Impression Rating via Speed-Dating: How A Single Communication Event Can Alter Perceptions of

195 Pages·2017·3.69 MB·English

TThhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff SSoouutthheerrnn MMiissssiissssiippppii
TThhee AAqquuiillaa DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmuunniittyy
Dissertations
Spring 5-2012
IImmpprreessssiioonn RRaattiinngg vviiaa SSppeeeedd--DDaattiinngg:: HHooww AA SSiinnggllee
CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn EEvveenntt CCaann AAlltteerr PPeerrcceeppttiioonnss ooff AAnnootthheerr IInnddiivviidduuaall
Andrew Clayton Dix
University of Southern Mississippi
Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations
Part of the Interpersonal and Small Group Communication Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Dix, Andrew Clayton, "Impression Rating via Speed-Dating: How A Single Communication Event Can Alter
Perceptions of Another Individual" (2012). Dissertations. 544.
https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/544
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more
information, please contact [email protected].
The University of Southern Mississippi

IMPRESSION RATING VIA SPEED-DATING:

HOW A SINGLE COMMUNICATION EVENT CAN ALTER

PERCEPTIONS OF ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL

by

Andrew Clayton Dix

Abstract of a Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate School
of the University of Southern Mississippi
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

May 2012
ABSTRACT

IMPRESSION RATING VIA SPEED-DATING:

HOW A SINGLE COMMUNICATION EVENT CAN ALTER

PERCEPTIONS OF ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL

by Andrew Clayton Dix

May 2012

The central purpose of this experiment is to scientifically test whether
interpersonal communication influences individual perceptions in a dating environment.
This study uses interaction appearance theory (IAT) as an empirical foundation for
understanding the relationship between communicative outcomes and personal opinions.
According to IAT, cognitive impressions of aesthetic appearance are highly fluid and
vulnerable to the results of multiple social interactions (Albada, Knapp, & Theune, 2002).
While most empirical investigations have provided additional support for this theory, no
studies have tested whether IAT applies to various other social constructs. As such, this
investigation was designed to address this gap in the literature as it explores the variables
of physical attractiveness, intelligence, attitudinal similarity, and background similarity
within an attraction-relevant atmosphere.
A total of 104 undergraduate students at a large southeastern university engaged
in speed-dating in order to ascertain if individual perceptions changed from pre-test to
post-test. Study participants were recruited via numerous channels that included but were
not limited to campus advertisements, class visits, and the student newspaper. Upon
arrival, participants completed a 19-item blended scale that was created by the principal
ii
investigator. Next, study participants socially interacted with multiple opposite-sex
speed-daters for a time period of three minutes per person. Before departure, the same 19-
item blended scale was re-administered to all study participants. The collected data was
then subjected to a series of statistical tests that included reliability analyses and 2 x 2 x 2
mixed factorial ANOVAs.
Four central conclusions were drawn based on the evidence that emerged from the
proposed hypotheses and research questions. First, interpersonal communication can be
strategically used by females to increase their level of physical attractiveness. Second, a
positive social interaction can make another person appear more intelligent. Third,
perceptions of attitudinal similarity are influenced by a mere 180 seconds of
communicative behavior. Fourth, the interaction appearance theory of communication
can be applied to a single social interaction as well as to multiple other dependent and
independent variables. When taken together, these results advance our practical
understanding of both interpersonal attraction as well as cognitive processes.

iii
COPYRIGHT BY

ANDREW CLAYTON DIX

2012
The University of Southern Mississippi

IMPRESSION RATING VIA SPEED-DATING:
HOW A SINGLE COMMUNICATION EVENT CAN ALTER
PERCEPTIONS OF ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL
by

Andrew Clayton Dix

A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate School
of The University of Southern Mississippi
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Approved:

_Lawrence A. Hosman_________________
Director

_Richard L. Conville___________________

_John C. Meyer_______________________

_Charles H. Tardy_____________________

_Eura Jung ________________________

_Susan A. Siltanen____________________
Dean of the Graduate School

May 2012
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer would like to acknowledge the faculty members who brought this
project to fruition. The first thank you goes out to Dr. Lawrence Hosman for his
assistance as dissertation chair. Additional gratitude is being directed towards Dr.
Richard Conville, Dr. Eura Jung, Dr. John Meyer, and Dr. Charles Tardy who graciously
served as committee members. Also, much oblige to Dr. Wendy Atkins-Sayre for
providing a remarkable space for conducting the present research.
The writer would also like to thank the operational individuals who assisted with
this experiment. Thank you Ed Pittman for participating as the male confederate in this
study. Similarly, considerable thanks are being paid to Shaunda French who served as the
female confederate in this dissertation. On a personal note, special thanks go out to MoCo
for dealing with me, this project, and my obsessive-compulsive tendencies.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………….................. ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS …………………………………………………………….... iv

LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………………... vii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ………………………………………………………….. viii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………..... 1

The Many Hats of Interpersonal Attraction
Empirical Foundations of Liking

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................... 6

The Current Research

III. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 65

Introduction
Participants
Materials
Procedure
Data Analyses

IV. RESULTS ................................................................................................ 90

Physical Attractiveness Dependent Variable
Intelligence Dependent Variable
Attitudinal Similarity Dependent Variable
Background Similarity Dependent Variable

V. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................ 124

Physical Attraction Changing Because of Social Interaction
Assessing the Intelligence of Others
How Do We Receive Attitudinally Similar Others?
Perceptions of Background Similarity in a Dating Environment
Limitations and Future Research
Conclusions

v
APPENDIXES ............................................................................................................... 147

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 161

vi
LIST OF TABLES

Table

1. Means for Interaction between Communication Condition and
Administration on Perceptions of Physical Attractiveness ...................................93

2. Means for Interaction between Communication Condition and
Administration on Perceptions of Intelligence .....................................................98

3. Means for Interaction between Participant Gender and Administration on
Perceptions of Intelligence ...................................................................................99

4. Means for Three-Way Interaction between Participant Gender,
Communication Condition, and Administration on Perceptions of
Intelligence...........................................................................................................102

5. Means for Interaction between Communication Condition and
Administration on Perceptions of Attitudinal Similarity ....................................106

6. Means for Interaction between Participant Gender and Communication
Condition on Perceptions of Attitudinal Similarity ............................................108

7. Means for Interaction between Participant Gender and Administration on
Perceptions of Attitudinal Similarity ..................................................................110

8. Means for Interaction between Participant Gender and Communication
Condition on Perceptions of Background Similarity ..........................................114

9. Means for Interaction between Participant Gender and Administration on
Perceptions of Background Similarity ................................................................116

10. Means for Three-Way Interaction between Participant Gender,
Communication Condition, and Administration on Perceptions of
Background Similarity ........................................................................................118

vii