Who has never made the wrong first impression on someone? Everyone, to a greater or lesser extent, judges others based on what they see first.

It is usual that if you see a beautiful person, you assume that he is also charismatic and warm, or if you see a person who wears glasses of pasta, you assume that he will be intelligent and responsible.

Implicit personality theories relate to the way in which inferences are made about other people based on how little is known about them. They are widely applied in everyday life and have profound repercussions at the social level.

Let us look in more detail at its definition, what factors influence the formation of first impressions and what the implications are for society.

Implicit personality theories: what are they?

Implicit personality theories are the biases that a person may commit when forming impressions of other people they do not know, based on a limited amount of information.

Certain factors influence the way in which first impressions about others are generated , such as the context, the prejudices that the individual has, as well as the state of mind or the rumours that have been spread about the prejudiced person.

The first definition of this type of theory was given by Bruner and Tagiuri in 1954, defining it as the knowledge one has about a person and the way in which such knowledge is used to make inferences about his personality. However, among the first people to address this concept was Solomon Ach, who, in the mid-1940s, carried out research to specify what factors influenced the formation of these first impressions.

General theories about this concept

Two theories have tried to explain in more depth how and why people, when we see another individual with certain characteristics and traits, generate inferences about his personality , assuming his behaviour and way of being.

Theory of consistency

This theory refers in the form in how a new impression generated relates to what was already known about the person being judged .

If positive traits have been seen in the person being judged, it is likely that it is assumed that the rest of his or her traits are also desirable. On the other hand, if what was observed was negative, it will be assumed that the person will have mostly undesirable characteristics.

Theory of attribution

This theory describes how people see that traits assumed in other individuals remain stable over time. That is, it is seen as if the characteristics attributed to another person remain constant throughout the other individual’s life.

Within this theory there are two positions:

On the one hand, the entity theory, which holds that personality traits are stable over time and situations , and that assumptions can be made about a person’s behaviour in general terms based on a reduced repertoire of his or her behaviours.

On the other hand is the incremental theory , which holds that features are something more dynamic, variable over time.

Factors influencing implicit personality theories

These are the elements that come into play in implicit personality theories.

1. Central vs. peripheral features

When a person is first observed or informed, the features seen are not equally taken into account. Some traits stand out from others. Within the research carried out by Asch himself, this idea was fundamental.

The central features are those that exert a greater protagonism and strength in the formation of the impression , while the peripheral ones are those that are not attributed so much importance, having less weight in the formation of the impression.

Asch was able to observe this through his research. In one of his studies, he asked some participants to form an impression of a person described as ‘intelligent, skilled, hardworking, warm, energetic, practical and cautious’, while others were asked to form an impression of a person described as ‘intelligent, skilled, hardworking, cold, energetic, practical and cautious’.

He saw that, although only one feature was changed, the impressions formed by the participants differed significantly. Moreover, when he asked them to answer which traits they found most remarkable, ‘warm’ and ‘cold’ stood out from the rest.

Also, he could observe that when a central trait was seen as negative, as is the case of ‘cold’, its sign was imposed, although the rest of the peripheral traits were positive.

2. Effect of Observer Traits

We people attribute traits to ourselves . The more importance we attribute to a certain trait about ourselves, the more likely we are to see it in others. Of course, the trait in question will vary depending on the person and the context plays an important role.

For example, if you consider yourself very extroverted, when you meet other extroverted people, the impression you get from them will tend to be more positive. Also, if one sees oneself as more reserved, when meeting people who are also unsociable one will see them as more desirable.

One of the explanations behind this phenomenon would be the perception of seeing people with characteristics similar to their own as members of the endogroup , just as it happens when a person of the same ethnic group, culture or religion is seen.

By considering them as parts of the same group as a personality characteristic or trait, one tends to bias the first impression in positive terms.

3. Filling gaps

Sometimes, and as simple as it may seem, when we receive little information about others, we proceed to ‘fill in the gaps’ that exist in their personality, attributing to them features consistent with what has already been seen .

4. Primacy effect

Greater weight is given to the information that has been received first compared to that which has come later.

The first features observed will define the direction in which the print is made , causing them to be analysed according to what has already been assumed first.

5. Mood

Humor can influence the way in which the first impression is made.

Being in a good mood favours a more integral and holistic analysis of the other person , taking into account all his/her features or trying to have as much information about him/her as possible.

However, if you are not having a good day, it is more common to opt for a strategy that focuses on specific details and features.

In addition, there is some congruence with the state of mind and the impression that has been made. If you are in a bad mood, you are more likely to make a negative first impression of another person.

Implications of such psychological theories

Implicit personality theories imply many consequences at the social level, especially when others are misjudged. Also, it has been suggested that this type of ways of generating impressions influence memory when remembering others, remembering, especially, the features and behaviours seen in the person that are consistent with how the first impression was generated.

They have been associated with the degree to which a particular employee action is evaluated by supervisors. For example, if a worker presents a remarkable trait that is positive for the organization, his or her boss assumes that he or she may have other positive traits as well, and the first impression is generated on that basis.

All this can be related to two phenomena.

Firstly, we have the halo effect , which is the tendency to conclude that a person’s traits are all positive if he shows a small amount of them, or, conversely, if he only shows a few negatives, it is assumed that the rest will also be positive. This fact could be simplified by categorizing people as undoubtedly good or undoubtedly bad based on a few behaviors seen.

Secondly, physical attractiveness often influences the way in which the impression is given . If a person is pretty, it is usually assumed that she will have socially desirable characteristics, while if a person is not, rather, graceful, it will be assumed that she has negative characteristics. This idea is popularly known, which is why there is a saying ‘don’t judge a book by its cover’.

Bibliographic references:

  • Bacova, V. (1998). Implicit personal theories on specific domains of the social world. Studia Psychologica, 40, 255-260.
  • Chiu, C. Y., Dweck, C. S., Tong, J. Y. Y. & Fu, J. H. Y. (1997). Implicit theories and conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 923- 940.
  • Chiu, C. Y., Hong, Y. Y. & Dweck, C. S. (1997). Lay dispositionism and implicit theories of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 19- 30.
  • Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C. Y. & Hong, Y. Y. (1995). Implicit theories. Elaboration and extension of the model. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 322-333.
  • Dweck, C. S., Hong, Y. Y. & Chiu, C. Y. (1993). Implicit theories. Individual differences in the likelihood and meaning of dispositional inference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 644-656.
  • Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley
  • Hollander, J. A. & Howard, J. A. (2000). Social psychological theories on social inequalities. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 338-351.