment. This judgment was made on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (least confident) to 7 (most confident).
    在這個“是/否”判斷之後,下一個屏幕要求參與者評估他們對自己的判斷有多自信。
    Participants responded by using the number keys at the top of the keyboard. The inter-trial interval was 1500 ms.
    該判斷以7分製作出,範圍從1(最不自信)到7(最自信)。參與者使用鍵盤頂部的數字鍵進行響應。審判間隔為1500毫秒。
  • To test whether judgments made under limited time exposure correlate with judgments made in the absence of time constraints, we correlated the proportions of trait attributions for each face (at each time exposure) with the mean criterion judgments for the face.
    為了測試在有限時間暴露下作出的判斷是否與在沒有時間限制的情況下做出的判斷相關,我們將每個面部(每次暴露時)的特徵歸因的比例與面部的平均標準判斷相關聯。
    Further, for each experiment, analyses were performed on the proportions of trait attributions, the response times for the trait judgments, and the mean confidence in judgments as a function of exposure time.
    此外,對於每個實驗,對性狀歸因的比例,性狀判斷的響應時間以及作為暴露時間的函數的判斷的平均置信度進行分析。
    We removed response time outliers by deleting response times which were 3 standard deviations above the participant’s mean.
    In all studies, this affected less than 2% of the trials.
    我們通過刪除比參與者平均值高3個標準偏差的響應時間來刪除響應時間異常值。
    在所有研究中,這影響了不到2%的試驗。
  • Results and Discussion
    結果和討論
  • Correlation of time-constrained with time-unconstrained judgments.
    時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性。
    As shown in Table 1, even after 100 ms exposure to a face, trait judgments were highly correlated with judgments made in the absence of time constraints.
    如表1所示,即使在暴露於面部100ms後,性狀判斷與在沒有時間限制的情況下做出的判斷高度相關。
    Although the correlations for all judgments but attractiveness increased with the increase in exposure from 100 to 1000 ms, none of these changes was significant.
    雖然所有判斷的相關性但吸引力隨著暴露從100毫秒增加到1000毫秒而增加,但這些變化都不顯著。
    We compared the correlations at 100 and 500 ms, at 500 and 1000 ms, and at 100 and 1000 ms, using the Williams’s test for dependent correlations (Steiger, 1980).
    我們使用Williams的依賴相關性檢驗(Steiger,1980)比較了100和500毫秒,500和1000毫秒,以及100和1000毫秒的相關性。
    None of these tests reached significance.
    這些測試都沒有達到重要性。
  • Correlation of time-constrained with time-unconstrained judgments.
    時間限制與時間無限制判斷的相關性。
    As shown in Table 1, even after 100 ms exposure to a face, trait judgments were highly correlated with judgments made in the absence of time constraints.
    如表1所示,即使在暴露於面部100ms後,性狀判斷與在沒有時間限制的情況下做出的判斷高度相關。
    Although the correlations for all judgments but attractiveness increased with the increase in exposure from 100 to 1000 ms, none of these changes was significant.
    雖然所有判斷的相關性但吸引力隨著暴露從100毫秒增加到1000毫秒而增加,但這些變化都不顯著。
    We compared the correlations at 100 and 500 ms, at 500 and 1000 ms, and at 100 and 1000 ms, using the Williams’s test for dependent correlations (Steiger, 1980).
    我們使用Williams的依賴相關性檢驗(Steiger,1980)比較了100和500毫秒,500和1000毫秒,以及100和1000毫秒的相關性。
    None of these tests reached significance.
    這些測試都沒有達到重要性。
  • We expected that we should find the highest correlation for judgments of attractiveness.
    我們期望我們應該能找到吸引力判斷具有最高的相關性。
    Attractiveness, after all, is a property of facial appearance.
    畢竟,吸引力是面部外觀的屬性。
    However, the correlations for judgments of trustworthiness were slightly higher.
    但是,可信度判斷的相關性略高。
    We also conducted partial correlation analyses, controlling for judgments of attractiveness, to rule out the possibility that judgments made after limited time exposure simply reflect an attractiveness halo effect.
    我們還進行了偏相關分析,控制了吸引力的判斷,排除了在有限時間曝光後做出的判斷只是反映了吸引力光環效應的可能性。
    Although the correlations were reduced (Table 1), they remained highly reliable for all judgments.
    雖然相關性降低(表1),但它們對所有判斷仍然高度可靠。
    Comparing the difference between the zero-order and the partial correlations at the different levels of time exposure suggests that the effect of attractiveness on trait judgments was reduced with increased exposure to the faces.
    比較不同時間曝光水平下的零級和部分相關性之間的差異表明,吸引力對特質判斷的影響隨著面部暴露的增加而減少。
    The partial correlations increased with the increased time exposure to faces, but as in the case of the zero-order correlations none of the changes reached significance.
    部分相關性隨著面部暴露時間的增加而增加,但是在零階相關的情況下,沒有一個變化達到顯著性。
  • We expected that we should find the highest correlation for judgments of attractiveness.
    我們期望我們應該能找到吸引力判斷具有最高的相關性。
    Attractiveness, after all, is a property of facial appearance.
    畢竟,吸引力是面部外觀的屬性。
    However, the correlations for judgments of trustworthiness were slightly higher.
    但是,可信度判斷的相關性略高。
    We also conducted partial correlation analyses, controlling for judgments of attractiveness, to rule out the possibility that judgments made after limited time exposure simply reflect an attractiveness halo effect.
    我們還進行了偏相關分析,控制了吸引力的判斷,排除了在有限時間曝光後做出的判斷只是反映了吸引力光環效應的可能性。
    Although the correlations were reduced (Table 1), they remained highly reliable for all judgments.
    雖然相關性降低(表1),但它們對所有判斷仍然高度可靠。
    Comparing the difference between the zero-order and the partial correlations at the different levels of time exposure suggests that the effect of attractiveness on trait judgments was reduced with increased exposure to the faces.
    比較不同時間曝光水平下的零級和部分相關性之間的差異表明,吸引力對特質判斷的影響隨著面部暴露的增加而減少。
    The partial correlations increased with the increased time exposure to faces, but as in the case of the zero-order correlations none of the changes reached significance.
    部分相關性隨著面部暴露時間的增加而增加,但是在零階相關的情況下,沒有一個變化達到顯著性。
  • To estimate whether the explained variance in judgments made in the absence of time constraints varies as a function of time exposure, we conducted 3 regression analyses (for each level of time exposure) in which time unconstrained judgments (5 types of judgment X 66 faces) were regressed on time constrained judgments and dummy variables controlling for the type of judgments (4) and the face stimuli (65).
    為了估計在沒有時間限制的情況下所做的判斷中所解釋的方差是否隨著時間暴露的變化而變化,我們進行了3次回歸分析(針對每個時間暴露水平),其中時間不受約束的判斷(5種類型的判斷X 66面臨)在時間約束的判斷和控制判斷類型(4)和麵部刺激(65)的虛擬變量上進行回歸。
  • As shown in Fig. 1, with the increase in exposure from 100 to 1000 ms, the accounted variance increased with 2.2% only.
    如圖1所示,隨著曝光量從100毫秒增加到1000毫秒,計算方差僅增加2.2%。
  • Although we did not have conditions in which participants were exposed to faces for more than 1000 ms, it is reasonable to assume that the explained variance could not be improved with longer exposures.
    雖然我們沒有條件讓參與者暴露於面部的時間超過1000毫秒,但可以合理地假設通過較長時間曝光無法改善所解釋的方差。
    Assuming that the average reliability of the judgments is .90, the ceiling of the explained variance should be on average 81.0%.
    假設判斷的平均可靠性為.90,則解釋方差的上限應平均為81.0%。
    Given that the procedures for collecting the time constrained judgments and the time unconstrained (criterion) judgments were different and that these differences can increase the error variance, the accounted variance at 1000 ms exposure (74.9%) seems very close to the possible ceiling.
    鑑於收集時間約束判斷的程序和時間無約束(標準)判斷的程序不同,並且這些差異可以增加誤差方差,1000毫秒暴露時的計算方差(74.9%)似乎非常接近可能的上限。
  • Although we did not have conditions in which participants were exposed to faces for more than 1000 ms, it is reasonable to assume that the explained variance could not be improved with longer exposures.
    雖然我們沒有條件讓參與者暴露於面部的時間超過1000毫秒,但可以合理地假設通過較長時間曝光無法改善所解釋的方差。
    Assuming that the average reliability of the judgments is .90, the ceiling of the explained variance should be on average 81.0%.
    假設判斷的平均可靠性為.90,則解釋方差的上限應平均為81.0%。
    Given that the procedures for collecting the time constrained judgments and the time unconstrained (criterion) judgments were different and that these differences can increase the error variance, the accounted variance at 1000 ms exposure (74.9%) seems very close to the possible ceiling.
    鑑於收集時間約束判斷的程序和時間無約束(標準)判斷的程序不同,並且這些差異可以增加誤差方差,1000毫秒暴露時的計算方差(74.9%)似乎非常接近可能的上限。
  • Analysis within experiments.
    實驗分析。
    All judgments showed the same pattern as a function of time exposure.
    所有判斷都顯示出與時間曝光相同的模式。
  • As shown in Fig. 2a, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, judgments become more negative (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .91, d &amp;gt; 0.85).
    如Fig. 2a所示,從100到500毫秒的暴露增加,判斷變得更負(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .91,d&amp;gt; 0.85)。
    Faces were perceived as less attractive, less likeable, less trustworthy, less competent, and more aggressive.
    面孔被認為不那麼有吸引力,不太可愛,不太可靠,缺乏能力,更具攻擊性。
    The mean level of judgments stabilized at 500 ms exposure and no significant changes were observed after that.
    平均判斷水平穩定在500毫秒暴露,之後沒有觀察到顯著變化。
    As shown in Fig. 2b, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, response times for all five judgments decreased (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.91).
    如圖2b所示,隨著暴露時間從100毫秒增加到500毫秒,所有五個判斷的響應時間都減少了(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93,d&amp;gt; 0.91)。
    As with the trait judgments, little change was observed with the increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms. Although response times kept decreasing, the only significant effect was for response times for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 4.14, p-rep = .99, d = 1.73.
    與特徵判斷一樣,隨著暴露時間從500毫秒增加到1000毫秒,幾乎沒有變化。 雖然響應時間不斷減少,但唯一顯著的影響是可信度判斷的響應時間,t(23)= 4.14,p-rep = .99,d = 1.73。
  • As shown in Fig. 2a, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, judgments become more negative (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .91, d &amp;gt; 0.85).
    如Fig. 2a所示,從100到500毫秒的暴露增加,判斷變得更負(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .91,d&amp;gt; 0.85)。
    Faces were perceived as less attractive, less likeable, less trustworthy, less competent, and more aggressive.
    面孔被認為不那麼有吸引力,不太可愛,不太可靠,缺乏能力,更具攻擊性。
    The mean level of judgments stabilized at 500 ms exposure and no significant changes were observed after that.
    平均判斷水平穩定在500毫秒暴露,之後沒有觀察到顯著變化。
    As shown in Fig. 2b, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, response times for all five judgments decreased (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.91).
    如圖2b所示,隨著暴露時間從100毫秒增加到500毫秒,所有五個判斷的響應時間都減少了(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93,d&amp;gt; 0.91)。
    As with the trait judgments, little change was observed with the increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms. Although response times kept decreasing, the only significant effect was for response times for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 4.14, p-rep = .99, d = 1.73.
    與特徵判斷一樣,隨著暴露時間從500毫秒增加到1000毫秒,幾乎沒有變化。 雖然響應時間不斷減少,但唯一顯著的影響是可信度判斷的響應時間,t(23)= 4.14,p-rep = .99,d = 1.73。
  • As shown in Fig. 2a, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, judgments become more negative (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .91, d &amp;gt; 0.85).
    如Fig. 2a所示,從100到500毫秒的暴露增加,判斷變得更負(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .91,d&amp;gt; 0.85)。
    Faces were perceived as less attractive, less likeable, less trustworthy, less competent, and more aggressive.
    面孔被認為不那麼有吸引力,不太可愛,不太可靠,缺乏能力,更具攻擊性。
    The mean level of judgments stabilized at 500 ms exposure and no significant changes were observed after that.
    平均判斷水平穩定在500毫秒暴露,之後沒有觀察到顯著變化。
  • As shown in Fig. 2b, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, response times for all five judgments decreased (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.91).
    如Fig. 2b所示,隨著暴露時間從100毫秒增加到500毫秒,所有五個判斷的響應時間都減少了(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93,d&amp;gt; 0.91)。
    As with the trait judgments, little change was observed with the increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms. Although response times kept decreasing, the only significant effect was for response times for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 4.14, p-rep = .99, d = 1.73.
    與特徵判斷一樣,隨著暴露時間從500毫秒增加到1000毫秒,幾乎沒有變化。 雖然響應時間不斷減少,但唯一顯著的影響是可信度判斷的響應時間,t(23)= 4.14,p-rep = .99,d = 1.73。
  • As shown in Fig. 2b, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, response times for all five judgments decreased (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.91).
    如Fig. 2b所示,隨著暴露時間從100毫秒增加到500毫秒,所有五個判斷的響應時間都減少了(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93,d&amp;gt; 0.91)。
    As with the trait judgments, little change was observed with the increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms.
    與特徵判斷一樣,隨著暴露時間從500毫秒增加到1000毫秒,幾乎沒有變化。
    Although response times kept decreasing, the only significant effect was for response times for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 4.14, p-rep = .99, d = 1.73.
    雖然響應時間不斷減少,但唯一顯著的影響是可信度判斷的響應時間,t(23)= 4.14,p-rep = .99,d = 1.73。
  • As shown in Fig. 2b, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, response times for all five judgments decreased (for all judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.91).
    如Fig. 2b所示,隨著暴露時間從100毫秒增加到500毫秒,所有五個判斷的響應時間都減少了(對於所有判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93,d&amp;gt; 0.91)。
    As with the trait judgments, little change was observed with the increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms.
    與特徵判斷一樣,隨著暴露時間從500毫秒增加到1000毫秒,幾乎沒有變化。
    Although response times kept decreasing, the only significant effect was for response times for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 4.14, p-rep = .99, d = 1.73.
    雖然響應時間不斷減少,但唯一顯著的影響是可信度判斷的響應時間,t(23)= 4.14,p-rep = .99,d = 1.73。
  • As shown in Fig. 2c, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, confidence in all five judgments increased.
    如Fig. 2c所示,隨著100到500毫秒的曝光增加,對所有五個判斷的置信度增加。
    The only effect that did not reach significance was for judgments of aggressiveness, t(24) = 1.47, p-rep = .84, d = 0.60 (for the other four judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.94).
    With increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms, confidence in judgments kept increasing with the exception of judgments of competence.
    Although this increase in confidence was significant only for attractiveness judgments, t(19) = 2.59, p-rep = .95, d = 1.19, and approached significance for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 1.94, p-rep = .90, d = 0.81, the combined p-value from all 5 studies was .028 (z = 2.20), and the average effect size d was .41.
    沒有達到顯著性的唯一影響是對侵略性的判斷,t(24)= 1.47,p-rep = .84,d = 0.60(對於其他四個判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93, d&amp;gt; 0.94)。 隨著能力判斷的增加,從500到1000毫秒的曝光率增加,對判斷的信心不斷提高。 雖然這種信心的增加僅對吸引力判斷有意義,但t(19)= 2.59,p-rep = .95,d = 1.19,並且接近可信度判斷的顯著性,t(23)= 1.94,p-rep = .90 ,d = 0.81,來自所有5項研究的組合p值為0.028(z = 2.20),平均效應大小d為0.41。
  • As shown in Fig. 2c, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, confidence in all five judgments increased.
    如Fig. 2c所示,隨著100到500毫秒的曝光增加,對所有五個判斷的置信度增加。
    The only effect that did not reach significance was for judgments of aggressiveness, t(24) = 1.47, p-rep = .84, d = 0.60 (for the other four judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.94).
    沒有達到顯著性的唯一影響是對侵略性的判斷,t(24)= 1.47,p-rep = .84,d = 0.60(對於其他四個判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93, d&amp;gt; 0.94)。
    With increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms, confidence in judgments kept increasing with the exception of judgments of competence.
    Although this increase in confidence was significant only for attractiveness judgments, t(19) = 2.59, p-rep = .95, d = 1.19, and approached significance for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 1.94, p-rep = .90, d = 0.81, the combined p-value from all 5 studies was .028 (z = 2.20), and the average effect size d was .41.
    隨著能力判斷的增加,從500到1000毫秒的曝光率增加,對判斷的信心不斷提高。 雖然這種信心的增加僅對吸引力判斷有意義,但t(19)= 2.59,p-rep = .95,d = 1.19,並且接近可信度判斷的顯著性,t(23)= 1.94,p-rep = .90 ,d = 0.81,來自所有5項研究的組合p值為0.028(z = 2.20),平均效應大小d為0.41。
  • As shown in Fig. 2c, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, confidence in all five judgments increased.
    如Fig. 2c所示,隨著100到500毫秒的曝光增加,對所有五個判斷的置信度增加。
    The only effect that did not reach significance was for judgments of aggressiveness, t(24) = 1.47, p-rep = .84, d = 0.60 (for the other four judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.94).
    沒有達到顯著性的唯一影響是對侵略性的判斷,t(24)= 1.47,p-rep = .84,d = 0.60(對於其他四個判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93, d&amp;gt; 0.94)。
    With increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms, confidence in judgments kept increasing with the exception of judgments of competence.
    隨著能力判斷的增加,從500到1000毫秒的曝光率增加,對判斷的信心不斷提高。
    Although this increase in confidence was significant only for attractiveness judgments, t(19) = 2.59, p-rep = .95, d = 1.19, and approached significance for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 1.94, p-rep = .90, d = 0.81, the combined p-value from all 5 studies was .028 (z = 2.20), and the average effect size d was .41.
    雖然這種信心的增加僅對吸引力判斷有意義,但t(19)= 2.59,p-rep = .95,d = 1.19,並且接近可信度判斷的顯著性,t(23)= 1.94,p-rep = .90 ,d = 0.81,來自所有5項研究的組合p值為0.028(z = 2.20),平均效應大小d為0.41。
  • As shown in Fig. 2c, with increased exposure from 100 to 500 ms, confidence in all five judgments increased.
    如Fig. 2c所示,隨著100到500毫秒的曝光增加,對所有五個判斷的置信度增加。
    The only effect that did not reach significance was for judgments of aggressiveness, t(24) = 1.47, p-rep = .84, d = 0.60 (for the other four judgments, p &amp;lt; .05, p-rep &amp;gt; .93, d &amp;gt; 0.94).
    沒有達到顯著性的唯一影響是對侵略性的判斷,t(24)= 1.47,p-rep = .84,d = 0.60(對於其他四個判斷,p &amp;lt;.05,p-rep&amp;gt; .93, d&amp;gt; 0.94)。
    With increased exposure from 500 to 1000 ms, confidence in judgments kept increasing with the exception of judgments of competence.
    隨著能力判斷的增加,從500到1000毫秒的曝光率增加,對判斷的信心不斷提高。
    Although this increase in confidence was significant only for attractiveness judgments, t(19) = 2.59, p-rep = .95, d = 1.19, and approached significance for trustworthiness judgments, t(23) = 1.94, p-rep = .90, d = 0.81, the combined p-value from all 5 studies was .028 (z = 2.20), and the average effect size d was .41.
    雖然這種信心的增加僅對吸引力判斷有意義,但t(19)= 2.59,p-rep = .95,d = 1.19,並且接近可信度判斷的顯著性,t(23)= 1.94,p-rep = .90 ,d = 0.81,來自所有5項研究的組合p值為0.028(z = 2.20),平均效應大小d為0.41。
  • Relations between trait inferences.
    特質推理之間的關係。
    We conducted principal components analyses with Varimax rotation to test whether person impressions become more differentiated as a function of increased time exposure to faces.
    我們使用Varimax旋轉進行了主成分分析,以測試人物印像是否因面部時間增加而變得更加分化。
  • As shown in Table 2, the analyses for both 100 and 500 ms exposure judgments identified only 1 factor, suggesting a coarse positive/ negative discrimination.
    如Table 2所示,100和500毫秒暴露判斷的分析僅確定了1個因子,表明粗略的正/負歧視。
    All positive traits had high positive loadings on the factor and aggressiveness had a high negative loading.
    This factor accounted for 62.5% of the variance in judgments made after 100 ms exposure and 58.3% of the variance in judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    所有陽性特徵都具有較高的正因負荷,而且攻擊性具有較高的負負荷。該因子佔100毫秒暴露後判斷的方差的62.5%,以及在500毫秒暴露後作出的判斷方差的58.3%。解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • As shown in Table 2, the analyses for both 100 and 500 ms exposure judgments identified only 1 factor, suggesting a coarse positive/ negative discrimination.
    如Table 2所示,100和500毫秒暴露判斷的分析僅確定了1個因子,表明粗略的正/負歧視。
    All positive traits had high positive loadings on the factor and aggressiveness had a high negative loading.
    所有正向特徵都具有較高的正向負荷,而且攻擊性具有較高的負向負荷。
    This factor accounted for 62.5% of the variance in judgments made after 100 ms exposure and 58.3% of the variance in judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    該因子佔100毫秒暴露後判斷的方差的62.5%,以及在500毫秒暴露後作出的判斷方差的58.3%。
    The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • The difference in the explained variance suggests that judgments made after 100 ms exposure were more correlated than judgments made after 500 ms exposure.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。
    In contrast to the analysis for 100 and 500 ms, the analysis for 1000 ms exposure identified two orthogonal factors, suggesting a more differentiated person impression.
    解釋的方差的差異表明,暴露100毫秒後做出的判斷與500毫秒暴露後的判斷相關性更高。與100和500毫秒的分析相反,1000毫秒暴露的分析確定了兩個正交因子,表明更加不同的人印象。
    The first factor accounted for 50.5% of the variance, and the second accounted for 27.8%.
    第一個因素佔方差的50.5%,第二個因素佔27.8%。
    The first factor comprised all positive traits and the second factor contrasted aggressiveness and trustworthiness.
    第一個因素包括所有積極特徵,第二個因素包括侵略性和可信度。
    Attractiveness and competence were practically unrelated to aggressiveness in this factor solution.
    在這個因素解決方案中,吸引力和能力實際上與侵略性無關。
  • As minimal time exposure as a tenth of a second is sufficient for people to make a specific trait inference from facial appearance.
    因為十分之一秒的最小時間曝光足以讓人們從面部外觀做出特定的特徵推斷。
     
    Additional time increases confidence in judgments and allows for more differentiated trait impressions.
    額外的時間增加了對判斷的信心,並允許更多差異化的特質印象。
     
    However, the judgments are already anchored on the initial inference.
    然而,判斷已經基於最初的推論。
     
    Coupled with findings suggesting that inferences from facial appearance may be uncontrollable (Hassin &amp; Trope, 2000, Exp. 4), our findings suggest that trait inferences from facial appearance can be characterized as fast, intuitive, system 1 processes. Lavater might have been right about one thing: “whether they are or are not sensible of it, all men [and women] are daily influenced by physiognomy” (1880, p. 9).
    結合暗示面部外觀的推論可能無法控制(Hassin&Trope,2000,Exp.4),我們的研究結果表明,面部外觀的特徵推斷可以表徵為快速,直觀的系統1過程。 Lavater可能對一件事情是正確的:“無論他們是否理解它,所有男性[和女性]每天都會受到地貌的影響”(1880,第9頁)。
     
    The effortless nature of trait inferences from facial appearance can be a general characteristic of inferences about other people (e.g., Todorov &amp; Uleman, 2003; Uleman, Blader, &amp; Todorov, 2005).
    面部外觀的特徵推斷的毫不費力的性質可以是關於其他人的推論的一般特徵(例如,Todorov和Uleman,2003; Uleman,Blader,&Todorov,2005)。
     
    Person impressions are created effortlessly on-line from minimal information.
     
     
     
    通過最少的信息在線輕鬆創建人物印象。
  •  
    Coupled with findings suggesting that inferences from facial appearance may be uncontrollable (Hassin &amp; Trope, 2000, Exp. 4), our findings suggest that trait inferences from facial appearance can be characterized as fast, intuitive, system 1 processes.
    結合暗示面部外觀的推論可能無法控制(Hassin&Trope,2000,Exp.4),我們的研究結果表明,面部外觀的特徵推斷可以表徵為快速,直觀的系統1過程。
    Lavater might have been right about one thing: “whether they are or are not sensible of it, all men [and women] are daily influenced by physiognomy” (1880, p. 9).
    Lavater可能對一件事情是正確的:“無論他們是否理解它,所有男性[和女性]每天都會受到地貌的影響”(1880,第9頁)。
     
    The effortless nature of trait inferences from facial appearance can be a general characteristic of inferences about other people (e.g., Todorov &amp; Uleman, 2003; Uleman, Blader, &amp; Todorov, 2005).
    面部外觀的特徵推斷的毫不費力的性質可以是關於其他人的推論的一般特徵(例如,Todorov和Uleman,2003; Uleman,Blader,&Todorov,2005)。
     
    Person impressions are created effortlessly on-line from minimal information.
     
     
     
    通過最少的信息在線輕鬆創建人物印象。
  •  
    Coupled with findings suggesting that inferences from facial appearance may be uncontrollable (Hassin &amp; Trope, 2000, Exp. 4), our findings suggest that trait inferences from facial appearance can be characterized as fast, intuitive, system 1 processes.
    結合暗示面部外觀的推論可能無法控制(Hassin&Trope,2000,Exp.4),我們的研究結果表明,面部外觀的特徵推斷可以表徵為快速,直觀的系統1過程。
    Lavater might have been right about one thing: “whether they are or are not sensible of it, all men [and women] are daily influenced by physiognomy” (1880, p. 9).
    Lavater可能對一件事情是正確的:“無論他們是否理解它,所有男性[和女性]每天都會受到地貌的影響”(1880,第9頁)。
     
    The effortless nature of trait inferences from facial appearance can be a general characteristic of inferences about other people (e.g., Todorov &amp; Uleman, 2003; Uleman, Blader, &amp; Todorov, 2005).
    面部外觀的特徵推斷的毫不費力的性質可以是關於其他人的推論的一般特徵(例如,Todorov和Uleman,2003; Uleman,Blader,&Todorov,2005)。
     
    Person impressions are created effortlessly on-line from minimal information.
     
     
     
    通過最少的信息在線輕鬆創建人物印象。
  •  
    Coupled with findings suggesting that inferences from facial appearance may be uncontrollable (Hassin &amp; Trope, 2000, Exp. 4), our findings suggest that trait inferences from facial appearance can be characterized as fast, intuitive, system 1 processes.
    結合暗示面部外觀的推論可能無法控制(Hassin&Trope,2000,Exp.4),我們的研究結果表明,面部外觀的特徵推斷可以表徵為快速,直觀的系統1過程。
    Lavater might have been right about one thing: “whether they are or are not sensible of it, all men [and women] are daily influenced by physiognomy” (1880, p. 9).
    Lavater可能對一件事情是正確的:“無論他們是否理解它,所有男性[和女性]每天都會受到地貌的影響”(1880,第9頁)。
     
    The effortless nature of trait inferences from facial appearance can be a general characteristic of inferences about other people (e.g., Todorov &amp; Uleman, 2003; Uleman, Blader, &amp; Todorov, 2005).
    面部外觀的特徵推斷的毫不費力的性質可以是關於其他人的推論的一般特徵(例如,Todorov和Uleman,2003; Uleman,Blader,&Todorov,2005)。
     
    Person impressions are created effortlessly on-line from minimal information.
     
     
     
    通過最少的信息在線輕鬆創建人物印象。
  • Person impressions are created effortlessly on-line from minimal information.
     
     
     
    通過最少的信息在線輕鬆創建人物印象。
  • “What we found was that, if given more time, people’s fundamental judgment about faces did not change,” Todorov said. “Observers simply became more confident in their judgments as the duration lengthened.”
    “我們發現,如果給予更多時間,人們對面孔的基本判斷並沒有改變,”托多羅夫說。 “隨著持續時間的延長,觀察者對他們的判斷只是變得更加自信。”
  • Why the brain makes such snap judgments is not yet entirely clear, Todorov said. However, he often works with a sophisticated technological tool for probing brain activity called a functional magnetic resonance imager (fMRI), and Todorov said some of his general research suggests that the part of the brain that responds directly to fear may be involved in judgments of trustworthiness.
    托多羅夫說,為什麼大腦做出如此快速的判斷尚不完全清楚。 然而,他經常使用一種先進的技術工具探測大腦活動,稱為功能性磁共振成像儀(fMRI),而托多羅夫說,他的一些一般性研究表明大腦中直接對恐懼作出反應的部分可能參與可信性的判斷。
  • Why the brain makes such snap judgments is not yet entirely clear, Todorov said. However, he often works with a sophisticated technological tool for probing brain activity called a functional magnetic resonance imager (fMRI), and Todorov said some of his general research suggests that the part of the brain that responds directly to fear may be involved in judgments of trustworthiness.
    托多羅夫說,為什麼大腦做出如此快速的判斷尚不完全清楚。 然而,他經常使用一種先進的技術工具探測大腦活動,稱為功能性磁共振成像儀(fMRI),而托多羅夫說,他的一些一般性研究表明大腦中直接對恐懼作出反應的部分可能參與可信性的判斷。
  • “The fear response involves the amygdala, a part of the brain that existed in animals for millions of years before the development of the prefrontal cortex, where rational thoughts come from,” he said. “We imagine trust to be a rather sophisticated response, but our observations indicate that trust might be a case of a high-level judgment being made by a low-level brain structure. Perhaps the signal bypasses the cortex altogether.”
    他說:“恐懼反應涉及杏仁核,這是大腦的一部分,在前額葉皮層發育前數百年來存在於動物體內,其中理性思維來源於此。” “我們認為信任是一種相當複雜的反應,但我們的觀察結果表明,信任可能是由低級別大腦結構造成的高層判斷。 也許這個信號完全繞過了皮層。“
  • “The fear response involves the amygdala, a part of the brain that existed in animals for millions of years before the development of the prefrontal cortex, where rational thoughts come from,” he said. “We imagine trust to be a rather sophisticated response, but our observations indicate that trust might be a case of a high-level judgment being made by a low-level brain structure. Perhaps the signal bypasses the cortex altogether.”
    他說:“恐懼反應涉及杏仁核,這是大腦的一部分,在前額葉皮層發育前數百年來存在於動物體內,其中理性思維來源於此。” “我們認為信任是一種相當複雜的反應,但我們的觀察結果表明,信任可能是由低級別大腦結構造成的高層判斷。 也許這個信號完全繞過了皮層。“
  • The research, Todorov said, explores some of the same topics addressed in “Blink,” the recent best-selling book by New York journalist Malcolm Gladwell about the rapid cognition our minds experience when making decisions quickly, especially those based on first impressions made in the “blink” of an eye. Gladwell, who is often described as a type of popular sociologist, has said the impetus for his book was the rapid judgments people made about him because of his long hair.
    Todorov說,這項研究探討了紐約記者Malcolm Gladwell最近暢銷書“Blink”中提到的一些相同的主題,這本書講述了我們的思想在快速做出決策時所經歷的快速認知,特別是那些基於第一印象的眨眼間。 經常被描述為一種流行社會學家的格拉德威爾曾表示,他出書的推動力是人們因對他的長頭髮而做出快速的判斷。
  • “This paper’s results concern specific mechanisms in the mind, while ‘Blink’ makes broader generalizations,” Todorov said. “Gladwell’s basic message is not essentially different from ours, though he views snap judgments to be primarily rational in nature. Our research finds that this is often the case, but not always.”
    “這篇論文的結果涉及到頭腦中的特定機制,而&amp;apos;Blink&amp;apos;則更廣泛地概括,”Todorov說。 “格拉德威爾的基本信息與我們的基本信息並無本質區別,儘管他認為快速判斷主要是理性的。 我們的研究發現,情況往往如此,但並非總是如此。“
  • Todorov cautioned that his findings do not imply, however, that quick first impressions cannot be overcome by the rational mind.
    托多羅夫告誡說,他的發現並不意味著理性思維無法克服快速的第一印象。
    “As time passes and you get to know people, you, of course, develop a more rounded conception of them,” he said. “But because we make these judgments without conscious thought, we should be aware of what is happening when we look at a person’s face.”
    “隨著時間的推移,你了解了人們,你當然會對他們形成更全面的概念,”他說。 “但是因為我們在沒有有意識思考的情況下作出這些判斷,所以當我們只是看到一個人的臉時,我們應該知道發生了什麼。”
  • “We still don’t know the physical features of a face that lead to a particular trait inference,” he said. “We know generally what makes a face attractive, such as its symmetry, the proportions of its parts and the like. But what is it about a face that makes you think its owner is an essentially competent person? That’s the subject of another study, one that needs to be done.”“我們仍然不知道是甚麼臉部的有形特徵而導致特定特徵的推斷,”他說。 “我們知道通常是什麼讓臉部具有吸引力,例如它組成部分的對稱性等。 但是,讓你認為它的擁有者是一個基本上有能力的人的臉是什麼? 這是另一項需要完成的研究的主題。“
  • How Many Seconds to a First Impression?

×