Perceptual Errors Essay, Research Paper

Perceptual Organization

(1)

 Similarity is described as the tendency to group similar items. Similarity is much like stereotyping. Stereotyping is when someone judges another person on the perception of the group to which that person belongs.

 Proximity is described as the tendency to group elements that are close together. Implicit theories allow the presence of one characteristic to bring up a list of other characteristics that one would “think” goes with it. Implicit theories group elements that close together.

 Closure is the tendency to fill in the gaps in incomplete stimuli. A perception of people that apply to closure would be the Halo Effect. The halo effect allows one salient characteristic to overshadow ones evaluation of another in multiple arenas. In other words a person will “fill in the gaps” of another person.

 Continuation is the tendency to organize stimuli into continuous lines or patterns. Selective Perception is much like continuation. Selective perception is the continuing to justify ones own values, beliefs, etc.

 Simplicity is the tendency to reduce stimuli to their simplest shapes or patterns. The Actor-Observer Bias is a good example of simplicity. The observer in the actor-observer bias only sees the actual behavior of the actor. The observer only can assume things from the behavior and not the internal factors contributing to the actor’s behavior.

Perceptual Errors

(2) During the exam the proctor used contrast, selective perception and stereotyping to form a conclusion about a certain student. When the proctor noticed the student looking around the room during the exam he was evaluating that students behavior with the behavior of the other students who were all looking down at their desks taking their exams. (CONTRAST) Later, when the proctor saw the student and his classmate talking to one another he assumed the two students were cheating. The proctor was selectively interpreting what he saw on the basis of his background and experience as a professor. (SELECTIVE PERCEPTION) When the proctor finally accused the student of cheating the proctor had no evidence … he didn’t hear the students’ conversation or see the student looking at other’s exams. The professor judged the student on his perception of what was possible going on in a group of students during an exam. (STEREOTYPING)

(3) An Example Of A Time That I Was Misperceived

I am from Kansas City and moved to Salisbury a year ago. Well, when people would find out that I was from Kansas many thought that I must have lived on a farm, had never seen the ocean, that I must be unsophisticated and if I knew “Dorothy.” Much to everyone’s surprise I grew up in a big city and went to the beach every summer for vacation. I wasn’t the unsophisticated “hick” everyone thought. People who met me for the first time stereotyped me with their perceptions of the Midwest. There are a lot of farms in Kansas but I didn’t live on one. People also used selective perception in perceiving me because they disregarded the information that was inconsistent with their thoughts on Kansas.

Attribution Theory

(4) A recent event in my life that led to an unexpected outcome was just a couple weeks ago I was assigned to a group in one of my classes. I thought my group had a lot of good ideas and that we would do really well working on a presentation together. Well, my group turned out to be really lazy and not wanting to put a lot of effort into the project. I was really worried about getting a good grade on my project because my grade depended on three other people. I ended up receiving a grade lower than I had expected. I classify my attribution as external unstable.

(5) My roommate is always doing homework and studying but is always being interrupted by her boyfriend. She had an exam last week and thought that she would do okay on it but when she got it back… she had failed. She blamed it on the professor but I blamed it on the time she spends with her boyfriend. I classify my attribution as internal, unstable.

(6) Managers often attribute employees’ poor performance to internal causes. The affected employee often attributes the outcome to external causes.

(7) The potential “cost” of this “misperception” between managers and employees are that employees getting in trouble for something that they may have had no control over. A severe “cost” would be employees losing their jobs.