Peeters(1983) made a distinction between other-relevant traits and possessor-relevant traits. ORTs denote unconditionally positive or negative consequences for persons in the social environment of the holder of the trait (e.g., honest, brutal), whereas PRTs denote unconditionally positive or negative consequences for the trait holder (e.g., happy, depressive). Most studies indicate that other-relevant traits (e.g., aggressive, honest) relate to other-interest, while possessor-relevant traits (e.g., depressive, intelligent) associate with self-interest. And it has been proved that other-relevant trait words had an advantage of attracting attention over possessor-relevant stimuli from the perspective of the recipient or the associates of the trait holder. This study aims to expand the processing of relevance dimension from the perspective of the possessor, as well as discriminate between the potential and the immediate recipient from the perspective of the recipient. The main contribution of the present research is to show that other-relevance and possessor-relevance could have their respective advantages from double perspective (the perspectives of the possessor and the recipient), but not other-relevance invariably dominates possessor-relevance. The present research adopted the study-test paradigm using event-related potentials. The data was collected from sixteen right-handed participants. There were three phases in each block: (1) The study phase required the participants to decide a). In the Recipient’s Perspective Condition, whether a trait of other persons, contacting with the participant, denoted larger consequences for persons in the social environment of the holder of the trait or for the trait holder; b).In the Possessor’s Perspective Condition, supposing that the participant have a certain trait, whether the trait denoted larger consequences for persons in the social environment of the participant or for the participant; c). In the Recipient’s Perspective Condition, whether a trait of other persons, contacting with the participant, denoted larger consequences for the participant or for the trait holder. (2)After the study phase, the participants were asked to subtract 3 from a 3-digit number shown on the screen. (3) The recognition test requested the participants to judge whether they had saw the presented word in the study phase and make a key-pressing response. The experimental results show that (1) Other-relevant trials significantly evoke larger amplitude than possessor-relevant trials at 150~800ms encoding stage and at 300~400ms during retrieval in both the Recipient and Possessor’s Perspective. (2) In the Possessor’s Perspective Condition, possessor-relevant trials evoke larger P600 amplitude than other-relevant trials during retrieval; (3) In the Recipient’s Perspective Condition, other-relevant trials denoting consequences for general persons in the social environment of the possessor significantly evoke larger amplitude during 300~800ms at encoding stage than those denoting consequences for self as the recipient. In conclusion, other-relevant traits capture more cognitive resources during encoding and at 300~400ms during retrieval, no matter which perspective evaluations are being made from. However, possessor-relevant traits indicate stronger recollection of episodic information during retrieval in the Possessor’s Perspective Condition. At last, other-relevant traits directing to the participants rather than general persons in the social environment of the possessor significantly reduce conflict of decision making at encoding stage.