How Elicitation Procedure Shapes Beliefs About Others' Affective Responses to Action and Inaction.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-23 DOI:10.1177/01461672231175958
Ioannis Evangelidis, Manissa P Gunadi
{"title":"How Elicitation Procedure Shapes Beliefs About Others' Affective Responses to Action and Inaction.","authors":"Ioannis Evangelidis, Manissa P Gunadi","doi":"10.1177/01461672231175958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Humans have long pondered the distinction between action and inaction. Classic work in social sciences provides evidence that most people believe that others experience higher levels of affect when they obtain the same outcome through action as opposed to inaction. In this paper, we theorize that people's attributions of affect to identical outcomes resulting from action versus inaction are largely constructive in nature, such that they heavily depend on the elicitation procedure. Seven preregistered studies demonstrate that most individuals cease to attribute greater affect to identical outcomes resulting from action as opposed to inaction when it is made possible-or salient-that they can state that action and inaction are associated with equal levels of affect. Consequently, the present studies suggest that researchers can reach different conclusions about participants' general proclivity to attribute greater affect to identical outcomes resulting from action (vs. inaction) depending on how participants' beliefs are measured.</p>","PeriodicalId":19834,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"1711-1724"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231175958","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Humans have long pondered the distinction between action and inaction. Classic work in social sciences provides evidence that most people believe that others experience higher levels of affect when they obtain the same outcome through action as opposed to inaction. In this paper, we theorize that people's attributions of affect to identical outcomes resulting from action versus inaction are largely constructive in nature, such that they heavily depend on the elicitation procedure. Seven preregistered studies demonstrate that most individuals cease to attribute greater affect to identical outcomes resulting from action as opposed to inaction when it is made possible-or salient-that they can state that action and inaction are associated with equal levels of affect. Consequently, the present studies suggest that researchers can reach different conclusions about participants' general proclivity to attribute greater affect to identical outcomes resulting from action (vs. inaction) depending on how participants' beliefs are measured.

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
诱导程序如何影响对他人行动和不行动的情感反应的信念。
人类长期以来一直在思考行动与不行动之间的区别。社会科学领域的经典研究证明,大多数人认为,当他人通过行动而不是不行动获得相同结果时,他们会体验到更高水平的情感。在本文中,我们从理论上认为,人们对行动与不行动所产生的相同结果的情感归因在很大程度上是建构性的,因此它们在很大程度上取决于诱导程序。七项预先登记的研究表明,当有可能或突出表明行动和不行动与同等程度的情感相关联时,大多数人不再将更大的情感归因于行动与不行动所导致的相同结果。因此,本研究表明,研究人员可以根据参与者信念的测量方法,对参与者将更大的情感归因于行动(与不行动)所导致的相同结果的普遍倾向得出不同的结论。
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
9.20
自引率
5.00%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: The Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin is the official journal for the Society of Personality and Social Psychology. The journal is an international outlet for original empirical papers in all areas of personality and social psychology.
期刊最新文献
Extreme Reactions to Globalization: Investigating Indirect, Longitudinal, and Experimental Effects of the Globalization-Radicalization Nexus. Understanding the Magnitude of Hypocrisy in Moral Contradictions: The Role of Surprise at Violating Strong Attitudes. Do Good Citizens Look to the Future? The Link Between National Identification and Future Time Perspective and Their Role in Explaining Citizens' Reactions to Conflicts Between Short-Term and Long-Term National Interests. How Elicitation Procedure Shapes Beliefs About Others' Affective Responses to Action and Inaction. Beautiful Strangers: Physical Evaluation of Strangers Is Influenced by Friendship Expectation.
×
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