When observers’ attention is drawn to the fact that a person belongs to two categories, the reaction is negative. But when attention is drawn away from the fact that this person represents a categorization problem, the person is viewed more positively.
Is giving $100 to your public radio station on the last day of their pledge drive different from giving $100 to the same station on the first day of the pledge drive? Logically speaking, it shouldn’t make a difference; a dollar has the same value whether it’s donated early or late. But psychologically speaking, people do seem to perceive a real difference.
Recent studies suggest that the relationship between perspective taking and stereotyping is not as simple as it seems. Under certain circumstances, taking another person's perspective can lead to increased, rather than decreased, stereotyping.
The future seems to be wide open to multiple different outcomes, but no amount of exertion can change the past. According to recent research, this is why people believe their will to be stronger when it comes to future events than it was in the past.
Imagine that Bob cleans his gun while plotting to kill his uncle. Suddenly, the gun accidentally goes off and the bullet hits a pedestrian walking down the street, killing the pedestrian instantly. Bob runs over and discovers that the pedestrian is his uncle. How responsible is Bob?
Which is morally worse: Pushing someone overboard to drown or doing nothing to save someone who is clearly drowning? Recent research suggests that people are more willing to opt for inaction because they know that, in general, others are more lenient toward non-actors than toward actors.
Recent research by a team of researchers led by Nathaniel Ratcliff of Penn State University suggests that the mind is exquisitely sensitive to power. Holding everything else constant, individuals with high social status are better remembered than those with lower social status.
Who's more evil, someone who abuses a person or someone who abuses a cat? Recent studies in social psychology suggest that distinctive behavior can carry disproportionate weight in people's moral judgments.
According to actress Halle Berry, regardless of how her one-quarter Black daughter Nahla ultimately chooses to self-identify, as long as she has “one drop” of Black blood, the world will see her as Black. Is this true?
What sorts of things do people spontaneously infer about a stranger based on a single action? In other words, in what ways do people automatically go beyond the action itself and "read in" additional information?
Considering how complex and ambiguous human behavior can be, how do we ever form coherent impressions of people? How exactly do employers decide which applicant will get the job? Just how do juries determine a defendant's guilt or innocence? In the Eye of the Beholder examines new developments in the science of social perception. This research, conducted primarily by social psychologists, begins to demystify the often puzzling judgments we form about other people on a daily basis.