Journal of Experimental Social Psychology最新文献_第4页

Masculinity contest cultures lead to self-group distancing in women 男性竞争文化导致女性的自我群体距离

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-09-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104832

Jenny Veldman , Andrea C. Vial

Past work has shown that personal experiences of gender discrimination are associated with a tendency among women to distance themselves from the gender ingroup. We propose that merely encountering workplace cultures with strong norms aligned with masculinity (i.e., a “masculinity contest culture,” or MCC) can produce a self-group distancing response. In four studies (total n = 3955) we demonstrate that MCCs devalue the female social identity, which undermines women's personal sense of status, leading them to self-group distance in these workplaces. In Study 1, women (not men) were more likely to conceal their gender in a workplace with strong (vs. weak) MCC and reported stronger self-group distancing. In Study 2, which included employees across industries that varied in MCCs, we found that MCC correlated with self-group distancing for women (not men), and lower personal status mediated this relationship. We further tested the causal chain in two experiments. In Study 3, participants perceived the female (vs. male) social identity as lower status in workplaces with strong (vs. weak/control) MCC, and ingroup status perceptions mediated the negative effect of MCC on personal status for women more strongly than men. In Study 4, experimentally elevating the status of the female social identity reduced the gender gap in self-group distancing via an increase in women's personal status. These findings illuminate how women's personal status in MCCs is strongly rooted in their gender ingroup status, and is a key mechanism whereby this subtle form of workplace bias triggers self-group distancing in women.

过去的研究表明，性别歧视的个人经历与女性与性别群体保持距离的倾向有关。我们提出，仅仅遇到与男性气质相一致的强烈规范的工作场所文化（即“男性气质竞赛文化”或MCC）就会产生自我群体距离反应。在四项研究中（总共n = 3955），我们证明了mcc贬低了女性的社会身份，这破坏了女性的个人地位感，导致她们在这些工作场所中自我群体距离。在研究1中，女性（而不是男性）更有可能在MCC较强（相对较弱）的工作场所隐瞒自己的性别，并报告了更强的自我群体距离。在研究2中，我们研究了不同行业的员工在MCC上的差异，我们发现MCC与女性（而不是男性）的自我群体距离相关，而较低的个人地位介导了这种关系。我们在两个实验中进一步检验了因果链。在研究3中，参与者认为女性（相对于男性）社会认同在具有强（相对于弱/控制）MCC的工作场所中地位较低，并且群体内地位感知在MCC对女性个人地位的负面影响中的中介作用强于男性。在研究4中，通过实验研究，女性社会身份地位的提升通过女性个人地位的提升来缩小自我群体距离的性别差距。这些发现阐明了mcc中女性的个人地位如何强烈地植根于她们在群体中的性别地位，这是这种微妙的工作场所偏见引发女性自我群体距离的关键机制。

{"title":"Masculinity contest cultures lead to self-group distancing in women","authors":"Jenny Veldman , Andrea C. Vial","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104832","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104832","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Past work has shown that personal experiences of gender discrimination are associated with a tendency among women to distance themselves from the gender ingroup. We propose that merely encountering workplace cultures with strong norms aligned with masculinity (i.e., a “masculinity contest culture,” or MCC) can produce a self-group distancing response. In four studies (total <em>n</em> = 3955) we demonstrate that MCCs devalue the female social identity, which undermines women's personal sense of status, leading them to self-group distance in these workplaces. In Study 1, women (not men) were more likely to conceal their gender in a workplace with strong (vs. weak) MCC and reported stronger self-group distancing. In Study 2, which included employees across industries that varied in MCCs, we found that MCC correlated with self-group distancing for women (not men), and lower personal status mediated this relationship. We further tested the causal chain in two experiments. In Study 3, participants perceived the female (vs. male) social identity as lower status in workplaces with strong (vs. weak/control) MCC, and ingroup status perceptions mediated the negative effect of MCC on personal status for women more strongly than men. In Study 4, experimentally elevating the status of the female social identity reduced the gender gap in self-group distancing via an increase in women's personal status. These findings illuminate how women's personal status in MCCs is strongly rooted in their gender ingroup status, and is a key mechanism whereby this subtle form of workplace bias triggers self-group distancing in women.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 104832"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145103963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The dosage of deception: How frequency and type influence trust evaluations 欺骗的剂量：频率和类型如何影响信任评估

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-09-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104823

T. Bradford Bitterly

Leading negotiation scholars have recommended that individuals never lie to their counterpart. This advice is based on negotiations research that has examined the interpersonal costs of deception through studies where a target is categorized as being deceptive or honest without consideration of the relative frequency of the deception. For example, prior work has broadly categorized individuals who lie once in a single-issue negotiation and individuals who lie once in a five-issue negotiation as liars. Consequently, it is hard to disentangle how many of the theoretical and prescriptive claims pertain to using deception sparingly, frequently, or only being deceptive. Across five preregistered studies (N = 4003), I examine contexts where individuals negotiate over multiple issues and disentangle the effects of being sparingly, mostly, or exclusively deceptive. Examining diverse deception strategies (e.g., lies by commission, dodging, paltering, deflection), I find that the economic and interpersonal consequences of deception are significantly different depending on the relative frequency with which individuals use it, underscoring the need to not only understand the effects of deception, but also the dosage. Although individuals punish deception, they also reward honesty, and are forgiving of counterparts who use deception sparingly. Combined, these findings deepen our understanding of deception and trust and advance our theoretical and prescriptive understanding of negotiations.

著名的谈判学者建议人们永远不要对对方撒谎。这一建议是基于谈判研究，该研究通过研究欺骗的人际成本，将目标分为欺骗或诚实，而不考虑欺骗的相对频率。例如，先前的研究将在单一问题谈判中撒一次谎的人和在五个问题谈判中撒一次谎的人大致分类为说谎者。因此，很难区分有多少理论和规定的主张与使用欺骗有节制、频繁或仅仅是欺骗性有关。在五项预先登记的研究中（N = 4003），我研究了个人就多个问题进行谈判的情况，并分析了少量、大部分或完全欺骗的影响。研究了不同的欺骗策略（例如，通过委托、躲避、搪塞、转移），我发现欺骗的经济和人际后果是显著不同的，这取决于个人使用它的相对频率，强调不仅需要了解欺骗的影响，而且还要了解剂量。尽管人们会惩罚欺骗，但他们也会奖励诚实，并原谅那些适度使用欺骗的同行。综上所述，这些发现加深了我们对欺骗和信任的理解，并推进了我们对谈判的理论和规范理解。

{"title":"The dosage of deception: How frequency and type influence trust evaluations","authors":"T. Bradford Bitterly","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104823","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104823","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Leading negotiation scholars have recommended that individuals never lie to their counterpart. This advice is based on negotiations research that has examined the interpersonal costs of deception through studies where a target is categorized as being deceptive or honest without consideration of the relative frequency of the deception. For example, prior work has broadly categorized individuals who lie once in a single-issue negotiation and individuals who lie once in a five-issue negotiation as liars. Consequently, it is hard to disentangle how many of the theoretical and prescriptive claims pertain to using deception sparingly, frequently, or only being deceptive. Across five preregistered studies (<em>N</em> = 4003), I examine contexts where individuals negotiate over multiple issues and disentangle the effects of being sparingly, mostly, or exclusively deceptive. Examining diverse deception strategies (e.g., lies by commission, dodging, paltering, deflection), I find that the economic and interpersonal consequences of deception are significantly different depending on the relative frequency with which individuals use it, underscoring the need to not only understand the effects of deception, but also the dosage. Although individuals punish deception, they also reward honesty, and are forgiving of counterparts who use deception sparingly. Combined, these findings deepen our understanding of deception and trust and advance our theoretical and prescriptive understanding of negotiations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 104823"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145103965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

How diversity and disadvantage frames shape employee reactions to affirmative action: Social identity threat, stereotype threat, and fairness perceptions 多样性和劣势框架如何影响员工对平权行动的反应：社会身份威胁、刻板印象威胁和公平感知

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-09-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104831

Samantha M. Greig, Courtney von Hippel, Tyler Okimoto

Many organizations invest in affirmative action strategies to address gender disparities in their workforce, aiming to enhance women's representation and advancement. Despite their potential benefits, research suggests these initiatives can encounter resistance due to perceptions of unfairness and stereotype-based assumptions that women have advanced due to preferential treatment rather than merit. This study examines whether gender-based affirmative action is more effectively justified by emphasizing organizational diversity or by highlighting the systemic disadvantages women face. Specifically, it investigates whether a disadvantage-based frame enhances perceptions of fairness and elicits positive responses; or instead triggers social identity threat and stereotype threat, prompting more negative responses. Using data from Australian employees, responses are analyzed through the lenses of social identity threat, stereotype threat, and fairness perceptions as explanatory mechanisms for outcomes including resentment toward affirmative action, self-efficacy in career progression, and policy support. Understanding how both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries respond to affirmative action is crucial for optimizing the effectiveness of these programs and improving career outcomes for women.

许多组织投资于平权行动战略，以解决劳动力中的性别差异，旨在提高妇女的代表性和地位。尽管这些举措有潜在的好处，但研究表明，由于对不公平的看法和基于陈规定型观念的假设，这些举措可能会遇到阻力，即女性的晋升是由于优待而不是merit。本研究考察了基于性别的平权行动是通过强调组织多样性还是通过强调女性面临的系统性劣势来更有效地证明其合理性。具体而言，它调查了基于劣势的框架是否增强了公平的感知并引发了积极的反应；或者反而会引发社会身份威胁和刻板印象威胁，引发更多的负面反应。使用来自澳大利亚员工的数据，通过社会身份威胁、刻板印象威胁和公平感知作为对平权行动怨恨、职业发展自我效能感和政策支持等结果的解释机制来分析他们的反应。了解受益者和非受益者如何应对平权行动，对于优化这些项目的有效性和改善女性的职业成果至关重要。

{"title":"How diversity and disadvantage frames shape employee reactions to affirmative action: Social identity threat, stereotype threat, and fairness perceptions","authors":"Samantha M. Greig, Courtney von Hippel, Tyler Okimoto","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104831","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104831","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many organizations invest in affirmative action strategies to address gender disparities in their workforce, aiming to enhance women's representation and advancement. Despite their potential benefits, research suggests these initiatives can encounter resistance due to perceptions of unfairness and stereotype-based assumptions that women have advanced due to preferential treatment rather than merit. This study examines whether gender-based affirmative action is more effectively justified by emphasizing organizational diversity or by highlighting the systemic disadvantages women face. Specifically, it investigates whether a disadvantage-based frame enhances perceptions of fairness and elicits positive responses; or instead triggers social identity threat and stereotype threat, prompting more negative responses. Using data from Australian employees, responses are analyzed through the lenses of social identity threat, stereotype threat, and fairness perceptions as explanatory mechanisms for outcomes including resentment toward affirmative action, self-efficacy in career progression, and policy support. Understanding how both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries respond to affirmative action is crucial for optimizing the effectiveness of these programs and improving career outcomes for women.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 104831"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145103966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Keeping the goal in sight and in mind: The association between visual attention and motivational mindsets among runners 保持目标在眼前和心中：跑步者的视觉注意力和动机心态之间的联系

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-09-09 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104822

Emily Balcetis, Jordan S. Daley, Bradley Tao, Bryce Lexow

Individuals rely on a multitude of tools, including visual attention-based strategies, to self-regulate. We ask if attention itself serves as the regulatory strategy, or whether shifts in attentional scope shift the reliance on implemental and deliberative motivational mindsets. Runners self-reported how frequently they actually use or believe they should use narrow and wide attentional scope, as well as implemental and deliberative mindset, across progressive stages of runs. As runs progress, runners increasingly narrow their attentional scope but do not increasingly use implemental motivational mindset; they also decreasingly widen their attentional scope but do not decreasingly use deliberative mindset (Exploratory Study, Study 1, Study 2, Study 3). Attentional scope and motivational mindset changes diverged over time suggesting an independence between them. Moreover, experimentally induced changes in attentional scope failed to cause corresponding changes in motivational mindset (Study 4). Task difficulty, as assessed by arousal, differentially related to changes in attentional scope and motivational mindset, suggesting scope and mindset are not governed by the same underlying system (Study 3). Finally, faster and slower runners showed distinct patterns of prioritizing narrow attentional scope (Study 3), suggesting that attentional narrowing is not simply a uniform response to arousal. Across 5 studies, data suggest the independence of attentional scope and motivational mindsets in the context of running. We discuss implications for visual attention, mindset theory, and self-regulation.

个体依靠多种工具，包括基于视觉注意力的策略，来进行自我调节。我们要问的是，注意力本身是否起到调节策略的作用，或者注意力范围的变化是否会改变对执行和审议动机心态的依赖。跑步者自我报告了他们在跑步的各个阶段实际使用或认为应该使用窄注意力范围和宽注意力范围的频率，以及执行和深思熟虑的心态。随着跑步的进展，跑步者越来越缩小他们的注意力范围，但没有越来越多地使用执行动机心态；他们也会逐渐扩大他们的注意力范围，但不会减少使用深思熟虑的心态（探索性研究，研究1，研究2，研究3）。注意范围和动机心态的变化随着时间的推移而分化，表明它们之间是独立的。此外，实验诱导的注意范围变化并没有引起动机心态的相应变化（研究4）。任务难度，通过唤醒来评估，与注意范围和动机心态的变化有不同的关系，这表明范围和心态不是由同一个潜在系统控制的（研究3）。最后，跑得快和跑得慢的人表现出不同的专注范围优先化模式（研究3），这表明专注范围缩小并不仅仅是对觉醒的统一反应。在5项研究中，数据表明，在跑步的背景下，注意力范围和动机心态是独立的。我们讨论了视觉注意、心态理论和自我调节的含义。

{"title":"Keeping the goal in sight and in mind: The association between visual attention and motivational mindsets among runners","authors":"Emily Balcetis, Jordan S. Daley, Bradley Tao, Bryce Lexow","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104822","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104822","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Individuals rely on a multitude of tools, including visual attention-based strategies, to self-regulate. We ask if attention itself serves as the regulatory strategy, or whether shifts in attentional scope shift the reliance on implemental and deliberative motivational mindsets. Runners self-reported how frequently they actually use or believe they should use narrow and wide attentional scope, as well as implemental and deliberative mindset, across progressive stages of runs. As runs progress, runners increasingly narrow their attentional scope but do not increasingly use implemental motivational mindset; they also decreasingly widen their attentional scope but do not decreasingly use deliberative mindset (Exploratory Study, Study 1, Study 2, Study 3). Attentional scope and motivational mindset changes diverged over time suggesting an independence between them. Moreover, experimentally induced changes in attentional scope failed to cause corresponding changes in motivational mindset (Study 4). Task difficulty, as assessed by arousal, differentially related to changes in attentional scope and motivational mindset, suggesting scope and mindset are not governed by the same underlying system (Study 3). Finally, faster and slower runners showed distinct patterns of prioritizing narrow attentional scope (Study 3), suggesting that attentional narrowing is not simply a uniform response to arousal. Across 5 studies, data suggest the independence of attentional scope and motivational mindsets in the context of running. We discuss implications for visual attention, mindset theory, and self-regulation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 104822"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145020170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Why do people choose extreme candidates? The role of identity relevance 为什么人们会选择极端的候选人？身份关联的作用

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-08-30 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104821

Mohamed A. Hussein , Zakary L. Tormala , S. Christian Wheeler

Elected officials are increasingly extreme. Research trying to understand this trend has tended to focus on structural factors, such as primary elections and changes in the supply of candidates. Less emphasis has been placed on psychological perspectives. The current research advances such a perspective. Leveraging research on attitudes, we investigate when and why people prefer extreme over moderate candidates from their own party. We posit that the identity relevance of people's attitudes plays a key role. Specifically, we propose that identity relevance fosters attitude extremity, which in turn promotes a preference for extreme over moderate candidates. Across six main studies (N = 3136) using a variety of political issues, operationalizations of identity relevance, instantiations of candidate extremity, and experimental paradigms (including two studies with human-LLM interactions), we find support for this hypothesis. Our findings suggest that as attitudes become more identity relevant, they become more extreme, leading individuals to prefer extreme over moderate candidates from their party. These results shed light on when and why people prefer extreme over moderate candidates, contribute to a nascent literature on the identity relevance of people's attitudes, and advance our understanding of the antecedents and consequences of attitude extremity.

民选官员越来越极端。试图理解这一趋势的研究往往侧重于结构性因素，如初选和候选人供应的变化。对心理学观点的重视程度较低。目前的研究提出了这样一个观点。利用对态度的研究，我们调查了人们何时以及为什么更喜欢自己政党的极端候选人，而不是温和派候选人。我们假设人们态度的身份相关性起着关键作用。具体来说，我们认为身份关联会促进态度极端，这反过来又会促进极端候选人对温和候选人的偏好。在六项主要研究（N = 3136）中，我们发现了对这一假设的支持，这些研究使用了各种政治问题、身份相关性的操作化、候选人极端的实例化和实验范式（包括两项与人-法学硕士互动的研究）。我们的研究结果表明，随着态度变得与身份更相关，他们变得更加极端，导致个人更喜欢极端而不是他们政党的温和派候选人。这些结果揭示了人们何时以及为什么更喜欢极端的候选人而不是温和的候选人，促进了关于人们态度的身份相关性的新生文献，并促进了我们对态度极端的前因和后果的理解。

{"title":"Why do people choose extreme candidates? The role of identity relevance","authors":"Mohamed A. Hussein , Zakary L. Tormala , S. Christian Wheeler","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104821","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104821","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Elected officials are increasingly extreme. Research trying to understand this trend has tended to focus on structural factors, such as primary elections and changes in the supply of candidates. Less emphasis has been placed on psychological perspectives. The current research advances such a perspective. Leveraging research on attitudes, we investigate when and why people prefer extreme over moderate candidates from their own party. We posit that the identity relevance of people's attitudes plays a key role. Specifically, we propose that identity relevance fosters attitude extremity, which in turn promotes a preference for extreme over moderate candidates. Across six main studies (<em>N =</em> 3136) using a variety of political issues, operationalizations of identity relevance, instantiations of candidate extremity, and experimental paradigms (including two studies with human-LLM interactions), we find support for this hypothesis. Our findings suggest that as attitudes become more identity relevant, they become more extreme, leading individuals to prefer extreme over moderate candidates from their party. These results shed light on when and why people prefer extreme over moderate candidates, contribute to a nascent literature on the identity relevance of people's attitudes, and advance our understanding of the antecedents and consequences of attitude extremity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 104821"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144920318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Evaluative conditioning with multiple unconditioned stimuli – Integration at judgment? 多重非条件刺激的评价条件作用-判断的整合？

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-08-27 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104820

Florian Weber , Hans Alves , Tobias Vogel , Moritz Ingendahl

Evaluative conditioning (EC), the change in the liking of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a positive/negative unconditioned stimulus (US), is a central effect in attitude formation. While EC has been widely studied in social psychology for many years, research has only recently begun investigating EC in stimulus-rich situations with multiple simultaneously occurring USs. Initial evidence suggests that conditioned attitudes develop in such situations as if people compute the average valence from the different USs. However, the cognitive processes underlying this averaging are insufficiently understood, especially when they operate in the conditioning process – only at encoding or also at judgment. To test this, we conducted two preregistered experiments where CSs simultaneously appeared with multiple USs and the valence of some of the USs changed after the conditioning procedure. We found that attitudes toward the CSs shifted in line with the changes in US valence, implying integration at judgment. Furthermore, our results confirm that valence integration of multiple USs still follows an averaging pattern, even when some USs change their valence after the initial pairing. Our research reveals key insights into information integration processes in EC, demonstrating that a simple averaging rule predicts conditioned attitudes from complex stimulus arrangements even in situations where affective stimuli change in valence throughout time. Furthermore, this implies that conditioned attitudes are flexibly constructed on the spot by retrieving and averaging the most recent valence information from previously paired attitude objects, showing the adaptivity of conditioned attitudes to new informational input.

评价条件反射（EC）是指由于条件刺激（CS）与积极/消极非条件刺激（US）配对而引起的对条件刺激（CS）的喜爱程度的变化，是态度形成的中心效应。虽然脑电在社会心理学中已被广泛研究多年，但直到最近才开始研究脑电在刺激丰富的情况下同时发生的多个脑电。最初的证据表明，在人们从不同的USs中计算出平均价的情况下，条件态度就会形成。然而，这种平均背后的认知过程还没有得到充分的理解，特别是当它们在条件反射过程中起作用时——只在编码或判断中起作用。为了验证这一点，我们进行了两个预注册实验，其中CSs与多个USs同时出现，并且一些USs的价在条件作用后发生了变化。我们发现，对CSs的态度随着美国价的变化而变化，这意味着在判断时的整合。此外，我们的研究结果证实，即使一些USs在初始配对后改变了它们的价态，多个USs的价积分仍然遵循平均模式。我们的研究揭示了电子商务中信息整合过程的关键见解，证明了一个简单的平均规则可以预测复杂刺激安排的条件态度，即使在情感刺激随时间变化的情况下也是如此。此外，这意味着条件态度是通过从先前配对的态度对象中检索和平均最近的价信息而灵活地在现场构建的，显示了条件态度对新信息输入的适应性。

{"title":"Evaluative conditioning with multiple unconditioned stimuli – Integration at judgment?","authors":"Florian Weber , Hans Alves , Tobias Vogel , Moritz Ingendahl","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104820","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104820","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Evaluative conditioning (EC), the change in the liking of a conditioned stimulus (CS) due to its pairing with a positive/negative unconditioned stimulus (US), is a central effect in attitude formation. While EC has been widely studied in social psychology for many years, research has only recently begun investigating EC in stimulus-rich situations with multiple simultaneously occurring USs. Initial evidence suggests that conditioned attitudes develop in such situations as if people compute the average valence from the different USs. However, the cognitive processes underlying this averaging are insufficiently understood, especially <em>when</em> they operate in the conditioning process – only at encoding or also at judgment. To test this, we conducted two preregistered experiments where CSs simultaneously appeared with multiple USs and the valence of some of the USs changed after the conditioning procedure. We found that attitudes toward the CSs shifted in line with the changes in US valence, implying integration at judgment. Furthermore, our results confirm that valence integration of multiple USs still follows an averaging pattern, even when some USs change their valence after the initial pairing. Our research reveals key insights into information integration processes in EC, demonstrating that a simple averaging rule predicts conditioned attitudes from complex stimulus arrangements even in situations where affective stimuli change in valence throughout time. Furthermore, this implies that conditioned attitudes are flexibly constructed on the spot by retrieving and averaging the most recent valence information from previously paired attitude objects, showing the adaptivity of conditioned attitudes to new informational input.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 104820"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144906957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The importance of feeling above-average morally versus agentically 感觉自己在道德上高于平均水平与行为上的重要性

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-08-25 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104815

Yujing Liang , Sara D. Hodges , Vera Hoorens

Which is more important for a positive self concept: feeling moral or feeling agentic? Research on self-superiority (better-than-average) beliefs, “self-superiority” for short, offers inconsistent evidence. Seemingly supporting the “morality hypothesis,” mean self-superiority is greater for morality. Seemingly supporting the “agency hypothesis,” individual differences in self-esteem correlate more strongly with self-superiority on agency. In three studies, we replicate past results and offer an explanation reconciling these inconsistent previous results. The morality hypothesis predicted that participants would find morality traits more personally important; greater moral self-superiority would be mediated by that greater importance; and the stronger correlation of agentic self-superiority with self-esteem would be moderated by the lower personal importance of agency. In contrast, the agency hypothesis predicted that participants would find morality traits more socially important and agency traits more personally important; that greater moral self-superiority would be mediated by the greater social importance of morality, and that the stronger correlation of agentic self-superiority with self-esteem would be moderated by the greater personal importance of agency. Participants generally showed moral self-superiority, but only those with high self-esteem showed agentic self-superiority (Studies 1–3). Participants rated morality traits as more socially important (Studies 1–2) and more extremely valenced (Study 3) but also more personally important than agency traits (Studies 1–3). Higher personal importance was, just like social importance and extremity of valence, associated with greater mean self-superiority but not with stronger correlations of self-superiority with self-esteem (Studies 1–3). These findings are more consistent with the morality hypothesis than with the agency hypothesis.

对于积极的自我概念来说，哪个更重要：道德感还是主观感？关于自我优越感（高于平均水平）信念的研究，简称“自我优越感”，提供了不一致的证据。似乎支持“道德假设”，意味着自我优越感对道德更大。似乎支持“代理假说”，自尊的个体差异与代理上的自我优越感有更强的相关性。在三项研究中，我们重复了过去的结果，并提供了一种解释，以调和这些不一致的先前结果。道德假设预测，参与者会认为道德品质对个人更重要；更大的道德优越感将由更大的重要性来调节；代理自我优越感与自尊的强相关性会被代理的个人重要性降低所调节。相比之下，代理假设预测参与者会认为道德品质对社会更重要，代理品质对个人更重要；更大的道德自我优越感会被更大的道德社会重要性所调节，能动性自我优越感和自尊的更强的相关性会被能动性更大的个人重要性所调节。参与者普遍表现出道德自我优越感，但只有高自尊的参与者表现出能动性自我优越感（研究1-3）。参与者认为道德特质在社会上更重要（研究1-2），更有价值（研究3），但在个人方面也比代理特质更重要（研究1-3）。与社会重要性和效价极值一样，较高的个人重要性与较高的平均自我优越感相关，但与自我优越感与自尊的相关性不强（研究1-3）。这些发现更符合道德假设，而不是代理假设。

{"title":"The importance of feeling above-average morally versus agentically","authors":"Yujing Liang , Sara D. Hodges , Vera Hoorens","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104815","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104815","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Which is more important for a positive self concept: feeling moral or feeling agentic? Research on self-superiority (better-than-average) beliefs, “self-superiority” for short, offers inconsistent evidence. Seemingly supporting the “morality hypothesis,” mean self-superiority is greater for morality. Seemingly supporting the “agency hypothesis,” individual differences in self-esteem correlate more strongly with self-superiority on agency. In three studies, we replicate past results and offer an explanation reconciling these inconsistent previous results. The morality hypothesis predicted that participants would find morality traits more personally important; greater moral self-superiority would be mediated by that greater importance; and the stronger correlation of agentic self-superiority with self-esteem would be moderated by the lower personal importance of agency. In contrast, the agency hypothesis predicted that participants would find morality traits more socially important and agency traits more personally important; that greater moral self-superiority would be mediated by the greater social importance of morality, and that the stronger correlation of agentic self-superiority with self-esteem would be moderated by the greater personal importance of agency. Participants generally showed moral self-superiority, but only those with high self-esteem showed agentic self-superiority (Studies 1–3). Participants rated morality traits as more socially important (Studies 1–2) and more extremely valenced (Study 3) but also more personally important than agency traits (Studies 1–3). Higher personal importance was, just like social importance and extremity of valence, associated with greater mean self-superiority but not with stronger correlations of self-superiority with self-esteem (Studies 1–3). These findings are more consistent with the morality hypothesis than with the agency hypothesis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 104815"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144894999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

On the relation between boredom and social behavior: A registered report 无聊与社会行为的关系：一篇注册报告

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-08-23 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104804

Thekla Müller-Boysen , Sergio Pirla , Stefan Pfattheicher

Boredom plays an essential role in everyday life and is a powerful motivator. This registered report investigated the interpersonal consequences of boredom. We recruited participants online (N = 3568) and ran one experiment manipulating boredom with three variations of behavioral options as dependent variables: 1) prosocial and non-social, 2) antisocial and non-social, and 3) prosocial, antisocial, and non-social. First, we tested whether boredom increases the likelihood of individuals engaging in any type of behavior, including both social and non-social alternatives. We found no significant main effect of boredom on behavior. Second, we tested whether boredom increases the likelihood of individuals engaging in prosocial or antisocial behavior. No clear evidence emerged for a total effect of boredom on prosocial or antisocial behavior. Moderation analyses revealed no significant effect of the prosocial personality trait Honestly-Humility, and the antisocial personality trait D. In addition, mediation analyses showed that boredom reduces individuals' sense of agency, which in turn is associated with increased prosocial and antisocial behavior; boredom also reduces a sense of meaning, which in turn relates to increased prosocial behavior when only this social option is presented. Overall, this study examined the motivational aspect of boredom with regard to social behavior and the role of personality traits as moderators and lack of agency and meaning as mediators.

无聊在日常生活中扮演着重要的角色，是一种强大的动力。这篇注册报告调查了无聊对人际关系的影响。我们在网上招募了3568名参与者，并进行了一项实验，以三种不同的行为选择作为因变量来操纵无聊：1)亲社会和非社会，2)反社会和非社会，3)亲社会、反社会和非社会。首先，我们测试了无聊是否会增加个体参与任何类型行为的可能性，包括社交和非社交选择。我们发现无聊对行为没有显著的主要影响。其次，我们测试了无聊是否会增加个体从事亲社会或反社会行为的可能性。没有明确的证据表明无聊对亲社会或反社会行为的总体影响。适度分析显示，诚实-谦卑的亲社会人格特质和反社会人格特质d没有显著影响。此外，中介分析显示，无聊降低了个体的代理感，代理感反过来又与亲社会和反社会行为的增加有关；无聊也会降低意义感，当只有这种社交选择时，意义感又会增加亲社会行为。总的来说，本研究考察了无聊对社会行为的动机方面，以及人格特质作为调节因素和缺乏能动性和意义作为调节因素的作用。

{"title":"On the relation between boredom and social behavior: A registered report","authors":"Thekla Müller-Boysen , Sergio Pirla , Stefan Pfattheicher","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104804","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104804","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Boredom plays an essential role in everyday life and is a powerful motivator. This registered report investigated the interpersonal consequences of boredom. We recruited participants online (<em>N</em> = 3568) and ran one experiment manipulating boredom with three variations of behavioral options as dependent variables: 1) prosocial and non-social, 2) antisocial and non-social, and 3) prosocial, antisocial, and non-social. First, we tested whether boredom increases the likelihood of individuals engaging in any type of behavior, including both social and non-social alternatives. We found no significant main effect of boredom on behavior. Second, we tested whether boredom increases the likelihood of individuals engaging in prosocial or antisocial behavior. No clear evidence emerged for a total effect of boredom on prosocial or antisocial behavior. Moderation analyses revealed no significant effect of the prosocial personality trait Honestly-Humility, and the antisocial personality trait D. In addition, mediation analyses showed that boredom reduces individuals' sense of agency, which in turn is associated with increased prosocial and antisocial behavior; boredom also reduces a sense of meaning, which in turn relates to increased prosocial behavior when only this social option is presented. Overall, this study examined the motivational aspect of boredom with regard to social behavior and the role of personality traits as moderators and lack of agency and meaning as mediators.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 104804"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144889043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The do-gooder dilemma: A self/other asymmetry in the perceived emotional costs of self-reporting good deeds 行善者困境：自我报告善行的感知情感成本中的自我/他人不对称

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-08-21 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104808

Jerry Richardson , Paul Bloom , Shaun Nichols , David Pizarro

Recent research in which individuals are encouraged to share stories of their own charitable giving on social media suggests that such sharing facilitates perceptions of prosocial norms and increases charitable donations. However, we predicted that this sharing might also incur unforeseen emotional costs, diminishing the “warm glow” of altruism. Across 5 preregistered experiments (N = 2840), participants reported that they would feel worse when sharing their own good deeds compared to their achievements, and substantially worse when sharing these stories on social media (compared to telling a friend or not sharing). In contrast, participants reported that others would feel better (i.e., less shame and embarrassment, more happiness and pride) after reporting their own good deeds. These studies suggest that individuals believe that (1) reporting their own good deeds will leave them feeling worse, and (2) others will not suffer similar negative feelings.

最近的一项研究表明，鼓励个人在社交媒体上分享自己的慈善捐赠故事，这种分享促进了对亲社会规范的认知，并增加了慈善捐赠。然而，我们预测，这种分享也可能产生不可预见的情感成本，减少利他主义的“温暖的光芒”。在5个预先注册的实验中（N = 2840），参与者报告说，与他们的成就相比，他们在分享自己的善行时会感觉更糟，在社交媒体上分享这些故事时（与告诉朋友或不分享相比）会感觉更糟。相比之下，参与者报告说，其他人在报告自己的善行后会感觉更好（即，更少的羞耻和尴尬，更多的快乐和骄傲）。这些研究表明，人们相信(1)报告自己的善行会让他们感觉更糟，(2)其他人不会遭受类似的负面情绪。

引用次数: 0

Norm-enhanced prebunking for actively open-minded thinking indirectly improves misinformation discernment and reduces conspiracy beliefs 规范增强的主动开放思维的预掩蔽间接提高了错误信息的识别，减少了阴谋信念

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-08-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104818

Mikey Biddlestone , Carolin-Theresa Ziemer , Rakoen Maertens , Jon Roozenbeek , Sander van der Linden

Recent research has demonstrated that actively open-minded thinking (AOT)—a cognitive thinking style characterized by the active avoidance of myside bias and overconfidence in one's conclusions—is related to lower misinformation susceptibility. Furthermore, logic-based inoculation has proven effective at conferring resistance against misinformation and conspiracy beliefs. Building on these findings, the current article outlines two pre-registered experiments, conducted on Reddit.com (Study 1, N = 462) and Prolific (Study 2, N = 464), wherein participants were either allocated to a control condition or presented with an inoculation message prebunking failure to engage in AOT. We hypothesised that improvements in AOT relative to the control group should indirectly reduce misinformation susceptibility and conspiracy beliefs. Results showed that in both studies, the AOT inoculation significantly improved AOT relative to the control group, and in turn, reduced conspiracy beliefs and improved veracity discernment of real news headlines from fake ones. Furthermore, the intervention also improved sharing decisions (Study 1), and its efficacy was exclusive to improving AOT rather than its individual epistemic components (Study 2). We provide recommendations for future efforts to reduce misinformation susceptibility using logic-based inoculation and discuss the theoretical implications of our findings.

最近的研究表明，积极开放的思维（AOT）——一种以积极避免自我偏见和对结论过度自信为特征的认知思维方式——与较低的错误信息易感性有关。此外，基于逻辑的接种已被证明在赋予对错误信息和阴谋信仰的抵抗力方面有效。基于这些发现，本文概述了在Reddit.com（研究1，N = 462）和多产（研究2，N = 464）上进行的两项预先注册的实验，其中参与者要么被分配到控制条件，要么被告知接种信息，因为他们没有参与AOT。我们假设，相对于对照组，AOT的改善应该间接减少错误信息的易感性和阴谋信念。结果显示，在两项研究中，接种AOT后，相对于对照组，AOT显著改善，进而减少了阴谋信念，提高了对真假新闻标题的真实性识别。此外，干预还改善了共享决策（研究1），其功效仅限于改善AOT，而不是改善其个体认知成分（研究2）。我们提出建议，为未来的努力，以减少错误信息易感性使用基于逻辑的接种和讨论我们的研究结果的理论意义。

{"title":"Norm-enhanced prebunking for actively open-minded thinking indirectly improves misinformation discernment and reduces conspiracy beliefs","authors":"Mikey Biddlestone , Carolin-Theresa Ziemer , Rakoen Maertens , Jon Roozenbeek , Sander van der Linden","doi":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104818","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jesp.2025.104818","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Recent research has demonstrated that actively open-minded thinking (AOT)—a cognitive thinking style characterized by the active avoidance of myside bias and overconfidence in one's conclusions—is related to lower misinformation susceptibility. Furthermore, logic-based inoculation has proven effective at conferring resistance against misinformation and conspiracy beliefs. Building on these findings, the current article outlines two pre-registered experiments, conducted on <span><span><em>Reddit.com</em></span><svg><path></path></svg></span> (Study 1, <em>N</em> = 462) and <em>Prolific</em> (Study 2, <em>N</em> = 464), wherein participants were either allocated to a control condition or presented with an inoculation message prebunking failure to engage in AOT. We hypothesised that improvements in AOT relative to the control group should indirectly reduce misinformation susceptibility and conspiracy beliefs. Results showed that in both studies, the AOT inoculation significantly improved AOT relative to the control group, and in turn, reduced conspiracy beliefs and improved veracity discernment of real news headlines from fake ones. Furthermore, the intervention also improved sharing decisions (Study 1), and its efficacy was exclusive to improving AOT rather than its individual epistemic components (Study 2). We provide recommendations for future efforts to reduce misinformation susceptibility using logic-based inoculation and discuss the theoretical implications of our findings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48441,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 104818"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144878219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0