1. Are they really out to get us? Examining Interpersonal Perceptions in an Intergroup Context

2. Social Perceptions Self-perception: Does Mr. Smoker think he is smart? Other perception: Is Mr. Smoker smart? Metaperception: Does Dr. Nonsmoker think that I am smart? Usually predicted by self perception

3. Background Social Perceptions What forms them? Are they accurate? Intergroup perceptions Social identity differences Why are intergroup perceptions special? In-group & out-group bias Social stigma Sources in perceptions

4. Who cares? Mr. Smokers Metaperception Dr. Nonsmokers Perception ?

5. Why SRM? Multiple sources in perceptions Social context Perceptions not independent Sources function at dyad and group level

6. Multiple Information Levels Target ABCD Perceiver AXXX BXXX CXXX DXXX

7. Multiple Sources

8. Social Category, Interpersonal Perception, & Interpersonal Accuracy Santuzzi (2007)

9. Smoking Stigma Stigma = negative evaluation Identified by behavior Relatively concealable No history … yet

10. Research Questions Do smokers think nonsmokers see them differently? Do nonsmokers actually see smokers differently? Are smokers accurate?

11. Social Category & SRM Smokers & Nonsmokers 4-person groups (g = 24) 3 group compositions Zero-acquaintance Self-perception 9 evaluative adjectives 5-point response scale 10-minute interactions Evaluation & metaperception Round-robin

12. Social Interaction Structure A D C BA D C B In-group PerceptionsOut-group Perceptions

13. Data Structure Target ABCD Perceiver AYYY BXYY CXXY DXXX Target ABCD Perceiver A-YY B-YY CXX- DXX- Asymmetric BlockRound-Robin

14. What I expected to see Perceiver and relationship variance Evaluative ratings Zero-acquaintance In-group v. out-group differences Biased perceptions & metaperceptions Stigma is different

15. Smoking Attitudes

16. Variance Partitioning: In-group Perceptions NonsmokersSmokers PerceiverTargetRelationshipPerceiverTargetRelationship Evaluation.18* (.16).02 (.04).06* (.06).13* (.07).07 (.10).06* (.05) Metaperception.17* (.10).00 (.02).02 (.03).16* (.14).01 (.04).04* (.02)

17. Variance Partitioning: Out-group Perceptions Mixed NonsmokersSmokers PerceiverTargetRelationshipPerceiverTargetRelationship Evaluation.30* (.28).08 (.25).11* (.19).16* (.49).03 (.23).10* (.16) Metaperception.28* (.18).05 (.09).04 (.09).06 (.34).03 (.17).04 (.09)

18. Meta-Accuracy: Sans SRM SmokersNonsmokers Smokers.95*.28 Nonsmokers.87*.86* TARGET EVALUATION PERCEIVER METAPERCETION

19. Meta-Accuracy Correlations Do Smokers know how Nonsmokers actually view them? a = perceiver effect b = target effect g = relationship effect e = error

20. Meta-Accuracy Correlations: Generalized Accuracy SmokersNonsmokers Smokers.18-.83 Nonsmokers1.00.44 TARGET EVALUATION PERCEIVER METAPERCEPTION

21. Conclusions Source patterns Individual & relationship sources in evaluation Differences in metaperception (smokers) Bias or Accuracy? Smokers less accurate ONLY in mixed groups Why different pattern? Identity differences motivate? Concern directed toward me? Did self-perception do it?

22. Design Considerations Population base rate Fewer (self-identified) smokers Order of interactions Shared v. unshared contexts Inferences from mixed contexts Compare to homogeneous situations

23. Thanks! Janet Ruscher Ron Landis Ed ONeal David Kenny Nyla Branscombe Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 & the APA