Bob Talbert is Part of the Mafia?!

Hey all! Long time, no write. Of course, I say that just about every time I write now, so I guess y'all should be used to it.

Anyways, things have been really calm over on my end. I'm done with school now, so I've just been working with a bit of gaming (read as: gaming all day). I talked recently with a few friends, though, so some ideas have been revitalized. Forgive me if I'm a bit scatterbrained while writing this post since I haven't done this for a while...

Some of you may know about Bob Talbert, and others of you may not...  For those of you who read the title of this post, though, I want you to know that Bob Talbert is not actually associated with the Mafia. The funny thing is, though, that that's probably not going to change your opinion about him. What do I mean by that?

Simple, really... Anyways, I don't have access to the scholarly article, so you'll have to trust me on this one... But, in an experiment by Wegner, Wenzlaff, Kerker, and Beattie (1991) (http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=6333 for a secondary article reference), the use of innuendo was tested for impressions of public figures. Essentially, various participants were given an article about a man named Bob Talbert. What the researchers manipulated was the title of each article. Some articles were neutral and talked about Bob Talbert arriving in the city. But, other articles were directly incriminating, such as, "Bob Talbert Linked to the Mafia." Yet, others articles insinuated something negative, such as, "Bob Talbert Linked to the Mafia?" or "Bob Talbert not Linked to the Mafia." After all the participants read their articles, they were asked to rate how favorably they viewed Bob Talbert.

For those that read the article with the neutral title, Bob Talbert was rated, on average, neutrally (big surprise, right?). For those that read the article with the negative title, Bob Talbert was rated negatively (again, another big surprise). Yet, the crazy thing, the participants that had the articles that insinuated something negative rated Bob Talbert just as negatively, on average, as those that read the negative article about Bob Talbert. Crazy, right?

Theoretically, the articles that had negative insinuations shouldn't have Bob Talbert rated as negatively as the articles that are directly negative. Why would an article that asks or even states that Bob Talbert's not linked to the Mafia lead to people viewing him so negatively? The researchers hypothesized that the first impressions people have of others are very hard to dispel... Even if it's stated that Bob Talbert's not linked to the Mafia, the main idea that sticks out is 'Bob Talbert' and 'Mafia.' Thus, even if you consciously think otherwise and know better, it is hard to unconsciously not associate the two.

One of the initial concerns is that this shows how devastating rumors may be... Even if rumors and gossip just raise the question and aren't direct accusations, they may still give way to these negative impressions. This can lead to people having a negative interaction with the person (or 'victim') of the rumors, thus reinforcing their own suspicions and negative impressions about the 'victim.'  This could be true for negative first impressions as well. If it's a first time meeting, ceteris paribus, and the 'victim' gives a negative impression to others, it would be difficult for others to change their view of the 'victim.' But, I digress.

So, how would one break out of this vicious cycle? Quite simply, people would really have to get to know the 'victim.' If after interacting people see there's no evidence for the accusation, or even if they come to start to like the 'victim,' impressions should change. Of course, like I mentioned before, it's hard to change a negative impression if people already view you negatively, so it would probably be something that would require a bit of work. If somebody holds a view against you because of rumor or gossip, though, it may be a testament about that person themselves...

I guess it's just important to remember that sometimes our first impressions aren't always the best impressions. Even if we happen to hear something about someone, it may be good to try and hold off judging  that person before really getting to know them. Atticus always did mention walking a mile in another person's shoes, right? Sounds like a good way to go.