Nadine Lavan, Jessica H Turner, Matthew R Utber, Clare A M Sutherland
{"title":"Rating Traits Together or Apart: Presentation Format Affects First Impression Judgements.","authors":"Nadine Lavan, Jessica H Turner, Matthew R Utber, Clare A M Sutherland","doi":"10.1177/17470218261417512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In perception experiments, researchers often collect multiple perceptual judgements from the same stimuli and participants to answer their research questions. While the way in which perceptual judgements are collected may affect the data, research rarely considers task design when investigating this topic. We therefore investigated how two frequently used methods of collecting multiple ratings can affect perceptual judgements, focusing on first impressions of faces. One participant group provided ratings of seven person characteristics (e.g. femininity, youthfulness, trustworthiness) blocked by characteristic, rating faces for one person characteristic at a time, across seven blocks. Another participant group completed one block in which they rated all seven characteristics simultaneously via a list of rating scales. The listed presentation format reduced task duration by 22%, but affected the perceptual ratings in several ways, pointing to reduced data quality, potentially as a result of satisficing behaviours. Specically, inter-rater agreement was lower for some person characteristics (youthfulness, femininity, and trustworthiness) in the listed format. Variance in ratings was also reduced for youthfulness, femininity, and dominance, with ratings clustering closer to the middle of the scale. Importantly, correlations between different person characteristics became universally positive in the listed format, indicating reduced independence of judgements. These findings highlight that while presenting multiple judgements at the same time may offer efficiency, this approach can introduce systematic biases and potentially reduce the reliability of perceptual data. We therefore suggest using a blocked presentation format and consider how these trade-offs would impact experiments looking at multiple perceptual judgements collected from the same participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"2315-2327"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13498745/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218261417512","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In perception experiments, researchers often collect multiple perceptual judgements from the same stimuli and participants to answer their research questions. While the way in which perceptual judgements are collected may affect the data, research rarely considers task design when investigating this topic. We therefore investigated how two frequently used methods of collecting multiple ratings can affect perceptual judgements, focusing on first impressions of faces. One participant group provided ratings of seven person characteristics (e.g. femininity, youthfulness, trustworthiness) blocked by characteristic, rating faces for one person characteristic at a time, across seven blocks. Another participant group completed one block in which they rated all seven characteristics simultaneously via a list of rating scales. The listed presentation format reduced task duration by 22%, but affected the perceptual ratings in several ways, pointing to reduced data quality, potentially as a result of satisficing behaviours. Specically, inter-rater agreement was lower for some person characteristics (youthfulness, femininity, and trustworthiness) in the listed format. Variance in ratings was also reduced for youthfulness, femininity, and dominance, with ratings clustering closer to the middle of the scale. Importantly, correlations between different person characteristics became universally positive in the listed format, indicating reduced independence of judgements. These findings highlight that while presenting multiple judgements at the same time may offer efficiency, this approach can introduce systematic biases and potentially reduce the reliability of perceptual data. We therefore suggest using a blocked presentation format and consider how these trade-offs would impact experiments looking at multiple perceptual judgements collected from the same participants.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.