The Transparency of Denial: Briefing in the Debriefing Paradigm

This research tested a new conceptualization of the impression perseverance effect. Here, as in earlier studies, some actor and observer subjects were given false feedback about the actor-subjects' performance in the experiment and then were informed during debriefing that the feedback had not been genuine. Other subjects, however, received a briefing about the falsity of the feedback before the task performance. These briefed subjects, like the debriefed subjects, subsequently made estimates of the actors' actual performance on the task that were significantly influenced in the direction of the false feedback. The briefed subjects did not, however, follow the debriefed subjects in making ability attributions to the actor in line with their performance estimates. These results cast doubt on the notion that attributional processing of the false information, as observed in the debriefing condition, is a necessary component of the perseverance effect. The idea that denied information and the denial may contribute independently to subsequent impressions is offered as an alternative explanation of briefing and debriefing phenomena. ;~::i!J ."I deny it!" said the March Hare. discredits the evidence on which the impresc-; "He ~enies it," sai? t,he King: "L~ve out that part." sions are based. The model asserts that this ~ (LewIS Carroll, Ailee s Adventures In Wonderland) ~ . 1 h 1 h ti d c..., laI ure occurs w en peop eave orme an Even by royal decree, it can be difficult to attribution or explanation for the observed "leave out" information that is known to be evidence. In essence, it is argued that the false. Certainly, when experimental subjects attribution remains as a basis for inference ~.i are told that the information they received even when the evidence is discredited. Our .::~~j in a study was false, they may continue to purpose in this research was to weigh this ;:: base judgments on it nonetheless. This phemodel against another kind of analysis, one nomenon was observed by WaIster, Berscheid, based on the idea that people see through Abrahams, and Aronson (1967), and has denials. since been incorporated into a general model .of impression perseverance by Ross, Lepper, Attribution and Perseverance c.', ;;;~\'i~~~ and their colleagues (e.g., Ross, Lepper, & According to the perseverance model of ~i~~~1 Hu?bard, 1975; Ross, ~epper, S.track, & Ross et aI. (1975, 1977), people try to interpret ~.;~. SteInmetz:, 1977): Accor~I~g to t~IS mode: or ~ake att~ibutions for t~e information ~ey :~ ~~,:,:~~~\'~i(; p.e°ple faIl to adjust theIr I~pressIo~s suffi receIve durIng an e.xpenment. On .finding ,i~'¥~~"~ clently when they encounter Information that that someone has faIled at an experImental ,