Dr. Smith, a university professor, finds that one of his colleagues, Dr. Tompkins, is difficult

to deal with professionally, but once you get Dr.

Tompkins away from the office, he can be one
of the nicest and most caring people you would want to know. Dr. Smith decides that while Dr.
Tompkins can be difficult to work with, he is still an admirable man. Which of the processes of
perceptual organization and interpretation (impression formation, implicit personality theory,
attribution theory, or use of personal constructs) did Dr. Smith most likely employ in arriving at
this conclusion?
What will be an ideal response?

More than one answer can be generated for this question. The emphasis should be on
justifying the student's choice. The answer should explain each concept and then apply each
concept to the situation to justify the use of one or more of the processes. An example follows.
* Impression formation involves the process of categorizing people based upon general physical
qualities, behaviors, and disclosed information. These perceptions then affect our subsequent
interpretations of their behavior. While impression formation is often thought of in terms of first
impressions, we can form and reform impressions at other times.
* Implicit personality theory involves the use of patterns of qualities we attribute to people so as
to increase our understanding and ability to predict their behavior. These theories are essentially
stereotypes that we use to fill in the blanks of another's personality. These theories can affect our
interpretations positively or negatively. The use of personal constructs allows us to organize our
perceptions of specific people. Constructs are bipolar qualities that help us differentiate one
person from another. People who are cognitively complex have well-developed sets of constructs
that allow them to differentiate people. People who are cognitively simple have less-welldeveloped sets of constructs. Cognitively simple people see the world in simple terms and do not
differentiate among people as well as cognitively complex people. Attribution theory seeks to
develop explanations for another person's behavior. We may seek to determine the intention of
the person in causing the effect or we may seek to determine the causes (causal attribution
theory) for another person's behavior based upon circumstance, a stimulus, or the person herself
or himself.
* In this case, there is no indication that Dr. Smith is trying to discover or explain the causes or
intentionality of Dr. Tompkins' behavior, so attribution theory does not seem to be directly
applicable. Implicit personality theory allows us to fill out a person's personality by association
with pre-existing patterns of associated qualities. While Dr. Smith may have employed an
implicit personality theory, there is no indication that he is "filling out" Dr. Tompkins'
personality. In fact, the case suggests that Dr. Smith's implicit personality theories may be
challenged by the complexity of Dr. Tompkins' behavior. Dr. Tompkins is not easily
categorized. While Dr. Smith does seem to be engaged in a process of re-forming his impression
of Dr. Tompkins, the process of differentiating between Dr. Tompkin's actions in a professional
setting and in a social setting suggests the application of cognitive constructs. This application
suggests that Dr. Smith is cognitively complex and sees the world in a more differentiated and
sophisticated manner than a person who might be cognitively simple. Therefore, Dr. Smith is
using personal constructs to create a specific and differentiated perception of Dr. Tompkins.