Persuasive Communication - How Audiences Decide. 2nd Edition

262 Understanding Intuitive Decision Making

The two versions of Citibank’s loan agreement form on pp. 146–147 illustrate how audi-

ences may ascribe personality traits to organizations on the basis of the documents they produce.

After the revised loan agreement was completed, the bank surveyed more than 100 borrowers

and asked them to evaluate the two versions of the form. In addition to preferring the revised

form, the borrowers inferred that the traits of banks using the two forms would be radically

different. The borrowers said a bank using the old form would not be customer oriented. Con-

versely, they said a bank using the new form would be trustworthy, sensitive to the customer,

modern, and effi cient.

Audiences incorporate their judgments of professionals and organizations into many types

of decisions that Chapter 2 reviews, including investment decisions, staffi ng decisions, sourcing

decisions, and employment decisions. For example, most fi nancial analysts would be reluctant to

recommend investing in a fi rm whose CEO they judged to be incompetent. Most recruiters would

not want to hire a job applicant they judged to be unlikable. Most consumers would be reluctant to

purchase a product from a supplier they deemed unreliable. And most job seekers would not bother

to apply to an organization they perceived to be unethical or hidebound.^8

If a professional or organization is the source of information for an audience, the audience will

also incorporate its judgment of the professional or organization into its evaluation of the infor-

mation they receive. Audiences tend to discount any information they receive from sources they

perceive to be biased or dishonest regardless of the type of decision they are asked to make.

The Impact of Person Perception on Decision Making

Person Perception and Voters’ Decisions

One of the most widely known research fi ndings from the person perception literature is that the

personal characteristics of a political candidate have a greater relative impact on voters’ decisions

than the candidate’s stand on the issues or their party affi liation.^9 In U.S. presidential elections, up

to 60% of the variance in voters’ preference for the Democratic or Republican candidate can be

accounted for by voters’ perceptions of the two candidates’ personality traits.^10

Voters’ perceptions of candidates’ personalities may be based on very little information. In a

study of the impact of candidates’ photographs on voters, university students cast hypothetical votes

for 11 candidates solely on the basis of the candidates’ election photos. The students’ voting behav-

ior refl ected their judgments of the candidates’ competence more than other traits. Interestingly, the

distribution of the students’ votes was signifi cantly correlated with the distribution of votes cast in

the actual election.^11

Person Perception and Recruiters’ Decisions

The impact of person perception is especially evident in recruiters’ hiring decisions, with their per-

ceptions of applicants’ nonverbal behaviors playing a signifi cant role. A study of recruiters making

hiring decisions fi nds that recruiters’ evaluations of job applicants’ nonverbal behaviors account for

more than 80% of the rating variance.^12

Other studies confi rm that recruiters weight applicants’ nonverbal behaviors heavily. In one

study, 52 recruiters reviewed video recordings of one of two versions of an applicant’s mock job

interview. The applicant’s verbal responses were identical in both versions but their nonverbal

behaviors were systematically varied. In the fi rst version the applicant showed minimal eye contact,

low energy, lack of affect, low voice modulation, and a lack of speech fl uency. In the second ver-

sion the applicant engaged in the opposite behaviors. All 26 recruiters who saw the fi rst version