Cited by 142Social and Intergroup PsychologyDeception detection and forensic psychologyPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Judging others in the shadow of suspicion

Open access
Fein, Steven, Hilton, James L.·1994·Motivation and Emotion

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02249398

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Perceivers do not make correspondent trait attributions when they become suspicious of the motives underlying the actor's behavior.

    “However, perceivers do not make these correspondent trait attributions when they become suspicious of the motives underlying the actor's behavior.”

    From The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities on Companies With Bad Reputations (2006) · cites this paper as Fein and Hilton (1994

    The Conclusion says suspicious perceivers can avoid the correspondence bias and suspend judgment when behavior has plausible rival explanations. But “do not make” is too absolute: Explaining the Effects of Suspicion says they may still make strong correspondent inferences when an ulterior-motive explanation becomes less plausible. Page numbers are not available in the supplied passages. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Allison, S. T., Mackie, D. M., Muller, M. M., & Worth, L. T. (1993). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 151-157.
  2. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental socialpsychology, (Vol. 24, pp. 235-267).
  3. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 345-370). San Diego: Academic Press.
  4. Strickland, L. H. (1958). Surveillance and trust. Journal of Personality, 26, 200-215.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fein, S., & Hilton, J. L.
Affiliations
  • Williams College (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Venue
Motivation and Emotion
Published
1994-06
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
167-198
ISSN
  • 0146-7239 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6644
OpenAlex
W2095011590
Cited by
142
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Motivation and Emotion (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Keywords
suspicion, dispositional inference, ulterior motives, contextual cues, interpersonal perception, threat perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review