时间距离对于验证性信息加工的影响

研究基于解释水平理论考察时间距离对于验证性信息加工的影响, 即在个体和组织决策情境中, 人们倾向于偏好选择和高估与自身观点和决策相一致的信息, 而不是非一致性信息。通过4个情境决策实验, 研究结果一致表明近期决策会提高信息搜寻和评估中的验证偏差, 而远期决策会降低它们的验证偏差, 知觉到的决策确定性在其中起到部分中介作用(实验1b)。解释水平(实验2)和期许性/可行性表征(实验3)分别在时间距离对验证性信息加工的影响中起到调节作用, 结果依次表明在低解释水平(高可行性-低期许性特征)条件下, 时间距离与验证性信息加工的负相关关系会得到显著增强, 而在高解释水平(高期许性-低可行性特征)条件下, 时间距离与验证性信息加工的负相关关系会得到显著降低。     

Interpreting Political Apologies: The Neglected Role of Performance

In recent years, state leaders have increasingly apologized for historical wrongdoing. This article argues that there are scant conceptual tools available in current apology theory to capture the meanings of such political apologies. Salient theories treat apologies predominantly as “speech acts,” and this perspective produces frameworks of analysis that are preoccupied with linguistic features (e.g., the phrasing of the utterance of the apologizer). This article points to the limitations of this approach by arguing that dramaturgical aspects of performance are equally important. Political apologies are frequently offered during public ceremonies. Reactions in their aftermath indicate that the setup of those ceremonies matter to the victims, who, as primary addressees, assign meanings to the act. Current apology theory, however, gives little consideration to this observation. “What is said” matters most; “where and how it is said” is being neglected. The article concludes with a proposal for future research, which includes the reimagining of political apology as “performance” –a concept that gives credence to both formal speech and dramaturgy.     

Influence of Peers’ Types of Trust on Trust Repair: The Role of Apologies

This study aims to answer the question how previous trust experiences contextualize trust repair efforts. The concepts of calculus-based and relational trust are utilized to show the influence of the kind of trust on trust repair tactics, specifically apologies. We focus on a neglected referent of trust, that is trust between peers, and elucidate apology and its complements that might be effective between peers. We propose that the effectiveness of apologies and its specific complements depend not only on trust breach but also on the type of trust prior to a breach. Specifically, we claim that when apology is complemented with compensation or external attributions, these tactics repair trust more effectively in calculus-based trust. But, when apology is complemented with empathy, acknowledgment of violated norms, and extensive involvement, these tactics can effectively repair trust in relational trust. The paper aims to contribute to our understanding of apologies and the effectiveness of it under different conditions.     

如何道歉更有效:调节聚焦与信息框架的作用

本研究结合调节聚焦理论探讨了如何道歉更有效。两个实验通过启动不同调节聚焦,创设冒犯情境并呈现不同框架的道歉信息,考察调节聚焦与道歉框架对道歉效果的影响。结果表明,向促进聚焦的受害者呈现积极框架的道歉信息、向防御聚焦的受害者呈现消极框架的道歉信息能改善受害者对冒犯者的评价,降低交往回避倾向,获得较好的道歉效果,且正确感是此种影响发生的内在机制。     

Why group apologies succeed and fail: intergroup forgiveness and the role of primary and secondary emotions

It is widely assumed that official apologies for historical transgressions can lay the groundwork for intergroup forgiveness, but evidence for a causal relationship between intergroup apologies and forgiveness is limited. Drawing on the infrahumanization literature, we argue that a possible reason for the muted effectiveness of apologies is that people diminish the extent to which they see outgroup members as able to experience complex, uniquely human emotions (e.g., remorse). In Study 1, Canadians forgave Afghanis for a friendly-fire incident to the extent that they perceived Afghanis as capable of experiencing uniquely human emotions (i.e., secondary emotions such as anguish) but not nonuniquely human emotions (i.e., primary emotions such as fear). Intergroup forgiveness was reduced when transgressor groups expressed secondary emotions rather than primary emotions in their apology (Studies 2a and 2b), an effect that was mediated by trust in the genuineness of the apology (Study 2b). Indeed, an apology expressing secondary emotions aroused no more forgiveness than a no-apology control (Study 3) and less forgiveness than an apology with no emotion (Study 4). Consistent with an infrahumanization perspective, effects of primary versus secondary emotional expression did not emerge when the apology was offered for an ingroup transgression (Study 3) or when an outgroup apology was delivered through an ingroup proxy (Study 4). Also consistent with predictions, these effects were demonstrated only by those who tended to deny uniquely human qualities to the outgroup (Study 5). Implications for intergroup apologies and movement toward reconciliation are discussed.     

Reconstruction of things past: Why do some memories feel so close and others so far away?

The vast majority of work in construal level theory focuses prospectively on the future. Through a series of studies controlling for knowledge about an event, we look retrospectively at the past and demonstrate that construal mindsets can materially influence how a past event is reconstructed in memory. Specifically, an event recalled in a more concrete mindset feels subjectively closer than when recalled in an abstract mindset (Studies 1-3). We present evidence suggesting this is because a concrete mindset actually makes people feel as though they know more, even if they were initially exposed to the same set of information—perceived information accessibility mediates the effect of construal level on temporal distance (Study 2). The effect of construal level on memory reconstruction extends to judgments of blame, where judgments of greater temporal distance drive a greater propensity to blame parties for negative events and temporal distance mediates these judgments (Study 3). Together, these studies are the first to demonstrate that the mindset employed when recalling an event shapes its remembrance.     

The Hidden Cost of Insurance on Cooperation

A common solution to mitigate risk is to buy insurance. Employing the trust game, we find that buying insurance against the risk of betrayal has a hidden cost: trustees are more likely to act opportunistically when trustors choose to be insured against the breach of trust. Supposedly, trustees are less likely to cooperate when trustors buy insurance because choosing insurance implicitly signals that the trustor expects the trustee to behave opportunistically, paradoxically encouraging trustees not to cooperate. These results shed new light on the potential drawbacks of financial safeguards that are intended to minimize the risky nature of trust taking: the presumed safeguard against the risk of betrayal may, under certain circumstances, increase the probability of betrayal. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

任务类型和性别属性对人际信任的影响

研究应用投资游戏任务及其变式,探讨了任务类型与性别属性对人际交往过程中信任给予和信任维持的影响。24名被试(平均年龄为20.41±1.99)通过轮组,完成了实验一和实验二的投资游戏任务。通过对投资比、返还比及其关系的比较和分析,结果发现:(1)在风险任务中,不同性别信任者的信任给予存在显著性差异,而且信任对象的性别属性对信任者的信任给予也存在显著性影响。(2)在无风险任务中,性别属性对信任对象的信任维持行为不存在显著影响,而信任者的信任给予对信任对象的行为具有显著的预测作用。这一结果表明,性别属性对人际信任的影响,与任务的风险性有关。     

Memory for intergroup apologies and its relationship with forgiveness

This paper examines memory for collective apologies. Our interest was in determining whether people are aware of intergroup apologies and whether this contributes to forgiveness for offending groups. Surveys conducted in three nations affected by Japanese World War II aggression found that participants were more likely to believe (incorrectly) that Japan had not apologized for WWII than to believe (correctly) that they had (Study 1). In contrast, participants were eight times more likely to believe that a corporation had apologized for misconduct than to (correctly) recall that they had not (Study 1). Forgiveness levels were higher among those who believed the group had apologized than among apology deniers, although the effect was weak and inconsistent. However, in a follow‐up study that measured identification with the victim group it was found that high identifiers were significantly less likely to “remember” an apology (Study 2). Results suggest that memories for collective apologies are fluid and may not be causally related to intergroup forgiveness. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Construal Level and Social Exclusion: Concrete Thinking Impedes Recovery From Social Exclusion

Social exclusion is a painful experience. Recent research has shown, however, that coping with exclusion can be facilitated by favorable conditions. In the current research, we investigated whether construal level affects recovery from social exclusion. We hypothesized that an abstract vs. concrete mindset would moderate coping with exclusion. Indeed, lower compared to higher concrete thinking (Study 1) and abstract compared to concrete thinking (Study 2) bolstered the basic need of belonging when excluded. Priming of abstract thinking, moreover, increased participants’ sense of belonging both in response to exclusion and inclusion relative to no priming (Study 3). Our results are the first to establish a relationship between construal level and social exclusion, thereby suggesting an alleviating “abstraction discount” effect for the consequences of social exclusion.     

Construing Consumer Decision Making

Understanding how consumers represent outcomes and weigh different decision criteria is critical to consumer behavior research. Construal‐level theory articulates how psychological distance alters the mental representation of inputs and the effective weight given to “high‐level” and “low‐level” criteria. Trope, Liberman, and Wakslak (2007) provide a review of this literature. In this commentary, we illustrate the relevance of construal‐level theory to issues in consumer psychology, particularly consumer decision making. We highlight specific questions that researchers could address by considering consumer behavior within the framework of changes in construal. We focus our discussion on how construal levels affect consideration sets and how shifts in weight from high‐level to low‐level features might lead to consumer regret and dissatisfaction. Construal level can help us understand follow‐through on stated intentions for “really new” products and illuminate public‐policy issues such as consumer saving for retirement and nonredemption of rebates. We identify open issues related to how construal levels for the same object evolve over time and whether resources differ in terms of how susceptible they are to psychological distance effects.     

Construal level and temporal judgments of the past: the moderating role of knowledge

The vast majority of work in construal level theory has found a robust relationship between construal level and temporal judgments for future events: Distance is associated with the abstract, and nearness is associated with the concrete. Our work looks at the past and proposes a critical moderator that reverses this relationship: knowledge. Through experiments involving real news events, we demonstrate that people with less knowledge about events felt nearer to them when recalling them in a concrete mindset versus an abstract one. However, this relationship reverses for those with greater knowledge: They feel closer to past events when recalling them in an abstract mindset versus a concrete one. We provide evidence that this reversal stems from feelings of metacognitive ease that inform temporal judgments when knowledge (which drives what information is held available and accessible in memory) and construal mindset (which drives what information is sought from memory) coincide. Our findings suggest that in memory, there are instances where the abstract seems near and the concrete seems distant.     

“I’ve said I’m sorry,haven’t I?” A study of the identity implications and constraints that apologies create for their recipients

In contrast to previous research on apologies, which has examined their role in enhancing impressions of those issuing them (e.g., Darby and Schlenker, 1989), the research reported here draws upon Goffman’s (1955) analysis of the “corrective cycle” and is concerned with constraints associated with the receipt of apologies. Study 1 examines the implications for the actor of accepting, not accepting, or rejecting apologies. It is demonstrated that across a variety of judgments, most positive views of the actor result when apologies are accepted; least positive views are associated with their rejection. A follow-up study sought to establish whether this effect would occur under circumstances in which unconvincing apologies are rejected. Results indicate that the apology’s status (convincing versus unconvincing) has no bearing on perceptions of actors. Based on a hypothetical role-play format, Study 2 addresses the matter of whether actors experience a subjective sense of constraint upon receipt of unsatisfactory apologies. The data suggest that there exists a pronounced tendency to accept such apologies, though typically with conditions that would be specified to the offender. More general implications of the data are discussed.     

Trust and reciprocity decisions: The differing perspectives of trustors and trusted parties

This paper examines trusting actions and reciprocity responses in the two-person Trust Game. Two experiments test a model that suggests that individuals in social and economic interactions are likely to view the situation from their own unique perspective. The results demonstrate that trustors focus primarily on the risk associated with trusting, while trusted parties—those who are in a position to reciprocate—base their decisions on the level of benefits they have received. Specifically, trusting is more likely when risk is low, but the likelihood of trust does not depend on the level of benefit that trust provides to trusted parties. Meanwhile, reciprocity is more likely when the benefit provided is high, but does not depend on the level of risk the trustor faced. Neither party is particularly sensitive to the factors that affect their counterpart's decision. Furthermore, trustors underestimate the extent to which the level of benefits they provide might affect the trusted party' decision to reciprocate. Responses to a post-experimental questionnaire provide additional support for the proposition that the parties view the interaction from markedly different perspectives. Implications of this are discussed.     

The psychological construal of health behaviors

IntroductionIn order to optimize the effectiveness of behavior change interventions, we need to understand how the construal level – how we mentally represent or construe events or behaviors – influences health-related choices.ObjectiveTo examine the impact of mental construal on health decisions. Based on the Construal Level Theory, we predicted that people would give more weight to “cognitive considerations” when making a choice after being primed with the high-level perspective, whereas they would give higher weights to “sensory considerations” after being primed with the low-level perspective.MethodIn the first experiment, ninety-nine participants were primed with either high-level or low-level perspective across decision scenarios about vaccination and physical safety. The second experiment investigated nutrition decisions, which asked seventy participants to taste food that either had no label or was labelled “organic”. Organic label should prime high-level construal as it implies outcomes (e.g., product quality and healthiness) that are more distant in time and uncertain, in contrast with sensory dimensions (e.g. taste and appearance), which are immediately present. Participants rated cognitive and sensory considerations as well as action intentions.ResultsThe first study revealed that after the priming with the high-level construal, cognitive considerations became more important than sensory considerations in predicting protective action intentions, whereas after priming with the low-level construal, sensory considerations became more important. The second study revealed that only sensory considerations predicted decisions to consume the non-labelled product and only the cognitive score predicted decisions to consume the organic-labelled product.ConclusionWe demonstrated a moderating effect of construal-level mindset in health-protective decisions. We also discuss the implications for health promotion and policy, such as optimizing the effectiveness of behavior change interventions.     

The Impact of Decision Timing on the Effectiveness of Leaders’ Apologies to Repair Followers’ Trust in the Aftermath of Leader Failure

Purpose

The aim of the present research was to investigate how a negative decision outcome generated by a leader in a hasty, timely, or delayed manner impacts upon the need for, and the effectiveness of apologies to restore followers’ trust.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Data were collected using five studies in which the effects of timing of an incorrect decision on the trust repair process were investigated.

Findings

In the aftermath of a leader’s failure, followers experienced a delayed incorrect decision as a more severe transgression than a hasty or a timely incorrect decision. This effect was mediated by procedural fairness concerns (Study 1). The present findings also revealed an interesting paradox. Specifically, in the delayed condition followers expressed the highest need for an apology (Studies 2 and 3), but at the same time expected an apology to be less effective for enhancing trustworthiness than in the timely and the hasty condition (Study 3). Moreover, we also showed that the actual provision of an apology was effective for restoring both trustworthiness (Study 4) and trust (Studies 4 and 5) in the timely and the hasty condition, but ineffective in the delayed condition.

Implications

The present research shows that when the outcome of a decision is uncertain, it is better to make a decision (too) soon rather than (too) late.

Originality/Value

Despite the ubiquity of timing errors in daily life, our studies are the first to focus on the role of timeliness of decisions in the trust repair process.

     

Unstuck from the concrete: Carryover effects of abstract mindsets in intertemporal preferences

Prior research has demonstrated that individuals show decreasing levels of impatience as the delay of consumption gets longer (i.e., present-bias). We examine the psychological underpinnings of such present-biased preferences by conceptualizing timing decisions as part of a series of judgments. We propose that shifts in the abstractness of processing (focusing on details vs. broad aspects) triggered by aspects of an earlier (related or unrelated) decision systematically influence the degree of present-bias in subsequent decisions. The results of five studies show that the processing mindset (concrete vs. abstract) evoked in previous related and unrelated decisions influences the level of construal evoked in subsequent decisions and moderates the extent of present-bias without changes in affect. We further show the default mindset is concrete (displaying high present-bias) and thus the effect of construal is eliminated when the subsequent intertemporal task is inherently more abstract.     

Fiduciary Duties and the Ethics of Public Apology

The practice of official apology has a fairly poor reputation. Dismissed as ‘crocodile tears’ or cheap grace, such apologies are often seen by the public as an easy alternative to more punitive or expensive ways of taking real responsibility. I focus on what I call the role‐playing criticism: the argument that someone who offers an apology in public cannot be appropriately apologetic precisely because they are only playing a role. I offer a qualified defence of official apologies against this objection, considering them through the lens of fiduciary duties. This focus draws our attention to formal or impersonal relationships that are nevertheless normatively rich, capable of sustaining trust, concern, and care. At the same time, I highlight several pitfalls for fiduciary apologisers, including the tension between apology as a mode of truth telling and the duty of confidentiality. I consider whether the fiduciary apologiser, in reflecting on her fiduciary obligations, has ‘one thought too many’ for genuine apology, and argue that the issue of mixed motives is not limited to fiduciary contexts, cautioning against excessive idealism in our conception of apology. I conclude with some reflections on possible conflicts between fiduciary obligations and the conscientious desire to apologise.     

How important is an apology to you? Forecasting errors in evaluating the value of apologies

Apologies are commonly used to deal with transgressions in relationships. Results to date, however, indicate that the positive effects of apologies vary widely, and the match between people's judgments of apologies and the true value of apologies has not been studied. Building on the affective and behavioral forecasting literature, we predicted that people would overestimate how much they value apologies in reality. Across three experimental studies, our results showed that after having been betrayed by another party (or after imagining this to be the case), people (a) rated the value of an apology much more highly when they imagined receiving an apology than when they actually received an apology and (b) displayed greater trusting behavior when they imagined receiving an apology than when they actually received an apology. These results suggest that people are prone to forecasting errors regarding the effectiveness of an apology and that they tend to overvalue the impact of receiving one.     

Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression

Four experiments were conducted to investigate the implications of ‘substantive’ responses for the repair of trust following a violation and the cognitive processes that govern how and when they are effective. These studies examined two forms of substantive responses, penance and regulation, that represent different categories of trust repair attempts. The findings from Studies 1–3 suggest that both can be effective to the extent that they elicit the crucial mediating cognition of perceived repentance. Data from Study 2 revealed that trustors saw signals of repentance as more informative when the transgression was due to a lapse of competence than due to a lapse of integrity. Study 4 compared these substantive responses to apologies (a non-substantive response) and revealed that, despite their surface-level differences, they each repaired trust through ‘perceived repentance.’ The paper offers an integrative framework for understanding the relationships among a range of trustor responses.