The First Impression Bias

In the same vein, we suggest that the simple observation and description of perceivers’ judgments of target dress, as well as the “lenses” through which they understand target dress, is necessary before trying to formulate comprehensive theories of person perception that include target dress. Some high-validity cues were utilized (e.g., distinctive appearance for openness to experience); some high-validity cues were not utilized (e.g., stylish appearance and extraversion); and some low-validity cues were nevertheless utilized (e.g., neat appearance and conscientiousness). Thus, this work highlights how heterogeneous both the validity and utilization of dress cues might be for inferring personality traits specifically (and, likely, ambiguous social categories more broadly). Some people are better at making snap judgments than others. Additionally, cultural differences can create false impressions. Physical features, which strongly affect first impressions, can lead an observer astray.

In addition to being a form of self-expression, dress is also a vital identity-signaling tool for oppressed groups. For example, across history, members of the LGBTQ+ community have used dress to subtly but clearly state their sexual orientation and gender identity to other members of the community, allowing relationships and networks to form without being “out” to the general public (Clarke, 2013). Psychologists have long understood that people form impressions within seconds of meeting someone. In nightlife settings, these first moments often shape how the rest of the interaction unfolds. Racial and social bias, Automatic categorization by race, gender, and social class systematically skews first impression accuracy in documented ways.

Marketing Is Often A Battle Of Perception

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(4), 590–598. Naumann, L. P., Vazire, S., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(12), 1661–1671. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41(3), 258–290. Confirmation bias, Once a judgment forms, contradicting evidence gets discounted rather than integrated, making initial errors self-perpetuating. Modifiable cues, Posture, eye contact, vocal pace, and grooming are all controllable, and all measurably affect how you’re perceived.

• Social identity can also correspond with lower subjective social status and incentivize specific groups to prioritize subjective status.
• Another example highlights the interplay between target dress, target face/body, and target context.
• A firm handshake is confidence in Germany or the United States; in parts of the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa, physical contact between strangers carries entirely different norms.

Much of the recent work on color in social cognition is grounded in evolutionary theory, attempting to draw parallels between human and nonhuman responses to specific colors. For example, red (as expressed in the reddening of the face or the skin) is characterized as a testosterone-based indicator in competitive interactions between males, and thus appears to signal dominance in some contexts (Elliot & Maier, 2014; Hill & Barton, 2005). Color-in-context theory integrates biology-based and context-based meanings of colors and states that the meaning of color varies depending on the motivations and mental states of perceivers (Elliot & Maier, 2012). In this way, aesthetic preferences for color might emerge from functional preferences. The omission of dress from much of this work is problematic because dress may be highly relevant to the accuracy of categorization judgments. However, unlike faces and bodies, dress is consciously chosen, sometimes specifically for its ability to signal social identity or for its value for performing one’s identity (e.g., one’s gendered or sexual self; see Morgenroth & Ryan, 2021).

Rianna might decide to score each trait on a scale of +5 (very positive) to –5 charmingtalks (very negative). Once she has these numbers, she could then either add them together or average them to get an overall judgment. A second reason is that most people are pretty good liars. The cues that liars give off are quite faint, particularly when the lies that they are telling are not all that important.

More importantly, how can you become more self-aware—both in making and interpreting first impressions—to foster a more inclusive and effective campus environment? Let’s drill down into the science, the biases, the cues, and the practical strategies that will help you align your awareness with your ambitions. Now that we understand the basics and the science behind first impressions, we can examine how the impact of a first impression can go far beyond social settings. In job interviews, studies show that interviewers often decide within the first few seconds whether a candidate is a good fit (Kurter, 2019). First impressions can shape a teacher’s expectations, which can influence a student’s performance.

The Power Of Nonverbal Cues And Appearance

The courses covered diverse areas of the college curriculum, including humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. For each instructor, three 10-second video clips were taken—10 seconds from the first 10 minutes of the class, 10 seconds from the middle of the class, and 10 seconds from the last 10 minutes of the class. Without sharing private or too much personal information, let the person know that you’re open to answering any questions they have about you that feel appropriate for how long you’ve known each other.

Once you’ve decided someone seems untrustworthy, you begin interpreting their subsequent behavior through that lens. The initial impression doesn’t just persist, it actively reshapes the evidence that follows it. Beneath all of this sits the primacy effect, a well-documented phenomenon in which the information we receive first carries disproportionate weight. Solomon Asch’s classic experiments in the 1940s showed that people described as “intelligent, industrious, impulsive, critical, stubborn, envious” were rated far more positively than people described with the same traits listed in reverse order. Lengthen the exposure to 500 milliseconds and judgments of competence, likeability, and aggressiveness also stabilize. By the time a full second has passed, you have already been evaluated on multiple personality dimensions by every person who’s glanced at you.

Before founding The Decision Lab, he worked at the Boston Consulting Group and Google. Female sexual orientation is perceived accurately, rapidly, and automatically from the face and its features. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(6), 1245–1251.

For example, basketball shorts or sweatpants might signal going to work out for targets who weigh less and dressing for comfort for targets who weigh more. Another line of research focuses on how women’s dress influences perceivers’ judgments of their sexual interest. This work, in line with other heteronormative trends in dress research, focuses on straight Western male reactions to female targets.

The Psychology Of First Impressions: How We Judge In Seconds

De Paulo and colleagues did find, however, that there were some reliable cues to deception. Most people are good and honest folk, and we expect them to tell the truth, and we tend to give them the benefit of the doubt (Buller, Stiff, & Burgoon, 1996; Gilbert, Krull, & Malone, 1990). In fact, people are more likely to expect deception when they view someone on a videotape than when they are having an interpersonal interaction with the person. It’s as if we expect the people who are right around us to be truthful (Bond & DePaulo, 2006). Rearranging your clothes, messing with your hair, or any other behaviors that signal your discomfort will focus the energy between you on you.

The result is a person who seems capable but slightly cold, a less favorable combination than warm-and-adequate. When someone is working hard to seem impressive, the warmth signals often suffer. You’re not assessing a neutral stimulus, you’re assessing a person-in-context, and the context loads the assessment from the start. Sustained, warm eye contact signals engagement and confidence; averted gaze reads as evasive or anxious.

In the wild, quick decisions about who was friend or foe was surely life or death for our ancestors (Weiniger, 2024). Characteristics that have a very strong influence on our impressions of others. Any type of communication that does not involve speaking, including facial expressions, body language, touching, voice patterns, and interpersonal distance. You can be sure that it would be good to take advantage of the primacy and halo effects if you are trying to get someone you just met to like you. Begin with your positive characteristics, and only bring the negatives up later. This will create a much better outcome than beginning with the negatives.

Computer modeling reveals that resemblance to emotion expressions also varies with race. Neutral expression Black faces resemble happy expressions more and angry expressions less than do White faces. Like Black faces, neutral expression Korean faces look more emotionally positive than White faces, which contributes to White judges’ impressions of Korean faces as less hostile, more trustworthy, and more competent than White faces — the “model minority” Asian stereotype (Zebrowitz et al., 2010).

By understanding the psychology behind snap judgments, recognizing your own biases, and adopting actionable strategies for both making and interpreting first impressions, you lay the groundwork for more authentic, impactful relationships. Cultural norms and implicit biases can heavily influence what’s considered “appropriate” or “professional.” That’s why it’s essential to align your presentation with the expectations of the specific environment, while also being mindful of diversity and inclusion. First impressions don’t happen by accident—they’re hardwired into the way our brains process social information. From an evolutionary perspective, the ability to quickly assess friend from foe, trustworthy from dangerous, offered a survival advantage. That’s why, even today, our brains are primed to make split-second decisions about the people we meet. Dan is a Co-Founder and Managing Director at The Decision Lab.

Put simply, if we get an initially positive general impression of someone, we often see their specific traits more positively. The halo effect has been demonstrated in many social contexts, including a classic investigation by Bingham and Moore (1931) on job interviewing and a far more recent study of students’ evaluations of their professors (Keeley, English, Irons, & Hensley, 2013). Despite lay consensus that dress is important for first impressions, recent reviews of social categorization and evaluation processes (Bacev-Giles, & Haji, 2017; Kang & Bodenhausen, 2015; Pauker et al., 2018; Rule & Sutherland, 2017) have little to say about the impact of dress on these processes. This lack of attention contrasts sharply with heavily-researched factors involved in person perception, such as facial appearance. However, people in the wild regularly perceive faces in a fully embodied state—that is, with an entire outfit and body unavoidably integrated into the categorization and evaluation process.