Dataset Information

Individual differences in trust evaluations are shaped mostly by environments, not genes.

ABSTRACT: People evaluate a stranger's trustworthiness from their facial features in a fraction of a second, despite common advice "not to judge a book by its cover." Evaluations of trustworthiness have critical and widespread social impact, predicting financial lending, mate selection, and even criminal justice outcomes. Consequently, understanding how people perceive trustworthiness from faces has been a major focus of scientific inquiry, and detailed models explain how consensus impressions of trustworthiness are driven by facial attributes. However, facial impression models do not consider variation between observers. Here, we develop a sensitive test of trustworthiness evaluation and use it to document substantial, stable individual differences in trustworthiness impressions. Via a twin study, we show that these individual differences are largely shaped by variation in personal experience, rather than genes or shared environments. Finally, using multivariate twin modeling, we show that variation in trustworthiness evaluation is specific, dissociating from other key facial evaluations of dominance and attractiveness. Our finding that variation in facial trustworthiness evaluation is driven mostly by personal experience represents a rare example of a core social perceptual capacity being predominantly shaped by a person's unique environment. Notably, it stands in sharp contrast to variation in facial recognition ability, which is driven mostly by genes. Our study provides insights into the development of the social brain, offers a different perspective on disagreement in trust in wider society, and motivates new research into the origins and potential malleability of face evaluation, a critical aspect of human social cognition.

SUBMITTER: Sutherland CAM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7229747 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Individual differences in trust evaluations are shaped mostly by environments, not genes.

Sutherland Clare A M CAM Burton Nichola S NS Wilmer Jeremy B JB Blokland Gabriëlla A M GAM Germine Laura L Palermo Romina R Collova Jemma R JR Rhodes Gillian G

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 20200427 19

People evaluate a stranger's trustworthiness from their facial features in a fraction of a second, despite common advice "not to judge a book by its cover." Evaluations of trustworthiness have critical and widespread social impact, predicting financial lending, mate selection, and even criminal justice outcomes. Consequently, understanding how people perceive trustworthiness from faces has been a major focus of scientific inquiry, and detailed models explain how consensus impressions of trustwor ...[more]

PMID: 32341163

Similar Datasets

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic constitutes a novel threat and traditional and new media provide people with an abundance of information and misinformation on the topic. In the current study, we investigated who tends to trust what type of mis/information. The data were collected in Norway from a sample of 405 participants during the first wave of COVID-19 in April 2020. We focused on three kinds of belief: the belief that the threat is overrated (COVID-threat skepticism), the belief that the threat is underrated (COVID-threat belief) and belief in misinformation about COVID-19. We studied sociodemographic factors associated with these beliefs and the interplay between attitudes to COVID-19, media consumption and prevention behavior. All three types of belief were associated with distrust in information about COVID-19 provided by traditional media and distrust in the authorities' approach to the pandemic. COVID-threat skepticism was associated with male gender, reduced news consumption since the start of the pandemic and lower levels of precautionary measures. Belief that the COVID-19 threat is underrated was associated with younger age, left-wing political orientation, increased news consumption during the pandemic and increased precautionary behavior. Consistent with the assumptions of the theory of planned behavior, individual beliefs about the seriousness of the COVID-19 threat predicted the extent to which individual participants adopted precautionary health measures. Both COVID-threat skepticism and COVID-threat belief were associated with endorsement of misinformation on COVID-19. Participants who endorsed misinformation tended to: have lower levels of education; be male; show decreased news consumption; have high Internet use and high trust in information provided by social media. Additionally, they tended to endorse multiple misinformation stories simultaneously, even when they were mutually contradictory. The strongest predictor for low compliance with precautionary measures was endorsement of a belief that the COVID-19 threat is overrated which at the time of the data collection was held also by some experts and featured in traditional media. The findings stress the importance of consistency of communication in situations of a public health threat.

Project description:BackgroundAs the only place in a store where customers must pass through, checkouts may be especially influential over purchases. Research is needed to understand the healthfulness of checkout environments.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to classify checkout product facings in California food stores.MethodsIn a cross-sectional study, 102 stores, including chains (dollar stores, drugstores, specialty food stores, supermarkets, and mass merchandisers) and independent supermarkets and grocery stores were sampled from 4 northern California cities. Observational assessments of each checkout product facing were conducted in February 2021 using the Store CheckOUt Tool. Facings were classified by category and healthfulness, defined by meeting Berkeley's Healthy Checkout Ordinance's healthy checkout standards: unsweetened beverages and specific foods containing ≤5 g added sugar and ≤200 mg sodium per serving. Log binomial regressions compared healthfulness by store and checkout characteristics.ResultsOf 26,758 food and beverage checkout facings, the most common categories were candy (31%), gum (18%), sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs; 11%), salty snacks (9%), mints (7%), and sweets (6%). Water represented only 3% and fruits and vegetables 1% of these facings. Only 30% of food and beverage facings met Berkeley's healthy checkout standards, with 70% not meeting the standards. The percentage of food and beverage facings not meeting the standards was even higher (89%) among snack-sized packages (≤2 servings/package). Compared with chain supermarkets, mass merchandisers, and specialty food stores (34%-36%), dollar and independent grocery stores had a lower percentage of food and beverage facings that met the healthy checkout standards (18%-20%; P < 0.05). Compared with lane and register areas (35%), endcaps and snaking sections within checkouts had fewer food and beverage facings that met the standards (21%-23%; P < 0.001).ConclusionsMost foods and beverages at checkout consisted of candy, SSBs, salty snacks, and sweets and failed to meet the healthy checkout standards.Curr Dev Nutr 2023;xx:xx.

Dataset Information

Individual differences in trust evaluations are shaped mostly by environments, not genes.

Publications

Individual differences in trust evaluations are shaped mostly by environments, not genes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets