Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Originalia

“On-line” und erinnerungsgestützte Urteilsbildung: Auslösefaktoren und empirische Unterscheidungsmöglicheiten

Published Online:January 01, 2000https://doi.org/10.1026//0033-3042.51.1.19

Abstract

Zusammenfassung. Im Bereich der sozialen Wahrnehmung können generell zwei verschiedene Urteilsprozesse unterschieden werden. Einerseits können Urteile direkt während der Enkodierung relevanter Informationen “on-line” gebildet und als unabhängige Einheiten im Gedächtnis abgespeichert werden. Andererseits können Personen Urteile erst zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt nach der Enkodierung relevanter Informationen bilden, wobei sie zuerst die früher verarbeiteten Informationen als Basis der Urteilsbildung erinnern müssen. Im vorliegenden Artikel geben wir zunächst eine Übersicht wichtiger Bedingungsfaktoren für diese beiden unterschiedlichen Urteilsprozesse. Danach diskutieren wir verschiedene empirische Methoden zur Differenzierung von on-line und erinnerungsgestützter Urteilsbildung. In zwei Experimenten wurden diese verschiedenen Methoden verglichen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, daß Indikatoren der Erinnerungsgüte sowie Antwortlatenzen (von Urteilen wie von Erinnerungsaufgaben) relativ zuverlässige Unterscheidungsmethoden sind. Die Messung von Antwortlatenzen ermöglichte darüber hinaus auch detaillierte Analysen der Urteilsprozesse. Korrelative Methoden waren dagegen für die Unterscheidung von on-line und erinnerungsgestützter Urteilsbildung wenig zuverlässig.


“On-line” versus memory-based judgments: Triggering conditions and empirical methods for differentiation

Abstract. In social perception two different judgment processes can be distinguished. On the one hand judgments can be formed “on-line” during the encoding of information and stored as independent units in memory. On the other hand persons can form judgments later after the encoding of the information. In this case they first have to recall earlier encoded information as a basis of their judgments. In the current paper we review conditions eliciting these judgmental processes. We then discuss several methods to differentiate empirically between on-line and memory-based judgments. Two experiments were conducted to compare these different discrimination methods. The results show that quality of memory as well as response latencies (for judgments and for memory) are reliable in discriminating between on-line and memory-based judgments. Response latencies also enabled more detailled analyses of judgment processses. In contrast, correlational methods provided less reliable discrimination between on-line and memory-based judgments.

Literatur

  • Anderson, N. (1989). Functional memory and on-line attribution.. In J. N. Bassili (Ed.), On-line cognition in person perception (pp. 1-17). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar

  • Carlston, D. E. Skowronski, J. J. (1986). Trait memory and behavior memory: The effects of alternative pathways on impression judgment response times.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 5– 13 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Dipboye, R. L. (1992). Selection interviews: Process perspectives . Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western Publ. Co. Google Scholar

  • Fazio, R. H. (1990). A practical guide to the use of response-latency in social psychological research.. In C. Hendrick & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research Methods in Personality and Social Psychology (pp. 74-97). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Google Scholar

  • Hamilton, D. L. Katz, L. B. Leirer, V. O. (1980). Cognitive representation of personality impressions: Organizational processes in first impression formation.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1050– 1063 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Hastie, R. (1993). Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

  • Hastie, R. Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgement depends on whether the judgement task is memory-based or on-line.. Psychological Review, 93, 258– 268 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Hastie, R. Pennington, N. (1989). Notes on the distincton between memory-based versus on-line judgment.. In J. N. Bassili (Ed.), On-line cognition in person perception (pp. 1-17). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar

  • Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience.. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York: Guilford Press. Google Scholar

  • Lichtenstein, M. Srull, T. K. (1985). Conceptual and methodological issues in examining the relationship between consumer memory and judgement.. In L. F. Alwitt & A. A. Mitchell (Eds.), Psychological Processes and Advertising Effects: Theory, Research, and Application (pp. 113-128). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar

  • Lichtenstein, M. Srull, T. K. (1987). Processing objectives as a determinant of the relationship between recall and judgment.. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 93– 118 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Mackie, D. M. Asuncion, A. G. (1990). On-line and memory-based modification of attitudes: Determinants of message recall - attitude change correspondence.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 5– 16 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • McConnell, A. R. Sherman, S. J. Hamilton, D. L. (1994a). On-line and memory-based aspects of individual and group target judgments.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 173– 185 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • McConnell, A. R Sherman, S. J. Hamilton, D. L. (1994b). Illusory correlation in the perception of groups: An extension of the distinctiveness-based account.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 414– 429 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Moser, D. V. (1992). Does memory affect judgment? Self-generated versus recall memory measures.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 555– 563 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Newman, L. S. Uleman, J. S. (1989). Spontaneous trait inferences.. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 155-188). New York: Guilford Press. Google Scholar

  • Sanbonmatsu, D. M. Sherman, S. J. Hamilton, D. L. (1987). Illusory correlation in the perception of individuals and groups.. Social Cognition, 5, 1– 25 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Sherman, S. J. Zehner, K. S. Johnson, J. Hirt, E. R. (1983). Social explanation: The role of timing, set, and recall on subjective likelihood estimates.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1127– 1143 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Snyder, M. Uranowitz, S.W. (1978). Reconstructing the past: Some cognitive consequences of person perception.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 941– 950 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Srull, T. K. Wyer, R. S., Jr. (1989). Person memory and judgment.. Psychological Review, 96, 58– 83 Crossref, Google Scholar

  • Wojcizke, B. (1994). Multiple meanings of behavior: Constructing actions in terms of competence or morality.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 222– 233 Crossref, Google Scholar