Perception errors: definition, types, features

A little theory

Before exploring the issue of interpersonal perception errors, it is worth examining the theoretical foundations of this category. Perception is the sensory knowledge of objects and phenomena in the environment. Perception is believed to be the basis of cognition. Perception occurs at the following levels:

Detection is the initial phase of perceptual development.
Discrimination is the process of forming a reference image of a situation.
Identification is the identification of the received image with those stored in consciousness.
Identification is the determination of an object to a specific class or category.

Perception has the following specific properties:

Objectivity - objects of perception are not a chaotic set of sensations, but are formed into specific images according to certain principles.
Structurality - an object or image is perceived as a structural model, which is abstracted from sensory sensations and has an objective nature.
Apperception - the general state of a person’s psyche influences the content of information obtained through perception. That is, it can be interpreted in favor of the interests of the subject.
Constancy - the same object or situation is perceived the same way even when conditions change.
Selectivity is the preferential perception of one object over other, less significant ones.
Meaningfulness - the perceived object subconsciously belongs to some category or class.

Three rules of perception

Features of human perception are subject to three basic rules. Namely:

Perception has a personal basis. Different people can perceive the same objects and events in different ways. At the same time, they consider their own view to be as close as possible to reality.
When a person believes that it is his perception that is closest to reality, difficulties arise in interpersonal communications associated with conflicts of interests.
If you allow emotions to control perceptions, you may miss important information for an objective assessment of reality. Thus the problem of false perception arises.

Sequence Effects

People perceive any new information based on the information that preceded it. This effect can be observed at work, master classes, and educational institutions.

Primacy effect

In other words, people overestimate the first impression. Because they believe that it is true, and the future attitude towards the person depends on it.

Novelty effect

You can talk for a long time and a lot about a person, but what will be remembered best is the fact that they did not expect from the person.

Repetition effect

The more often the same message is repeated, the more likely it is that people will believe what is happening. Many people think: “If everyone is talking about it, it means it’s true.”

Forms of organization of perception

The following basic forms of organization of perception are distinguished:

Figure-ground is a fundamental shape that determines the ability to distinguish dominant features (figure) and stimuli (ground). In this case, the figure reacts only to those stimuli that are really close to it.
Constancy means that over a long period of time a person uses the same samples and models to form perceptions.
Grouping - a number of signs and stimuli are grouped into a recognizable structure, which is characterized by internal uniformity. Grouping occurs according to the principles of proximity, similarity, isolation, and integrity.

The result of the perception process is the formation of a certain holistic image of the interlocutor or situation.

Correlate the proposed socio-psychological concepts and their definitions:

In my opinion, the following ratio would be correct:

A stereotype is a personal antipathy or active hostility towards another social group; however, individuals may or may not participate in discriminatory activities based on their views; Prejudice is a one-sided, distorted and, as a rule, prejudiced view characteristic of representatives of professional, age, social, ethnic groups or classes.

In other words, prejudice is a negative attitude towards a particular group (category) of people or cultural practice, most often unfounded; false, biased, negative opinion about someone or something, prejudice. For example, imagine that someone is trying to convince someone about the benefits of eating boiled insects. You can answer: “They are disgusting.” But crabs are also disgusting, nevertheless many people love them. “Yes, but insects have no nutritional benefit,” you continue. “In fact, they have a lot of proteins,” the opponent answers. He may use other arguments, but the point is that not eating insects is the result of a food bias that exists in some cultures. Some prejudices stem from a single personal experience (having an unpleasant encounter with a representative of some ethnic, social, religious or other group, and this encounter gave rise to prejudice against the entire group). Other prejudices come from parental teachings such as “we have nothing in common with such people.” People who feel unsafe may use another group as a scapegoat, e.g. as a socially recognized target that is fired upon because of this danger. This is what the Nazis did to the Jews, and the Bolsheviks to the landowners and capitalists.

Stereotypes are psychological connections, either innate or formed in the distant past, and which have become so automatic that a person is not even aware of them. Stereotypes determine and regulate the lion's share of human thinking and behavior. They are responsible for gait, handwriting, accent, habits, character, ways of processing information, behavior in similar situations, etc. Due to the fact that stereotypes are practically not realized, they are almost beyond the control of consciousness, often forcing a person to act in a certain way even against his will. So, on the embankment of the city of Sochi, one enterprising young man earns good money on one of the stereotypes of our culture. We all learned to ride a bicycle as children, and over time this process became automatic and turned into a stereotype. An observant entrepreneur connected the handlebars of a bicycle to the wheel with a gear train, and now when the rider turns the handlebars to the left, the wheel turns to the right, and vice versa. For a fee, anyone is offered three attempts (five for women) to ride this unusual structure just six meters in any direction without touching the ground with their feet. The prize is ten times the initial deposit. To many, this offer seems like an easy opportunity to make money, especially since they see how dashingly the owner and his assistant ride around on this bicycle. Before my eyes, dozens of people wishing to test their dexterity rode around the rebellious iron horse. The result is elbows, knees and noses smashed on the asphalt, and not a single one has coped with such a seemingly simple task. A person sits in the saddle, adjusts himself, well understanding that he only needs to turn the steering wheel in the opposite direction, while shifting the center of gravity to the other side. But his stereotype is configured differently, and the subconscious obeys the stereotype more readily than the mind. Result: the bicycle flies in one direction, the man, along with the unconquered stereotype, flies in the other.

Thus, prejudice is directly related to stereotype, namely, it is often based on a negative stereotype.

Problems of perception

The occurrence of perceptual disturbances and errors is largely caused by certain key perceptual problems. Namely:

A person's ability to process information is not infinite. When forming an impression about a person or situation, a huge amount of data enters the brain. Not being able to process the entire stream, we sift through them, perceiving only those that are within the scope of our interests and contribute to the speedy achievement of our goals.
Risk of false conclusions. When information is received in insufficient quantities, we draw conclusions about a person or situation based on limited data, conjecturing non-existent parameters. And when an opinion has already been formed, we do not want to take into account additional information.
Perception is a feedback system. Not only do we form impressions of people, but they also form impressions of us. By making guesses on this issue, we can draw incorrect conclusions, which leads to misunderstandings and conflict situations.
Intentional distortion of information. Trying to make the best impression on others, a person gives deliberately false information about himself.

Typical mistakes in understanding personality

Some common perception errors make it difficult to correctly understand and evaluate people. Here are the main ones:

The effect of preliminary acquaintance. This means that, long before direct communication, you form an impression of your interlocutor based on previously received information and your own prejudices.
Stereotype effect. The presence of certain stereotypes about the person himself or about the social group to which he belongs. In the process of communication, you pursue the goal of confirming the correctness of your beliefs.
Haste effect. An error in human perception associated with the desire to make a conclusion about the personality of the interlocutor before receiving complete information about him.
Structuring effect. An inference about a person based on his individual most striking features without taking into account other characteristics.
Halo effect. Transferring the first impression to the assessment of the qualities and all subsequent actions of a person.
Projection effect. A perception error in which a person attributes his own traits, feelings and qualities to the interlocutor.
The primacy effect. The first information received about a person personally or from third-party sources covers all objective facts and affects the attitude towards this person.
Mood effect. The error in human perception is due to the fact that emotional uplift or despondency can form the basis of the impression of the interlocutor. At the same time, its objective characteristics are not taken into account.
Deafness effect. Associated with a lack of desire to listen to other people’s opinions, the habit of relying only on one’s own feelings.
The effect of conservatism. This refers to the refusal to reconsider an opinion about a person, even if he has changed significantly over time.
Last information effect. Receiving positive or negative information about a person can radically change a long-established impression of him.

Concept of social perception

The observer, the author of a message that must be perceived, understood, interpreted by the observer, has long been the object of close attention of social psychologists. How is text read? What characteristics of appearance and observation are most important from the point of view of perception and understanding? What psychological characteristics are behind these characteristics, and how does the observer know this? At the moment of perception, the observed person appears before the observer as a certain set of socially significant features through which psychological properties and states are traditionally transmitted in a particular culture. Signs, or, as they are commonly called, “perceptual hooks,” which for a given person are a well-known social code. The meaning of most of them was deciphered for him by his parents and other close people, some by himself, and others he appropriated in the process of communicating with examples of his culture. These “hooks” are partly international: their interpretation is almost the same in different cultures and communities. At their core, these are the signs that decipher basic human emotions for us: joy, fear, pain, etc. The rest, and the majority of them, have a “local meaning”: born into a certain ethnic, social or even professional group. To interpret them correctly, it is important to know the culture of a particular group, or even better, to be included in it from birth. So what “hooks” are the most important for human perception? In answering this question, we will have to rely mainly on European and American studies, extrapolating their results to the Russian environment, since there is very little Russian research in this area.

A person's face is the most important source of information about the perceived person. Of all the parameters, the most important for us are facial expressions and eyes. Micro movements of the facial muscles can express a wide range of feelings and experiences. Facial expressions provide the most important and “honest” information about a person’s states: he is happy, sad, angry, worried. In terms of transmitting stable personality traits, its capabilities are very limited. Speaking about the face, how can one not recall physiognomy, an ancient science that “knows how” to read a person, his features, past, present and future based on the configuration of facial features. One of the first physiognomic systems appeared in China in the 3rd century BC. More than 100 face reading cards have been developed.
Human gestures and postures In the post-war years, a fairly popular area of research in social psychology was the creation of catalogs of gestures and postures characteristic of a particular culture. In recent years, much has been written about poses as a means of expression. Let us only emphasize that the best studied set of behavioral reactions (postures, gestures) that express the attitude towards a partner according to the following parameters: avoidance - approach, openness - closedness, dominance - submission. For example, physical communication distance indicates closeness or formality of contacts.
Human gait. There are many definitions of gait in the Russian language, which directly indicate the occupation, psychological state and even psychological characteristics of its performer: unkempt, tired, elevated, sophisticated, confident.

Problems of understanding

Not only people's perceptions of each other, but also understanding in the communication process can be affected by perception errors. Effects influencing these processes:

The effect of accompanying events. If certain phenomena often accompany or precede communication, they can be associated with a certain person and linked with his person.
The effect of unusualness. If an action does not fit into the generally accepted framework, but it was preceded by some event, then they try to present it as the reason explaining the behavior.
The effect of equal probability. The perception error may be due to the fact that the same line of behavior may have several explanations, which are equally valid.
The effect of underestimating the situation. A person’s action is interpreted from the point of view of his personal qualities, but external circumstances that could influence the chosen line of behavior are not taken into account at all.
The effect of cultural influence. Behavior is interpreted based on the philosophy that society adheres to. For example, in Western culture special attention is paid to the influence of external circumstances, while in the East they believe in the influence of higher forces.

The stereotype of expectation and its pedagogical options

Let us turn to the opinion of M. Snyder: “Stereotypes can create their own reality. They direct social interaction in such a direction that a stereotypically perceived individual begins to confirm through his behavior another person’s stereotypical impressions of himself.” A stereotype capable of generating a new reality is commonly called the “expectation stereotype.” It also has other names, better known in educational psychology: “self-actualizing prophecy” (R. Burns), “Pygmalion effect.”

The mechanism that ensures the operation of this stereotype is embedded in the process of social perception itself: the observer, on the basis of his “perceptual” research, forms his own strategy of behavior in relation to the observed and implements it. The observed person, constructing his own behavior, starts from this strategy, and, consequently, from the subjective opinion about him that has formed in the observer’s head. If the observer is an authoritative person, the observed person will try to fit into the model of behavior that was offered to him. The “prophecy” (the subjective assessment made by the observer) will begin to take effect.

Let's see how the stereotype of expectation works in the field of educational relationships.

One of the most important results of pedagogical stereotyping is the formation in the teacher’s mind of an image of an ideal student. This is the kind of student who supports the teacher in his role as a successful educator and makes his work enjoyable: cooperative, knowledge-seeking, disciplined. Children who resemble this ideal are perceived by the teacher not only as “good” students, but in general as good people, pleasant in all respects. Children who fit the opposite image—“bad” students—are generally perceived as indifferent, aggressive, and as sources of negative emotions.

The expectations that teachers form towards the child actually begin to determine his actual achievements. This is due to the fact that the child’s self-perception is formed under the influence of such expectations. As the Western psychologist Rist notes, many children are doomed to eke out a miserable existence at school and experience self-dislike only because they have been labeled “underdeveloped,” “unbalanced,” and “incapable” from the very beginning. That is, feedback from teachers to students, in the form of expectations, works, according to R. Burns, as a “self-actualizing prophecy.”

The stereotype of expectation is a really active factor in the pedagogical process. This is due to the fact that it manifests itself not only in the attitudes and expectations of the teacher, but also very actively in his behavior.

Let us consider the manifestations of the expectation stereotype in teaching practice.

1. The stereotype is manifested in the attitude towards the students’ answers. “Good” students are called on more often and supported more actively. The teacher, through his gestures and phrases, makes it clear to a “bad” student from the very beginning that he does not expect anything good from him. An amazing paradox arises: objectively, the teacher spends less time interviewing “bad” students than interviewing “good” ones, but in the mind of the teacher, subject to the “expectation stereotype,” the situation is subjectively reversed, and he sincerely believes that he spends the lion’s share of teaching time on lagging behind.

2. The stereotype also affects the nature of assistance in answering. Unbeknownst to himself, the teacher prompts and helps the “good” ones in order to confirm his expectations. However, he is convinced that he is pulling out the “bad” student.

3. The stereotype gives rise to characteristic statements addressed to successful and unsuccessful students. The bad ones are criticized more and harsher using generalizations like: “I didn’t learn again,” “As always, you...”, etc.

In general, an expectation stereotype can have positive consequences if the teacher managed to develop positive expectations in relation to a weak child. However, research shows that at the negative pole this stereotype works more effectively and consistently. In general, three factors determine the result of the influence of an expectation stereotype on a child:

— the teacher’s idea of the student’s abilities;

- the student’s own idea of his or her capabilities;

— the importance of the teacher’s opinion for the student.

Accordingly, you can expect results in cases where the teacher is authoritative for the child, when he and the student himself have a high opinion of educational opportunities. And also in those when the teacher has an extremely low opinion of the child’s abilities, and the latter no longer has words for self-support.

Let us now turn to another situation of social cognition - dialogical, which presupposes both perception and understanding by partners of each other.

The most common perceptual errors in psychology

From psychological practice, several common situations can be identified that cause difficulties in perception. Here are the most common perception errors:

The illusion of control. If a person is interested in the outcome of a particular situation, he tends to overestimate his influence on it. This phenomenon was discovered by the American psychologist Langer, who studied the behavior of people playing the lottery. One group bought tickets themselves, and the second received them as a gift. The former categorically refused the offer to exchange tickets, as they believed that their personal choice affected the likelihood of winning.
Zero risk preference. If a person is offered to reduce a minor risk to zero or significantly reduce a significant one, he is most likely to choose the first option. Although, it is much wiser to give preference to the second.
Selective perception. For example, you have developed an opinion on a specific issue. You search for information and become more and more convinced that you are right. But the catch is that you pay attention only to the information that confirms that you are right, and leave the rest without attention.
The illusion of transparency. This error of social perception occurs when a person finds himself in a situation in which it is necessary to lie. At the moment, it seems to him that everyone sees right through him, that everyone sees his insincerity.
Attribution error. It consists in the fact that a person explains his own mistakes by objective circumstances, and the mistakes of others by their personal qualities. This approach impedes the individual's ability to take responsibility for his actions.
The effect of moral trust. If a person has a strong positive reputation in society, others begin to think that he has neither vices nor bad intentions, which is often not true.
Cascade of available information. If some information appears frequently in sources that reach a large audience, it is considered true. The older generation is influenced by television and the press, and the younger generation is influenced by social networks.
Stockholm buyer syndrome. This is the name of the error of perception when a person justifies an expensive purchase, attributing all sorts of advantages to it and turning a blind eye to the shortcomings. Purchases made unnecessarily are justified in the same way.
Belief in a just world. Since people are afraid to realize the injustice and chaos of the world around them, they tend to find logic even in the most terrible and absurd situations.
Distorted perception of distortions. If you don’t find any vices or shortcomings in yourself, then you definitely have them. But you perceive them in a positive way, that is, distorted.

Concept, types and functions of communication

There are differences between communication and activity, as types of human activity. The result of an activity is usually the creation of some material or ideal object, product (formulation of a thought, idea). The result of communication is the mutual influence of people on each other. Both activity and communication should be considered as interconnected aspects of social activity developing a person. In real human life, communication and activity as specific forms of social activity appear in unity, but in a certain situation they can be realized independently of each other. The content of the category of communication is diverse: it is not only a type of human activity, but also a condition and the result of this same activity; exchange of information, social experience, feelings, moods.

Communication is characteristic of all higher living beings, but at the human level it takes on the most perfect forms, becoming conscious and mediated by speech. There is not even the shortest period in a person’s life when he is out of communication, out of interaction with other subjects. Therefore, communication became the object of socio-psychological analysis in the 20th century.

Content in communication is information that is transmitted from one living being to another in inter-individual contacts. The content of communication can be information about the internal motivational or emotional state of a living being, information about the state of the external environment, for example, signals of danger or the presence of biologically significant factors, for example, food, somewhere nearby. In humans, the content of communication is much broader than in animals. People exchange information with each other that represents knowledge about the world: rich, lifetime experience, knowledge, abilities and skills. Human communication is multi-subject, it is the most diverse in its internal content. In terms of content, communication can be presented as:

Material is the exchange of products and objects of activity that serve as a means of satisfying the actual needs of subjects.
Cognitive - sharing knowledge.
Active - exchange of actions, operations, abilities, skills.

An illustration of cognitive and active communication can be communication associated with various types of cognitive or educational activities. Here, information is transmitted from subject to subject that expands horizons, improves and develops abilities.

Conditional - exchange of mental or physiological states. In conditional communication, people exert influence on each other, designed to bring each other into a certain physical or mental state, for example, to lift the mood or spoil it; excite or calm each other, and ultimately have a certain effect on each other’s well-being.

Motivational – exchange of motivations, goals, interests, motives. Such communication has as its content the transfer to each other of certain motives, attitudes or readiness to act in a certain direction. For example, one person wants to ensure that another person has a certain desire to arise or disappear, so that a certain attitude towards action develops, a certain need is actualized, etc.

The purpose of communication is what a person does for this type of activity. In animals, the purpose of communication may be to encourage another living being to take certain actions, or to warn that it is necessary to refrain from any action. A person's number of goals increases. If in animals the goals of communication usually do not go beyond the satisfaction of biological needs, then in humans they are a means of satisfying many different needs: social, cultural, cognitive, creative, aesthetic, the needs of intellectual growth, moral development and a number of others.

By purpose, communication is divided into:

Biological is communication necessary for the maintenance, preservation and development of the organism. It is associated with the satisfaction of basic organic needs.
Social communication pursues the goals of expanding and strengthening interpersonal contacts, establishing and developing interpersonal relationships, and personal growth of the individual.

Business communication is usually included as a private moment in any joint productive activity of people and serves as a means of improving the quality of this activity. Its content is what people are doing, and not the problems that affect their inner world. There are as many private types of communication as there are subtypes of biological and social needs, for example:

Personal communication is focused mainly around psychological problems of an internal nature, those interests and needs that deeply and intimately affect a person’s personality; searching for the meaning of life, determining one’s attitude towards a significant person, towards what is happening around, resolving any internal conflict.
Instrumental - communication that is not an end in itself, is not stimulated by an independent need, but pursues some other goal other than obtaining satisfaction from the act of communication itself.
Target is communication, which in itself serves as a means of satisfying a specific need, namely the need for communication.

In human life, communication does not exist as a separate process or an independent form of activity. It is included in individual or group practical activity, which can neither arise nor be realized without intensive and versatile communication.

Means of communication can be defined as methods of encoding, transmitting, processing and decoding information transmitted in the process of communication from one living being to another. Encoding information is a way of transmitting it from one to another. Information can be transmitted through direct bodily contacts: touching the body, hands, etc. Information can be transmitted and perceived by people at a distance, through the senses (observation by one person of the movement of another, perception of sound signals produced by him). Man, in addition to all these natural methods of transmitting information, has many that are invented and improved by him. This is language and other sign systems, writing in its various types and forms (texts, diagrams, drawings), technical means of recording, transmitting and storing information (radio and video technology; mechanical, magnetic, etc.). In terms of his ingenuity in choosing means and methods of communication, man is far ahead of all known living beings living on planet Earth.

The functions of communication are distinguished in accordance with the content of communication. There are four main functions of communication. When combined, they give the communication processes specific specificity in specific forms:

1) The instrumental function characterizes communication as a social mechanism for managing and transmitting information necessary to perform an action. 2) Integrative - reveals communication as a means of uniting people. 3) The function of self-expression defines communication as a form of mutual understanding of the psychological context. 4) The translation function acts as a function of transferring specific methods of activity, assessments, etc.

Of course, these four functions do not exhaust the meaning and characteristics of communication. Other functions of communication include: expressive (the function of mutual understanding of experiences and emotional states), social control (regulation of behavior and activities), socialization (formation of interaction skills in society in accordance with accepted norms and rules), etc.

Communication is extremely diverse in its forms. We can talk about direct and indirect communication, direct and indirect, mass and interpersonal. In this case, direct communication is understood as natural contact “face to face” using verbal (speech) and non-verbal means (gestures, facial expressions, pantomime), when information is personally transmitted by one of its participants to another. Indirect communication is characterized by the inclusion of an “additional” participant in the communication process as an intermediary through whom information is transmitted.

Direct communication is carried out with the help of natural organs given to a living being by nature: hands, head, torso, vocal cords, etc. Direct communication is historically the first form of communication between people with each other; on its basis, in the later stages of the development of civilization, various types arise mediated communication. Indirect (i.e. through something) communication can be considered as incomplete psychological contact with the help of written or technical devices that make it difficult or delay in time the receipt of feedback between the participants in communication. Such communication is associated with the use of special means and tools for organizing communication and exchanging information. These are either natural objects (a stick, a thrown stone, a footprint on the ground, etc.), or cultural ones (sign systems, recordings of symbols on various media, print, radio, television, etc.).

Mass communication is multiple, direct contacts of strangers, as well as communication mediated by various types of media. Interpersonal is associated with direct contacts of people in groups or pairs with a constant composition of participants. It implies a certain psychological closeness of partners: knowledge of each other’s individual characteristics, the presence of empathy, understanding, and joint experience in activities.

When communicating, people strive to understand each other; The deeper the relationship, the stronger the desire to understand not only the meaning, but also the meaning of the word.

Errors in decision making

Errors in perceiving the situation when making decisions deserve special attention. Namely:

Pendulum solutions. This is a phenomenon in which, having realized the error of his decision, a person tries to return to his original state, believing that from the initial position he can influence the situation and correct it.
Duplicate solutions. Finding himself in new conditions, a person tries to adapt the decisions he makes to the established situation.
Conflicting decisions. Unlike the previous situation, a person in new conditions tries to make decisions that completely contradict the previously established and established way of life.
Adventurous solutions. Due to an incomplete perception of reality or an overestimation of one’s own capabilities, a person makes a decision that most likely will not be implemented or will fail.
Late decisions. Fearing making a mistake, a person thinks for a long time, missing the right time to act. As a result, when a decision is finally made, it can no longer affect anything and has no significant significance.
Demotivating decisions. Instead of lifting the spirits of those around him and his own spirit, the person takes a position that brings everyone down.
Template solutions. A person constantly acts according to a scheme developed over time, without analyzing its effectiveness.
Underestimation of risk. A person is aware of threats and risks, but prefers to think that this will not happen to him.

Effects (errors) of social perception.

The most studied and richest in factual material is the area of social perception

(social perception), which is associated with a description of its main phenomena, effects, and manifestations. All these effects and phenomena are at the same time a kind of “errors” (a manifestation of inaccuracies in social perception), and the most important patterns, the causes of which are rooted in the fundamental characteristics of the psyche. A fairly complete description of these effects, important for managers, can be found in A. V. Karpov [6, p. 236-239].

“Halo effect” (“halo effect”, “halo or horn effect”)

is the most famous of all the “errors” of interpersonal perception. Its essence is that the general favorable impression (opinion) of a person is transferred to the assessment of his unknown traits, which are also perceived as positive. Conversely, a general negative impression also leads to a negative evaluation of those traits that are unknown. This effect increases with a decrease in general awareness of the object of perception; in this case, it itself serves as a kind of means of replenishing the lack of information about the object. This effect leads to the fact that information about a person is categorized in a certain way, namely, it is superimposed on the image stored in memory that was formed in advance. This image plays the role of a “halo” that prevents one from seeing the actual features of the perceived personality. At the same time, the “halo effect” can influence both positive and negative evaluations (“horns effect”). (“First I work for the record book, and then the record book works for me” – this is the student’s formulation of this effect.) However, often not everything depends on the person himself; the information that others receive about him even before direct contact is also of particular importance.

“Sequence effect” as “primacy effect”

consists in a tendency to a strong overestimation of the first information about a person, in its fixation and high stability in the future in relation to other information received later.
It is also called the “dating effect”,
or
“first impression”.
As research shows, this initial information is extremely important subjectively; it receives a subjective assessment disproportionate to its objective importance and is very difficult to correct in the future. This effect is based primarily on unconscious evaluation mechanisms. A number of studies have shown that in a significant proportion of cases this effect is by no means just an “error”, since it gives, although a rough, approximate, but still quite accurate result. An ill-wisher who wants to harm a person is in a hurry to report something discrediting about him to the new boss. Against such an installation background, it is difficult for a person to justify himself and prove something. And a lot of time will pass until the leader understands the situation and assesses who is who.

"Sequence effect" as "novelty effect"

unlike the previous one, it does not refer to the perception of a stranger, but to the perception of an already familiar person. When it comes to close people, the situation is reversed: for some reason, the latest, new information becomes more reliable. Any unexpected action, non-standard act of a loved one forces one to draw a conclusion about the presence of certain personality traits that were not noticed earlier and which will further affect the development of the relationship. Newer information about the known turns out to be subjectively the most significant. This applies not only and not so much to information about the external characteristics of the subject, but also to his, for example, speech behavior. Therefore, there is a rule according to which the conversation should end with some effective phrase, since it is this that is best captured by the interlocutor and most of all influences his opinion and behavior.

The last two consistency effects are due to a common psychological mechanism – the mechanism of stereotyping.

All phenomena caused by it are sometimes separated into a separate group - the group of
“stereotyping effects”. A stereotype is
some stable image of a phenomenon or a person, which is used as a means, a kind of “shortcut”, a scheme for interaction.
It arises on the basis of common ideas about the essence of certain phenomena that have developed in everyday life (or in professional activity). It also arises on the basis of limited past experience, as a result of the desire to draw conclusions on the basis of limited information. Very often, the effects of this group arise in relation to group or professional affiliation (“all accountants are pedants”), but often also on the basis of purely everyday ideas (“fat people are good-natured, thin people are bilious,” “all plumbers are drunkards”). Stereotyping, as a mechanism and reason for the group of effects that arises on its basis, cannot be assessed from the standpoint of “good or bad.” It is twofold: by simplifying the process of perception, a person unwittingly “pays” for this simplification with the probability of erroneous perception. Otherwise, stereotyping leads to prejudice.
If a person's perception is based on past experiences, and the experience was negative, then any subsequent perceptions of members of the same group may be tinged with hostility, which harms people's learning and their interactions. Ethnic stereotypes are especially common when, based on limited information about individual representatives of ethnic groups, preconceived conclusions are drawn about the entire group.

Socrates also said: “Three things can be considered happiness: that you are not a wild animal, that you are a Greek and not a barbarian, and that you are a man and not a woman”... Almost two and a half millennia have passed, and the situation has changed little. The Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences conducted a number of interesting studies in 1997. To the question: “Why can’t women run businesses successfully?”

respondents answered as follows: “simply” believe that women are not capable of doing business at all – 22%;
sympathize with women, but believe that it is more difficult for them to receive support from officials, for example, to take out a loan from a bank - 22%; drew attention to the fact that for some reason it is more difficult for women to obtain an appropriate education - 12%; note the resistance of relatives, friends, and family to their doing business – 21%. What comments can there be here?
One of the relatively independent types of stereotyping are the so-called modeling errors. This is an image

a certain model of a person that develops on the basis of stereotypes and arises even
before the start of
interpersonal interaction, on the basis of preliminary information about him.
Modeling errors arise on the basis of an incompletely adequate pre-perceptual setting.
It is not entirely adequate because it is formed under the influence of stereotyping.
A particular type of modeling error, but important specifically for management activities, is the peculiar technocratic perception
of subordinates.
The manager “models” the subordinate on the basis of his official and professional affiliation and builds the image as he should be, based on this affiliation, and not on the basis of the characteristics of the real person. This phenomenon is a particular manifestation of the general technocratic, manipulative
leadership style. It is often a source of interpersonal conflicts in the “manager-subordinate” vertical. From this follows the well-known rule of humanistic management: one must see a person in a subordinate, and not a subordinate in a person; to lead not positions, but people.

The "role" effect.

It is necessary to distinguish between the personal characteristics of the person himself and his behavior determined by role functions. A leader can be a very gentle person, nevertheless, trying to create an impression of toughness and demandingness among his subordinates, he may seem heartless and rude. However, the performance of role functions can actually have an impact on the individual (mastering a profession in psychology is often associated with the concept of “professional deformation”).

The effect of "presence".

If a person has excellent skills in any activity, then in front of others he will cope with it even better than alone; if his actions are not honed to the point of automatism, then the presence of other people will lead to not so good results.

"Advance effect"

- this is when non-existent virtues are attributed to a person, and then they are disappointed when faced with his behavior, which is inadequate to the positive image that has developed about him.

"The Leniency Effect."

It consists of an unreasonably positive perception by the leader of his subordinates and exaggeration of their positive traits while underestimating the negative ones, in the opinion that they will “get better.”
Its basis is the desire to protect oneself from possible conflicts that inevitably arise during an objective assessment of negative traits. This effect is more often observed among leaders of democratic and especially permissive styles. For leaders of an authoritarian style, it “turns around” and appears as the effect of hyper-demandingness,
or
the effect of the prosecutor.
The effect of “physiognomic reduction”

consists of hasty conclusions about the internal psychological characteristics of a person based on his external appearance. These stereotypes are sometimes based on outdated psychophysiological concepts (Kretschmer et al.) about the connection between the structure of facial and body features and character traits. According to A. A. Bodalev, out of 72 people he interviewed about how they assessed the personality traits of other people by their appearance, 9 answered that a square chin is a sign of willpower, a large forehead is a sign of intelligence; 3 subjects identified coarse hair with an unruly character; 14 considered fatness a sign of good nature; 2 people associated thick lips with sexuality; 5 respondents considered short stature to be a sign of authority; 5 out of the total believe that beauty is a sign of stupidity.

"Beauty Effect"

manifests itself in the fact that outwardly more attractive people are regarded as more pleasant in general (more open, sociable, successful), while less attractive people are assigned a less enviable role. It is worth noting that beauty is still a subjective concept, the concept of it varies in different cultures, however, this does not prevent people of different nationalities from making mistakes when assessing the personality of others precisely because of their focus on the attractiveness of their interlocutor. However, a number of psychological studies have shown that almost every person seems likeable and attractive to someone.

"The Expectations Effect" or "Pygmalion Effect":

what kind of feedback a person expects, this is what he receives as a result (if he expects the employee to be constrained and closed, he will receive this; he assumes lightness and simplicity - he will provoke the partner to exactly this line of behavior); our open and kind-hearted behavior is to some extent a guarantee of the same reaction from our employees.

The phenomenon referred to as the effect of negative asymmetry of initial self-esteem is more complex and has a group conditionality.

Initially, it is the other group (“They”) that has more pronounced qualitative certainty in perception than its own group (“We”). But in the future, the first is assessed worse and less accurately than the second (one’s own). This is one of the typical sources of behavior of a leader who sets “other” individuals and “other” groups as an example to his subordinates, but does not adequately assess the advantages of “his” group - “not seeing a prophet in his own country.” A kind of “mirror” version of this phenomenon is the opposite effect: polarization with a “plus” sign in the assessments of members of one’s own group (“We are overestimated”) and with a “minus” sign for members of the out-group (“They are underestimated”). This effect is based on a mechanism for strengthening the group’s self-identity, emphasizing its importance and value, and therefore one’s importance as its leader.

Such polarization is a special case and at the same time one of the reasons for a more general phenomenon, which is called the phenomenon of “in-group favoritism.”

It consists of the tendency to favor in perception and value judgments members of one's own group as opposed to members of some other group (or groups).
This phenomenon sets the “most favored nation” mode for interpersonal relationships and perceptions of members within a group compared to intergroup connections. In terms of the relationship between the leader of a group (organization) and his subordinates, he acquires additional specific features. Firstly, he can and most often becomes selective in relation to individual members of the group. Secondly, at the same time it hypertrophies, transforming into the well-known phenomenon of protectionism,
that is, it moves from the plane of perception to the plane of action.

The phenomenon of “presumption of reciprocity” (illusion of reciprocity)

consists in a person’s stable tendency to perceive the attitude towards him from the people around him as similar to his own attitude towards them.
The reason for the phenomenon of “presumption of reciprocity” is that it is precisely this – a similar, i.e., equal relationship – that is subjectively presented as the most fair. The assumption of reciprocity is a kind of starting point from which interpersonal relationships begin to be built. For a manager, it is at the same time a regulator – a restraining mechanism. It forces him to remember that unfair assessments can cause a boomerang effect
on the part of subordinates.

The phenomenon of “assumption of similarity”

consists in the subject’s tendency to believe that other people significant to him perceive others in the same way as he does.
He transfers his perception of other people onto his subordinates. Thus, a leader is inclined, as a rule, to believe that his subordinates’ perception of both other people and himself is exactly the same as his own perception. Moreover, he builds his behavior and relationships with subordinates in such a way as to cultivate and strengthen this “unity of perception and assessments.” In extreme terms, this phenomenon can also go beyond perception and transform into the phenomenon of imposition of opinions. Two more phenomena – “mirror image” and favoritism
– have similar content and are as follows. Members of two groups (especially those in conflict) perceive the same personality traits as positive in members of their own group and as negative in members of the other group.

"Projection Effect".

Projecting your own qualities onto people causes an attitude of expectation and corresponding behavior. This effect very often manifests itself in people’s inability to take another person’s point of view. D. Carnegie draws attention to developing the ability to look at what is happening through the eyes of another person, and not according to the usual scheme: “I wouldn’t do that.” Of course, a choleric person will not behave like a phlegmatic person, so you shouldn’t expect this from him. The “projection effect” is associated with the level of development of the reflexive mechanism. It is, of course, easier for a person to see what is familiar and understandable to him, that is, himself in another person. A classic example of projection is a situation where a manager believes that the needs of his subordinates are the same as his own.

A characteristic “error” of perception is the phenomenon of ignoring the informational value of something that did not happen.

Any leader knows well that often what is more important is not what a person said or did, but what he did not say or do. In practice, this understanding is not always supported by actions due to this effect. Moreover, information “about what did not happen” is not only underestimated, but is often ignored as not occurring and therefore not taken into account at all, which very often leads to errors in management. Everyone knows the expression “silence is a sign of consent” as the simplest case of this phenomenon. In management, it is often quite complex and requires special understanding. The most important feature of professional competence and experience of a manager is a correct assessment of what could have happened, but did not happen, and why it did not happen.

Herbert Simon's theory of administrative behavior.

One of the most prestigious scientists in the social sciences over the past half century has been Herbert A. Simon. His administrative rational model of organization is often identified as a generic approach, applicable to either government or public enterprises. Simon's model has the potential to stimulate the policies needed for more genuine community organizations. Therefore, it has wide interest in manufacturing circles.

Herbert Alexander Simon was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the son of a German immigrant, an electrical engineer, inventor, and patent lawyer. After graduating from the University of Chicago with a bachelor's degree in 1936, the young economist continued to work at the university, working on problems of municipal government.

Simon's career began as a researcher for the City of Chicago (1936-38). In 1938-1939 he worked for the International Association of City Administrators in Chicago. His first papers on the problem of quantifying municipal performance, published in the late 1930s, served as the basis for Simon's appointment in 1939 as head of a research group at the University of California, which dealt with similar topics.

Three years later, after the expiration of the research funds, Simon returned to Chicago to continue his graduate studies. Along with his studies, he worked from 1942 to 1949, first as an assistant professor and then as a professor of political science at the Illinois Institute of Technology. After receiving his doctorate in 1943, Simon remained at the University of Chicago. In 1949, he moved from Chicago to Pittsburgh, where he helped organize the new Graduate School of Industrial Administration at Carnegie Mellon University. There he became a professor of management and then a professor in the department of computer science and psychology.

Simon was greatly influenced by his involvement in the development of computers and artificial intelligence. As Simon himself wrote, for him the main goal was not the “brute force” of computers for speed and solving complex problems, but copying human thinking in order to understand how it works. In this regard, Simon turned to a detailed analysis of how people think, and eventually came to formulate his theory of bounded rationality. At the same time, he was motivated by the same idea that previously inspired W. Mitchell - to make the social sciences as accurate as the natural ones.

In 1947, after several years of participation in research on organizational behavior, Simon published the book Administrative Behavior, in which he developed the ideas of Charles Barnard on motivation and decision making. In 1957, these views found even more complete expression in the book Models of Man.

In Memory of Alfred Nobel in Economics for 1978, Simon was awarded the prize "for his pioneering study of decision-making within economic organizations." In addition to the Nobel Prize, he received the American Psychological Association Award for Outstanding Contributions to Science (1969). He is a member of the American Economic Association, the American Psychological Association, the Econometric Society, the American Sociological Association, and the American National Academy of Sciences. He was awarded honorary degrees by the universities of Chicago, Yale, McGill, Lund and them. Erasmus (Rotterdam, Netherlands).

In an autobiographical sketch, Simon. rigor" of the social sciences, so that they are better equipped to solve the difficult problems they face, and to encourage close interaction between scientists in the natural and social sciences so that they can jointly apply their specialized knowledge and skills to the many complex issues of public policy that which requires both types of wisdom."

Thus, Herbert Simon made enormous contributions to the science of economic theory and management. His observations on decision-making within economic organisms are fully applicable to the systems and techniques of planning, budgeting and control used in both business and public administration. They therefore provide an excellent basis for empirical research.

Organizational rationality

The idea of rationality is the cornerstone of Simon's administrative literature. The use of a rational term varies depending on the level of analysis. In one sense, Simon uses rationality as the focus for organizational effectiveness. Otherwise - to describe individual behavior of an individual within an organization.

In reaching agreement with Simon's perspective, it is necessary to determine that the concept of "rational" is equivalent to "effective". More than three decades ago, Simon, along with co-authors D. Smithburg and W. Thompson (1950), observed that efficiency in its broadest sense is often used as a virtual synonym for rationality.

Therefore, organizational rationality means the economic efficiency of an administrative unit. Moreover, efficiency is a basic organizational need of people and management.

The book Administrative Behavior spends a lot of time on how an organization must be structured to do its job effectively. Simon argues that rationality as organizational effectiveness is more than just a guiding criterion. Instead, efficiency takes on importance as the operating principle of an organization. Simon goes on to say simply that efficiency is what good or right government intends.

However, the concept of rationality as efficiency is not universal throughout the organization. Most likely this is the area of a specific group. Therefore, it is most used with the opportunity cost of group activity in an organization. Even though this definition of rationality as efficient operations is a common one, Simon's writings do not preclude consideration of other issues. For example, unlike Luther Gulick, Simon rejects efficiency as a normative value for organizations. Instead, Simon sees effectiveness in terms of results, as a phenomenon that can be assessed objectively.

Thus, efficiency must be considered in an organization along with other issues. For example, with such an important aspect as the moral environment of the organization.

Organizational power and individual decisions.

In the analysis of any political or organizational theory, the central consideration is traditionally given to the role of power within the organization. Simon sees "an exercise of power" as a condition where the initiator "allows his decision to be presented to him by some other person." Moreover, according to the logic of organizational rationality (i.e., efficient operations), this power is clearly the power of organizational management.

In other words, it is not the good will of individual participants that directly influences their own decisions. Instead, behavior is intentionally shaped by management. For example, an employee's goal identification is a product of his or her location within the organization. This is so because being an organizational participant “changes a person's behavior by changing the actual premises that underlie his choices and decisions.” Employees thus expect and orient their behavior towards the goals of the organization. As Simon puts it, “a decision is organizationally rational if it is oriented towards the goals of the organization.” But what this situation creates is a psychological environment where participants must "adapt" to organizational goals, regardless of their own particular needs or choices. Thus Simon's rational man is clearly an institutionalized man.

Simon's employee is not only an "organized and institutionalized person" but also a person who "allows his decisions to be controlled by the decisions of others," which resembles a kind of deception. On closer examination, indeed, Simon's goal is to create a special environment that will encourage an individual to make the best decision, the decision most beneficial to the organization's needs and ends.

That is, there is a purely transactional quality of power, and its presence is felt whenever a subordinate accepts a superior's decision while simultaneously suspending his own critical faculties.

Simon's administratively rational view promotes the materialization of employees in the daily existence of work, and also divides people into organizational units. Employees are provided with the correct election perimeter (that is, the elections established by management). The rational model is indeed a secret political theory. This is the model whereby only the material needs of the participants are legitimized because human labor power is seen only as a means for human existence (that is, human labor power is nothing more than a means for material culture). This is a theory that serves government policy. Thus, it serves the existing power structure - administrative control.

This occurs, due to the preoccupation with instrumental methods in creating effective organizations, directing the individual's consciousness towards the means of achieving organizational goals. The perception is diverted far from the employees' own intentions. Moreover, a focus on management goals prohibits thought on the part of people about how such goals are defined, who, and who ultimately benefits from such measures. In reality, then, employees only limited choices, in the reified organization the prospects of individual choice are transformed into prospects of regulation. In other words, choice from a rational perspective results in compliance or simple obedience to superior authorities.

Thus, Simon's administrative rational theory of organization is a political theory, but it is clearly not the theory of social organization that Simon promotes, since the neutral and objective approach actually hides a strong organizational preference.

Ideology in the rational model

Simon's organization is rational to the extent that it is managed to maximize efficiency. However, rational in this context does not mean that the organization satisfies politically democratic or moral goals. Instead, efficiency in the rational model is an ideology or reified activity. Also, embodied efficiency creates obstacles to human growth, democratic participation, and social action in everyday organizational work situations.

There are two main problems to effectiveness: as an ideology and as a substantive activity. First, subject effectiveness is a barrier to political, social, and psychological development in people. Second, efficiency as an ideology is a moral barrier between people in organizations. This is a barrier that prohibits democratic interaction and dialogue among the workforce. Therefore, the prospect of social organizational existence is effectively neutralized. They are blocked because subject activity compresses the range of participants' choices, thus limiting the human choices that are available to resolve and alleviate problems in the workplace.

Efficiency as an ideology is a tool of modality that mystifies social relations in human consciousness. Moreover, this effectiveness is limited by the functional roles of people in the organization. These limits work towards the explicit implementation of abstract calculation and manipulation of the final outcome appropriate to the task in the organizational environment.

Subject effectiveness creates an understanding of the dehumanization of effectiveness, but it also poses a threat to human consciousness by minimizing human reflection and choice.

That is, rationality as efficiency reflects but distorts the everyday work environment. It is certainly an ideology because it automates computational behavior as the only prescribed manner of thought and action. At the same time, it strengthens the reality of organizational life. Consequently, human consciousness towards other values, ways of thinking, and actions (besides those prescribed by objective efficiency) will seem utopian, if conceivable at all.

Creating an effective environment is the creation of a social structure where people are forced to make decisions that are most beneficial to the needs and ultimate goals of the organization. But at the same time, this social structure is created by management, which allows efficiency to become an ideology or materialized activity.

Thus, the social environment of the organization becomes alienated by everyday employees. The social environment becomes alien when it is capable of independently resisting the human activity that produced and sustains it. Therefore, an alienated environment is a gap between what people create and what is created.

Herbert Simon made enormous contributions to the science of economic theory and management. His observations on decision-making within economic organisms are fully applicable to the systems and techniques of planning, budgeting and control used in both business and public administration. They therefore provide an excellent basis for empirical research.

Efficiency must be considered in the organization along with other issues. For example, with such an important aspect as the moral environment of the organization.

There is a purely transactional quality to power, and its presence is felt whenever a subordinate accepts a superior's decision while simultaneously suspending his own critical faculties. Simon's administrative rational theory of organization is a political theory, but it is clearly not the theory of social organization that Simon promotes, since the neutral and objective approach actually hides a strong organizational preference.

The social environment of the organization becomes alienated by everyday employees. The social environment becomes alien when it is capable of independently resisting the human activity that produced and sustains it. Therefore, an alienated environment is a gap between what people create and what is created.

Visual perception problems

The interpretation of information is also influenced by errors in visual perception. The reasons for such errors may lie both in the physiology of the visual apparatus and in psychological problems that lead to incorrect interpretation of shapes and sizes. Here are the main types of errors:

Illusion of perception of size - segments of the same length may appear different if there are additional elements or in different positions.
Distortion of geometric figures - due to the fact that parallel lines may not appear as such, and regular figures may look distorted.
The illusion of color and contrast - the same color can be perceived differently against different backgrounds.
The illusion of movement - with a certain arrangement of static objects they can appear dynamic.
Double images - different images can be seen in one image.
Illusions of depth perception - when focusing your gaze, the surface may appear either concave or convex.
The effect of perceptual readiness - in accordance with it, a person sees what he expects. In this regard, he may not notice any defects or details in the image.
A pareidolic illusion is a mental transformation of a real object into something else. An example is a situation where people see animal figures in the clouds and so on.
The aftereffect is due to the fact that an image can be stored on the retina for a short time, which is transferred to another object, changing its perception.

Peculiarities of perception

Perception can be determined by the idea of the partner formed during communication. Psychological research shows that the basis for the perception of previously unfamiliar faces and persons with whom we already have some experience of communication are various psychological mechanisms. In one case, perception occurs through the psychological mechanisms of intergroup communication, in the other - through the mechanisms of interpersonal communication.

Are you an expert in this subject area? We invite you to become the author of the Directory Working Conditions

Psychological mechanisms of perception within the framework of intergroup communication include social stereotyping, the essence of which is to build an image of another person based on certain standard patterns.

Definition 2

A social stereotype is a stable idea about certain phenomena or persons. It is typical for representatives of the corresponding social group.

Different social groups, when interacting with each other, develop social stereotypes, which can be, for example, ethnic (national).

Factors of perception errors

There are several factors that can affect the quality of perception. Perception error factors are as follows:

The superiority factor. In most cases, it is a fair assumption that people entering into communication have unequal positions. They may differ in social status, financial situation, level of intelligence, age, and so on. Thus, there is an overestimation or underestimation of personality associated with indirect parameters. This factor operates only when there is a significant difference for a person. The assessment parameters are different for everyone - clothing, behavior, environment, and so on.
Attractiveness factor. Based on personal preferences, it is common for a person to overestimate or underestimate the interlocutor. Thus, to the person we like more, we attribute positive qualities that may not be inherent in him. At the same time, antipathy makes us turn a blind eye to other people's virtues.
Attitude factor. People who treat us well look better in our eyes than they really are. But we tend to underestimate those who don’t like us or are indifferent.
Opinion factor. The closer a person's opinion is to our own position, the more attractive he seems to us. If someone else's point of view differs significantly from ours, this person will seem extremely unpleasant to us, despite all his virtues.

Barriers

Errors in perceiving a situation or a person are associated with the existence of certain barriers. Here are the key ones:

Aesthetic barrier. As a rule, it is associated with the appearance of the interlocutor. If a person is sloppy, untidy, or his image does not correspond to your ideas about aesthetics, you will have a negative attitude towards him on a subconscious level.
Barrier of negative emotions. It occurs when you communicate with a person who is upset about something or feels bad. This can lead to hostility and even rudeness. You may perceive this as rudeness and ignorance. If you are about to have an important meeting, be sure to first inquire about the situation and mood of the potential interlocutor in order to avoid mistakes in perceiving the situation.
Barrier of psychological defense. Perhaps you are being too rude or are a step above your interlocutor. This can cause the opponent to become aggressive as a defense mechanism.
Installation barrier. Perhaps the interlocutor has a negative attitude towards a specific topic or situation in which your communication takes place.
Double barrier. The idea is that you expect the same behavior and the same decisions from your interlocutor as you expect from yourself. If this does not happen, you change your attitude about your opponent in a negative direction.

Literature

1. Andreeva G.M. Social Psychology. – M.: Aspect Press, 2001.

2. Goranchuk V.V. Psychology of business communication and managerial interactions. St. Petersburg: Neva, 2003.

3. Krysko V.G. Social psychology: a course of lectures. – 2nd ed. – M.: Omega, 2005.

4. Morozov A.V. Business psychology. Lecture course. – St. Petersburg: Union, 2002.

5. Psychology and ethics of business communication. Textbook/Ed. Lavrinenko V.N. UNITY-DANA, 2006

7. Titova L.G. Business communication: Textbook. – M.: UNITY-DANA, 2005.

Attention!

If you need help writing a paper, we recommend turning to professionals. More than 70,000 authors are ready to help you right now. Free adjustments and improvements. Find out the cost of your work

Free estimate

Size: 25.38K

Downloads: 195

05.10.10 at 22:54 Author:katya2007312008

Liked? Click on the button below. It's not difficult for you

, and we
are pleased
).

To download test papers for free at maximum speed, register or log in to the site.

Important! All submitted Tests for free downloading are intended for drawing up a plan or basis for your own scientific works.

Friends! You have a unique opportunity to help students just like you! If our site helped you find the job you need, then you certainly understand how the job you add can make the work of others easier.

Add a job

If the Test work, in your opinion, is of poor quality, or you have already seen this work, please let us know.

Fighting Perceptual Errors

To prevent errors in the perception of information, adhere to the following recommendations:

Pay attention not only to textual information, but also to surrounding circumstances. In particular, when talking about the interlocutor, it is worth paying special attention to non-verbal signals (gestures, posture, facial expressions, intonation, and so on).
Don't pretend to listen. If you are unfocused, try to compose yourself or reschedule the conversation. The first person to suffer from a lack of information is yourself.
Don't be too sensitive. Concentrate on the informational rather than the sensory component.
Don't rush to conclusions. Without thoroughly analyzing the information received, do not draw conclusions or make any decisions.
Do not give in to a hasty protest impulse. Before objecting to your interlocutor, listen to his arguments in full and analyze them.

Address questions sequentially. A rapid flow of questions unsettles interlocutors and forces them to take a defensive position. Moreover, this way no problem will be fully considered.