Three studies explore mental processes underlying spontaneous trait inferences about self-informants and the spontaneous trait transference characterizing third-party informants. Process differences are suggested in that instructions prompting a nontrait inference (truth or lie?) reduce self-informant trait-savings effects and lower self-informant trait judgments. For third-party informants, such instructions have no effect on these outcome variables. Results of a third study are inconsistent with cognitive load as an explanation for these effects. Taken together, these results indicate that inferences, and not merely associations, spontaneously form when processing information about self-informants. The results also show that the inferences and judgments that occur in spontaneous trait transference are not caused by the misidentification of third-party informants as self-informants.
Bassili, J.N. (1989). Trait encoding in behavior identification and dispositional inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 285-296.
3.
Bassili, J.N. (1993). Procedural efficiency and the spontaneity of trait inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 200-205.
4.
Brown, R.D., & Bassili, J.N. (2002). Spontaneous trait associations and the case of the superstitious banana. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 38, 87-92.
5.
Carlston, D.E., & Skowronski, J.J. (1994). Savings in the relearning of trait information as evidence for spontaneous inference generation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 840-856.
6.
Carlston, D.E., & Skowronski, J.J. (2005). Linking versus thinking: Evidence for the different associative and attributional bases of spontaneous trait transference and spontaneous trait inference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 884-898.
7.
Carlston, D.E., Skowronski, J.J., & Sparks, S. (1995). Savings in relearning II: On the formation of behavior-based trait associations and inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 429-436.
8.
Chun, W.Y., Spiegel, S., Kruglanski, A. (2002). Assimilative behavior identification can also be resource dependent: The unimodel perspective on personal-attribution phases . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 542-555.
9.
Crawford, M.T., Skowronski, J.J., & Stiff, C. (in press). Limiting the spread of spontaneous trait transference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
10.
Gilbert, D.T., Pelham, B.W., Krull, D.S. (1988). Cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 54, 733-740.
11.
Jarvis, B.G. (2002). Direct RT Research Software (Version 2002) [Computer program]. New York: Empirisoft.
12.
Lupfer, M.B., Clark, L.F., & Hutcherson, H.W. (1990). Impact of context on spontaneous trait and situational attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 239—249.
13.
Mae, L., Carlston, D.E., & Skowronski, J.J. (1999). Spontaneous trait transference to familiar communicators: Is a little knowledge a dangerous thing?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 233-246.
14.
McClelland, J.L., & Rumelhart, D.E. (1985). Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information. Journal of ExperimentalPsychology, 114, 159-188.
Skowronski, J.J., & Carlston, D.E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin,105, 131-142.
17.
Skowronski, J.J., Carlston, D.E., Mae, L., & Crawford, M.T. (1998). Spontaneous trait transference: Communicators take on the qualities they describe in others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 837-848.
18.
Smith, E.R., & DeCoster, J. (1998). Knowledge acquisition, accessibility, and use in person perception and stereotyping: Simulation with a recurrent connectionist network. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 21-35.
19.
Smith, E.R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131.
20.
Todorov, A., & Uleman, J.S. (2002). Spontaneous trait inferences are bound to actors' faces: Evidence from a false recognition paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1051-1065.
21.
Todorov, A., & Uleman, J.S. (2003). The efficiency of binding spontaneous trait inferences to actors' faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 39, 549-562.
22.
Todorov, A., & Uleman, J.S. (2004). The person reference process in spontaneous trait inferences. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology , 87, 482-493.
23.
Uleman, J.S. (1999). Spontaneous versus intentional inferences in impression formation. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 141-160). New York: Guilford.
24.
Uleman, J.S., & Moskowitz, G.B. (1994). Unintended effects of goals on unintended inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 490-501.
25.
Uleman, J.S., Newman, L.S., & Winter, L. (1992). Can personality traits be inferred automatically? Spontaneous inferences require cognitive capacity at encoding. Consciousness and Cognition, 1, 77—90.
26.
Van Overwalle, F., & Labiouse, C. (2004). A recurrent connectionist model of person impression formation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 28-61.
27.
Wigboldus, D.H., Sherman, J.W., Franzese, H.L., & van Knippenberg, A. (2004). Capacity and comprehension: Spontaneous stereotyping under cognitive load. Social Cognition , 22, 292-309.
28.
Winter, L., Uleman, J.S., & Cunniff, C. (1985). How automatic are social judgments?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 904-917.
