Findings

Your move

Kevin Lewis

August 09, 2015

Hierarchy, Dominance, and Deliberation: Egalitarian Values Require Mental Effort

Laura Van Berkel et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, September 2015, Pages 1207-1222

Abstract:
Hierarchy and dominance are ubiquitous. Because social hierarchy is early learned and highly rehearsed, the value of hierarchy enjoys relative ease over competing egalitarian values. In six studies, we interfere with deliberate thinking and measure endorsement of hierarchy and egalitarianism. In Study 1, bar patrons’ blood alcohol content was correlated with hierarchy preference. In Study 2, cognitive load increased the authority/hierarchy moral foundation. In Study 3, low-effort thought instructions increased hierarchy endorsement and reduced equality endorsement. In Study 4, ego depletion increased hierarchy endorsement and caused a trend toward reduced equality endorsement. In Study 5, low-effort thought instructions increased endorsement of hierarchical attitudes among those with a sense of low personal power. In Study 6, participants thinking quickly allocated more resources to high-status groups. Across five operationalizations of impaired deliberative thought, hierarchy endorsement increased and egalitarianism receded. These data suggest hierarchy may persist in part because it has a psychological advantage.

---------------------

Pupil Mimicry Correlates With Trust in In-Group Partners With Dilating Pupils

M.E. Kret, A.H. Fischer & C.K.W. De Dreu
Psychological Science, forthcoming

Abstract:
During close interactions with fellow group members, humans look into one another’s eyes, follow gaze, and quickly grasp emotion signals. The eye-catching morphology of human eyes, with unique eye whites, draws attention to the middle part, to the pupils, and their autonomic changes, which signal arousal, cognitive load, and interest (including social interest). Here, we examined whether and how these changes in a partner’s pupils are processed and how they affect the partner’s trustworthiness. Participants played incentivized trust games with virtual partners, whose pupils dilated, remained static, or constricted. Results showed that (a) participants trusted partners with dilating pupils and withheld trust from partners with constricting pupils, (b) participants’ pupils mimicked changes in their partners’ pupils, and (c) dilation mimicry predicted trust in in-group partners, whereas constriction mimicry did not. We suggest that pupil-contingent trust is in-group bounded and possibly evolved in and because of group life.

---------------------

Context Matters: The Social Effects of Anger in Cooperative, Balanced, and Competitive Negotiation Situations

Hajo Adam & Jeanne Brett
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, November 2015, Pages 44–58

Abstract:
When does expressing anger in negotiations lead to concessions? Although research has begun to address this question, it has not yet examined the influence of the negotiation context. We propose that the effect of expressing anger depends on the competitiveness of the negotiation situation. Specifically, when the negotiation situation balances cooperative and competitive elements, expressing anger elicits larger concessions than no anger, and responses are driven by cooperation-inducing strategic inferences (e.g., a perception that the anger expresser is tough and threatening). However, when the negotiation context is predominantly cooperative or predominantly competitive, expressing anger does not elicit larger concessions than no anger, and responses are driven by cooperation-inhibiting affective reactions (e.g., reciprocal anger and a desire to retaliate against the anger expresser). Results from two computer-mediated negotiation experiments using different negotiation scenarios, different manipulations of the competitiveness of the situation, and different subject populations supported our hypotheses.

---------------------

The Benefits of Dominance Complementarity in Negotiations

Scott Wiltermuth, Larissa Tiedens & Margaret Neale
Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, August 2015, Pages 194–209

Abstract:
We investigated whether dominance complementarity can lead people to reach mutually beneficial outcomes in negotiations by increasing the likelihood that they will successfully coordinate the exchange of information. We suggest that negotiators who differ in how dominantly they behave in the negotiation exchange information effectively because they fulfill different roles in the negotiation process. Study 1 demonstrated that dominant negotiators generally assert their desires, while relatively submissive negotiators generally ask questions to find ways to satisfy their own desires without escalating conflict with the dominant negotiators. Studies 2 and 3 demonstrated that participants were best able to discover integrative agreements when one negotiator was instructed to behave dominantly and the other negotiator, submissively. Improved information exchange mediated the relationship between dominance complementarity and improved joint outcomes in Study 3.

---------------------

The awestruck effect: Followers suppress emotion expression in response to charismatic but not individually considerate leadership

Jochen Menges et al.
Leadership Quarterly, August 2015, Pages 626–640

Abstract:
This study examines how followers regulate their outward expression of emotions in the context of two types of leadership that are commonly associated with transformational leadership, namely charismatic leadership and individually considerate leadership. Based on new theorizing and a series of three studies involving experiments and field work, we show that the two types of leadership have different effects on followers' emotional expressiveness. Specifically, we find that followers under the influence of leaders' charisma tend to suppress the expression of emotions (we call this the “awestruck effect”), but followers express emotions when leaders consider them individually. Awestruck followers may suffer from expressive inhibition even as charismatic leaders stir their hearts.

---------------------

The effect of requesting money with a few coins in one hand: The foot-in-the-hand technique

Nicolas Guéguen
Social Influence, forthcoming

Abstract:
Research has shown that individuals comply more readily to a monetary request made by a solicitor if the request disrupts the refusal script or if it is perceived as a legitimate request. We tested the effect of a new technique called the foot-in-the-hand technique (FITH), whereby solicitors requested money while holding a few coins in their hand. Findings show that the presence of money increased compliance with the request (Study 1), particularly when a reason for solicitation was added (Study 2). When the requesters stated that they were close to reaching the sum necessary to buy a particular product, more compliance was obtained (Study 3). A goal-oriented explanation was used to interpret the effect of the FITH technique.

---------------------

Abstract Language Signals Power, But Also Lack of Action Orientation

Mauricio Palmeira
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, November 2015, Pages 59–63

Abstract:
Powerful people tend to think more abstractly, and those who use abstract speech are perceived as more powerful. Given that appearing powerful may lead to actual power, those interested in achieving powerful positions may benefit from using abstract speech. In the current research, we propose that concrete speech may also have comparable benefits. Specifically, we argue that while abstract thinking is required to set big goals and make high level plans, concrete thinking is required to follow plans and achieve goals. Thus, whereas abstract speech signals the ability to think at a high level, concrete speech signals action orientation. Across four experiments, we find strong evidence for a link between concrete thinking and perceptions of action orientation. Importantly, we find that both power and action orientation are important predictors of preferences for leadership positions.

---------------------

Testing Theories about Ethnic Markers

Niels Holm Jensen et al.
Human Nature, June 2015, Pages 210-234

Abstract:
In recent years, evolutionary psychologists and anthropologists have debated whether ethnic markers have evolved to solve adaptive problems related to interpersonal coordination or to interpersonal cooperation. In the present study, we add to this debate by exploring how individuals living in a modern society utilize the accents of unfamiliar individuals to make social decisions in hypothetical economic games that measure interpersonal trust, generosity, and coordination. A total of 4603 Danish participants completed a verbal-guise study administered over the Internet. Participants listened to four speakers (two local and two nonlocal) and played a hypothetical Dictator Game, Trust Game, and Coordination Game with each of them. The results showed that participants had greater faith in coordinating successfully with local speakers than with nonlocal speakers. The coordination effect was strong for individuals living in the same city as the particular speakers and weakened as the geographical distance between the participants and the speakers grew. Conversely, the results showed that participants were not more generous toward or more trusting of local speakers compared with nonlocal speakers. Taken together, the results suggest that humans utilize ethnic markers of unfamiliar individuals to coordinate behavior rather than to cooperate.

---------------------

GO Figure: Analytic and Strategic Skills are Separable

Sascha Baghestanian & Seth Frey
Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, forthcoming

Abstract:
We measure the game behavior and analytic reasoning skills of expert strategic reasoners: professional GO players. We argue for a distinction between what we call “strategic” and “analytic” reasoning skills and present separate measures to elicit strategic and analytic abilities. The paper investigates the behavior of our subject pool in many different types of one-shot games, including the Traveler’s Dilemma, Centipede, Kreps, and Matching Pennies games. We observe that increased strategic skill predicts a greater probability of Nash behavior, while greater analytic skill predicts more cooperative play, even when such behavior is inconsistent with individual rationality.

---------------------

The bonding effect of money in the workplace: Priming money weakens the negative relationship between ostracism and prosocial behavior

Aurelia Mok & David De Cremer
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, forthcoming

Abstract:
The feeling of being ostracized in the workplace has been associated with the withdrawal of prosocial and helping behaviours. We propose that reminders of money would moderate (weaken) this relationship. We conducted three studies with working adult participants. Results showed that activating thoughts of money, even unrelated to compensation, reduced the negative relationship between ostracism and prosocial intentions (Studies 1 and 3) and behaviour (Study 2) in the organization. Study 3 furthermore showed that this effect occurs by reinforcing organizational identification. Our research identifies a factor that is already present in the work setting that could buffer the negative psychological and behavioural outcomes associated with ostracism: cues of money. We discuss the implications for research on money, social threats, and organizational behaviour.

---------------------

When Does Gossip Promote Generosity? Indirect Reciprocity Under the Shadow of the Future

Junhui Wu, Daniel Balliet & Paul Van Lange
Social Psychological and Personality Science, forthcoming

Abstract:
Reputation through gossip is a key mechanism promoting cooperation. The present research proposes that gossip promotes cooperation when one anticipates future interdependence with the gossip recipient (Hypothesis 1), that this effect is more pronounced for proself, compared to prosocial, individuals (Hypothesis 2), and explores the mediating role of reputational concern and expected indirect benefits in the relation between gossip and cooperation. Results from three studies supported these hypotheses, showing that people are more generous in response to gossip to their future interaction partner(s), compared with gossip to other(s) they would never meet or no gossip. Moreover, proselfs, compared with prosocials, showed a larger increase in generosity when they anticipated future interactions with the gossip recipient(s). The observed gossip-based generosity was primarily mediated by reputational concern rather than expected indirect benefits from future partners, and the mediation of reputational concern was more pronounced for proselfs than for prosocials.


Insight

from the

Archives

A weekly newsletter with free essays from past issues of National Affairs and The Public Interest that shed light on the week's pressing issues.

advertisement

Sign-in to your National Affairs subscriber account.


Already a subscriber? Activate your account.


subscribe

Unlimited access to intelligent essays on the nation’s affairs.

SUBSCRIBE
Subscribe to National Affairs.