Person Perception as Affected by Personality Traits

An experimental study looking at the effects of swapping the central personality trait of warm to
cold on scores of impression in order to assess the effect on person perception.

Word Count: 1,961

Abstract:
We studied impression formation based on an individual’s personality traits. Our aim

was to study the effects of varying a central trait on the impression of an individual. Therefore,

our independent variable was the central trait, warm or cold, and our dependent variable was the

numerical impression score from Likert scale questions. The hypothesis predicted the group

given the central trait warm would have a higher impression score than cold.

To study this topic, we created an experiment with two groups, using independent

measures. Group A was shown the same person as Group B, but read the trait warm instead of

cold. Subjects then answer questions based on the likelihood of certain events, with a higher

score indicating a more positive impression. Participants consisted of twenty Utica Academy for

International Studies students, ages fifteen to seventeen, with seventeen females and three males.

We used the Mann-Whitney statistical inference test, receiving a U-value of 14.5 which

is less than 27, the critical value, meaning our data is significant at P = 0.05. We can reject our

null hypothesis and conclude the warm trait leads to a higher score of impression, and thus that

the two traits lead to differing perceptions.

Word Count: 199

1
Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………1
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………….2
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………..3
Method…………………………………………………………………………………………..5
Design……………………………………………………………………5
Participants………………………………………………………………6
Materials…………………………………………………………………6
Procedure………………………………………………………………...7
Results…………………………………………………………………………………………...8
Descriptive……………………………………………………………………………….8
Inferential……………………………………………………………………………….10
Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………10
References……………………………………………………………………………………...13
Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………..14

2
Introduction:

When forming impressions of an individual, we often base them off the personality traits

they have. Other factors exist too, like looks or voice, yet personality is an influential factor in

creating impressions. The aim of our study is to analyze the effects of varying a central trait on

the perceptions of an individual formed by our subjects, with our independent variable being the

central quality, changing warm to cold, and our dependent variable being the impression formed,

based on the numerical results of Likert scale questions. Our rationale for doing this study was

to analyze personality’s effect on impressions, which is justified because we form impressions of

others constantly, making it helpful to understand how they function.

Our hypothesis is one-tailed:

Experimental Hypothesis: Warm condition subjects will have a higher score of impression than

cold condition subjects.

Null Hypothesis: Subjects in both conditions will have the same score of impression.

We replicated Solomon Asch’s study (1946), which aimed to test the effects of varying a

central trait on impressions. He assigned subjects to two groups, each being read the same list of

seven traits except the middle trait, swapping warm for cold. Each group wrote their

impressions, then chose, from a list of thirty-six traits, what they perceived the individual to be

like. Asch found that certain traits dominantly pertained to either cold or warm, indicating that a

change in one trait can drastically affect our impressions. Asch’s study is strengthened through

his use of qualitative and quantitative information. His ecological validity is limited because the

experiment occurred in a lab and subjects were given a list of words, which is not similar to real-

life impressions. However, this is also a strength since confounding variables were controlled,

3
like appearance, to only focus on personality traits. Asch’s results, however, have low

applicability since his subjects were only college students. He did incorporate both genders, but

did not intend to incorporate multiple cultures as well.

Asch’s results are expanded on by McCarthy and Skowronski (2011) who used Asch’s

seven traits and swapped warm and cold. When the subjects ranked their impressions using

numerical scales for five qualifiers, ratings were higher and more positive when the traits

included warm rather than cold. They also assessed the Construal Level Theory, finding that,

when subjects perceived the individual as distant, the warm or cold trait had more impact on the

impression. Nearly half of the subjects were female, and cross-cultural factors were not

accounted for. This study was limited since only Northern Illinois undergraduates were studied,

but was strengthened by the use of scales to quantify qualitative traits, aiding comparison of

impressions.

Nauts et. al (2014), contradicted the prior two studies. After assigning subjects to one of

two groups which received seven traits, swapping warm and cold, both indicated that intelligence

was a more important trait influencing perception than warm or cold, refuting Asch’s primacy-

of-warmth affect and indicating that warmth or coldness is not a central trait. Subjects were an

array of ages, increasing applicability, and men and women were studied. Culture was not

specifically assessed as a factor, although subjects varied in cultural background because MTurk

was used.

4
Method

Design:

We chose the independent measures design to control for extraneous variables. The

person being perceived was the same for both groups except for one trait. Therefore, we did not

want the subject to perceive the same person twice, notice the single difference in trait, and

assume what our experiment was about, which would occur if we used repeated measures. We

wanted to ensure deception. We also wanted to simulate a first impression to add realism to the

study, so forming an impression twice would alter the results.

Our control condition was Group A, the subjects forming impressions based on the trait

warm (app. 4). Our experimental condition was Group B, who saw the same person’s picture

(app. 9) and were read the same traits, except for hearing cold instead of warm (app. 4). Our

independent variable was the central trait, warm or cold, and our dependent variable was their

impression score based on the Likert scale questionnaire (app. 6).

In regard to extraneous variables, we controlled for the appearance of an individual as a

possibility of affecting the impression by using the same picture (app. 9) for both groups, and we

kept the individual’s description (app. 4) the same except for the warm and cold traits. Finally,

we had the same experimenter read the descriptions to control for speed, voice inflection, and

emphasis of words, which could impact impressions.

Ethically, we received informed consent (app. 1) for all subjects, informing them that

they could withdraw from the study at any time, results would remain confidential, and results

would be emailed to them at completion of the study. We also briefed the participants (app. 2),

5
gave them standardized instructions (app. 2), and debriefed (app. 3) them after the study was

complete so they were aware of what had occurred and any deception was removed.

Participants:

Our participants were twenty Utica Academy for International Studies students, fifteen to

seventeen, with seventeen females and three males. We used convenience sampling because we

were limited in our ability to attain subjects. This method was used to gain subjects efficiently.

We allocated subjects to their condition by grouping the first ten and flipping a coin to randomly

assign them to their condition. The second ten subjects were assigned to the second condition

that had not been done first.

These results apply to the target population, Utica Academy for International Studies

students ages fifteen to seventeen.

Materials:

• PowerPoint (app. 9)

• Projector (app. 10)

• Classroom with tables and chairs (app. 10)

• Standardized instructions and briefing (app. 2)

• Debrief (app. 3)

• Survey (app. 6)

• Consent forms (app. 1)

• Demographic info forms (app. 5)

• Description for Group A (warm) (app. 4)

• Description for Group B (cold) (app. 4)

6
Procedure:

• Acquire one picture of the individual being perceived with a neutral expression (app. 9).

• Make the PowerPoint, putting the same picture for both groups, but an empty slide in-

between so one group does not discover that the pictures are the same (app. 9).

• Use a room with tables, at least ten chairs, and a projector to show the PowerPoint (app.

10).

• Use convenience sampling to acquire ten subjects, flip a coin to assign the subjects to the

first condition, and bring all ten in together, preferably seating them alone to prevent

copying.

• Read the first paragraph of the standardized instructions and briefing form (app. 2), and

give each subject a consent form (app. 1) to fill out and turn in at the end of the

experiment.

• Read the second and third paragraphs of the standardized instructions (app. 2) and ask if

any subjects have questions.

• Read the fourth paragraph of the standardized instructions (app. 2) and show the subjects

the PowerPoint picture (app. 9) corresponding with their group condition with the lights

off for about five seconds. Then, show the blank slide and read the description

corresponding with their group condition (app. 4).

• Read the fifth paragraph of the standardized instructions (app. 2), and have subjects fill

out the survey (app. 6).

• Finish the standardized instructions (app. 2) and debrief the subjects (app. 3), having

them fill out the demographic information sheet (app. 5). When finished, all papers

should be collected by the experimenters. Ask the subjects to leave.

7
 • Repeat steps three through ten, using the new subjects for the second condition not used

prior. Be sure, in step 7, to read the description (app. 4) for the second condition too.

Results:

Descriptive:

Based on our design, the data collected (app. 7) was ordinal. Therefore, median and

interquartile range were chosen as descriptive statistics.

Median IQR

Group A 18 4

Group B 15.5 1

Both 16 3

8
 These results support my aim, indicating that Group A’s scores (warm), were higher than

Group B (cold), because Group A’s median was 18, while Group B’s was 15.5. Results were

dispersed fairly close the medians, with IQRs of 4 and 1 respectively.

9
 Comparison of Medians
18.5
18
18
17.5
17
Median Value

16.5
16
15.5
15.5
15
14.5
14
Group A (warm) Group B (cold)
Groups

Series 2

Inferential:

A Mann-Whitney test was employed because we used independent measures and

received ordinal data. From our data (app. 7) and calculations (app. 8), our U-value = 14.5.

Because our hypothesis is one-tailed with each sample size being 10, our critical value is 27 (ap.

11). The level of significance was P = 0.05, and because 14.5 < 27, we can reject the null

hypothesis at that significance level.

Discussion:

Because we can reject our null hypothesis, we know our results suggest a difference

between the perception of an individual based on a single trait. We know the traits warm and

cold correlate with distinctly different perceptions of an individual, especially because a strength

of our study was controlling the effects of other traits on perception. We kept all traits the same

except the one we tested, indicating greater reliability. These findings were consistent with

Asch’s (1964), who used the same seven traits and only modified one. However, in comparison

10
to Asch’s study, a strength of ours was its greater realism, allowing for greater application,

considering we included a more realistic setting in which the subjects saw the person’s picture

and were read a description rather than a list. However, the picture was also a limitation of our

study because it added a confounding variable. Looks can alter one’s impression, so we cannot

assume that traits were the sole cause of the results we acquired.

Our results were consistent with McCarthy and Skowronski (2011). Our Group A’s

median impression score was greater than Group B’s. 18 > 15.5, indicating a more positive

impression score for a warm individual. Unlike McCarthy and Skowronski (2011), we did not

analyze perceived distance and its effects on impression because of our limitation of convenience

sampling which only acquired UAIS IB students who were all psychologically distant from the

person in the picture since none of the subjects had seen that person before. However, this was

also a limitation of their study because they measured two variables at once, cold vs. warm and

near vs. distant, affecting the reliability of the results.

Our results were inconsistent with Nauts et. al (2014) because our study only focused on

the amount of warmth as the central trait. We did not assess subjects on what they felt was the

trait that most effected their impressions because those results would be qualitative and difficult

to compare, a strength of our study and limitation of theirs.

If we repeated our study, I would have the subjects read the traits instead of listen to

them, since the tone of the speaker’s voice could influence impressions by accidentally placing

emphasis on traits, emphasizing those traits in their impressions. I would also have both groups

see the picture and be read the description for the same amount of time. This would control for

the variable of time on impression formation, since a group having more time may formulate a

different perception due to more time to perceive and think about the individual.

11
 Moving forward, I would study the effects of other traits on impressions to assess which

has a greater impact. I would also assess whether looks, sound, or traits have a greater impact on

impression. In my study’s case, we can use this information to better understand how people

assess us and why people react the way they do to us. This can help us understand why we judge

certain people differently, and try to counter that initial reaction.

In conclusion, our study indicates that our perceptions are influenced by people’s

qualities, and therefore that we judge people in this way. Our impression can be affected,

sometimes drastically, by a slight difference in traits, like warm and cold, yet other factors may

still be at play.

12
References:

Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming Impressions of Personality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 41(3), 258-290. Retrieved September 28, 2016, from http://www.all-about-
psychology.com/

Foreman, D. I., & Corder, G. W. (n.d.). APPENDIX B: Critical Value Tables [Book]. Retrieved
November 21, 2016, from
https://www.safaribooksonline.com/library/view/nonparametric-statistics-
a/9781118840429/bapp02.xhtml

Man Standing. (n.d.). Retrieved September 30, 2016, from

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/man standing

McCarthy, R. J., & Skowronski, J. J. (s2011, May 30). You're getting warmer: Level of construal
affects the impact of central traits on impression formation. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 1304-1307. Retrieved September 27, 2016, from
http://www.niu.edu/jskowronski/publications/2011McCarthySkowronski2.pdf

Nauts, S., Langner, O., Huijsmans, I., Vonk, R., & Wigboldus, D. H. (2014). Forming
Impressions of Personality: A Replication and Review of Asch's (1946) Evidence for a
Primacy-of-Warmth Effect in Impression Formation. Social Psychology, 45(3), 153-163.
doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000179

13
Appendices
Appendix 1:

Consent Form

• I have been informed about the nature of the research.

• I understand that I have the right to withdraw from the research at any time, and that any

information/ data about me will remain confidential.

• My anonymity will be protected as my name will not be identifiable.

• The research will be conducted so that I will not be demeaned in any way.

• I will be debriefed at the end of the research and will have the opportunity to find out the results

at a later date.

I give my informed consent to participate in this research.

Name (Signature):______________________________________________

Date:________________________________________________________

Contact Number:_______________________________________________

Contact Email (if results desired):__________________________________

*Your contact information will not be used for anything other than as a means to provide you with the

results of our research.

14
Appendix 2:

Standardized Instructions and Briefing:

Today, you will be participating in an experiment conducted by Thea Kirsch and Lisette
LeMerise. Before we begin instructions, please fill out the given consent form acknowledging
that you agree to participation in this study, and that any data collected during the experiment
will remain confidential and that you will remain anonymous. Once you have completed the
form, hand it to one of the experimenters.
We will be recreating and modifying an experiment done by Asch (1964), in which you will be
asked questions about your impressions of a given individual. You will be shown an image of an
individual, as if you were meeting them for the first time, and then read a description of that
individual, written by others who know them.
Afterward, you will be asked a series of questions about your impressions of the individual in the
form of numerical scales, or Likert scales, and finally, you will be debriefed on the reasons for
and relevant info of the experiment. We will then ask you to fill out a questionnaire on
demographic info, which will only include relevant subject information.

Do you have any questions? If so, feel free to ask us at this time.
If any questions arise during the operation of the experiment, feel free to ask us at any time.

At this time, you will now be shown a picture of the person you will be meeting, and I will read
the corresponding description of the individual. Please listen to the description carefully, as if
you were getting to know the individual.

At this time, you will be given a form designed to quantify your base-line impressions of the
individual. There are a series of 5 questions, each based on a scale from 1 to 5, in which you will
rank the likelihood of the following question. Take your time, and answer the questions to the
best of your ability based on your intuitive reactions. If you have any confusion about the
questions, please let us know, and once completed, notify the experimenter.

At this time, you will be debriefed on the experiment.

15
Appendix 3:

Debriefing:
You were a part of Group [A or B] of our recreation of Asch’s study on impression formation. In
this experiment we were testing how the descriptions given will affect your impression of the
individual. From Asch’s original study, we researched the experimental groups that were
executed, and we narrowed it down to two groups. One of the groups you guys took part in was
the group with the description that used the adjective [warm or cold] and the other group which
had the adjective of [warm or cold]. All other descriptions were identical, including intelligent,
skillful, industrious, determined, practical, and cautious. Even the image was the same. The
survey you just completed will be used to see how the description you heard affected how you
perceived this individual.
At this time, please fill out the sheet on your relevant demographic info.
Your personal information and results will remain anonymous. If you would like to withdraw
your information at any time, please contact us in order to do so. In addition, the email you
provided will allow us to contact you to provide you with the results of the study if you so
choose. Thank you for participating in our study and have a great day.

16
Appendix 4:

Description for Group A:

Description of Individual:
Acquaintances of this individual commonly consider them to be intelligent. This person
often performs well on exams, and is able to understand complex problems. They are also
known to be skillful and industrious, in that they can apply the knowledge they acquire to the
task at hand, whether that be physical, mental, or emotional. This individual is also described as
warm in their interactions with others, as well as determined in the tasks they set out to
accomplish. Finally, acquaintances tend to call this person practical, yet cautious, for they
carefully make sure their actions apply to the situation at hand.

Description for Group B:

Description of Individual:
Acquaintances of this individual commonly consider them to be intelligent. This person
often performs well on exams, and is able to understand complex problems. They are also
known to be skillful and industrious, in that they can apply the knowledge they acquire to the
task at hand, whether that be physical, mental, or emotional. This individual is also described as
cold in their interactions with others, as well as determined in the tasks they set out to
accomplish. Finally, acquaintances tend to call this person practical, yet cautious, for they
carefully make sure their actions apply to the situation at hand.

17
Appendix 5:

Demographic Info:

As stated on the consent form, I understand that this data will remain confidential, and that I have the
right to withdraw my data from the research of this experiment at any time.

Signature:_________________________________________________

Please fill out the following information for purposes of data for each subject:

What is your age?:__________________________________________

What is your gender?: Male, Female, or Other
Which group were you assigned to? (Circle the corresponding): A or B
What is your subject number?:________________________________

18
Appendix 6:
Survey
Based on the picture shown and the description given, please answer the questions.

• To what extent would you hire this person for a job or internship?

1 2 3 4 5
Never Rarely Possibility Strong Chance Definitely

• To what extent do you think this person is approachable?

1 2 3 4 5
Never Rarely Possibility Strong Chance Definitely

• To what extent would you be friends with this person?

1 2 3 4 5
Never Rarely Possibility Strong Chance Definitely

• To what extent would you hang out with this person?

1 2 3 4 5
Never Rarely Possibility Strong Chance Definitely

• To what extent would you trust this person?

1 2 3 4 5
Never Rarely Possibility Strong Chance Definitely

19
Appendix 7:

Raw Data
Group A- Warm group
Subject Question Question Question Question Question Total Age Gender
1 2 3 4 5
A 4 3 3 3 3 16 16 F
B 4 3 5 5 3 20 16 F
C 5 3 3 3 4 18 16 F
D 2 3 4 4 3 16 16 F
E 5 4 5 5 3 22 17 F
F 4 3 4 3 4 18 16 F
G 4 5 4 3 4 20 16 F
H 4 3 4 3 3 17 16 F
I 4 5 3 4 3 19 16 M
J 4 3 3 3 3 16 16 M
Median: 18, 𝑄1 = 16, 𝑄3 = 20 IQR= 𝑄3 − 𝑄1 = 20 − 16 = 4

Group B- Cold Group

Subject Question Question Question Question Question Total Age Gender
1 2 3 4 5

K 4 3 4 2 4 17 16 F
L 3 2 2 3 2 12 16 F
M 4 3 3 2 3 15 16 F
N 3 2 3 2 1 11 15 F
O 4 3 3 2 4 16 16 M
P 5 3 2 2 4 16 17 F
Q 3 2 3 4 3 15 17 F
R 4 3 3 2 4 16 17 F
S 3 2 3 3 3 15 17 F
T 3 2 4 5 5 19 16 F
Median: 15.5, 𝑄1 = 15, 𝑄3 = 16 IQR= 𝑄3 − 𝑄1 = 16 − 15 = 1

20
Appendix 8:
Mathematical Computations
Ordering Scores from Least to Greatest:

N L M Q S A D J O P R H K C F I T B G E
11 12 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 20 20 22

Median: 16, 𝑄1 = 15.5, 𝑄3 = 18.5

IQR= 𝑄3 − 𝑄1 = 18.5 − 15.5 = 3
Ranking the Subjects’ Scores:

N L M Q S A D J O P R H K C F I T B G E
1 2 4 4 4 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 12.5 12.5 14.5 14.5 16.5 16.5 18.5 18.5 20

Group A 𝑇1
𝑇1 = 8.5 + 8.5 + 8.5 + 12.5 + 14.5 + 14.5 + 16.5 + 18.5 + 18.5 + 20 = 140.5
Group B 𝑇2
𝑇2 = 1 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 8.5 + 8.5 + 8.5 + 12.5 + 16.5 = 69.5
Therefore, 𝑇𝑥 = 140.5

Subject Amounts:
Group A: 𝑛1 = 10
Group B: 𝑛2 = 10
Therefore 𝑛𝑥 = 10

(𝑛𝑥 +1)
Using the equation 𝑈 = 𝑛1x 𝑛2 + 𝑛𝑥 x 2
- 𝑇𝑥 , we can figure out the U-value.
(10+1)
𝑈 = 10 x 10 + 10 x 2
– 140.5
(11)
𝑈 = 10 x 10 + 10 x 2
– 140.5

𝑈 = 100 + 55 – 140.5
𝑈 = 14.5

When U is less than 27, we can reject the null hypothesis, and in this case we can!

21
Appendix 9:

22
Appendix 10:
Materials:
• PowerPoint slides
• Projector
• Classroom with tables and at least ten chairs
• Standardized instructions sheet
• Debrief sheet
• Survey
• Consent forms
• Demographic info forms
• Description of individual for Group A (warm)
• Description of individual for Group B (cold)

23
Appendix 11:

24