Who influences meta-accuracy? It takes two to know the impressions we make

Datos Bibliográficos

ID6204422
AutoresNorhan Elsaadawy (0000-0002-2773-9601, University of Toronto), Erika N Carlson (0009-0006-6058-8821, University of Toronto), Lauren J Human (0000-0001-8384-2075, McGill University)
Año2021
Volumen121
Número1
Páginas201-214
Fecha de publicación2021-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Personality and Social Psychology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0022-3514 • E-ISSN: 1939-1315
EditorialAmerican Psychological Association (APA) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1037/pspp0000376
PMID33180543
OpenAlexW3094624557
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas10

191). Metaperceivers tended to have the most robust influence on meta-accuracy, but perceivers and especially dyads influenced accuracy as well. This suggests there are "good" metaperceivers, perceivers, and dyads of meta-accuracy and that a more complete understanding of meta-accuracy must consider both members of an interaction. As a first step in understanding how both individuals influence accuracy, we tested the role of self-perception, specifically if some metaperceivers, perceivers, or dyads fostered accuracy because metaperceivers happened to be seen as they saw themselves. Perceivers largely fostered accuracy by seeing metaperceivers as they saw themselves but metaperceivers and dyads mostly fostered accuracy by other means. Potential contextual effects are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

Impression formation · Perception · Social perception · Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior · Mental Health Research Topics · Personality Traits and Psychology · Psychology · Social Psychology