What you say about others says a lot about you
scienceblog.com
scienceblog.com
edit: bleh, I already feel awkward for saying that about my sister, but it was relevant to the subject...
There are various degrees of criticism of others (when absent). I agree I would want to change subject if it's totally negative, but most of the time I feel like there is also a lot of good things said and to be said.
If your parents and sister are _that_ negative about others, I guess you could also bring that concern to them instead of fleeing :)
I mean, I used to do it a lot myself before, but eventually I realized that it really changes the way you perceive and interact with other people. Even if its not overtly negative, it establishes sort of a gulf between yourself and the people you talk about, and you can't be honest or real with them.
I mean, whether you talk about people or not, you still have those thoughts. But I find that if I keep them to myself rather than share them with others, it's easier to not become attached to them. The more you talk about them, the more those thoughts anchor themselves in your memory and then they become the basis for future interaction. If you're always referring to one of your coworkers as irresponsible, you're a lot more likely to assume that they didn't get their work done on time (or whatever).
On the other hand, you may talk about your interactions with others just because you are talking about your own life and this other person is a major factor in your life.
You could also talk about someone in a directly productive way, such as discussing candidates for a job or asking for advice or assistance on behalf of someone else.
It sounds like your sister's conversations are towards the gossip end of the spectrum, but it is important to note that not all discussion of others is like that.
I remember my professor talked about this in college. For example, to find out about a person, during a job interview, present them with a hypothetical situation where someone does something unusual. Or something doesn't go as planned. Then ask the interviewee to explain why the hypothetical person did what they did.
For example: "Susan is falling behind on her project. What happened?" Then then let the the interviewee come up with a reason. "Well, of course, she is stupid and doesn't know how to finish her work" would be one answer. Or "She has tons of personal problems that get in the way" and so on.
Well, that is a very much a contrived example. Perhaps it is more useful in clinical study as it is a little too obvious. So maybe ask them about a mutual acquaintance, or the previous boss...
Also, beware, a lot of people know about this trick, and could just fake it. I.e. they might just really hate the person they are talking about but they know the reason the question was asked so the lie -- "Oh, that person is fantastic. My skills pale compared to hers/his, they are great, yada yada..."
"Perceiver effects as projective tests: What your perceptions of others say about you." Wood, Dustin; Harms, Peter; Vazire, Simine, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 99(1), Jul 2010, 174-190.
Here is an excerpt from the abstract:
---
... results provide compelling evidence that how individuals generally perceive others is a stable individual difference that reveals much about the perceiver's own personality.
---
This just seems a bit too much like a Rorschach test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_test#Controversy ), and the interpretation that you can directly come to some conclusion about a job applicant based on what they say about a hypothetical person is even warned against in the actual article:
"First, the studies clearly demonstrate that perceiver effects represent more than simply the projection of an individual’s self-image onto other people."
Projective tests have their uses in clinical psychology (e.g. with the crazies) - but whether you would want to apply them to normal situations is questionable.
"In each study, we found regular relationships between personality traits and perceptions of others. Individuals who perceived others positively reported higher agreeableness (particularly aspects associated with friendliness and low hostility); higher life satisfaction; and lower endorsement of measures of personality disorders, depression, and antisocial attitudes."
In other words, the test is likely to tell you two things: first, how positive you are (which is unsurprising, since positivity is almost by definition related to seeing things and others in a positive light) and second whether you are not totally nuts (e.g. positive people are likely to be associated with lower measures of personality disorders, depression and antisocial attitudes).
But in non-clinical settings - such as in a job interview? "The magnitude of individual differences in the positivity of perceptions of others is fairly large, and individual differences in perceiver positivity impacted judgments of single targets to a considerable degree." That is, the positivity measure is stable, but there is a lot of variance. This suggests that you don't want to use this for finding out much more than how positive a person is - and if that is your sole criteria in a job interview, good luck!
Edit: to clarify that last quote - it basically says that among a normal group of college students, positivity measures have high individual differences and these differences impact judgments to a high degree. So big differences in the results of the measure may be simply explained by individual differences in positivity measures.
If the guy you are having a business lunch with is extremely nice to you, but an asshole to the waiter, what does that say about how you will be treated after you enter the contract you are discussing?
If the girl you just started dating seems super nice, but hates every person around her for one reason or another, what will she treat you like after 5 years?
A) This is nonsense. Yes, the social construct of 'mental health' obviously excludes those who are deeply disturbed by the social status quo. Of course there is a strong correlation between having a low opinion of the people around you and being depressed, but simply adopting a rosier view of the world at best cures only the symptom.
B) Wow, this is great! I love it when scientific studies can provide insight into things we intuit but have trouble putting into words. I've always thought this, and it feels great to see others confirming my ideas. I can't wait to read the full paper, but until then I'll remind myself that a positive outlook will help both me and those around me.
C) Both A and B.
Seriously, though, I call bullshit. If a friend asks for your opinion about, say, a potential hire whom you're acquainted with, and you know he's antisocial and incompetent, do you try to say positive things about him? Also, opinions about other people are a relative to the abilities and attitudes of the parties involved, aren't they? If you're Superman, earthlings are all weaklings. If you're Mr. Glass, then just about everyone is stronger than you. I say you should try to form objective opinions about other people instead of either trying to see only the good or the bad, and only when you find that all your opinions skew in one direction do you potentially have a problem (or you could be Superman).
Oddly, I am now both forming a negative impression of another poster and becoming depressed at the same time...
This says nothing about your true qualities.
What annoys you about people? Do you try to understand them? As the old adage goes: "He who knows everything, forgives everything."
Getting along with people we like and who like us is effortless. But how well we are able to get along with people we don't like or who don't like us, tells how much effort we are both willing and able to make to build a rapport.
This study in no way controls for the fact that people may be somewhat accurately rating people in their lives.
EDIT: corrected translation
I will say that forcing myself to see the best in people and often times the worst in myself, makes it easier to form relationships and to be happy in general.
Yes it is. If you say an idea is wrong, you are judging the people who believe it as deluded.
- That person is wrong, they must be stupid.
- That person knows he's wrong and is just trying to further his own agenda.
- I think that person is wrong and they are either misinformed or know something I don't.
The article says that "a person’s tendency to describe others in positive terms is an important indicator of the positivity of the person’s own personality traits". It doesn't say you only tell good things about others.