Do-no-harm in coalition formation: Why losses inhibit exclusion and promote fairness cognitions

Previous research on coalition formation has established that people will not hesitate to exclude others in order to maximize their payoff. The authors propose that this view is too narrow and that the decision to exclude depends on the valence of the payoff. Consistent with a “do-no-harm” hypothesis, Experiment 1 showed that participants were more reluctant to exclude in order to minimize their losses than to maximize their gains. Experiment 2 replicated this effect and showed that participants were most affected by payoff valence when they were disposed to consider the viewpoint of others. Additional analyses revealed that participants were more motivated by fairness (Experiment 1) and that fairness was more cognitively accessible (Experiment 2) when payoffs were negative rather than positive.     

Honesty pays: On the benefits of having and disclosing information in coalition bargaining

People typically think of negotiations as competitive, which often leads them to engage in secrecy and even deception. In three experiments we show that this approach can backfire in coalition bargaining. Results show that, even though bargainers with an outcome advantage only obtain favorable outcomes when this information is public, they rarely choose to reveal this information. Fairness motivations fueled decisions to reveal this information and make attractive offers whereas self-interest fueled decisions not to reveal and make unattractive offers. Finally, perspective taking increased proselfs' inclinations to keep their advantage private whereas it increased prosocials' inclinations to reveal. These findings suggest that many people are not naturally inclined to reveal private information when they have an outcome advantage, but that fairness motives encourage revelation and, ironically, increase revealers' outcomes in coalition bargaining. Thus, in this context, honesty pays.     

Get angry, get out: The interpersonal effects of anger communication in multiparty negotiation

Research on multiparty negotiation has investigated how parties form coalitions to secure payoffs but has not addressed how emotions may affect such coalition decisions. Extending research on bilateral negotiations which has generally argued that it is beneficial to communicate anger, we argue that it constitutes a considerable risk when there are more than two people present at the negotiation table. Using a computer-mediated coalition game we show that communicating anger is a risky strategy in multiparty bargaining. The main findings of three studies were that participants: (1) form negative impressions of players who communicate anger and therefore (2) exclude such players from coalitions and from obtaining a payoff share, but (3) make considerable concessions on those rare occasions that they choose to form a coalition with an angry player, or (4) when they had to form a coalition with an angry player. We discuss the implications of these results for theorizing on emotions, negotiations, and coalition formation.     

The equal division kernel: An equity approach to coalition formation and payoff distribution in N-person games

Most existing models of coalition formation and payoff distribution in groups rest upon normative considerations and are ambiguous in their predictions insofar as they do not determine which of several coalitions will most probably result. The paper sketches the basic features of a model derived from social psychological exchange-and equity-theory which predicts coalitions and payoff distributions for a variety of situations. The evaluation of the model by the results of several experiments indicates that it provides a reasonable starting point for further theoretical developments that are based empirical studies.     

Morality and behavioural regulation in groups: A social identity approach

In recent years social psychologists have displayed a growing interest in examining morality—what people consider right and wrong. The majority of work in this area has addressed this either in terms of individual-level processes (relating to moral decision making or interpersonal impression formation) or as a way to explain intergroup relations (perceived fairness of status differences, responses to group-level moral transgressions). We complement this work by examining how moral standards and moral judgements play a role in the regulation of individual behaviour within groups and social systems. In doing this we take into account processes of social identification and self-categorisation, as these help us to understand how adherence to moral standards may be functional as a way to improve group-level conceptions of self. We review a recent research programme in which we have investigated the importance of morality for group-based identities and intra-group behavioural regulation. This reveals convergent evidence of the centrality of moral judgements for people’s conceptions of the groups they belong to, and demonstrates the importance of group-specific moral norms in identifying behaviours that contribute to their identity as group members.     

In fairness to future generations: The role of egocentrism, uncertainty, power, and stewardship in judgments of intergenerational allocations

In this paper, we found that fairness judgments in intergenerational allocation decisions depend on (1) individuals’ position in the intergenerational sequence (i.e., whether they are in the preceding or succeeding generation), (2) the amount of uncertainty about the effect of the preceding generation’s decisions on the succeeding one, and (3) whether the preceding generation is primed with power. We found that both power priming and greater levels of uncertainty about the future consequences of present decisions can elicit stewardship attitudes, which may temper self-interested behavior on the part of the preceding generation. Our data also indicate that the nature of the uncertainty is important; it is not just a matter of how much future generations will be affected, but also whether or not they will be affected at all by the decisions of earlier generations. Our findings help to explain (1) how intergenerational inequities can occur even when people are explicitly focused on achieving fair allocations of resources between generations, and (2) how social responsibility concerns can motivate intergenerational beneficence in the face of intergenerational conflict.     

The utility of a multifoci approach to the study of organizational justice: A meta-analytic investigation into the consideration of normative rules,moral accountability,bandwidth-fidelity,and social exchange

Multifoci justice pulls from research on social exchange theory to argue that despite the proliferation of rule sets in the literature (often referred to as the “types” of justice), individuals seek to hold some party accountable for the violation/upholding of such rules, and it is these parties (e.g., supervisors, the organization as a whole) that are most likely to be the recipients of attitudes and behaviors (i.e., target similarity effects). To explore these issues, we meta-analytically (k = 647, N = 235,682) compared the predictive validities of source- vs. type-based justice perceptions and found that (a) multifoci justice perceptions more strongly predicted outcomes directed at matched sources than did type-based justice perceptions, (b) multifoci justice perceptions more strongly predicted target similar than dissimilar outcomes, and (c) the relationships between multifoci justice perceptions and target similar outcomes were mediated by source-specific social exchange.     

Social influence in newly formed groups: The roles of personal and social intentions, group norms, and social identity

Intentions to participate in a group activity in newly formed groups were followed over time. Two forms of intentions were examined: traditional behavioral intention to take part in a group-based act (personal intention), and social intentions to act as an agent of the group (social intention). In addition, the study explored other group process variables as distinctive predictors of ‘social identification’. The paper concludes with a discussion of the role of social intentions, linking the findings to social identification development and maintenance over time.     

A social neuroscience approach to self and social categorisation: A new look at an old issue

We take a social neuroscience approach to self and social categorisation in which the current self-categorisation(s) is constructed from relatively stable identity representations stored in memory (such as the significance of one's social identity) through iterative and interactive perceptual and evaluative processing. This approach describes these processes across multiple levels of analysis, linking the effects of self-categorisation and social identity on perception and evaluation to brain function. We review several studies showing that self-categorisation with an arbitrary group can override the effects of more visually salient, cross-cutting social categories on social perception and evaluation. The top-down influence of self-categorisation represents a powerful antecedent-focused strategy for suppressing racial bias without many of the limitations of a more response-focused strategy. Finally we discuss the implications of this approach for our understanding of social perception and evaluation and the neural substrates of these processes.     

A protean approach to social influence: Dark Triad personalities and social influence tactics

To avoid detection, those high on Dark Triad traits (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism) may adopt a protean approach to interpersonal influence. We show the Dark Triad traits correlate with a number of unique tactics of influence (Study 1; N = 259). We show this protean approach was insensitive to differences in targets of manipulation (Study 2; N = 296). When forced to choose one tactic to solve different adaptive problems, the Dark Triad traits were correlated with unique tactical choices (Study 3; N = 268). We show these associations are generally robust to controlling for the Big Five and participants’ sex (Study 1 and 2). We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for both life history and cheater-detection theories.     

The world in black and white: Ostracism enhances the categorical perception of social information

In two experiments, ostracized individuals showed more pronounced categorical perception of inclusion- and exclusion-related stimuli. Specifically, ostracism enhanced the ability to distinguish between-category differences (e.g., between happy and angry faces) relative to within-category differences (e.g., between two happy expressions). Participants were socially included or excluded via Cyberball (a virtual ball-tossing task). In Experiment 1, ostracized participants showed greater perceptual acuity in distinguishing between subtly happy and angry expressions combined with a reduced ability to discriminate expressions within each expression category. Experiment 2 found analogous categorical perception effects for targets varying on the dimension of race. Importantly, this effect was specific to social information; categorical perception of non-social objects was not qualified by social exclusion. These results suggest that ostracism exacerbates categorical perception, attuning perceivers to the differences between various inclusion- and exclusion-related categories relative to within category acuity, making the world appear more ‘black-and-white’ than it might otherwise.     

Fairness lies in the heart of the beholder: How the social emotions of third parties influence reactions to injustice

The present research explores third parties’ (e.g., jurors, ombudsmen, auditors, and employees observing others’ encounters) ability to objectively judge fairness. More specifically, the current research suggests that third parties’ justice judgments and reactions are biased by their attitudes toward the decision recipient and, in particular, the affective aspect of those attitudes as characterized by their felt social emotions. We explore how the congruence of a social emotion (i.e., the extent to which the emotion reflects feeling a subjective sense of alignment with the target of the emotion) can influence their evaluations of recipients’ decision outcomes. The five studies presented show that congruence can lead third parties to react positively to objectively unfair decision outcomes and, importantly, that the influence of social emotions on subjective justice judgments drive third party reactions to decisions, decision makers, and even national policies.     

A sociocultural framework for understanding partner preferences of women and men: Integration of concepts and evidence

In the current sociocultural framework for understanding mating preferences, we propose that gender roles affect sex differences and similarities in mate preferences. Gender roles, in turn, are shaped by the unequal division of labour between women and men. As a consequence, mating preferences and choices should converge across the sexes as the weakening of this division puts the sexes in more similar social roles in their societies. To evaluate these assumptions, we review relevant findings from three domains that show variability in gender roles: (a) cross-cultural variability related to differences in societies’ division of labour, (b) historical variability related to temporal changes in the division of labour, and (c) individual variability in gender attitudes that reflects the gradual and uneven spread of shifts toward gender equality throughout each society. The bringing together of multiple lines of evidence puts the sociocultural framework on a new and more secure foundation.     

A Meadian account of social understanding: Taking a non-mentalistic approach to infant and verbal false belief understanding

Performance on false belief tasks has long been considered a key indicator of the development of social understanding in young children. We consider the enabling conditions for performing non-verbal and verbal false belief tasks as well as a typical developmental path toward false belief understanding. We argue that, in early ontogenesis, children anticipate the coordination of activity with others rather than read, probe, or reflectively engage with the psychological states of others. As linguistically mediated reflective thought emerges, children gradually become able to parse and isolate the myriad of incipient somatic, affective, and intentional responses that arise in any given moment. With reflective thought, children also begin to develop distinct and temporally coherent understandings about the minds of self and other. We provide an account of how the reflective thought that facilitates false belief understanding emerges. Our account focuses on a gradually developing refinement of social coordination and the shared perspectival understandings inherent in social coordination.     

Integrating social exchange and affective explanations for the receipt of help and harm: A social network approach

We integrated theories of social exchange and emotion to explain the receipt of interpersonal citizenship (help) and counterproductive behaviors (harm). Using social network methodology, data on a total of 534 relationships were obtained from three samples of employees working for a food services organization. Results were consistent across all three samples. Employees received help and harm from coworkers toward whom they engaged in those behaviors, as well as from coworkers in whom they elicited positive and negative affective states, respectively. Additionally, affective states predicted the receipt of help and harm controlling for engagement, suggesting a means by which social exchanges may become imbalanced. Overall, findings demonstrate the validity of social exchange and affective explanations for the receipt of help and harm in the workplace.     

A transactional approach to social anxiety and the genesis of interpersonal closeness: Self, partner, and social context

It remains unclear whether social anxiety interferes with the generation of closeness during initial encounters. We addressed the question of whether perceived closeness between strangers differs as a function of dyad characteristics (i.e., self and partner levels of social anxiety) and social context. We conducted an experiment with 90 participants randomly assigned to either a 45-minute personal disclosure or small-talk dyadic conversation. Multilevel modeling results yielded a 3-way interaction, such that the effect of social anxiety on closeness generated during the interaction was moderated by social anxiety reported by interaction partners and social context. In the personal disclosure condition, perceived closeness was greatest when the most socially anxious individuals interacted with each other. In the small-talk condition, perceived closeness was greatest when the least socially anxious individuals interacted with each other. Across conditions, partners with substantial differences in social anxiety (i.e., mixed dyads) reported relatively less closeness than partners with similar levels of social anxiety. Social anxiety effects were not attributable to depressive symptoms or physical attraction to partners. These findings suggest that neglecting specific qualities of interaction partners and social situational factors may lead to spurious conclusions in understanding interpersonal outcomes related to social anxiety.     

Exogenous attention to angry faces in social anxiety: A perceptual accuracy approach

We investigated the interaction between endogenous and exogenous attention for the processing of emotional stimuli in individuals with high social anxiety using accuracy rates. Following the presentation of an endogenous cue at the centre, exogenous cues (i.e., angry and neutral faces) were presented at peripheral locations. Subsequently, non-emotional masked targets were presented, and the participants were instructed to discriminate between the targets. With respect to exogenous attention, high socially anxious people exhibited higher accuracy when the angry face and target appeared on the same side than when they appeared on different sides, whereas low socially anxious people did not exhibit such effects. On the other hand, different abilities of endogenous attention were not observed between high and low socially anxious people. These results suggest that exogenous attention is biased towards threat in high socially anxious people.     

Strength-is-Weakness: The (ir)relevant relation between resources and payoffs in coalition formation

A key observation in coalition formation is that bargainers who control many resources are often excluded from coalitions by bargainers who control few resources, the Strength-is-Weakness effect. We argue that this effect is contingent on whether resources provide a legitimate claim to be included in a coalition. Across three incentivized coalition experiments (n = 2745; 915 triads), three participants (player A had four resources, player B had three resources, player C had two resources) negotiated about a payoff of 90 monetary units. Depending on condition, these resources were obtained randomly, earned, or earned and proportionally linked to the payoff. Results showed player As were less included when resources were obtained randomly and more often included in coalitions when resources were earned and/or proportionally linked to the payoff. This provides evidence that the Strength-is-Weakness is contingent on the legitimacy of the resources.     

Understanding the influence of outcome valence in bargaining: A study on fairness accessibility, norms, and behavior

In this study we investigate how outcome valence affects the importance of self-interest and fairness in ultimatum bargaining. In three experiments we systematically study the effect of outcome valence on fairness accessibility, norms, and behavior. Results on all three aspects show strong evidence for the hypothesis that fairness becomes more important and self-interest becomes less important in negative valence bargaining. Fairness accessibility was higher when bargaining involved negative payoffs than when it involved positive payoffs (Experiment 1), the fairness norm was stronger in negatively versus positively valenced bargaining when an identical unequal offer benefiting the allocators was evaluated (Experiment 2), and allocators allocated more to recipients in negative valence bargaining than in positive valence bargaining (Experiment 3). We relate our findings to insights derived from the do-no-harm principle.     

How social and non-social information influence classification decisions: A computational modelling approach

Social information such as observing others can improve performance in decision making. In particular, social information has been shown to be useful when finding the best solution on one’s own is difficult, costly, or dangerous. However, past research suggests that when making decisions people do not always consider other people’s behaviour when it is at odds with their own experiences. Furthermore, the cognitive processes guiding the integration of social information with individual experiences are still under debate. Here, we conducted two experiments to test whether information about other persons’ behaviour influenced people’s decisions in a classification task. Furthermore, we examined how social information is integrated with individual learning experiences by testing different computational models. Our results show that social information had a small but reliable influence on people’s classifications. The best computational model suggests that in categorization people first make up their own mind based on the non-social information, which is then updated by the social information.