ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Article
Purchase PDF (329 K)

Article Toolbox
 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
View Record in Scopus
 
doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.08.005    
How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)

Copyright © 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

When what you type isn’t what they read: The perseverance of stereotypes and expectancies over e-mail

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Nicholas Epleya, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author and Justin Krugerb, E-mail The Corresponding Author

aDepartment of Psychology, William James Hall 1480, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA

bDepartment of Psychology, University of Illinois, 603 E. Daniel Street, Champaign, IL 61820, USA


Received 14 January 2004; 
revised 19 August 2004. 
Available online 5 November 2004.

Abstract

People form impressions of others by communicating with them, but not all modes of communication transmit information with equal fidelity. E-mail, for instance, is an inherently more limited mode of communication than is voice because of its relative lack of paralinguistic and non-verbal cues. The present research investigated the implication of this distinction for the biasing influence of stereotypes and expectancies. Three experiments demonstrated that racial stereotypes and bogus expectancies influence people’s impressions of a target more strongly over e-mail than voice interactions (Studies 1–3). This occurred despite an experimental design that ensured that the word-for-word content was constant across the two mediums. Follow-up analyses revealed that the effect was due, at least in part, to the greater ambiguity of e-mail versus voice communication (Study 3). Although e-mail affords many benefits, the present research suggests that it may also have some unexpected costs.

Keywords: Stereotypes; Impression formation; Communication; Communication medium; E-mail; Ambiguity

Article Outline

Experiment 1
Method
Results and discussion
Experiment 2
Method
Results and discussion
Experiment 3
Method
Results and discussion
General discussion
Limitations
Implications
Acknowledgements
References





Corresponding Author Contact InformationCorresponding author

 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.