Sriraj Aiyer, Hoi Ching Kam, Ka Yuk Ng, N. Young, Jiaxin Shi, G. Feldman
{"title":"Outcomes Affect Evaluations of Decision Quality: Replication and Extensions of Baron and Hershey’s (1988) Outcome Bias Experiment 1","authors":"Sriraj Aiyer, Hoi Ching Kam, Ka Yuk Ng, N. Young, Jiaxin Shi, G. Feldman","doi":"10.5334/irsp.751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.751","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70670185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Valentine Filleul, F. d’Arripe-Longueville, Eric Meinadier, J. Maillot, Derwin K.-C. Chan, Stéphanie Scoffier-Mériaux, K. Corrion
{"title":"Development of a French Paper-and-Pencil Implicit Association Test to Measure Athletes’ Implicit Doping Attitude (IAT-Dop)","authors":"Valentine Filleul, F. d’Arripe-Longueville, Eric Meinadier, J. Maillot, Derwin K.-C. Chan, Stéphanie Scoffier-Mériaux, K. Corrion","doi":"10.5334/irsp.651","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.651","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70669521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. Masciantonio, Maxime Résibois, P. Bouchat, D. Bourguignon
–
-
{"title":"Social Network Sites and Well-Being: Is it Only a Matter of Content?","authors":"A. Masciantonio, Maxime Résibois, P. Bouchat, D. Bourguignon","doi":"10.5334/irsp.736","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.736","url":null,"abstract":"–","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70669882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
K. Stasiuk, M. Paruzel-Czachura, R. Polczyk, J. Maciuszek
{"title":"The Limits of the Primacy of Morality Hypothesis: Are Global Impressions of Experts Based Mainly on their Competence or Morality?","authors":"K. Stasiuk, M. Paruzel-Czachura, R. Polczyk, J. Maciuszek","doi":"10.5334/irsp.643","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.643","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70669489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nathalie Bick, L. Froehlich, Maria‐Therese Friehs, P. Kotzur, Helen Landmann
In the academic domain, belonging to a negatively stereotyped group can impair performance and peer relationships. In higher distance education, stereotypes may be particularly influential as face-to-face contact is limited and non-traditional students who are at risk of being stereotyped are overrepresented. Still, research on stereotypes in higher distance education is sparse. The current research addresses this gap by investigating the Big Two of social perception (warmth, competence) and subordinate facets (friendliness, morality, assertiveness, ability, conscientiousness) in the context of higher distance education. It tests a) how well models with warmth/competence or the facets fit the data, b) whether stereotypes in higher distance education depend on the student group, and c) how the Big Two and subordinate facets predict intergroup emotions and behavioral intentions in higher distance education. An online survey with N = 626 students (74% female) of a large distance university showed that a measurement model with four facets (i.e., friendliness, morality, ability, conscientiousness) reveals adequate model fit for 12 student groups. Perceived stereotypes were positive for female
{"title":"Social Evaluation at a Distance – Facets of Stereotype Content about Student Groups in Higher Distance Education","authors":"Nathalie Bick, L. Froehlich, Maria‐Therese Friehs, P. Kotzur, Helen Landmann","doi":"10.5334/irsp.686","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.686","url":null,"abstract":"In the academic domain, belonging to a negatively stereotyped group can impair performance and peer relationships. In higher distance education, stereotypes may be particularly influential as face-to-face contact is limited and non-traditional students who are at risk of being stereotyped are overrepresented. Still, research on stereotypes in higher distance education is sparse. The current research addresses this gap by investigating the Big Two of social perception (warmth, competence) and subordinate facets (friendliness, morality, assertiveness, ability, conscientiousness) in the context of higher distance education. It tests a) how well models with warmth/competence or the facets fit the data, b) whether stereotypes in higher distance education depend on the student group, and c) how the Big Two and subordinate facets predict intergroup emotions and behavioral intentions in higher distance education. An online survey with N = 626 students (74% female) of a large distance university showed that a measurement model with four facets (i.e., friendliness, morality, ability, conscientiousness) reveals adequate model fit for 12 student groups. Perceived stereotypes were positive for female","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41568120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"What Do We Talk About When We Talk About Others? Evidence for the Primacy of the Horizontal Dimension of Social Evaluation in Workplace Gossip","authors":"E. Martinescu, K. Peters, B. Beersma","doi":"10.5334/irsp.687","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.687","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49427554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
V. Yzerbyt, Julien Barbedor, Antonin Carrier, O. Rohmer
Contemporary approaches of impression formation and stereotypes celebrate the role of the Big Two in social evaluation: the horizontal and vertical dimensions (Abele et al., 2021). Recently, interest has grown in making further distinctions within each of these dimensions (Abele et al., 2008). Here, we focused on the vertical facets, namely, assertiveness and ability. Research found that assertiveness is more strongly related to a target’s status than ability. Arguably, this pattern emerges because assertiveness comes across as less negotiable, whereas ability leaves more room for appreciation. Building on this assumption, we reasoned that judgments of ability provide more opportunity to justify or to reclaim positive identity, depending on one’s position in the hierarchy. Specifically, we hypothesized that the legitimacy beliefs and status of the judges are key factors to consider in that they moderate the perceived overlap between the vertical facets. Using a novel paradigm based on Goodman et al.’s (2001) social ladder, Studies 1a and 1b relied on judges’ legitimacy beliefs as a proxy for status, whereas Studies 2 and 3 directly examined the judges’ relative status. As predicted, we consistently found more overlap between assertiveness and ability among high-legitimacy/status judges than among low-legitimacy/status
当代印象形成和刻板印象的方法赞扬了“二巨头”在社会评价中的作用：横向和纵向（Abele et al.，2021）。最近，人们越来越有兴趣在这些维度中的每一个维度上做出进一步的区分（Abele等人，2008）。在这里，我们关注的是垂直方面，即自信和能力。研究发现，自信与目标的地位比能力更密切相关。可以说，这种模式的出现是因为自信给人的印象是不太可谈判的，而能力给人留下了更多的升值空间。基于这一假设，我们推断，根据一个人在等级制度中的地位，对能力的判断提供了更多的机会来证明或恢复积极的身份。具体而言，我们假设法官的合法性信念和地位是需要考虑的关键因素，因为它们缓和了纵向方面之间的重叠。使用基于古德曼等人（2001）社会阶梯的新范式，研究1a和1b依赖于法官的合法性信念作为地位的代表，而研究2和3直接考察了法官的相对地位。正如预测的那样，我们一致发现，在高合法性/地位法官中，自信和能力之间的重叠比在低合法性/身份法官中更多
{"title":"The Facets of Social Hierarchy: How Judges’ Legitimacy Beliefs and Relative Status Shape Their Evaluation of Assertiveness and Ability","authors":"V. Yzerbyt, Julien Barbedor, Antonin Carrier, O. Rohmer","doi":"10.5334/irsp.695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.695","url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary approaches of impression formation and stereotypes celebrate the role of the Big Two in social evaluation: the horizontal and vertical dimensions (Abele et al., 2021). Recently, interest has grown in making further distinctions within each of these dimensions (Abele et al., 2008). Here, we focused on the vertical facets, namely, assertiveness and ability. Research found that assertiveness is more strongly related to a target’s status than ability. Arguably, this pattern emerges because assertiveness comes across as less negotiable, whereas ability leaves more room for appreciation. Building on this assumption, we reasoned that judgments of ability provide more opportunity to justify or to reclaim positive identity, depending on one’s position in the hierarchy. Specifically, we hypothesized that the legitimacy beliefs and status of the judges are key factors to consider in that they moderate the perceived overlap between the vertical facets. Using a novel paradigm based on Goodman et al.’s (2001) social ladder, Studies 1a and 1b relied on judges’ legitimacy beliefs as a proxy for status, whereas Studies 2 and 3 directly examined the judges’ relative status. As predicted, we consistently found more overlap between assertiveness and ability among high-legitimacy/status judges than among low-legitimacy/status","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46582047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Xueli Zhu, Lei Cheng, Zifei Li, Lijuan Xiao, Fang Wang
{"title":"Economic Inequality Perception Dampens Meritocratic Belief in China: The Mediating Role of Perceived Distributive Unfairness","authors":"Xueli Zhu, Lei Cheng, Zifei Li, Lijuan Xiao, Fang Wang","doi":"10.5334/irsp.673","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.673","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46545209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Human judgments are inherently comparative. Recently, a so-called more-less asymmetry in comparative communication has been demonstrated: ‘more than’ comparisons are preferred to corresponding ‘less than’ comparisons. Here we show that a ubiquitous social-structural factor – social power – shapes biases in such comparisons. Powerholders, relative to powerless individuals, liked more, agreed more with and considered more likely to be true ‘more than’ compared to ‘less than’ statements. This was true despite the fact that the differently formulated statements were logically equivalent. In Study 1 ( N = 153), induced high power (vs. control or low power) led to believing that ‘more than’ statements were more likely to be true. In Studies 2A/B ( N = 449) the judgments of participants in high power conditions were more favorable when comparisons were made using ‘more than’ comparisons. This was also the case in a pilot study ( N = 149) in which individual differences in chronic sense of power were assessed. These findings suggest that powerholders’ decisions based on comparative information are especially prone to the more-less judgmental bias resulting in asymmetry. They are in line with approaches positing that power increases and lack of power decreases reliance on subjective experiences, including – but not limited to – ease of information processing and the use of fast and frugal strategies in judgment and decision-making.
{"title":"For Powerholders ‘More is More’: Power Shapes Judgments of Logically Equivalent Comparative Statements","authors":"Karl-Andrew Woltin, A. Guinote, Cátia P Teixeira","doi":"10.5334/irsp.598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.598","url":null,"abstract":"Human judgments are inherently comparative. Recently, a so-called more-less asymmetry in comparative communication has been demonstrated: ‘more than’ comparisons are preferred to corresponding ‘less than’ comparisons. Here we show that a ubiquitous social-structural factor – social power – shapes biases in such comparisons. Powerholders, relative to powerless individuals, liked more, agreed more with and considered more likely to be true ‘more than’ compared to ‘less than’ statements. This was true despite the fact that the differently formulated statements were logically equivalent. In Study 1 ( N = 153), induced high power (vs. control or low power) led to believing that ‘more than’ statements were more likely to be true. In Studies 2A/B ( N = 449) the judgments of participants in high power conditions were more favorable when comparisons were made using ‘more than’ comparisons. This was also the case in a pilot study ( N = 149) in which individual differences in chronic sense of power were assessed. These findings suggest that powerholders’ decisions based on comparative information are especially prone to the more-less judgmental bias resulting in asymmetry. They are in line with approaches positing that power increases and lack of power decreases reliance on subjective experiences, including – but not limited to – ease of information processing and the use of fast and frugal strategies in judgment and decision-making.","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42669377","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：