Cited by 500Social and Intergroup PsychologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

A battle of wills: Self-verification versus behavioral confirmation.

Swann, William B., Ely, Robin J.·1984·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

When a perceiver forms an expectancy about a target individual that is discrepant with that target's self-conception, whose viewpoint will triumph? Although research on behavioral confirmation argues that perceivers will "win" by causing targets to confirm the expectancy, research on self-verification argues that targets will "win" by bringing perceivers to treat them in a manner that confirms their self-conceptions. The research reported here sought to reconcile these competing viewpoints by considering the certainty of perceivers' expectancies and targets' self-conceptions. Perceivers first formed relatively certain or uncertain expectancies about targets that were inconsistent with targets' self-conceptions. They then interacted with targets, who possessed relatively certain or uncertain self-conceptions, in a series of three successive interview sessions. Analyses of the behavior or targets indicated that self-verification always occurred when targets were certain of their self-conceptions. Self-verification also tended to occur when both perceivers and targets were uncertain of their beliefs. Behavioral confirmation tended to occur only when perceivers were certain of their expectancies and targets were uncertain of their self-conceptions. At the end of the experiment, perceivers had generally abandoned their expectancies, but targets revealed no self-rating change. The conditions under which self-verification versus behavioral confirmation occur are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.46.6.1287

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • SFPs of trait ascriptions occurred only when ascribers were certain of the ascriptions, not when they were less confident.

    “For several studies found that SFPs of trait ascriptions occurred only when ascribers were certain of the ascriptions, not when they were less confident (Swann and Ely 1984;Pelham and Swann 1994;Swann 2012: 30).”

    From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Swann and Ely 1984

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 57 · Cited by 500

Authors
Swann, W. B., & Ely, R. J.
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1984
Volume
46
Issue
6
Pages
1287-1302
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W4255001351
Cited by
500
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 15
FWCI
39.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
self-verification, behavioral confirmation, self-concept, self-presentation, person perception
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Self Concept, Set, Psychology, Social Behavior

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