First Impressions: Examining Decisions After 100-Ms Face Exposure

This essay explores the concept of first impressions and how they are formed based on brief exposure to faces, particularly within a 100-millisecond timeframe. It delves into the social psychology behind these snap judgments, referencing studies conducted by Willis Todorov on trait inferences derived from facial appearances. The analysis covers experiments involving varying exposure times and their impact on judgments of traits like likeability, trustworthiness, aggressiveness, and competence. The essay also discusses the strengths and weaknesses of Todorov's research, highlighting the role of timed experiments in revealing how quick character assessments are often made without adequate rational thought. It concludes that even minimal exposure can lead to trait implications, with additional exposure enhancing confidence in these initial judgments. Desklib offers a wealth of similar essays and study resources for students.

First impressions by Willis Todorov

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
MAIN BODY
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES

INTRODUCTION
People more often draw trait implications from the facial presence of other people. It is
identified that the negligible situations under which the people can make such implications.
There is a discussion about the detailed trials, each of them concentrating on an explicit trait’s
findings, that operated the exposure time of unaware faces. In this, the decisions are made after a
100-ms exposure interrelated highly with the decisions are made in the absence of time
limitations, depicting that the exposure times was adequate for the applicants to produce an
impression (Clément, 2020).
MAIN BODY
The concept of social psychology is generally the scientific study of the human behaviors as
well as the mental processes as it can link to how the human can interact with others. In this, the
social psychologist can believe that the behaviors of the humans can be identified by both the
person's feature as well as the social conditions in which they live. It is generally the study of the
social conditions also. From the article, it is identified that, as a reduced vulnerability time as a
10th of a second is adequate for an individual to make an important trait inference from the facial
appearance. An extra vulnerability time enhances the confidence in the judgements as well as can
enable for more distinguished impressions of traits. The author conducted the study to effectively
know about the first impression that can make up the mind after many exposures to face. In this
discussion, people more frequently draw the inferences of traits from their facial appearance of
the other people’s. The author generally identified the negligible conditions under which an
individual can make such inferences. The author generally conducted the five experiments, and
each of them is concentrating on the particular trait opinion. The author generally influences the
vulnerability time of strange faces. The judgements can be made after a 100ms vulnerability
1

correlated highly with judgements that has been made in the absence of time confinement,
declare that the vulnerability time was generally sufficient for the participants in order to form an
impression (First Impressions, Making Up Your Mind After a 100-Ms Exposure to a Face, 2006).
The author says, for every judgement such as likeability, attractiveness, trustworthy,
aggressiveness as well as competence can enhanced the vulnerability time did not specifically
enhance the connections. While doing the research, the author started the research with the basic
three trail practices in order to inform the engaged participants with the activities. The author
conducted trails and for this, the author takes 66 faces in which 33 are male and 33 are the
female. These were generally categorized into 3 sets of each 22 people in a group. In this, each of
the engaged participants that is 22 of the faces were generally presented for the 100ms and
remaining 22 participants among them were present for 500ms and rest of the engaged
participants were generally presented for 1000ms. The author did this because, they were more
interested in the first impression and every face was presented only for once. The author can
have randomized the trail orders for every engaged participant by the computer system such that
the vulnerability time levels were specifically intermixed randomly (Abendschein, Pauli, Schmid
& Huber, 2021). In addition to this, the author generally conducted the principal factors analyses
with the varimax rotation in order to test whether the person impressions become more
differentiated as a function of enhanced vulnerability towards the face impressions. Through the
experiments, the analysis for both 500ms and the 100ms vulnerability time period can determine
only one of the components, signifying an abrasive of positive or negative discrimination. In this,
it is identified that all the positive traits generally had high positive loadings on the component as
well as the aggressiveness generally had some increased negative loadings. The author found that
the components have been accounted for 62.5% of the variance in the judgements made after
2

100ms vulnerability and about 58.3% of all the variance in the judgements made after 500ms
vulnerability. It is determined from the differences in the explained variance suggests that the
judgements made after 100ms vulnerability were more correlated than the judgements are
generally made after 500ms vulnerability (Shtudiner & Klein, 2020).
From the article, it is identified that the minimal vulnerability as 100ms is quite sufficient for
the people to make a specific trait inference from the face of stranger. In this, for every 5 traits,
the conclusions are made after 100ms vulnerability to the face were greatly associated with the
decisions that are particularly made in the absence of time limitations. In this, an additional
vulnerability the time did not enhances these such associations. The author found that the
response time has been reduced when the vulnerability time has been enhanced from 1000 to
500ms. Moreover, the response times are generally measured from the counterbalance of the
faces to the response. Therefore, in the very 500ms conditions, the participants generally had an
extra 400ms to figure out their conclusions. In addition to this, if the engaged participants figure
out the conclusions much faster in the 500ms conditions than in the 100ms circumstances, the
reaction times must have been reduced by more than 400ms in the former conditions. And from
overall article, it is analyzed that the extra vulnerability time enhances the confidence among the
conclusions as well as can enable for more distinguished traits affects. It is also determined from
the study that inferences from the facial occurrence can be difficult, from the discussion, the
traits illation from the facial occurrence can be identified as a self-generated, fast as well as a
system in processes (Theodorou & Kosic, 2021). In addition to this, the strengths and
weaknesses here involves such as Todorov uses the timed experiments and has found that the
snaps judgements on the character are quite often formed with lack of adequate time for the
rational thought. Furthermore, the strengths and weaknesses can also involve such as the
3

formation of impression has been considered by using three methods like free association, free
response as well as a check-list form. Here weaknesses can involve such as the first impression
was not accurate because the faces are superficial, quite general and can be inaccurate as well.
CONCLUSION
From the above discussion, it is analyzed that as little an exposure time as a 10th of a
second is quite adequate for the people to make a detailed trait implication from the facial
presence. An extra experience time can enhance the confidence within the judgements as well as
can enable for more distinguished trait imprints. Therefore, the findings are already attached on
the initial implication.
4

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Shtudiner, Z., & Klein, G. (2020). Gender, attractiveness, and judgment of impropriety: The case
of accountants. European Journal of Political Economy, 64, 101916.
Clément, F. (2020). Trust: Perspectives in Psychology. In The Routledge Handbook of Trust and
Philosophy (pp. 205-213). Routledge.
Theodorou, A., & Kosic, A. (2021). Need for Closure, Morality, and Prejudice. Social
Psychology.
Abendschein, R., Pauli, S., Schmid, L., & Huber, S. (2021, February). Impressions at First
Touch: Insights on how visually impaired persons form their first impressions of
technology. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Tangible,
Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (pp. 1-8).
Online:
First Impressions
, Making Up Your Mind After a 100-Ms Exposure to a Face, 2006 [Online] Available through:
<file:///C:/Users/user/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DIa6400.18502/KTmu15JQXlug0pQY
RHkIM6Zv.pdf>
5