check
Publications | Prof. Eyal Pe'er

Publications

2010
Babad, E. & Peer, E., 2010. Media Bias in Interviewers' Nonverbal Behavior: Potential Remedies, Attitude Similarity and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34(1), pp.57 - 78. Available at: . Publisher's VersionAbstract

Previous research demonstrated that viewers’ judgments of an interviewee are influenced by the nonverbal behavior of the interviewer. In studies of this media bias effect, judges view a short political interview with a friendly or a hostile interviewer, and then rate their impressions of the interviewee, whose behavior remains identical in all conditions. The present research utilizes the same design and materials to explore potential cognitive remedies, to investigate the effect of attitude similarity on media bias, and to meta-analyze seven replications of the media bias effect. In Study 1, a cognitive remedy in the form of an instruction to ignore the interviewer neutralized and even reversed the media bias effect. In Study 2, insertion of a brief segment depicting a “beaming” and relaxed interviewee also reversed the media bias effect. Study 3 demonstrated that negative ratings of the interviewee due to interviewer’s hostility were intensified when respondents considered the interviewee as “one of them” politically, and disappeared when he was perceived as “one of us”. Study 4 demonstrated the consistency of the media bias effect by meta-analyzing seven replications in different countries. Implications for nonverbal research and for media research concerning the consistency of the media bias effect and its amenability to remedy are discussed.

Peer, E., 2010. Speeding and the time-saving bias: How drivers’ estimations of time saved in higher speed affects their choice of speed. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, pp.1978 - 1982. Available at: . Publisher's VersionAbstract
According to the time-saving bias, drivers overestimate the time saved when increasing from an already relatively high speed and underestimate the time saved when increasing from a relatively low speed. This study examined the effect the time-saving bias may have on drivers’ choice of speed using hypothetical situations. Drivers were presented with a situation involving acceleration from a relatively low speed in order to arrive at a destination on time and were asked to estimate the time that could be saved by increasing to higher speeds. Drivers also estimated the speed required for arriving on time, the speed they would personally choose and the speed they believed other drivers would opt for in such a situation. Results showed that drivers indeed underestimated the time that could be saved by increasing from a low speed. In addition, drivers who showed a high time-saving bias (above median) indicated notably higher speeds in all three categories above and their indicated speeds ex
2009
Gamliel, E. & Peer, E., 2009. Effect of Framing on Applicants' Reactions to Personnel Selection Methods. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, (3), p.282. Available at: . Publisher's VersionAbstract
This research demonstrates the effect of framing on applicants' reactions to two personnel selection methods: undergraduate grade point average and personnel interview scores. Presenting a selection situation framed positively (to accept applicants) caused applicants to rate both selection methods more favorably relative to presenting them with an identical selection situation framed negatively (to reject the remaining applicants). Framing affected reactions that emphasized distributive justice aspects of the selection situation and procedural justice aspects. The results are consistent with Prospect theory and with Fairness Heuristic theory. The paper offers a theoretical explanation for the effect of framing on applicants' reactions to personnel selection methods, discusses the implications of this effect, and suggests directions for future research.
2006
Gamliel, E. & Peer, E., 2006. Positive versus Negative Framing Affects Justice Judgments. Social Justice Research, 19(3), pp.307 - 322. Available at: . Publisher's VersionAbstract
This research demonstrates the effect of framing on justice judgments. Presenting identical allocation situations in different modes of accomplishing the resource allocation, resulting in either positive (benefits) or negative (harms) outcomes, affects justice judgments. Two independent studies revealed that participants judged non-egalitarian principles (i.e., merit, ability, effort, need, and tenure) as more just when allocation of a resource was presented in the positive framing manner (e.g., to deliver goods or to withhold bads) relative to presenting the exact same resource allocated in a negative framing manner (e.g., to deliver bads or to withhold goods). It is suggested that the way resource allocation is framed evokes favorable (or unfavorable) associations that cause people to judge the situation as more (or less) just. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]