Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
BY S. E. ASCH
Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science
New School for Social Research
TABLE 2
CHOICE OF FITTING QUALITIES (PERCENTAGES)
i. generous 91 8 55 87 33 56 58
2. wise 65 25 49 73 33 30 50
3- happy 90 34 QI
58 75 65
4. good-natured 94 17 69 QI
55 87 56
5. humorous 77 13 36 76 12 71 48
6. sociable 91 38 7i 91 55 83 68
7. popular 84 28 57 83 39 94 56
8. reliable 94 99 96 96 97 95 IOO
9. important 88 99 88 87 88 94 96
ID. humane 86 31 64 91 45 59 77
ii. good-looking 77 69 58 53 93 79
12. persistent IOO 97 98 96 IOO IOO IOO
13. serious IOO 99 96 91 IOO IOO IOO
14. restrained 77 89 82 67 94 82 77
15. altruistic 69 18 44 68 27 29 46
1 6. imaginative 51 19 24 45 9 33 31
17. strong 98 95 95 94 96 IOO IOO
1 8. honest 98 94 95 IOO 92 87 IOO
titative data describe group trends; they Under these conditions the selection
do not represent adequately the form of fitting characteristics shows a signifi-
of the individual impression. Generally cant change. The distribution of choices
the individual responses exhibit much for the total group (see Table 2, column
stronger trends in a consistently posi- labeled "Total") now falls between the
tive or negative direction. For these "warm" and "cold" variations of Experi-
reasons we employ the check-list results ment I. It appears that a more neutral
primarily for the purpose of comparing impression has formed.
group trends under different conditions. The total group results are, however,
For this purpose the procedure is quite largely a statistical artifact. An exami-
adequate. nation of the check-list choices of the
TABLE 3
RANKINGS OF "WARM" AND "COLD": EXPERIMENT I
"WARM" "COLD"
RANK
N PERCENTAGE N PERCENTAGE
i 6 M 12 27
2 15 35 8 21
3 4 10 i 2
4 4 10 2 5
5 4 10 3 7
6 3 7 2 . .5
7 6 14 13 33
42 100 41 100
TABLE 4
RANKINGS OF "POLITE" AND "BLUNT": EXPERIMENT III
A: "POLITE" B: "BLUNT"
RANK
N PERCENTAGE N PERCENTAGE
i 0 0 0 0
2 0 o 4 15
3 0 0 3 12
4 2 10 5 19
5 3 16 6 23
6 4 21 i 4
7 rIO 53 7 27
19 100 26 100
given data. In later experiments too The A group contained 20, the B group
we have found a strong trend to reach 26 subjects.
out toward evaluations which were not The changes introduced into the selec-
contained in the original description. tion of fitting characteristics in the
transition from "polite" to "blunt" were
C. Variation of a Peripheral Quality far weaker than those found in Experi-.
Would a change of any character- ment I (see Table 2). There is further
quality produce an effect as strong as evidence that the subjects themselves
that observed above? "Warm" and regarded these characteristics as rela-
"cold" seem to be of special importance tively peripheral, especially the char-
for our conception of a person. This acteristic "polite." If we may take the
was, in fact, the reason for selecting rankings as an index, then we may
them for study. If there are central conclude that a change in a peripheral
qualities, upon which the content of trait produces a weaker effect on the
other qualities depends, and dependent total impression than does a change in
qualities which are secondarily de- a central trait. (Though the changes
termined, it should be possible to produced are weaker than those of
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 267
Experiment I, they are nevertheless sub- appearing in Table 5 shows. (Compare
stantial. Possibly this is a consequence Table 3 of Experiment I.)
of the thinness of the impression, which More enlightening are the subjects'
responds easily to slight changes.) comments. In Series A the quality
D. Transformation from a Central to a "warm" is now seen as wholly de-
Peripheral Quality pendent, dominated by others far more
The preceding experiments have dem- decisive.
onstrated a process of discrimination I think the warmth within this person is a
between central and peripheral quali- warmth emanating from a follower to a
ties. We ask: Are certain qualities leader.
TABLE 5
RANKINGS OF "WARM" AND "COLD": EXPERIMENT IV
"WARM" "COLD"
i i 4 0 0 i 5
2 0 o 0 o o o
3 2 9 i 5 3 15
4 6 27 4 19 2 10
5 7 30 4 19 I 5
6 7 30 12 57 2 10
. -
7 — —-
II 55
constantly central? Or is their func- The term "warm" strikes one as being a
tional value, too, dependent on the dog-like affection rather than a bright friend-
other characteristics? liness. It is passive and without strength.
His submissiveness may lead people to
Experiment IV think he is kind and warm.
TABLE 6
SYNONYMS OP "CALM": EXPERIMENT V
serene 18 3
cold, frigid, icy, cool, calculating, shrewd, nervy, schem-
ing, conscienceless o 20
soothing, peaceful, gentle, tolerant, good-natured, mild- it O
mannered ii 0
poised, reserved, restful, unexcitable, unshakable 18 7
deliberate, silent, unperturbed, masterful, impassive,
collected, confident, relaxed, emotionless, steady,
impassive, composed ii 26
synonyms given to the two final terms. The data of Table 6 provide evidence
In Table 6 we list those synonyms of of a tendency in the described direction,
"calm" which occurred with different but its strength is probably underesti-
frequencies in the two groups. It will mated. We have already mentioned
be seen that terms appear in one group that certain synonyms appeared fre-
which are not at all to be found in the quently in both series. But it is not to
other; further, some terms appear with be concluded that they therefore carried
considerably different frequencies under the same meaning. Doubtless the same
the two conditions. These do not, how- terms were at times applied in the two
ever, include the total group of syno- groups with different meanings, pre-
nyms; many scattered terms occurred cisely because the subjects were under
equally in both groups. the control of the factor being investi-
We may conclude that the quality gated. To mention one example: the
"calm" did not, at least in some cases, term "quiet" often occurred as a syno-
function as an independent, fixed trait, nym of "calm" in both groups, but the
but that its content was determined by 3
In an earlier investigation the writer (2) has
its relation to the other terms. As a dealt with basically the same question though in
consequence, the quality "calm" was not a very different context. It was there shown that
certain phenomena of judgment, which appeared
the same under the two experimental to be due to changes of evaluation, were produced
conditions. In Series A it possessed an by a shift in the frame of reference.
270 S. E. ASCH
subjects may have intended a different qualities of high merit (intelligent—
meaning in the two cases. For this industrious), proceeds to qualities that
reason Table 6 may not reveal the full permit of a better or poorer evaluation
extent of the change introduced by the (impulsive — critical — stubborn), and
factor of embedding. closes with a dubious quality (envious).
The preceding experiments permit the This order is reversed in Series B.
following conclusions: A considerable difference develops
1. There is a process of discrimination between the two groups taken as a
between central and peripheral traits. whole. The impression produced by A
All traits do not have the same rank and is predominantly that of an able person
value in the final impression. The who possesses certain shortcomings
change of a central trait may completely which do not, however, overshadow his
alter the impression, while the change merits. On the other hand, B impresses
of a peripheral trait has a far weaker the majority as a "problem," whose
effect (Experiments I, II, and III). abilities are hampered by his serious
2. Both the cognitive content of a trait difficulties. Further, some of the quali-
and its functional value are determined ties (e.g., impulsiveness, criticalness) are
in relation to its surroundings (Experi- interpreted in a positive way under
ment IV). Condition A, while they take on, under
3. Some traits determine both the con- Condition B, a negative color. This
tent and the function of other traits. trend is not observed in all subjects, but
The former we call central, the latter it is found in the majority. A few
peripheral (Experiment IV). illustrative extracts follow:
II. THE FACTOR OF DIRECTION Series A
A person who knows what he wants and
If impressions of the kind here in- goes after it. He is impatient at people who
vestigated are a summation of the effects are less gifted, and ambitious with those who
of the separate characteristics, then an stand in his way.
identical set of characteristics should Is a forceful person, has his own convic-
produce a constant result. Is it possible tions and is usually right about things. Is
self-centered and desires his own way.
to alter the impression without chang-
The person is intelligent and fortunately he
ing the particular characteristic? We puts his intelligence to work. That he is
investigate this question below. stubborn and impulsive may be due to the
fact that he knows what he is saying and
Experiment VI what he means and will not therefore give in
The following series are read, each to easily to someone else's idea which he dis-
agrees with.
a different group:
A. intelligent—industrious—impulsive—criti- Series B
cal—stubborn—envious This person's good qualities such as indus-
B. envious—stubborn—critical—impulsive— try and intelligence are bound to be restricted
industrious—intelligent by jealousy and stubbornness. The person is
emotional. He is unsuccessful because he is
There were 34 subjects in Group A, 24 weak and allows his bad points to cover up
in Group B. his good ones.
This individual is probably maladjusted
The two series are identical with because he is envious and impulsive.
regard to their members, differing only
in the order of succession of the latter. In order to observe more directly
More particularly, Series A opens with the transition in question, the writer
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 271
proceeded as follows. A new group one. Somehow, he seems more intelligent,
(N=24) heard Series B, wrote the with his critical attitude helping that char-
acteristic 6f intelligence, and he seems to be
free sketch, and immediately thereafter industrious, perhaps because he is envious and
wrote the sketch in response to Series A. wants to get ahead.
They were also asked to comment on
the relation between the two impres- The check-list data appearing in
sions. Under these conditions, with the Table 7 furnish quantitative support for
transition occurring in the same sub- the conclusions drawn from the written
jects, 14 out of 24 claimed that their sketches.
TABLE 7
CHOICE OF FITTING QUALITIES (PERCENTAGES)
j. generous 24 10 42 23
2. wise 18 17 35 19
3. happy 3* 5 51 49
4. good-natured 18 0 54 37
5. humorous 52 21 53 29
6. sociable
7. popular
56 27 50 48
35 14 44 39
8. reliable 84 91 96 94
9. important 85 90 77 89
10. humane 36 21 49 46
II. good-looking 74 35 59 53
12. persistent 82 87 94 100
13. serious 97 100 44 100
14. restrained 64 9 91 91
15. altruistic 6 5 32 25
1 6. imaginative 26 14 37 16
17. strong 94 73 74 , 96
1 8. honest 80 79 66 81
impression suffered a change, while the Under the given conditions the terms,
remaining 10 subjects reported no the elements of the description, are
change. Some of the latter asserted that identical, but the resulting impressions
they had waited until the entire series frequently are not the same. Further,
was read before deciding upon their the relations of the terms to one another
impression. The following are a few have not been disturbed, as they may
comments of the changing group: have been in Experiments I and II,
You read the list in a different order and
with the addition and omission of parts.
thereby caused a different type of person to How can we understand the resulting
come to mind. This one is smarter, more difference ?
likeable, a go-getter, lively, headstrong, and The accounts of the subjects suggest
with a will of his own; he goes after what he
wants. that the first terms set up in most sub-
The first individual seems to show his envy jects a direction which then exerts a
and criticism more than the second one. continuous effect on the latter terms.
This man does not seem so bad as the first When the subject hears the first term,
272 S. E. ASCH
a broad, uncrystallized but directed im- Some further evidence with regard to
pression is born. .The next jcharacter- this point is provided by the data with
istic comes not as a separate item, but is regard to ranking. We reproduce in
related to the established direction. Table 8 the rankings of the character-
Quickly the view formed acquires a istic "envious" under the two conditions.
certain stability, so that later character-
istics are fitted—if conditions permit4— Experiment VII
to the given direction. It seemed desirable to repeat the pre-
Here we observe a factor of primacy ceding experiment with a new series.
guiding the development of an impres- As before, we reversed thie succession of
TABLE 8
RANKING OF "ENVIOUS": EXPERIMENT VI
INTELLIGENT-»ENVIOUS ENVIOUS-»!NTELLIGEN r
RANK
N PERCENTAGE N PERCENTAGE
i 5 15 7 29
2 4 II 4 i"
3 15 5 21
4 3 9 2 8
4 it 2 8
6 13 39 4
34 too 24 100
sion. This factor is not, however, to be terms. Unlike the preceding series,
understood in the sense of Ebbinghaus, there is no gradual change in the merit
but rather in a structural sense. It is of the given characteristics, but rather
not the sheer temporal position of the the abrupt introduction at the end (or
item which is important as much as the at the beginning) of a highly dubious
functional relation of its content to the trait. The series were:
content of the items following it.5 A. intelligent— skillful — industrious—deter-
4 mined—practical—cautious—evasive
For an instance in which the given conditions B. evasive—cautious—practical—determined
may destroy the established direction, see page 273.
6
In accordance with this interpretation the —industrious—skillful—intelligent
effect of primacy should be abolished—or re-
versed—if it does not stand in a fitting relation While the results are, for reasons to
to the succeeding qualities, or if a certain quality be described, less clear than in the ex-
stands out as central despite its position. The
latter was clearly the case for the quality "warm- periment preceding, there is still a defi-
cold" in Experiment I (see Table i) which, nite tendency for A to produce a more
though occupying a middle position, ranked com- favorable impression with greater fre-
paratively high.
The distinction between the two senses of quency. We report below the more
primacy could be studied experimentally by extreme protocols in each series.
comparing the recall of an identical series of
character-qualities in two groups, one of which
reads them as a discrete list of terms, the other Series A
as a set of characteristics describing a person. He seems to be a man of very excellent
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 273
character, though it is not unusual for one Series A
person to have all of those good qualities. I put this characteristic in the background
A scientist in an applied field, who does and said it may be a dependent characteristic
not like to discuss his work before it is com- of the person, which does not dominate his
pleted. Retiring and careful—but brilliant. personality, and does not influence his actions
Works alone, does not like to be annoyed to a large extent.
with questions. A very dynamic man. I excluded it because the other characteris-
A normal, intelligent person, who sounds tics which fitted together so well were so
as if he would be a good citizen, and of value much more predominant. In my first impres-
to all who know him. sion it was left out completely.
He seems to have at least two traits which It changed my entire idea of the person—
are not consistent with the rest of his per- changing his attitude toward others, the type
sonality. Being cautious and evasive contra- of position he'd be likely to hold, the amount
dicts his positive qualities. Altogether, he is of happiness he'd have—and it gave a certain
a most unattractive person—the two above- amount of change of character (even for traits
mentioned traits overbalancing the others. not mentioned), and a tendency to think of
the person as somewhat sneaky or sly.
Series B
This is a man who has had to work for Similar reactions occur in Group B,
everything he wanted—therefore he is eva- but with changed frequencies.
sive, cautious and practical. He is naturally The importance of the order of im-
intelligent, but his struggles have made him pressions of a person in daily experience
hard. is a matter of general observation and
He is out for himself, is very capable but is perhaps related to the process under
tends to use his skill for his own benefit.
investigation. It may be the basis for
He is so determined to succeed that he the importance attached to first im-
relies on any means, making use of his cun-
ning and evasive powers. pressions. It is a matter of general
experience that we may have a "wrong
Questioning disclosed that, under the slant" on a person, because certain char-
given conditions, the quality "evasive" acteristics first observed are given a cen-
produced unusual difficulty. Most sub- tral position when they are actually
jects in both groups felt a contradiction subsidiary, or vice versa.
between it and the series as a whole. In
response to the question, "Were there Experiment VIII
any characteristics that did not fit with
We studied the factor of direction in
the others?" n out of 27 in Group A
yet another way. Series A of Experiment
mentioned "evasive" while it was men-
VI was divided in two parts and pre-
tioned by ir out of a total of 30 in
sented to a new group as a description
Group B.
of two persons. The new series were:
It is of interest to observe how this
crucial term was dealt with by individ- A. intelligent—industrious—impulsive
B. critical—stubborn—envious
ual subjects. Some in Group A felt
unable to reconcile it with the view they Procedure, (i) Series A was read to
had formed; consequently they rele- this group (Group i), followed by the
gated it to a subsidiary position and, in written sketch and the check list. (2)
the most extreme cases, completely The subjects were instructed that they
excluded it. Others reported the oppo- would hear a new group of terms de-
site effect: the final term completely scribing a second person. Series B was
undid their impression and forced a new read and' the usual information was
view. The following comments are obtained. (3) Upon completion of the
illustrative: second task the subjects were informed
274 S. E. ASCH
that the two lists described a single per- The person seemed to be a mass of
son. They were instructed to form an contradictions.
impression corresponding to the entire He seemed a dual personality. There are
two directions in this person.
list of terms. Certain questions were
subsequently asked concerning the last On the other hand, only a minority in
step which will be described below. A Group 2 (9 out of 24) report any diffi-
control group (Group 2) responded culty. Further, the reasons given by the
only to the entire list of six terms (as latter are entirely different from those
in Series A of Experiment VI), and of Group i. These subjects speak in
answered some of the final questions. very general terms, as:
TABLE 9
CHOICE OP FITTING QUALITIES: EXPERIMENT VIII (PERCENTAGES)
4887 6
i. generous 10. humane 87 19
2. wise 3 ii. good-looking 81 36
3. happy 84 0 12. persistent
13. serious
85 67
4. good-natured 74 3 87 83
5. humorous 87 12 14. restrained 16 37
6. sociable
7. popular
89 24 15. altruistic
1 6. imaginative
66 o
94 9 65 15
8. reliable 85 47 17. strong 94 50
9. important 90 24 1 8. honest 100 58
We are concerned mainly to see how These characteristics are possessed by every-
Group i dealt with the final task, the one in some degree or other. The terms do
not give an inclusive picture.
establishing of an impression based on
the two smaller series. That Lists A and Only two subjects in Group 2 mention
B were widely different will be clear in contradiction between traits as a source
the check-list results of Table 9. of difficulty.
Most subjects of Group i expressed The formation of the complete im-
astonishment at the final information pression proceeds differently in the two
(of Step 3) and showed some reluctance groups. Series A and B are at first
to proceed. In response to the question, referred, in Group i, to entirely differ-
"Did you experience difficulty in form- ent persons. Each is completed in its
ing an impression on the basis of the direction, and the fact that they come
six terms," the majority of Group i (32 successively seems to enhance the con-
out of 52) replied in the affirmative. trast between them. It is therefore
The reasons given were highly uniform: difficult for them to enter the new
the two sets of traits seemed entirely impression. Some subjects are unable
contradictory. to reconcile the two directions com-
pletely; in consequence their divergence
I had seen the two sets of characteristics as
opposing each other. It was hard to envision becomes the paramount fact, as the fol-
all these contradictory traits in one person. lowing protocols illustrate:
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 275
The directions reacted on each other and a change in one or more of the traits, of
were modified, so that the pull in each direc- which the following are representative:
tion is now less strong. This gives a Jekyll
and Hyde appearance to this person. In A impulsive grew out of imaginative-
ness; now it has more the quality of hastiness.
I applied A to the business half of the
man—as he appeared and acted during work- Industriousness becomes more self-centered.
ing hours. B I referred to the man's social Critical is now not a derisive but rather a
life. constructive activity.
Stubborn had an entirely personal mean-
The independent development of A ing; now it refers to being set in one's ideas.
and B is on the other hand prevented The tenor of most replies is well rep-
in Group 2, where they function from resented by the following comment:
the start as parts of one description.6
When the two came together, a modifies
This conclusion is in general con- tion occurred as well as a limiting boundary
firmed by the following observation. to the qualities to which each was referred.
To the question: "Did you proceed by
combining the two earlier impressions III. STRONGLY SIMPLIFIED IMPRESSIO>,S
or by forming a new impression?" the To a marked degree the impressions
following responses are obtained: (a) here examined possess a strongly unified
33 of 52 subjects answer that they character. At the same time they lack
formed a new impression, different the nuances and discriminations that a
from either A or B; 12 subjects speak full-fledged understanding of another
of combining the two impressions, while person provides. Therefore they can be
7 subjects assert that they resorted to easily dominated by a single direction.
both procedures. The following are We propose now to observe in a more
typical responses in the first subgroup: direct and extreme manner the forma-
I couldn't combine the personalities of A tion of a global impression.
and B. I formed an entirely new impression.
I can conceive of the two sets of character- Experiment IX
istics in one person, but I cannot conceive of We select from the series of Experi-
my impressions of them as belonging to one ment I three terms: intelligent—skill-
person. ful—warm—all referring to-strong posi-
As I have set down the impressions, one is tive characteristics. These form the
exactly the opposite of the other. But I can basis of judgment. The results appear
fit the six characteristics to one person.
in Table 10.
That the terms of Series A and B There develops a one-directed im-
often suffered considerable change when pression, far stronger than any observed
they were viewed as part of one series in the preceding experiments. The
becomes evident in the replies to another written sketches, too, are unanimously
question. The subjects were asked, enthusiastic. The impression also de-
"Did the terms of the series A and B velops effortlessly.
retain for you their first meaning or did Negative characteristics hardly in-
they change?" Most subjects describe trude. That this fails to happen raises
6
a problem. Many negative qualities
The procedure of "successive impressions" could quite understandably be living
here employed might be extended to the study of
the effect of early upon later impressions. For together with those given. But the sub-
example, the impression resulting from the jects do not as a rule complete them in
sequence (A) + (B) might be compared with the this direction. This, indeed, they seem
reverse sequence (B) + (A), and each of these
with the sequence (A+B) or (B+A). to avoid.
276 S. E. ASCH
Experiment IXa The differences between "warm" and
The next step was to observe an im- "cold" are now even more considerable
pression based on a single trait. There than those observed in Experiment I.
are two groups; one group is instructed No qualities remain untouched. But
to select from the check list those char- even under these extreme conditions
acteristics wKich belong to a "warm" the characterizations do not become
person, the second group those belong- indiscriminately positive or negative.
ing to a "cold" person. The results "Warm" stands for very positive quali-
appear in Table 10. ties, but it also carries the sense of a
In order to show more clearly the certain easy-goingness, of a lack of re-
TABLE 10
CHOICE OF FITTING QUALITIES: EXPERIMENT IX (PERCENTAGES)
INTELLIGENT- INTELLIGENT-
SKILLFUL- SKILLFUL-
WARM WARM COLD WARM WARM COLD
(N=34) (N=22) (N=33) (N=34) (N=22) (N=33)
range of qualities affected by the given straint and persistence, qualities which
terms we constructed a second check are eminently present in "cold." A
list (Check List II) to which the sub- simplified impression is not to be simply
jects were to respond in the manner identified with a failure to make distinc-
already described. The results are re- tions or qualifications. Rather, what we
ported in Table n. find is that in a global view the distinc-
A remarkably wide range of qualities tions are drawn bluntly.
is embraced in the dimension "warm- The consistent tendency for the dis-
cold." It has reference to tempera- tribution of choices to be less extreme
mental characteristics (e.g., optimism, in Experiment I requires the revision of
humor, happiness), to basic relations to an earlier formulation. We have said
the group (e.g., generosity, sociability, that central qualities determine the con-
popularity), to strength of character tent and functional value of peripheral
(e.g., persistence, honesty). It even qualities. It can now be seen that the
includes a reference to physical charac- central characteristics, while imposing
teristics, evident in the virtually unani- their direction upon the total impres-
mous characterizations of the warm sion, were themselves affected by the
person as short, stout, and ruddy, and surrounding characteristics.
in the opposed characterizations of the Upon the conclusion of the experi-
cold person. ments, the subjects were asked to state
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 277
the reason for their choice of one pre- It is of interest for the theory of our
dominant direction in their characteri- problem that there are terms which
zations. All agreed that they felt such a simultaneously contain implications for
tendency. Some cannot explain it, say- wide regions of the person. Many terms
ing, in the words of one subject: "I do denoting personal characteristics show
not know the reason; only that this is the same property. They do not observe
the way it 'hit' me at the moment"; or: a strict division of labor, each pointing
"I did not consciously mean to choose neatly to one specific characteristic;
the positive traits." Most subjects, how- rather, each sweeps over a wide area and
ever, are explicit in stating that the affects it in a definite manner.7
TABLE ii
CHECK LIST II: CHOICE OF FITTING QUALITIES: EXPERIMENT IXA (PERCENTAGES)
given traits seemed to require comple- Some would say that this is a seman-
tion in one direction. The following tic problem. To do so would be, how-
statements are representative: 7
On the basis of the last findings an objection
These qualities initiate other qualities. A might be advanced against our earlier account of
man who is warm would be friendly, conse- the distinction between central and peripheral
quently happy. If he is intelligent, he would traits. If, as has just been shown, "warm" refers
to such a wide range of qualities, then the force
be honest. of the demonstration (see Experiment I) that it
The given characteristics, though very gen- exerts a great effect on the final impression
eral, were good characteristics. Therefore seems to be endangered. Is it to be wandered at
other good characteristics seemed to belong. that, this quality, which is single only in a lin-
When, for example, I think of a person as guistic sense, but psychologically plural, should be
warm, I mean that he couldn't be ugly. so effective? And should not the distinction be
drawn rather between qualities which contain
This was the tenor of most statements. many other qualities and qualities—such as
"politeness"—that are much more specific in
A few show factors at work of a some- range ?
what different kind, of interest to the The objection presupposes that a quantitatively
larger number of qualities will exert a greater
student of personality, as: effect than a smaller number. But this assumption
I naturally picked the best trait because I is precisely what needs to be explained. Why
does not the more inclusive term provide a greater
hoped the person would be that way. number of occasions for being affected by other
I went in the positive direction because I terms? What the assertion fails to face is that
would like to be all those things. there is a particular direction of forces.
278 S. E. ASCH
ever, to beg the question by disposing IV. SIMILARITY AND DIFFERENCE OF
of the psychological process that gives IMPRESSIONS
rise to the semantic problem. What The preceding discussion has definite
requires explanation is how a term, and consequences for the perception of
a highly "subjective" one at that, refers identity and difference between the
so consistently to so wide a region of characteristics of different persons. Of
personal qualities. It seems similarly these the most significant for theory is
unfruitful to call these judgments ster- the proposition that a given trait in two
eotypes. The meaning of stereotype is different persons may not be the same
itself badly in need of psychological trait, and, contrariwise, that two differ-
clarification. Indeed, in the light of our ent traits may be functionally identical
TABLE 12 ,
RESEMBLANCE OF SETS: EXPERIMENT X
N PERCENTAGE N PERCENTAGE
I 0 o 7 9
2 10 13 0 0
3 68 87 5 6
4 0 0 66 85
78 100 78 1 00
50 100 41 100
N PERCENTAGE N PERCEKTAGE
48 100 46 100
The choice of similar sets cannot in matched in only 22 and 25 per cent of
this case be determined merely on the the cases, respectively, while "quick" of
basis of the number of "identical ele- Set i is, in 32 per cent of the cases,
ments," for on this criterion Sets 2 and matched with "slow" of Set 3, and
3 are equally similar to i, while Sets i "quick" of Set 2 with "slow" of Set 4
and 4 are equally similar to 2. What in 51 per cent of the cases.8
factors may be said to determine the At this point the reports of the sub-
decisions with regard to similarity and jects become very helpful. They were
difference ? requested at the conclusion to state in
We come somewhat closer to an writing whether the quality "quick" in
answer in the replies to the following 8
In a forthcoming publication the writer will
question: "Which characteristics in the deal with theoretically similar issues in the con-
other sets resemble most closely (a) text of a problem in social psychology. This will
'quick' of Set i? (b) 'quick' of Set 2? be the report of an investigation of changes in
the content of identical social assertions when they
(c) 'helpful' of Set i? (d) 'helpful' of function as part of different frames of reference.
280 S. E. ASCH
Sets i and 2 was identical or different, In 3 slowness indicates care, pride in work
together with their reasons, and simi- well-done. Slowness in 4 indicates sluggish-
ness, poor motor coordination, some physical
larly to compare the quality "slow" in retardation.
Sets 3 and 4. The written accounts
permit of certain conclusions, which are Speed and skill are not connected as
stated below. are speed and clumsiness. Without
1. The content of the quality changes exception, "quick" is perceived to spring
with a change in its environment. The from skill (skillful—Kruick); but the
protocols Below, which are typical, will vector in Set 2 is reversed, "clumsy"
show that the "quicks" of Sets i and 2 becoming a consequence of speed
are phenomenally different, and simi- (clumsy«-quick). While Sets i and 3
larly for the "slows" of Sets 3 and 4. are identical with regard to the vectors,
The quickness of i is one of assurance, of
Set 2 is not equivalent to 4, the slow-
smoothness of movement; that of 2 is a forced ness and clumsiness of 4 being sensed
quickness, in an effort to be helpful. as part of a single process, such as
i is fast in a smooth, easy-flowing way; the sluggishness and general retardation
other (2) is quick in a bustling way—the (slow*=?clumsy).
kind that rushes up immediately at your
request and tips over the lamps. 3. Dynamic consequences are grasped
3 takes his time in a deliberate way; 4 in the interaction of qualities. "Quick"
would like to work quickly, but cannot— and "skillful" (as well as "slow" and
there is something painful in his slowness. "skillful") are felt as cooperating,
3 is slow in a methodical, sure way, aiming whereas "quick" and "clumsy" cancel
toward perfection; in 4 it implies a certain one another.
heaviness, torpor.
2 drops everything fast. He is fast but
2. The dynamic sources of the quality accomplishes nothing. The clumsy man
are relationally determined. In the might be better off if he were slow.
protocols we observe a process of mutual The second person is futile; he is quick to
determination between traits. They are come to your aid and also quick to get in
your way and under your hair.
grasped as not simply contiguous to one
i can afford to be quick; 2 would be far
another but in dynamic relation, in better off if he took things more slowly.9
which one is determined by, or springs
from, the other. In the light of these comments, which
i is quick because he is skillful; 2 is clumsy
are representative, we are able to formu-
because he is so fast. late the prevailing direction of the rela-
Great skill gave rise to the speed of i, tions within the sets.
whereas 2 is clumsy because he does every- In Sets i and 3 the prevailing struc-
thing so quickly. ture may be represented as:
helpful helforul
III. The second and third terms in IV. In the following series the second
Sets i and 2 below were compared, and third terms were to be compared:
respectively. SET i SET 2
SET i SET 2 warm cold
witty witty
intelligent impulsive persuasive persuasive
critical critical
stubborn stubborn Twenty-seven of 30 subjects judged
All subjects in a group of 31 judged "persuasive" as different; all judged
the term "critical" to be different in the "witty" to be different. A few of the
two sets; while 19 (or 61 per cent) comments follow:
judged "stubborn" as different. A few Witty:
of the remarks follow:
i laughs with the audience; 2 is either
Critical: laughing at or trying to make others laugh at
some one. 2 is satirical, not humorous.
i is critical because he is intelligent; 2
because he is impulsive. i has a jolly and happy-go-lucky wit. 2
The intelligent individual is critical in a will use wit as one uses a bow and arrow—
constructive manner; the impulsive one prob- with precision. He will have a target which
ably hurls criticism unthinkingly. will not be missed.
The intelligent person may be critical in a The wit of the warm person touches the
completely impersonal way; 2 may be critical heart. The cold person's wit is touched with
of people, their actions, their dress, etc. irony.
Stubborn: Persuasive:
The stubbornness of an intelligent person 1 is persuasive in trying to help others; 2 in
is more likely to be based on reason and it trying to help himself.
can be affected by reasoning. 2 may persuade through fear.
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 283
2 would be detached in his arguments; i qualities will have the same function
would appeal more to the inner emotional within their respective structures.
being of others.
V. The term "gay" was compared in DISCUSSION
the following series: I
SET i SET 2 The investigations here reported have
gay Say _ their starting-point in one problem and
intelligent stupid converge on one basic conclusion. In
industrious lazy
different ways the observations have
Twenty-seven of 30 subjects call "gay" demonstrated that forming an impres-
different. Some representative reasons sion is an organized process; that char-
follow: acteristics are perceived in their dynamic
They may both be equally gay, but the relations; that central qualities are dis-
former is different. The stupid person can covered, leading to the distinction
be gay over serious, sad matters, while the between them and peripheral qualities;
intelligent person is gay with reason. that relations of harmony and contra-
The first person's gaiety comes from full- diction are observed. To know a per-
ness of life; 2 is gay because he knows no son is to have a grasp of a particular
belter.
structure.
i knows when to be gay and when not
to be. Before proceeding it may be helpful
The gaiety of i is active and energetic; the to note two preliminary points. First:
gaiety of 2 is passive. For the sake of convenience of expres-
The intelligent person is gay in an intelli- sion we speak in this discussion of
gent way. forming an impression of a person,
They are the same—gaiety has no relation though our observations are restricted
to intelligence and industriousness. entirely to impressions based on descrip-
The foregoing observations describe a tive materials. We do not intend to
process of relational determination of imply that observations of actual per-
sons would not involve other processes
character-qualities. A given quality
which we have failed to find under the
derives its full concrete content from its
present conditions; we are certain that
place within the system formed by the they would (see p. 288 ff.). But we see
relations of the qualities. Some quali- no reason to doubt that the basic fea-
ties are seen as a dynamic outgrowth of tures we were able to observe are also
determining qualities. Qualities are present in the judgment of actual per-
seen to stand in a relation of harmony sons. Secondly: We have not dealt in
or contradiction to others within the this investigation with the role of indi-
system. These processes set require- vidual differences, of which the most
ments for the comparison of impres- obvious would be the effect of the sub-
sions. Identical qualities in different ject's own personal qualities on the
structures may cease to be identical: the nature of his impression. Though the
vectors out of which they grow may issue of individual differences is unques-
alter, with the consequence that their tionably important, it seemed desirable
very content undergoes radical change. to turn first to those processes which
In the extreme case, the same quality in hold generally, despite individual differ-
two persons will have different, even ences. A proper study of individual
opposed, meanings, while two opposed differences can best be pursued when a
284 S. E. ASCH
minimum theoretical clarification has zation of the dependent traits. As a
been reached. rule the several traits do not have equal
Let us briefly reformulate the main weight. And it is not until we have
points in the procedure o£ our subjects: found the center that we experience the
i. There is an attempt to form an assurance of having come near to an
impression of the entire person. ( The understanding of the person.
subject can see the person only as a 4. The single trait possesses the prop-
unit;10 he cannot form an impression erty of a part in a whole. A change in
of one-half or of one-quarter of the a single trait may alter not that aspect
person. This is the case even when the alone, but many others—at times all.
factual basis is meager; the impression As soon as we isolate a trait we not only
then strives to become complete, reach- lose the distinctive organization of the
ing out toward other compatible quali- person; the trait itself becomes abstract.
ties. The subject seeks to reach the core The trait develops its full content and
of the person through the trait or traits. weight only when it finds its place
2. As soon as two or more traits are within the whole impression.
understood to belong to one person, 5. Each trait is a trait of the entire
they cease to exist as isolated traits, and person. It refers to a characteristic
come into immediate dynamic inter- form of action or attitude which belongs
action.11 The subject perceives not this to the person as a whole. In this sense
and that quality, but the two entering we may speak of traits as possessing the
into a particular relation. There takes properties of Ehrenfels-qualities. Traits
place a process of organization in the are not to be considerd as referring to
course of which the traits order them- different regions of the personality, on
selves into a structure. It may be said the analogy of geographical regions
that the traits lead an intensely social which border on another.
life, striving to join each other in a 6. Each trait functions as a repre-
closely organized system. The repre- sentative of the person. We do not
sentation in us of the character of experience anonymous traits the par-
another person possesses in a striking ticular organization of which constitutes
sense certain of the qualities of a system. the identity of the person. Rather the
3. In the course of this process some entire person speaks through each of his
characteristics are discovered to be cen- qualities, though not with the same
tral. The whole system of relations clearness.
determines which will become central. 7. In the process of mutual inter-
These set the direction for the further action the concrete character of each
view of the person and for the concreti- trait is developed in accordance with
10
the dynamic requirements set for it by
To be sure, we do often react to people in a its environment. There is involved
more narrow manner, as when we have dealings
with the ticket-collector or bank teller. It cannot an understanding of necessary conse-
however be said that in such instances we are pri- quences following from certain given
marily oriented to the other as a person. The
moment our special attitude would give way to a characteristics for others. The envy of
genuine interest in the other, the point stated a proud man is, for example, seen to
above would fully apply.
11
have a different basis from the envy of
We cannot say on the basis of our observa-
tions whether exceptions to this statement occur, a modest man.
e.g., whether some traits may be seen as acci- 8. On this basis consistencies and
dental, having no relation to the rest of the per- contradictions are discovered. Certain
son. It seems more likely that even insignificant
traits are seen as part of the person. qualities are seen to cooperate; others to
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 285
negate each other. But we are not con- tant regions of psychology, such as in
tent simply to note inconsistencies or to forming the view of a group, or of
let them sit where they are. The con- the relations between one person and
tradiction is puzzling, and prompts us another.
to look more deeply. Disturbing fac-
tors arouse a trend to maintain the unity II
of the impression, to search for the It may be of interest to relate the
most sensible way in which the charac- assumptions underlying the naive pro-
teristics could exist together,12 or to
cedure of our subjects to certain cus-
decide that we have not found the key
tomary formulations, (i) It should now
to the person. We feel that proper
understanding would eliminate, not the be clear that the subjects express certain
presence of inner tensions and incon- definite assumptions concerning the
sistencies, but of sheer contradiction. structure of a personality. The gaining
(It may be relevant to point out that the of an impression is for them not a
very sense of one trait being in contra- process of fixing each trait in isolation
diction to others would not arise if we and noting its meaning. If they pro-
were not oriented to the entire person. ceeded in this way the traits would
Without the assumption of a unitary remain abstract, lacking just the content
person there would be just different and function which makes them living
traits.) traits. In effect our subjects are in
9. It follows that the content and glaring disagreement with the elemen-
functional value of a trait changes with taristic thesis which assumes independ-
the given context. This statement ex- ent traits (or traits connected only in
presses for our problem a principle a statistical sense) of constant content.
formulated in gestalt theory with regard (2) At the same time the procedure of
to the identity of parts in different struc- our subjects departs from another cus-
tures (8, 10). A trait central in one tomary formulation. It is equally far
person may be seen as secondary in from the observed facts to describe the
another. Or a quality which is now process as the forming of a homo-
referred to the person may in another geneous, undifferentiated "general im-
case be referred to outer conditions. (In pression." The uriity perceived by the
the extreme case a quality may be observer contains groupings the parts
neglected, because it does not touch of which are in more intimate connec-
what is important in the person.) tion with each other than they are with
We conclude that the formation and parts of other groupings.13 Discrimina-
change of impressions consist of specific tion of different aspects of the person
processes of organization. Further, it and distinctions of a functional order
seems probable that these processes are are essential parts of the process. We
not specific to impressions of persons may even distinguish different degrees
alone. It is a task for future investiga- of unity in persons. Increasing clear-
tion to determine whether processes of ness in understanding another depends
this order are at work in other impor- on the increased articulation of these
12
distinctions. But in the process these
Indeed, the perception of such contradiction, 13
or of the failure of a trait to fit to the others, may If we may assume that the situation in the
be of fundamental importance for gaining a observed person corresponds to this view, an im-
proper view. It may point to a critical region portant conclusion follows for method, namely,
in the person, in which things are not as they that we can study characteristics of persons with-
should be. out an exhaustive knowledge of the entire person.
286 S. E. ASCH
continue to have the properties of parts tion of these effects. The impression
in a single structure. would accordingly be derived from the
If we may for the purpose of discus- separate interaction of the components,
sion assume that the naive procedure which might be represented as follows:
is based on a sound conception of the
structure of personality, it would by no \b. Impression =
means follow that it is therefore free
from misconceptions and distortions.
But in that case the nature of errors
in judgment would have to be under-
stood in a particular way. It would
be necessary to derive the errors from
characteristics of the organizational
processes in judgment. The present etc.
investigation is not without some hints or
for this problem. It points to the
danger of forcing the subject to judge
artificially isolated traits—a procedure
almost universally followed in rating
studies—and to the necessity of provid-
ing optimal conditions for judging the It is important to note that this for-
place and weight of a characteristic mulation is in a fundamental regard
within the person (unless of course the different from Proposition II. The
judgment of isolated traits is required latter proposition asserts that each trait
by the particular problem). Under such is seen to stand in a particular rela-
conditions we might discover an im- tion to the others as part of a complete
provement in the quality of judgment view. The entire view possesses the
and in agreement between judges. At formal properties of a structure, the
the same time this investigation con- form of which cannot be derived from
tains some suggestions for the study of the summation of the individual rela-
errors in factors such as oversimplifica- tions.14 In the same manner that the
tion leading to "too good" an impres- content of each of a pair of traits can
sion, viewing a trait outside its context be determined fully only by reference
or in an inappropriate context. to their mutual relation, so the content
of each relation can be determined fully
Ill only with reference to the structure of
Returning to the main theoretical relations of which it is a part. This
conceptions described earlier (see pp. we may illustrate with the example of
258-260) it is necessary to mention a ,a geometrical figure such as a pyramid,
variant of Proposition I, which we have each part of which (e.g., the vertex)
failed so far to consider and in rela- implicitly refers to the entire figure.
tion to which we will be able to We would propose that this is the basis
state more precisely a central feature of for the discovery of central and periph-
Proposition II. It would be a possible eral traits and for assertions such as
hypothesis that in the course of form- that a given person is "integrated,"
ing an impression each trait interacts restricted, etc.
with one or more of the others, and 14
For a basic treatment of the concept of struc-
that the total impression is the summa- ture the reader is referred to M. Wertheiraer (10).
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY
On the the other hand, the notion of How consistent would this inter-
structure is denied in all propositions pretation be with the observations we
of the form I, including Ib. In the have reported? It seems to us that
latter, an assumption is made concern- there are grave difficulties in the way
ing the interaction of qualities, which of such an interpretation. In so far as
has the effect of altering the character the terms of conditioning are at all in-
of the elements. Once we have taken telligible with reference to our problem,
account of this change, we have in the the process of interaction can be under-
final formulation again a sum of (now stood only as a quantitative increase or
changed) elements: diminution in a response. This is not,
however, the essential characteristic of
Ib. Impression = a + b-f-c + d + e interaction as we have observed it,
In still another regard there is a dif- which consists in a change of content
ference between Propositions II and Ib. and function. The gaiety of an in-
This has to do with the nature of the telligent man is not more or less than
interaction between the traits. In terms the gaiety of a stupid man; it is dif-
of Proposition II the character of inter- ferent in quality. Further, the condi-
action is determined by the particular tioning account seems to contain no
qualities that enter into the relation principle that would make clear the
(e.g., "warm-witty" or "cold-witty"). It particular direction interaction takes.
is doubtful however whether a theory Here we may mention a more gen-
which refuses to admit relational eral point. We have referred earlier to
processes in the formation of a whole the comparative ease with which com-
impression would admit the same rela- plex situations in another person are
tional processes in the interaction of perceived. If traits were perceived sepa-
one trait with another. rately, we would expect to encounter the
In view of the fact that Proposition same difficulties in forming a view of
Ib has not, as far as we know, been a person that we meet in learning a
explicitly formulated with reference to list of unrelated words. That we are
the present problem, it becomes neces- able to encompass the entire person in
sary to do so here, and especially to one sweep seems to be due to the 16
state the process of interaction in such structured character of the impression.
a manner as to be consistent with it. between central and peripheral traits would be
This we might do best by applying cer- referred to a difference between conditioned reac-
tions of greater and lesser strengths; (2) the
tain current conceptions. We could change from a central to a peripheral trait could
speak of traits as "conditioned verbal be explained by the displacement of a response by
reactions," each of which possesses a other, stronger responses; (3) the factor of direc-
tion might be dealt with in terms of changes in
particular "strength" and range of gen- the temporal appearance of stimuli; (4) strongly
eralization. Interaction between traits unified impressions could be an expression of
would accordingly be assimilated to the highly generalized reactions; etc. Such formula-
tions would, however, fail to deal adequately with
schema of differential conditioning to the central feature of our findings, namely,
single stimuli and to stimuli in com- changes in the quality of traits and the organized
bination, perhaps after the manner of form 10
of the impression.
It should not, however, be concluded that
the recent treatment of "stimulus con- our views of persons are crystal clear. In fact,
figurations" by Hull (4,5) .1B they lack the precision with which we grasp a
mathematical theorem. We rarely feel that we
16 have exhausted our understanding of another per-
Proceeding in the same manner, it would be
possible to restate some of our observations in son. This has partly to do with the fact that the
terms such as the following: (i) the distinction person is in constant change.
288 S. E. ASCH
In terms of an interaction theory of say the clandestine change by a pupil
component elements, the difficulty in of an answer on a school test, has
surveying a person should be even the same psychological meaning in all
greater than in the formulation of cases.17 Once this point is realized,
Proposition I, since the former must its consequences for the thesis of
deal with the elements of the latter Hartshorne and May become quite
plus a large number of added factors. threatening. Let us consider a few of
the possibilities in the situation, which
IV would be classified as follows by Hart-
In order to retain a necessary distinc- shorne and May:
tion between the process of forming an
Honest
impression and the actual organization
of traits in a person, we have spoken 1. The child wants to alter his answer on a
test but fears he will be caught.
as if nothing were known of the latter.
2. He does not change because he is indiffer-
While we cannot deal with the latter ent to the grade.
problem, one investigation is of par-
ticular relevance to the present discus- < Dishonest
sion. We refer to the famous investi- 1. The child changes his answer because he
gation of Hartshorne and May (3), who is devoted to his teacher and anxious not
to lose her regard.
studied in a variety of situations the
2. He cannot restrain the impulse to change
tendencies in groups of children to act the wrong answer into the answer he now
honestly in such widely varied matters knows to be correct.
as copying, returning of money, cor-
recting one's school work, etc. The Psychologically, none of these acts are
relations between the actions of children correctly classified. Further, two of
in the different situations were studied these are classified in precisely the
by means of statistical correlations. wrong way. The child who wishes to
These were generally low. On the basis cheat but is afraid does not belong in
of these results the important conclu- the honest category, while the child
sion was drawn that qualities such as who cannot bear to leave the wrong
honesty are not consistent character- answer uncorrected does not necessarily
istics of the child but specific habits deserve to be called dishonest. We do
acquired in particular situations, that not intend to say that the psychological
"neither deceit, nor its opposite, hon- significance of the reactions was as a
esty, are unified character traits, but rule misinterpreted; for the sake of
rather specific functions of life situa- illustration we have chosen admittedly
tions." Having accepted this conclu- extreme examples. But the failure to
sion, equally fundamental consequences consider the psychological content intro-
were drawn for character education of duces a serious doubt concerning the
children. conclusions reached by Hartshorne and
Abstracting from the many things May.
that might be said about this work,
we point out only that its conclusion
is not proven because of the failure A far richer field for the observation
to consider the structural character of the processes here considered would
of personality traits. As G. W. All- be the impressions formed of actual
port (i, p. 250 ff.) has pointed out, we 17
See also discussion by D. W. MacKinnon (7,
may not assume that a particular act, p. 26 ff.).
FORMING IMPRESSIONS OF PERSONALITY 289
people. Concrete experience with per- servation of persons can furnish answers
sons possesses a substantial quality and to these questions.
produces a host of effects which have In still another regard did our in-
no room for growth in the ephemeral vestigation limit the range of observa-
impressions of this investigation. The tion. In the views formed of living
fact that we are ourselves changed by persons past experience plays a great
living people, that we observe them in role. The impression itself has a his-
movement and growth, introduces fac- tory and continuity as it extends over
tors and forces of a new order. In considerable periods of time, while fac-
comparison with these, momentary im- tors of motivation become important
pressions based on descriptions, or even in determining its stability and resist-
the full view of the person at a given ance to change.
moment, are only partial aspects of a Even within the limits of the present
broader process. study factors of past experience were
In such investigation some of the highly important. When the subject
problems we have considered would re- formed a view on the basis of the given
appear and might gain a larger applica- description, he as a rule referred to a
tion. Other problems, which were of contemporary, at no time to characters
necessity excluded from the present in- that may have lived in the past; he
vestigation, could be clarified in such located the person in this country, never
an approach. We mention one which in other countries. Further, experiments
is of particular importance. It was a we have not here reported showed un-
constant feature of our procedure to mistakably that an identical series of
provide the subject with the traits of traits produced distinct impressions de-
a person; but in actual observation the pending on whether we identified the
discovery of the traits in a person is person as a man or woman, as a child
a vital part of the process of establish- or adult. Distinctions of this order
ing an impression. Since observation clearly depend on a definite kind
gives us only concrete acts and qualities, of knowledge obtained in the past.
the application of a trait to a person Indeed, the very possibility of grasping
becomes itself a problem. Is character- the meaning of a trait presupposes that
ization by a trait for example a statisti- it had been observed and understood.
cal generalization from a number of That experience enters in these in-
instances? Or is it the consequence of stances as a necessary factor seems
discovering a quality within the setting clear, but the statement would be mis-
of the entire impression, which may leading if we did not add that the
therefore be reached in a single in- possibility of such experience itself pre-
stance? In the latter case, repeated supposes a capacity to observe and
observation would provide not simply realize the qualities and dynamic rela-
additional instances for a statistical con- tions here described. The assertion that
clusion, but rather a check on the the properties of the impression depend
genuineness of the earlier observation, on past experience can only mean that
as well as a clarification of its limiting these were once directly perceived. In
conditions. Proceeding in this manner, this connection we may refer to certain
it should be possible to decide whether observations of Kohler (6, p. 234 ff.)
the discovery of a trait itself involves concerning our understanding of feel-
processes of a strutural nature. Only ings in others which we have not
direct investigation based on the ob- observed in ourselves, or in the absence
290 S. E. ASCH
of relevant previous experiences. In his cannot supplant the direct grasping of
comprehensive discussion of the ques- qualities and processes, the role of past
tion, G. W. Allport (i, p. 533 ff.) has experience is undoubtedly great where
equally stressed the importance of direct impressions of actual people extending
perception of a given structure in over a long period are concerned. Here
others, of our capacity for perceiving the important question for theory is
in others dynamic tendencies. whether the factors of past experience
Nor do we consider it adequate to involve dynamic processes of the same
assert that in the present investigation order that we find at work in the
our subjects were merely reproducing momentary impression, or whether
past observations of qualities and of these are predominantly of the nature
the ways in which they modify each of associative bonds. It seems to us
other. When the subject selected a cer- a useful hypothesis that when we relate
tain trait as central (or when he de- a person's past to his present we are
posed a once central trait to a minor again relying essentially on the compre-
role within a new context) it is by no hension of dynamic processes.
means clear that he was guided by spe-
cific, acquired rules prescribing which REFERENCES
traits will be central in each of a great 1. ALLPORT, G. W. Personality: a psychological
number of constellations. It seems interpretation. New York: Holt, 1937.
2. ASCH, S. E. Studies in the principles of
more in accordance with the evidence judgments and attitudes: II. Determination
to suppose that the system of the traits of judgments by group and by ego stand-
itself points to a necessary center. And ards. /. soc. Psychol., 1940, 12, 433—465.
3. HARTSHORNE, H., & MAY, M. A. Vol. I,
as we have mentioned earlier, the inter- Studies in deceit, 1928; Vol. II, Studies in
action between two traits already pre- service and self-control, 1939; Vol. Ill
supposes that we have discovered— (with F. K. Shuttleworth), Studies in the
organization of character, 1930.
whether in the past or in the present 4. HULL, C. L. Principles of behavior. New
—the forces that work between them. York: Appleton-Century, 1943.
Given the quality "quick" we cannot 5. HULL, C. L. The discrimination of stimulus
configurations and the hypothesis of affer-
unequivocally infer the quality "skill- ent neural interaction. Psychol. Rev., 1945,
ful";18 but given "quick-skillful" we 52, 133-142-
6. KOHLER, W. Gestalt psychology. New York:
try to see how one grows out of the Liveright, 1929.
other. We then discover a certain con- 7. MACKINNON, D. W. The structure of per-
stancy in the relation between them, sonality. In Hunt, J. McV. (Ed.), Person-
ality and the behavior disorders, Vol. I.
which is not that of a constant habitual New York: Ronald Press, 1944.
connection. 8. TERNUS, J. Experimentelle Untersuchungen
While an appeal to past experience iiber phanomenale Identitat. Psych,
Forsch., 1926, 7, 81-136.
18
That it is at times difficult to infer qualities 9. THORNDIKE, E. L. A constant error in
on the basis of central traits is due to such factors psychological rating. /. appl. Psychol.,
as the lability of the person, the degree to which 1920, 4, 25-29.
the actions of a person are directed by a single 10. WERTHEIMER, M. Productive thinking. New
center, as well as situational forces. York: Harper, 1946.