CHILDRENS IMPLICIT PERSONALITY THEORIES AS PREDICTORS OF THEIR SOCIALJUDGMENTS

Social judgment and trait ascription have long been central issues in psychology. Two studies tested the hypothesis that children who believ e that personality is a fixed quality (entity theorists) would make mo re rigid and long-term social judgments than those who believe that pe rsonality is malleable (incremental theorists). Fourth and fifth grade rs (mean age 10.2 years) viewed a slide show of a boy displaying negat ive behaviors (Study 1-being shy, clumsy, and nervous; Study 2-lying, cheating, and stealing) and then made a series of ratings. Half of the subjects saw a consistent (negative) ending, and half saw an inconsis tent (more positive) ending. Even when they viewed positive counterevi dence, entity theorists did not differ in their ratings of the focal t raits, but incremental theorists did. Entity theorists in Study 2 also predicted significantly less change in the short term and the long te rm than did incremental theorists. Study 2 further revealed that, when the behaviors were more negative, entity theorists made more generali zed and global negative trait evaluations of the target, showed less e mpathy, and recommended more punishment. Differences in the social jud gment processes of entity and incremental theorists are discussed, and implications for issues (such as stereotyping) are explored.