impressionformation_inthewild

Previous

Citation article

Title:
Everyday perceiver-context influences on impression formation: No evidence of consistent effects.
Authors:
Xie, S. Y., Thai, S., & Hehman, E.
Year of publication:
2023
Publication name:
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Volume number:
49
Issue number:
6
Page numbers:
955-968
DOI or URL:
https://doi.org/10.1177/014616722210850
Publication type:
Refereed Journal Article

Study details

Baseline session:
Yes
Followup session:
No
Study design:
There were no manipulations. Participants completed an intake questionnaire, which included a brief measure of personality (Rammstedt & John, 2007) and demographic questions. They were then directed to a webpage explaining how to install and use the ExperienceSampler smartphone app (Thai & Page-Gould, 2018) that would record their responses throughout the day for up to 15 consecutive days. Data collection proceeded in multiple waves between August 29 and December 16 in 2019. Participants were notified twice a day for up to 15 consecutive days at quasi-random times via the app. Participants indicated the hours that they would be available to use their phone on weekdays and weekends, and notification times were randomized within these periods. When responding to a notification, participants were asked to report their impression of one randomly-selected human face, on 6 traits commonly assessed in impression formation research: friendliness, trustworthiness, attractiveness, intelligence, physical strength, and dominance (Hehman et al., 2017; Todorov et al., 2015). Participants rated each trait impression on 1-“Not at all” to 7-“Very much” Likert-type scales. Traits were presented in randomized order across surveys and across participants. After ratings, participants then completed brief measures of their current situation, environment, mood, and physiological state. The order of questionnaires and items within questionnaires were also randomized per survey. Participants could miss 5 notifications total, after which they would no longer receive notifications.
ESM measurement waves:
30
Ethics granting body:
---
Ethics protocol number:
334-0119
Location of participants (Countries):
United States of America
Background information:
neigh neigh
Languages:
English
Setting:
---
Collection platform:
---
Days of ESM data collection:
15
Number of ESM measures per day:
2
Sampling schedule:
signal-contingent
ESM schedule start time:
participant-specified
ESM schedule end time:
participant-specified
ESM schedule duration:
---

Sample details

Type of sample:
Participants were MTurk workers who chose to continue after an intake survey
Recruitment information:
Amazon Mechanical Turk
Incentives:
money per survey (25c USD) and a $2.00 USD bonus for completing at least 10 surveys
Exclusions:
neigh
Number of participants:
218

Contact info

Contact:
eric hehman
Contact email:
eric.hehman@mcgill.ca
Selection Variable Info Assessment type Constructs