Page 145 - The Social Animal

Social Cognition 127

pends on what we are currently thinking about, as well as what be-
liefs and categories we typically use to make sense of things.The cat-
egories we use to interpret the world can vary with the individual;
some people see the world through rose-colored glasses, whereas
others see it in hostile or depressive terms. Our interpretation can
also depend on what happens to be prominent in the situation. And
what is prominent can be induced through priming—a procedure
based on the notion that ideas that have been recently encountered
or frequently activated are more likely to come to mind and thus will
be used in interpreting social events.
A study by Tory Higgins, William Rholes, and Carl Jones illus-
trates the role of priming in the formation of impressions about other
15
people. In this experiment, subjects were asked to participate in two
“different” research projects—one on perception and one on reading
comprehension. The first experiment served to prime different trait
categories; some of the subjects were asked to remember positive trait
words (adventurous, self-confident, independent, and persistent), whereas
the others were asked to remember negative trait words (reckless, con-
ceited, aloof, and stubborn). Five minutes later, as part of the “reading
comprehension” study, subjects then read an ambiguous paragraph
about a fictitious person named Donald.
The paragraph described a number of behaviors performed by
Donald that could be interpreted as either adventurous or reckless
(e.g., skydiving), self-confident or conceited (e.g., believes in his abil-
ities), independent or aloof (e.g., doesn’t rely on anyone), and persist-
ent or stubborn (e.g., doesn’t change his mind often). The subjects
then described Donald in their own words and rated how desirable
they considered him to be. The results showed that how they were
primed influenced their impressions of Donald. When negative trait
categories had been primed, they characterized Donald in negative
terms and saw him as less desirable than when positive categories
had been primed.
Thus, cues too subtle for us to consciously notice can color our
judgments about other people’s behavior. But can such cues affect
our own behavior? Apparently so. John Bargh and his associates
have conducted studies showing surprisingly strong effects of expo-
16
sure to words on behavior. In one study, participants unscrambled
jumbled-up words (anagrams) and were told to go get the experi-
menter in the next room when they were finished. Unbeknownst to