Social Perception I. Overview: What do we select to perceive? A.How do we select what we perceive? B. Searching for predictability and order in perception via social comparison II. What influences what we perceive? A.Selective Attention B. Needs C. Personal History D. Cultural Norms E. Values F. Notions Of Structure And Order

Social Perception III. What are the Consequences of Perception? A. Distortions and Incorrect Inferences B. Development of Categories IV. Ways In Which Perceptions Can Be Distorted? A. By Suggestion B. By Language C. By the Need to Integrate Information

Social Perception V. The Role of Language in Perception VI. Social Perceptions and Impression Formation A. How Do We Form First Impressions? B. Dimensions Affecting Impressions 1. Height 2. Attractiveness of Persons 3. Attractiveness of Companions C. Later Information and Earlier Impressions D. Impressions and the Responses of Others

Social Perception An example of Wilson’s research findings in the “real world.”

Social Perception VII. Accuracy of Judgmental Processes A. Systematic Types of Inaccuracy 1. Confirming and Disconfirming Information 2. Frequency and Probability Information 3. Baseline Information B. Overconfidence

Social Perception VII. Accuracy of Judgmental Processes (cont.) C. Why Don't We Learn From Experience? 1. Selective Forgetting 2. Environmental Effects 3. Restriction of Outcome Information 4. Simplification of Outcome Categories D. Ways of Thinking About How to Investigate Explanations of Behavior Lab Experimentation Unaided Judgements

Social Perception VII. Accuracy of Judgmental Processes (cont.) E. "Refencing" to Maintain Consistency F. How Can We Become More Accurate? 1. Learn How To Search For and Use Disconfirming Information (Need An Awareness of Principles of Experimental Design) 2. Use Process As Well As Outcome Feedback 3. Try To Assess The Effects Of Environmental Influences 4. Don't Trust Unaided Memory - Keep Records

Contact Theory What Could We Be Doing? A. Contact Theory– Necessary But Not Sufficient Conditions 1. Common Goals/Cooperation 2. Equal Status Contact 3. Contact That Contradicts Stereotypes 4. Long-Term Contact 5. Norms Favoring Contact (authorities, custom or laws) B. Plus Two More… 1 Arousal of Relevant Identity 2 Reduction of Anxiety

Study Design: Method ✹ Two Institutions: Augsburg and Villanova ✹ Pre-post test (with partial control group) ✹ Instruments ✹ Student survey: CoBRAS (Neville et al., 2000) ✹ Three CoBRAS Subscales: ● Unawareness of Racial Privilege (.83,.85) ● Unawareness of Institutional Discrimination (.72,.76) ● Unawareness of Blatant Racial Issues (.71,.73) ✹ Instructor survey ✹ Course syllabi (2 raters)

Findings ✹ Three factors emerged: Intergroup Cooperation, Institutional Support, and Reflection.

Intergroup Cooperation ✹ The level of cooperation between students and those whom they serve is significantly associated with change in unawareness of institutional discrimination (ID) and ✹ B =.20 t(201)=2.8, p <.01

Institutional Support ✹ The level of institutional support for the service is significantly associated with change in unawareness of blatant racial issues (BRI), and ✹ B =.18 t(201)=2.58, p <.01

Reflection ✹ The extent to which the course encouraged students to reflect on their own values and identities is significantly associated with change in unawareness of blatant racial issues (BRI), and ✹ B =.19 t(201)=2.69, p <.01

What Does It Mean? ✹ These findings point to the possibility of breaking down prejudices and biases through the thoughtful and consistent application of the tenets of Contact Theory in your classroom. ✹ No other social contact theory has been demonstrated to impact learners’ attitudes and beliefs to the extent that we observe with Contact Theory.