Thin-Slicing Judgments In Psychology

Thin-slicing in psychology refers to the ability to make accurate judgments about people or situations based on very limited information, often within a few seconds or minutes. It’s the process of drawing quick conclusions from a small fraction of an experience. While thin-slicing can be accurate, it’s also susceptible to biases and may not always lead to correct assessments.

Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111(2), 256-274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.111.2.256

Rationale

Ambady and Rosenthal (1992) justify examining whether accurate judgments of people can be made from brief observations of their expressive behavior.

Prior research by Allport (1973) suggested individuals have consistent expressive styles, and observers’ impressions formed from brief interactions were often verified upon further acquaintance.

Recent research has also found consensus between strangers and self-ratings of personality (e.g., Albright, Kenny, & Malloy, 1988; Watson, 1989).

Ambady and Rosenthal (1992) argue expressive behaviors rapidly communicate interpersonal information, often unintentionally.

They aim to systematically review research on the accuracy of predictions from observations <5 minutes (“thin slices”) of expressive behavior.

Method

Meta-analytic procedures were used to analyze the data (Rosenthal, 1984) including converting statistics to a common effect size r. Mean effect sizes were computed and compared between categories of studies using contrasts.

The authors conducted a meta-analysis on 38 studies (from 44 studies) that met the criteria of basing ratings on <300 seconds of observations and relating those ratings to clear external criteria. The studies spanned clinical, social, and deception research areas.

Information about subjects (median N = 32, range 2-271), raters, study characteristics, behavioral channels rated, and accuracy effect sizes were extracted.

Accuracy referred to the correspondence between consensus judge ratings and external criteria like patient prognosis or supervisor evaluations.

Sample

The 38 studies included a median of 32 participants each (range 2-271), with various mixes of gender across studies. The median number of raters per study was 37 (range 2-446).

Results

The average effect size across studies was r=.39, indicating judges could predict outcomes from thin slices at levels significantly above chance.

• Accuracy was unrelated to length of exposure, with no significant differences found between clips <30 seconds versus those up to 5 minutes.
• Type of outcome and type of study (field vs. lab) also did not significantly impact accuracy.
• Ratings based solely on nonverbal behaviors were as accurate as those including verbal behaviors.

Conclusion(s)

The authors conclude that thin slices of expressive behavior permit surprisingly accurate predictions of outcomes, challenging the notion that more information leads to greater accuracy.

Intuitive judgments made from brief observations seem more accurate than expected. Certain affective, interpersonal dimensions are judged quickly and efficiently.

Intuitive natural judgments refer to the instinctive, reflexive assessments people make about others based on quick impressions and gut feelings. These judgments are made spontaneously and automatically, without deliberation.

Some examples could include:

• Feeling like someone is untrustworthy based on brief interaction
• Sensing when someone is angry just from their tone of voice
• Having an immediate positive or negative reaction to someone’s appearance

Strengths and Limitations

• A key strength is the systematic meta-analytic method and inclusion criteria allowing generalization.
• Limitations include potential publication bias, and some ambiguity around what constitutes an “objective” criterion. The choice of particular external criteria may influence results.

Implications

The findings suggest expressive behaviors rapidly communicate a great deal of information about individuals.

This has implications for social perception processes and person-situation debates regarding behavioral consistency.

Practical implications include efficiency for research, selection, training and evaluation relying on interpersonal judgments.

Primary Paper

Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111(2), 256-274.

Other References

Albright, L., Kenny, D. A., & Malloy, T. E. (1988). Consensus in personality judgments at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 387-395.

Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt.

Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Watson, D. (1989). Strangers’ ratings of the five robust personality factors: Evidence of a surprising convergence with self-report. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(1), 120–128.

Further Reading

• Ambady, N. (2010). The perils of pondering: Intuition and thin slice judgments. Psychological Inquiry, 21(4), 271-278.
• Ambady, N., Hallahan, M., & Conner, B. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 538.
• Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of personality and social psychology, 64(3), 431.
• Curhan, J. R., & Pentland, A. (2007). Thin slices of negotiation: predicting outcomes from conversational dynamics within the first 5 minutes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 802.

Learning Check