No laughing matter
Differentiating What Is Humorous From What Is Not
Caleb Warren & Peter McGraw
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
After 2.5 millennia of philosophical deliberation and psychological experimentation, most scholars have concluded that humor arises from incongruity. We highlight 2 limitations of incongruity theories of humor. First, incongruity is not consistently defined. The literature describes incongruity in at least 4 ways: surprise, juxtaposition, atypicality, and a violation. Second, regardless of definition, incongruity alone does not adequately differentiate humorous from nonhumorous experiences. We suggest revising incongruity theory by proposing that humor arises from a benign violation: something that threatens a person's well-being, identity, or normative belief structure but that simultaneously seems okay. Six studies, which use entertainment, consumer products, and social interaction as stimuli, reveal that the benign violation hypothesis better differentiates humorous from nonhumorous experiences than common conceptualizations of incongruity. A benign violation conceptualization of humor improves accuracy by reducing the likelihood that joyous, amazing, and tragic situations are inaccurately predicted to be humorous.
---------------------
Moral Symbols: A Necklace of Garlic against Unethical Requests
Sreedhari Desai & Maryam Kouchaki
Academy of Management Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
This paper investigates whether by exposing superiors to moral symbols subordinates can discourage their superiors from asking them to perform unethical acts. Findings from five laboratory studies and one organizational survey study demonstrated that exposure to moral symbols displayed by the subordinates dissuades superiors from both engaging in unethical behaviors themselves and asking their subordinates to engage in unethical behavior. This paper shows that the display of moral symbols leads to two main consequences of (1) the activation of the concept of morality and increases in individuals' moral awareness to decrease unethical behavior, and (2) eliciting inferences about the moral character of the displayer to lower the likelihood of that person being subjected to unethical directives. Additionally, our findings demonstrate that moral symbols influence ethical decisions despite the powerful positions of superiors and do not bring hidden backlash effects against those who display them. In sum, our findings show that followers can serve as a form of social influence to guide their leader's behavior and reduce the occurrence of unethical acts in the workplace.
---------------------
But it's my right! Framing effects on support for empowering policies
Nurit Shnabel, John Dovidio & Ziv Levin
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, March 2016, Pages 36-49
Abstract:
Rights framing - presenting intergroup inequality as violating a minority group's basic rights - challenges the status quo of intergroup relations because it implies that the solution lies in a fundamental structural change. We suggest that majority-group members may show a backlash response to this challenge. Three studies revealed that Israeli Jews' support for policies that empower Israeli Arabs was lower when exposed to rights framing, compared to distress framing, i.e., presenting inequality as causing distress to the minority group (Studies 1-2), or a no-framing, control condition (Studies 2-3). This effect was mediated by increased zero-sum perceptions (Study 2). When rights framing was combined with a manipulation highlighting intergroup positive interdependence (thus countering zero-sum perceptions), its negative effect disappeared (Study 3). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
---------------------
An Experimental Test of Deviant Modeling
Owen Gallupe et al.
Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, forthcoming
Objectives: Test the effect of deviant peer modeling on theft as conditioned by verbal support for theft and number of deviant models.
Methods: Two related randomized experiments in which participants were given a chance to steal a gift card (ostensibly worth CAN$15) from the table in front of them. Each experiment had a control group, a verbal prompting group in which confederate(s) endorsed stealing, a behavioral modeling group in which confederate(s) committed theft, and a verbal prompting plus behavioral modeling group in which confederate(s) did both. The first experiment used one confederate; the second experiment used two. The pooled sample consisted of 335 undergraduate students.
Results: Participants in the verbal prompting plus behavioral modeling group were most likely to steal followed by the behavioral modeling group. Interestingly, behavioral modeling was only influential when two confederates were present. There were no thefts in either the control or verbal prompting groups regardless of the number of confederates.
Conclusions: Behavioral modeling appears to be the key mechanism, though verbal support can strengthen the effect of behavioral modeling.
---------------------
Blind loyalty? When group loyalty makes us see evil or engage in it
John Angus Hildreth, Francesca Gino & Max Bazerman
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, January 2016, Pages 16-36
Abstract:
Loyalty often drives corruption. Corporate scandals, political machinations, and sports cheating highlight how loyalty's pernicious nature manifests in collusion, conspiracy, cronyism, nepotism, and other forms of cheating. Yet loyalty is also touted as an ethical principle that guides behavior. Drawing on moral psychology and behavioral ethics research, we developed hypotheses about when group loyalty fosters ethical behavior and when it fosters corruption. Across nine studies, we found that individuals primed with loyalty cheated less than those not primed (Study 1A and 1B). Members more loyal to their fraternities (Study 2A) and students more loyal to their study groups (Study 2B) also cheated less than their less loyal counterparts due to greater ethical salience when they pledged their loyalty (Studies 3A and 3B). Importantly, competition moderated these effects: when competition was high, members more loyal to their fraternities (Study 4) or individuals primed with loyalty (Studies 5A and 5B) cheated more.
---------------------
Peter Strelan, Ian McKee & N.T. Feather
European Journal of Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
For all the well-established benefits of forgiveness for victims, when and how is forgiving more likely to be beneficial? Three experimental studies found that forgiving is more likely to be beneficial when victims perceived reparative effort by offenders such that offenders deserve forgiveness. Deservingness judgements were elicited by manipulating post-transgression offender effort (apology/amends). When offenders apologized (Study 1; recall paradigm) or made amends (Study 2; hypothetical paradigm) and were forgiven - relative to transgressors who did not apologize/make amends but were still forgiven - forgiving was beneficial. These findings - that deserved forgiveness is more beneficial for victims than undeserved forgiveness - were replicated when forgiving itself was also manipulated (Study 3). Moreover, Study 3 provided evidence to indicate that if a victim forgives when it is not deserved, victim well-being is equivalent to not forgiving at all. Of theoretical and practical importance is the mediating effect of deservingness on relations between post-transgression offender effort and a victim's personal consequences of forgiving.
---------------------
How learning shapes the empathic brain
Grit Hein et al.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 5 January 2016, Pages 80-85
Abstract:
Deficits in empathy enhance conflicts and human suffering. Thus, it is crucial to understand how empathy can be learned and how learning experiences shape empathy-related processes in the human brain. As a model of empathy deficits, we used the well-established suppression of empathy-related brain responses for the suffering of out-groups and tested whether and how out-group empathy is boosted by a learning intervention. During this intervention, participants received costly help equally often from an out-group member (experimental group) or an in-group member (control group). We show that receiving help from an out-group member elicits a classical learning signal (prediction error) in the anterior insular cortex. This signal in turn predicts a subsequent increase of empathy for a different out-group member (generalization). The enhancement of empathy-related insula responses by the neural prediction error signal was mediated by an establishment of positive emotions toward the out-group member. Finally, we show that surprisingly few positive learning experiences are sufficient to increase empathy. Our results specify the neural and psychological mechanisms through which learning interacts with empathy, and thus provide a neurobiological account for the plasticity of empathic reactions.
---------------------
Cynthia Levine, Devika Basu & Edith Chen
Journal of Personality, forthcoming
Objective: This study's goal was to conduct a preliminary test of the theory that just world beliefs can buffer against negative physiological outcomes after people experience certain types of negative life events by testing associations between just world beliefs and physiological outcomes among people with different life event histories.
Method: In a sample of 247 adults (Mage = 46.01, 24.31% men, 60.78% white), this research investigated the relationship between just world beliefs and metabolic symptoms, inflammation, and sleep among people who had recently experienced an unfair event, another type of negative event, or no negative event.
Results: Stronger just world beliefs correlated with lower metabolic risk, lower inflammation, and better sleep among people who had recently experienced an unfair event, but not among those in the other two event groups
Conclusions: These findings suggest that people's beliefs about the world may interact with their life experiences in ways that have implications for health-relevant outcomes.