Perspective taking reduces the correspondence bias: A systematically replication of Hooper et al. (2015)

IF 3.4 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcbs.2024.100735
Cibele Pacheco Gomide , William Ferreira Perez , Candido Vinicius Bocaiuva Barnsley Pessôa
{"title":"Perspective taking reduces the correspondence bias: A systematically replication of Hooper et al. (2015)","authors":"Cibele Pacheco Gomide ,&nbsp;William Ferreira Perez ,&nbsp;Candido Vinicius Bocaiuva Barnsley Pessôa","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2024.100735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Correspondence bias has been extensively described in the scientific literature, along with its harmful consequences to relationships, decision-making, etc. Interventions aiming to reduce correspondence bias or its negative impact have been also offered. In this regard, the present study systematically replicated Hooper et al. (2015) to observe the effect of a brief perspective-taking training based on Relational Frame Theory (RFT-PT) on correspondence bias. Eighty-one participants were randomized into four groups, two experimental groups that underwent training and two control groups that answered a general knowledge questionnaire. To observe the extent of correspondence bias and the effect of training on this phenomenon, all participants were exposed to an experimental condition involving the Attitude Attribution Paradigm consisting of essays in favor of or against meritocracy. This condition demanded that the participant read an essay about meritocracy, supposedly written by a candidate in a selection process, and attribute to the declarant a position in favor or against meritocracy. Attenuation of correspondence bias was observed in the groups that underwent the RFT-PT compared to the control groups, supporting the hypothesis that the opportunity to vary perspectives may decrease correspondence bias. An analysis of correspondence bias in light of the RFT is suggested.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":"32 ","pages":"Article 100735"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144724000152","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Correspondence bias has been extensively described in the scientific literature, along with its harmful consequences to relationships, decision-making, etc. Interventions aiming to reduce correspondence bias or its negative impact have been also offered. In this regard, the present study systematically replicated Hooper et al. (2015) to observe the effect of a brief perspective-taking training based on Relational Frame Theory (RFT-PT) on correspondence bias. Eighty-one participants were randomized into four groups, two experimental groups that underwent training and two control groups that answered a general knowledge questionnaire. To observe the extent of correspondence bias and the effect of training on this phenomenon, all participants were exposed to an experimental condition involving the Attitude Attribution Paradigm consisting of essays in favor of or against meritocracy. This condition demanded that the participant read an essay about meritocracy, supposedly written by a candidate in a selection process, and attribute to the declarant a position in favor or against meritocracy. Attenuation of correspondence bias was observed in the groups that underwent the RFT-PT compared to the control groups, supporting the hypothesis that the opportunity to vary perspectives may decrease correspondence bias. An analysis of correspondence bias in light of the RFT is suggested.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
透视可减少对应偏差:对Hooper等人(2015)研究的系统性复制
科学文献对对应偏差及其对人际关系、决策等的有害影响进行了广泛的描述。也有人提出了旨在减少对应偏差或其负面影响的干预措施。在这方面,本研究系统地复制了 Hooper 等人(2015 年)的研究,观察基于关系框架理论(RFT-PT)的简短透视训练对对应偏差的影响。81名参与者被随机分为四组,两组实验组接受培训,两组对照组回答常识问卷。为了观察对应偏差的程度以及培训对这一现象的影响,所有参与者都接受了由赞成或反对任人唯贤的文章组成的态度归因范式的实验条件。该条件要求被试阅读一篇假定由参加选拔的候选人撰写的关于任人唯贤的文章,并将赞成或反对任人唯贤的立场归因于声明者。与对照组相比,在接受 RFT-PT 的组别中观察到了对应偏差的减弱,这支持了 "改变观点的机会可能会减少对应偏差 "的假设。建议根据 RFT 对对应偏差进行分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
18.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS). Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.
期刊最新文献
Feasibility of a brief, remote self-compassion intervention for employed mothers Exploring the interconnectedness of depression, anxiety, diabetes distress, and related psychosocial factors in adults with type 2 diabetes: A network analysis Effects of a randomized controlled trial of mobile app-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy on depressive symptoms and process variables in college students - Focusing on the mediating effects of acceptance and cognitive defusion- Changes in university students’ behaviour and study burnout risk during ACT-based online course intervention: A mixed methods study Third wave interventions for adolescents with mental health disorders: A systematic review with meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1