Automatic Trait Automatic Trait Inferences about ProfilesInferences about Profiles

Kristin Stecher & Scott Counts

the new self-representationthe new self-representation

BackgroundBackground

Automatic Trait Inferences◦Evidence from social psychology

Automatic inferences of traits (Uleman, 1988)◦Behavior

Jack told his mother that he ate the chocolates. ◦Trait cues recognized faster than semantic cues.

Honest Chocolates

Uleman, 1988

Study 1Study 1Automatic Trait InferencesAutomatic Trait Inferences

Hypotheses:Individuals make personality trait

inferences when viewing online profiles.◦Memory for profiles is based more on the inferences they make from profiles rather than the actual content of the profiles.

These inferences can be “automatic”.

AutomaticityAutomaticity

Automatic trait inferences:1. Often below conscious awareness.2. They are not intentional (not implied by the

direction set).3. They are not controllable.

Uleman, 1999

Creating ProfilesCreating Profiles

Created 60 profiles using pilot testing.Picture +“About me”

◦30 trait profiles◦30 semantic (no trait implied) profiles

Sample Trait Profile Sample Trait Profile (implies hick)(implies hick)

Sample Semantic Profile Sample Semantic Profile (does not imply hick)(does not imply hick)

Automatic InferencesAutomatic Inferences Methods Methods

Presentation Phase◦Trait Profile◦Semantic Profile

Cue Phase ◦Trait Cue

“Hick”◦Semantic Cue

“Jordan”Dependent measure is recall for profile

content when cued.

Evidence for Automatic Evidence for Automatic Inferences Inferences

Main Effect Profile: F(1,30)=21.4, p<0.001Profile x Word Interaction: F(1, 29)=35.3, p<0.001

31 participants

DiscussionDiscussion

Participants remember trait implying profiles better than semantic profiles.

They recall more about implied traits than actual profile content.

ONLY if the profile cues a trait. ◦i.e. Trait not semantic condition

What are the factors about the profile that affect memory?

Study 2Study 2Factors that Affect MemoryFactors that Affect Memory

Overall Coherence: How well do profile elements fit together

Number of Attributes: How many particular elements does a profile contain

Specificity: How specific is each particular element

N=3,9,3

Coherence HypothesesCoherence Hypotheses

There is a positive relationship between coherence and memory for a profile

Relationship between profile Relationship between profile coherency ratings and memorycoherency ratings and memory

Weak to moderate correlation between overall coherence and memory

Overall Trait profile

Semantic profile

R = .19 .22 .12

Relationship between number of Relationship between number of elements and memoryelements and memory

R = -.28 R = .33

Specificity Results Specificity Results

Very little relationship between specificity and memory

Overall Trait profile

Semantic profile

R = -.09 -.16 -.04

Specificity: Specificity: Individual DifferencesIndividual Differences

Summary/RecommendationsSummary/Recommendations

Help users convey traits (30% memory improvement)Particularly with few elementsParticularly with coherent profilesTrait tags?Language processing?

Coherency: General trend of facilitating memory

Try to account for individual differencesAuto-classification of users based on memory

preferences (e.g., for specificity)?

Questions?Questions?

Automatic Trait Automatic Trait Inferences about ProfilesInferences about Profiles

Kristin Stecher & Scott Counts