There is no question appearance is important when making judgments. A mug shot of a felon wanted for gang affiliation spread virally through social media gaining him over 96,000 “likes”. The current studies assessed if judgments of faces impacted individuals’ choices for whom to form alliances with in a competitive game scenario. In Study 1, participants were asked to make judgments of 60 photographs (30 convicted criminals; 30 known innocents matched for attractiveness). Guilty individuals were perceived as less trustworthy ( p <.001), less competent ( p <.01), less likeable, ( p <.05), more deceitful ( p =.001), and more criminal ( p <.001); yet they were also rated as more attractive ( p =.001). In Study 2, participants were given a game scenario wherein they chose photographs of individuals with whom to make an alliance in anticipation of a competitive game. Controlling for attractiveness, results showed that 95.2% of participants chose to work with criminals over innocents. The current studies assessed if judgments of faces impacted choices AbstractExperiments First Impressions are Important, But Everyone Deserves a Second Chance: An Evaluation of Selection Behaviour When Forming Alliances in a Competitive Game Scenario Katelynn Carter-Rogers, Steven M. Smith, T. Todd Floyd & David T. Chafe Research Question VariableNot GuiltyGuiltytSignificance Trustworthiness p <.001 Competence p =.003 Deceitfulness p =.001 Attractiveness p =.001 Likeable p =.038 Criminality p <.001 Study 1 ProcedureStudy 2 – Big Brother Procedure N= 152 M age = % Female Participants were asked to make judgments about photographed faces (12 guilty; 12 not guilty). Faces were rated on likert type scales 1-7 assessing trust, competence, deceit, attractiveness, likeableness, and criminality. VariableAllianceEnemytSignificance Criminality p <.001 PersonalityBtsignificance Openness p =.577 Extraversion *p =.025 Agreeableness *p =.040 Contentiousness p =.286 Neuroticism *p =.049 ΔR =.31* p <.05 Our previous research projects show that participants from lower SES can identify guilty faces better than middle and high SES. Do instantaneous character judgments influence decisions to collaborate with unfamiliar individuals? H 1 : Guilty individuals will be perceived more negatively. H 2 : Participants will choose to collaborate with non-guilty individuals. Not guilty individuals were perceived more positively then the guilty individuals (except for attractiveness). After these participants finished the judgment experiment, they were asked if they would like to come back and play a game. N= 146 M age = % Female In Study 2, 24 images from Study 1 were used to create the Big Brother game. These images were equated for attractiveness in a pilot study. Participants were asked to create alliances, and identify enemies based on the images presented to them. They were given the instructions to the “Big Brother” game, and instructed to explain why they wanted people on their team, and why they did not. Participant personality characteristics were also assessed for exploratory purposes. Discussion The importance of forming first impressions is highly important within a competitive game- type scenario. In the Big Brother game, individuals are placed in a unique social situation where they compete with others for a monetary prize; forming first impressions is extremely important in selecting alliances as it will often have an effect on the success rate. In Study 1, participants made first impression judgments about unfamiliar faces. It was found that not guilty individuals were perceived more positively then the guilty individuals (excluding attractiveness). The initial first impression within Study 1 did not reflect the decision to collaborate with the individuals in Study 2. Future research will focus on the demographics, and potential dark triad personality traits participants may have when making these dangerous decisions. Results It was hypothesized that participants would avoid guilty individuals based on the first impression of them during the game. Participants wanted to collaborate with guilty individuals more than they wanted to work with not guilty individuals. Though it does not support hypotheses 2, it does suggest that a competitive situation has superseded prior judgments and beliefs concerning these individuals. Personality did contribute to this finding, where people who were lower in extraversion, higher in agreeableness, and higher in neuroticism chose to collaborate with guilty individuals. Results