Key Aspects of Personality Assessment in Investigative Communication

The process of assessing a person begins with the first impression, which is essentially a general perception of the subject of interest. The subsequent perception process becomes more specific, focusing on the details of the individual. Typically, the first impression is not verbalized and occurs at a sensory level. Naturally, this first impression carries the risk of error, which is influenced by several factors.

The sources of such errors include stereotypes, the opinions of others, the halo effect, the leniency effect, the observer’s mental state, dominant needs, defense mechanisms, and simplification. Let’s briefly examine these errors:

1. Stereotypes. If the observed person differs from the observer in some noticeable way, this difference often triggers certain standard images or stereotypes. These can be group or ethnic stereotypes, stereotypes related to appearance, or those concerning physical disabilities, expressive movements, voice, and speech. Such stereotypes, which hinder accurate perception, exist in all cultures. Understanding these stereotypes, especially in the context of different nationalities, can significantly reduce errors in interpreting individual behavior.
2. Opinions of Others. Often, even a general or fragmentary opinion about a person is enough to influence our assessment. If someone provides a characterization or even a superficial judgment about the person of interest, we tend to fit the person’s behavior into a certain template shaped by that external, possibly biased or false, opinion.
3. Halo Effect. If you like the person you are observing, you tend to evaluate them in terms of “pleasantness”; if not, in terms of “unpleasantness.” This overall assessment tends to extend to almost every trait of the individual, blurring the details and forming a generalized impression. This phenomenon often leads the observer to create a stable, specific image of the person.
4. Leniency Effect. In practice, most people approach the evaluation of a stranger with goodwill, often overlooking obvious flaws. However, some people prefer to doubt the positive qualities of the observed individual, sometimes even adopting a strategy of mistrust until the person proves their integrity. Excessive leniency may indicate psychological issues in the observer.
5. Mental State. It is well known that a person in a good mood tends to view others positively and elicits positive feelings in return. Conversely, someone in a depressive state not only sees everything negatively but also provokes negative attitudes from others. Thus, the observer’s mental state can be a source of errors in personality assessment.
6. Dominant Need. A dominant need makes a person especially sensitive to the object of that need; for example, a hunter spots animals more easily, a berry picker notices berries. However, the stronger the need, the more likely it is to cause misperceptions—such as mistaking an object for an animal or picking an inedible berry. Therefore, the observer’s current dominant needs can lead to errors.
7. Projection. Projection is a defense mechanism that distorts perception. Its essence lies in distorting reality. Projection occurs in everyone’s behavior but is most pronounced in people with “shaky nerves.” This mechanism causes a person to perceive a feeling as their own, supposedly caused by the other person. More complex forms of projection also occur, such as suspecting others of things or believing one is being accused of intentions incompatible with their self-concept. Projection is essentially the opposite of empathy. While empathy allows a person to feel the mood of another, projection distorts and weakens the perception process, whereas empathy organizes and strengthens it. The perception process is subjective: we tend to assess others in comparison to our own self-concept, but this does not guarantee objectivity.
8. Simplification. The first impression is usually incomplete because the person being observed is complex. As a result, we tend to simplify our perception of people. Since this tendency is common, many people are almost incapable of perceiving others accurately. They often draw conclusions based on a single fact, solidify these conclusions in their minds, and are slow to change them. This trait depends on individual characteristics.

It is important to consider the causes of these errors. They are related to the characteristics of the person being observed, the unintentional or intentional influence of the observed on the observer, and the observer’s own personality traits. This includes both the psychological characteristics of those we observe and their actions aimed at anticipating our assessment or deceiving the observer.

People are perceived differently. Some are open and easy to form a first impression about. Others are closed off, making it difficult to say anything definite. Some are so well hidden behind their “shell” that it is hard to guess their inner experiences—they may be intellectual, simple-minded, shy, etc., but it is often difficult for an investigator to discern this.

Others are always suspicious or anxious, expecting trouble and thus remaining tense and hostile. Some are constantly active, hiding their inner world behind their actions and feeling superior to others. There are also people who adapt well to circumstances, showing outrage, flattery, or servility as needed, with moods that change depending on the situation. Some people defy any characterization, blending into the crowd and leaving no impression on the observer.

All of this affects the first impression. Sometimes, the first impression is distorted because the observed person is noticeably different from the observer. For example, when we perceive a foreigner, we often see the entire nation rather than individual traits. We are struck by features that are less pronounced in ourselves. When first among foreigners, such as Vietnamese, we may feel disoriented, thinking they all look alike. However, understanding that such phenomena are a regular part of social perception helps us adapt quickly.

We should also remember the anticipation of the observer’s assessment. Some people intuitively try to make a good impression, smiling and showing attention, which can lead to misperception. The error increases if the situation or the observer causes the observed person to feel suspicious or anxious, prompting them to try even harder to please or anticipate the observer’s desires.

Sometimes, the observer is deliberately deceived. A person who realizes they are being watched may use various tricks to appear as they wish to be perceived. Psychologically, this is expressed by distorting or substituting expressive movements—either exaggerating, minimizing, or neutralizing them, or hiding behind a mask. Deception can be intentional or unintentional.

In practice, assessing a person during communication is fraught with difficulties because it occurs both consciously and subconsciously, often beyond our control. To bring the assessment process under conscious control, it is necessary to understand the general scheme of perceiving a person by external signs and to analyze its details. The great Russian physiologist I.M. Sechenov once noted: “A person’s psychological activity is expressed, as is well known, by external signs, and usually everyone—ordinary people, scientists, naturalists, and those engaged in spiritual work—judge the inner by the outer, that is, by external signs.”