ABSTRACT
A basketball coach complains vociferously in response to what he views as poor officiating. An observer might infer that the coach is a “competitor” with a powerful desire to win. A second observer might infer that the coach is simply a “poor sport.” The different interpretations may stem, in part, from differences in construct accessibility. Bruner (1957), in his seminal work on perceptual readiness, suggested that constructs in memory differ in the likelihood that they will be used to interpret events. Although an individual may possess several relevant constructs in memory for interpreting an event, he or she will tend to rely on the construct that is the most highly accessible. The differences between the two observers in the perception of the coach's personality may result because the construct “competitor” was highly accessible for the first observer, whereas the construct “poor sport” was highly accessible for the second.
