Is Psychological Judgement Mentally Automatic and Unavoidable?
By BRIGID O'BRIEN
Throughout the day, a single individual will make a plethora of judgments about a person on the street, a coworker, or a peer. People often make judgements on physical appearance and on how people present themselves, among other things. Can we change our judgemental state of minds? If an individual is acting judgemental, does it mean that they have a negative mindset? Or is judgement merely a cognitive reflex? Understanding the psychology of social judgement and snap judgment can help explain these neurobiological tendencies.
There are numerous types of psychological judgement. Social judgement is pervasive among humans--who subconsciously do the judging, or get judged--constantly. Whether a person has known someone for a day or a year, they form judgements about things such as appearance or personality. The website Psychology Campus explains in their article “Social Judgement” that social judgement is connected to two concepts that are loosely known as observable judgement and internal judgement. Observable judgement is assuming something about a human from their posture, facial expression, clothing, etc. We can actually see and observe these physical things.
Internal judgement, on the other hand, is a bit more complicated. This type of judgement occurs when a human makes an inference about someone's personality, loyalty, and love --all mental states of mind which are not externally observable. To form a internal judgement, someone would make an inference about another person from an assumption. When Sarah looks at Morgan, she sees that Morgan is smiling at her. She therefore assumes that Morgan genuinely likes her, when Morgan could be smiling at Sarah and loathing her existence. “Most of us learn to control or manipulate many of the cues we show to others in order to hide our internal state. Thus, we say ‘Fine thanks.’ when asked ‘How are you?’ even when we are sometimes far from fine,” Psychology Campus reports. Essentially, both types of judgement are from assumptions, but observable judgment is more likely to be closer to the truth than internal judgement.
In addition to these two concepts, the subconscious actions of filtering and inference are a large part of social judgement. “With respect to filtering, people tend to ignore much of what they see,” writes Psychology Campus. “With inference, people tend to go beyond the evidence in front of them and complete the picture that they filtered or did not see.” When an individual filters their observations of others, the brain is kept from being overwhelmed with information. An inference fills the gaps in the brain of unknown information. This tends to happen if someone is over-analyzing a person’s friendliness and actions, especially if they subconsciously want the person to feel a certain way towards them -- like a crush.
Scientists’ understandings of judgement continue to grow more nuanced with additional research. Scientific American’s article Mixed Impressions: How We Judge Others on Multiple Levels, written by Marina Krakovsky, evaluates social psychologist Amy Cuddy, Susan Fiske, and Peter Glick’s findings of judgement and how we perceive people -- explicitly when when we first meet them. “When we meet a person, we immediately and often unconsciously assess him or her for both warmth and competence,” she writes. Krakovsky also explored a study conducted by Nicolas Kervyn and his colleagues, who discovered that if a person is perceived as warm, they are therefore seen as less competent, and vise versa. If an individual is seen as competent, they are seen as cold rather than warm. “People who are judged as competent but cold—including those in stereotyped groups such as Jews, Asians and the wealthy—provoke envy and a desire to harm, as violence against these groups has often shown. And people usually seen as warm but incompetent, such as mothers and the elderly, elicit pity and benign neglect,” Krakovsky explains. Many of these stereotypes could pertain to a certain group more than another, depending on race, gender, class, point of view, etc.
Rapid social judgement-- specifically when we meet someone new-- is defined as ‘snap judgement.’ Snap judgement is a subcategory of social judgement. It happens subconsciously, and can even take precedent over rational mind. The article Snap Judgments Decide a Face's Character, Psychologist Finds written by Chad Boutin from News at Princeton writes that “Princeton University psychologist Alex Todorov has found that people respond intuitively to faces so rapidly that our reasoning minds may not have time to influence the reaction -- and that our intuitions about attraction and trust are among those we form the fastest.” Todorov goes on to explain that his five psychological experiments display that we are “hardwired” to make snap judgements, although he is not sure why the brain automatically makes quick and sometimes irrational assumptions. His studies suggest that the part of the brain that reacts to judgement and trust is called the amygdala. “The fear response involves the amygdala, a part of the brain that existed in animals for millions of years before the development of the prefrontal cortex, where rational thoughts come from,” Todorov states. He continues to explain his observations imply that trust may be a “case of high level judgement,” and that “the signal may bypass the cortex altogether.” This confusing ‘psychologist talk’ essentially boils down to this: trust and judgement are neurobiological, skipping over the rational part of our brains, therefore worsening our ability to form logical assumptions about an individual right away.
Interestingly enough, snap judgement studies also indicate that we instinctively make assumptions about an individual from animalistic instincts. Our non-verbal indications including posture and facial expressions originate back to these natural tendencies. Amy Cuddy, social psychologist and professor of business administration at Harvard University is one of the psychologists studying the warmth and competence factor of social judgement. She explains these instincts in The Psyche on Automatic, written by Craig Lambert in the Harvard Magazine. In the article, Cuddy says that perceptions of competence are often from physical assumptions. “In all animal species, postures that are expansive, open, and take up more space are associated with high power and dominance,” Cuddy says. “Postures that are contractive--limbs touching torso, protecting the vital organs, taking up minimal space— are associated with low power, being at the bottom of the hierarchy.” These instinctual postures directly connect to judgement and assumptions in the 21st Century. If an individual is slouching or folding their arms we see them as nervous and/or scared, trying to hide and protect themselves. Contrarily, if an individual is sitting up straight and keeping their arms away from their body we see them as confident.
The accumulation of multiple psychological studies and experiments concerning social judgement and snap judgement answers the seemingly complex question - is judgement automatic and natural, and is it possible to change our judgemental state of minds? Neurobiologically, an individual is prone to making social or snap judgements. “As time passes and you get to know people, you, of course, develop a more rounded conception of them. But because we make these judgments without conscious thought, we should be aware of what is happening when we look at a person's face,” describes psychologist Alex Todorov. Consequently, it seems that people have the ability to be mentally aware, and therefore can realize that they are making a (sometimes illogical) snap judgement. If this is acknowledged, an individual is capable of changing their assumptions and keeping an open mind. Todorov optimistically concludes that “quick first impressions can be overcome by the rational mind.”
By BRIGID O'BRIEN
Throughout the day, a single individual will make a plethora of judgments about a person on the street, a coworker, or a peer. People often make judgements on physical appearance and on how people present themselves, among other things. Can we change our judgemental state of minds? If an individual is acting judgemental, does it mean that they have a negative mindset? Or is judgement merely a cognitive reflex? Understanding the psychology of social judgement and snap judgment can help explain these neurobiological tendencies.
There are numerous types of psychological judgement. Social judgement is pervasive among humans--who subconsciously do the judging, or get judged--constantly. Whether a person has known someone for a day or a year, they form judgements about things such as appearance or personality. The website Psychology Campus explains in their article “Social Judgement” that social judgement is connected to two concepts that are loosely known as observable judgement and internal judgement. Observable judgement is assuming something about a human from their posture, facial expression, clothing, etc. We can actually see and observe these physical things.
Internal judgement, on the other hand, is a bit more complicated. This type of judgement occurs when a human makes an inference about someone's personality, loyalty, and love --all mental states of mind which are not externally observable. To form a internal judgement, someone would make an inference about another person from an assumption. When Sarah looks at Morgan, she sees that Morgan is smiling at her. She therefore assumes that Morgan genuinely likes her, when Morgan could be smiling at Sarah and loathing her existence. “Most of us learn to control or manipulate many of the cues we show to others in order to hide our internal state. Thus, we say ‘Fine thanks.’ when asked ‘How are you?’ even when we are sometimes far from fine,” Psychology Campus reports. Essentially, both types of judgement are from assumptions, but observable judgment is more likely to be closer to the truth than internal judgement.
In addition to these two concepts, the subconscious actions of filtering and inference are a large part of social judgement. “With respect to filtering, people tend to ignore much of what they see,” writes Psychology Campus. “With inference, people tend to go beyond the evidence in front of them and complete the picture that they filtered or did not see.” When an individual filters their observations of others, the brain is kept from being overwhelmed with information. An inference fills the gaps in the brain of unknown information. This tends to happen if someone is over-analyzing a person’s friendliness and actions, especially if they subconsciously want the person to feel a certain way towards them -- like a crush.
Scientists’ understandings of judgement continue to grow more nuanced with additional research. Scientific American’s article Mixed Impressions: How We Judge Others on Multiple Levels, written by Marina Krakovsky, evaluates social psychologist Amy Cuddy, Susan Fiske, and Peter Glick’s findings of judgement and how we perceive people -- explicitly when when we first meet them. “When we meet a person, we immediately and often unconsciously assess him or her for both warmth and competence,” she writes. Krakovsky also explored a study conducted by Nicolas Kervyn and his colleagues, who discovered that if a person is perceived as warm, they are therefore seen as less competent, and vise versa. If an individual is seen as competent, they are seen as cold rather than warm. “People who are judged as competent but cold—including those in stereotyped groups such as Jews, Asians and the wealthy—provoke envy and a desire to harm, as violence against these groups has often shown. And people usually seen as warm but incompetent, such as mothers and the elderly, elicit pity and benign neglect,” Krakovsky explains. Many of these stereotypes could pertain to a certain group more than another, depending on race, gender, class, point of view, etc.
Rapid social judgement-- specifically when we meet someone new-- is defined as ‘snap judgement.’ Snap judgement is a subcategory of social judgement. It happens subconsciously, and can even take precedent over rational mind. The article Snap Judgments Decide a Face's Character, Psychologist Finds written by Chad Boutin from News at Princeton writes that “Princeton University psychologist Alex Todorov has found that people respond intuitively to faces so rapidly that our reasoning minds may not have time to influence the reaction -- and that our intuitions about attraction and trust are among those we form the fastest.” Todorov goes on to explain that his five psychological experiments display that we are “hardwired” to make snap judgements, although he is not sure why the brain automatically makes quick and sometimes irrational assumptions. His studies suggest that the part of the brain that reacts to judgement and trust is called the amygdala. “The fear response involves the amygdala, a part of the brain that existed in animals for millions of years before the development of the prefrontal cortex, where rational thoughts come from,” Todorov states. He continues to explain his observations imply that trust may be a “case of high level judgement,” and that “the signal may bypass the cortex altogether.” This confusing ‘psychologist talk’ essentially boils down to this: trust and judgement are neurobiological, skipping over the rational part of our brains, therefore worsening our ability to form logical assumptions about an individual right away.
Interestingly enough, snap judgement studies also indicate that we instinctively make assumptions about an individual from animalistic instincts. Our non-verbal indications including posture and facial expressions originate back to these natural tendencies. Amy Cuddy, social psychologist and professor of business administration at Harvard University is one of the psychologists studying the warmth and competence factor of social judgement. She explains these instincts in The Psyche on Automatic, written by Craig Lambert in the Harvard Magazine. In the article, Cuddy says that perceptions of competence are often from physical assumptions. “In all animal species, postures that are expansive, open, and take up more space are associated with high power and dominance,” Cuddy says. “Postures that are contractive--limbs touching torso, protecting the vital organs, taking up minimal space— are associated with low power, being at the bottom of the hierarchy.” These instinctual postures directly connect to judgement and assumptions in the 21st Century. If an individual is slouching or folding their arms we see them as nervous and/or scared, trying to hide and protect themselves. Contrarily, if an individual is sitting up straight and keeping their arms away from their body we see them as confident.
The accumulation of multiple psychological studies and experiments concerning social judgement and snap judgement answers the seemingly complex question - is judgement automatic and natural, and is it possible to change our judgemental state of minds? Neurobiologically, an individual is prone to making social or snap judgements. “As time passes and you get to know people, you, of course, develop a more rounded conception of them. But because we make these judgments without conscious thought, we should be aware of what is happening when we look at a person's face,” describes psychologist Alex Todorov. Consequently, it seems that people have the ability to be mentally aware, and therefore can realize that they are making a (sometimes illogical) snap judgement. If this is acknowledged, an individual is capable of changing their assumptions and keeping an open mind. Todorov optimistically concludes that “quick first impressions can be overcome by the rational mind.”