A Social Dilemma Analysis of Commuting Preferences: The Roles of Social Value Orientation and Trust1

The current research advances a social dilemma analysis of commuting, examining the roles of preexisting personality differences in social value orientation (i.e., prosocial vs. proself orientation) and trust (i.e., a general belief in the honesty and cooperative intentions of others) in determining preferences for collectively desirable commuting options: preferences for commuting by public transportation (Study 1) and carpooling (Study 2). Consistent with predictions, both studies revealed that, relative to p of prosocials, preferences of proselfs were more strongly associated with beliefs about the relative efficiency of cars (i.e., an outcome affecting personal well-being). Also, greater preferences for collectively desirable actions were observed among prosocials with high trust—relative to prosocials with low trust and proselfs with high or low trust—providing support for the claim that 2 conditions (i.e., prosocial goals and trust in others) must be met to obtain collectively desirable commuting preferences.     

Verbal imitation is based on intention understanding

Using an elicited imitation paradigm, we investigated whether young children imitate the communicative intentions behind speech. Previous research using elicited imitation has shown that children tend to correct ungrammatical sentences. This finding is usually interpreted as evidence that children, like adults, remember and reproduce the gist of linguistic information. In three studies, we tested whether this tendency is also a product of their intention understanding. Replicating and extending previous research by Meltzoff [Meltzoff A. N. (1995). Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Developmental Psychology, 31, 838–850], our first two experiments showed that children tend to correct ungrammatical sentences. A critical third experiment showed that children correct ungrammatical sentences only when they believe the model to be an intentional agent. These results complement previous findings from the action domain and strongly support the claim that imitation is based on understanding the intentions of others.     

“Put a Little Love in Your Heart”: Acceptance of Paternalistic and Ally Political Discourses Both Predict Pro-Roma Solidarity Intentions Through Moral Inclusion

The way politicians talk about minorities institutes the normative context of intergroup relations. We investigated how endorsement of different political discourses predicts donation and collective action intentions by majority members toward the Roma in five European countries. The survey was conducted online using samples demographically similar to the populations of Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, France, and Ireland (N = 5,054). First, results showed that accepting paternalistic discourse versus discourse promoting allyship were not distinguishable; both promoted higher moral inclusion which in turn predicted higher prosocial intentions. Second, donations (i.e., immediate relief) and collective action (i.e., social change action) were driven by identical factors. Third, acceptance of openly hostile political discourse neither predicted moral exclusion, nor lower prosocial intentions. In summary, our research provides important evidence that when it comes to Roma—non-Roma relations, the previously established distinction between solidarity intentions that aim to solidify status relations versus bring about social change is completely blurred, presumably because of the social context in which any positive message communicates moral inclusion challenging the hostile status quo.     

The claims of reflective equilibrium

In On Certainty, the emphasis is on the solitary individual as subject of knowledge. The importance of our dependence on others, however, is brought out in Wittgenstein's remarks about trust. In this paper, the role and nature of trust are discussed, the grammar of trust being contrasted with that of reliance. It is shown that to speak of trust is to speak of a fundamental attitude of one person towards others, an attitude which, unlike reliance, is not to be explained, or assessed, by an appeal to reasons. It is, rather, because we have such a fundamental readiness to accept what we are taught by others that we can come to develop an understanding of reasons. The idea that believing something without evidence is always a weakness is shown to be a philosophical prejudice. Trust is always for something we can rightfully demand from others: misplaced trust, accordingly, is not a shortcoming on the part of the trustful person, but of the person in whom the trust was placed. The destruction of trust is a tragedy of life; in Culture and Value, Wittgenstein suggests a connection between distrust and madness.     

执行意向对目标达成的促进及其作用过程

执行意向,也被称为“如果—那么”计划,是指将一个预期的情境与一个确定的目标定向行为联系起来,明确说明了个体在什么时间、地点以及如何追求一个特定目标的计划.大量的实验室和现场实验研究发现,执行意向能有效促进目标的达成.执行意向中“如果”成分使得预期情境线索的心理表征高度激活;而“那么”成分使得计划中的反应得以自动实施.这两个假设的认知过程已被证实,并且在执行意向影响目标达成过程中起到中介作用.在未来的研究中除了将其与动机理论进行整合以及更深入地去探讨其心理机制之外,还要积极进行本土化的实证研究.     

Explaining Normativity: On Rationality and the Justification of Reason

Aspects of the world are normative in as much as they or their existence constitute reasons for persons, i.e. grounds which make certain beliefs, moods, emotions, intentions or actions appropriate or inappropriate. Our capacities to perceive and understand how things are, and what response is appropriate to them, and our ability to respond appropriately, make us into persons, i.e. creatures with the ability to direct their own life in accordance with their appreciation of themselves and their environment, and of the reasons with which, given how they are, the world presents them.
An explanation of normativity would explain the various puzzling aspects of this complex phenomenon. In particular it would explain how it is that aspects of the world can constitute reasons for cognitive, emotive, and volitional responses; how it is that we can come to realise that certain cognitive, emotional or volitional responses are appropriate in various circumstances, and inappropriate in others; and how it is that we can respond appropriately. This paper explores an aspect of the last of these questions.     

An interdependence analysis of commuting decisions

The current research advances an interdependence analysis of commuting decisions (i.e. commuting by car versus public transportation), delineating the determinants of an individual's outcomes in terms of own decisions, other commuters' decisions, and the combination or interaction of own and others' decisions (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978). Consistent with hypotheses, findings revealed that a concern with comfort led to a higher overall personal preference for the car, and a lower overall preference for others to commute by public transportation, when compared to a concern with travel time. Additionally, consistent with the claim that commuter decisions are also guided by considerations broader than a concern with individual outcomes, findings revealed that individuals with prosocial orientations (i.e. those concerned with maximizing collective outcomes) in combination with high levels of trust (i.e. believing in the honesty and cooperative intentions of others) exhibited a greater overall personal preference for public transportation, and a reduced desire to avoid other commuters, relative to individuals with a prosocial orientation and low levels of trust, or a proself orientation (i.e. those concerned primarily with maximizing own outcomes), regardless of levels of trust. Finally, consistent with the current interdependence analysis, intention to commute by car was positively associated with not only overall personal preference for the car, but also with the desire to avoid other commuters. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do the wrong thing: How toddlers tell a joke from a mistake

We investigated whether 19–36-month-olds (1) differentiate mistakes from jokes, and (2) understand humorous intentions. The experimenter demonstrated unambiguous jokes accompanied by laughter, unambiguous mistakes accompanied by the experimenter saying, “Woops!”, and ambiguous actions that could either be a mistake or a joke, accompanied by either laughter or, “Woops!” Toddlers were asked to try. Nineteen- to 36-month-olds differentiated jokes and mistakes by copying unambiguous jokes and correcting unambiguous mistakes. Only 25–36-month-olds differentiated mistakes and humorous intentions by copying ambiguous actions marked by laughter, and correcting those marked by, “Woops!” Understanding humorous intentions precedes understanding intentions behind pretense, lying, and false beliefs, thus may be a first step in understanding that others can intend to do the wrong thing.     

Whose promises are worth more? How social status affects trust in promises

Promises are among the most widely used tools for increasing trust in social hierarchies; yet the effect of social status on trust in promises is unknown. Here we used a modified version of the Trust Game, in which participants, acting as Investors, were paired with Trustees of varying social status who were given the opportunity to promise (or not) to return at least half of the multiplied amount (i.e., 4 × the amount invested). No return feedback was provided. Participants invested more in partners who promised than those who did not or whose promise information was concealed. Importantly, in both lab-manipulated (Exps. 1–3: math-induced) and pre-existing (Exp. 4: university-based) hierarchies, participants invested more in promises given by high status than low status partners. Post-experiment measures suggest that this may be due to greater expectations of honesty for high status than low status others. Potential explanations and implications are discussed.     

权力和地位对信任行为的影响

采用两个实验探讨了权力和地位对信任和不信任行为的影响。实验1首先通过角色分配法操纵被试的权力感(高vs.低),然后采用信任和非信任博弈任务来测量被试的信任和不信任行为。结果发现,在信任行为上,高权力者比低权力者存在更低的信任水平;但在不信任行为上,二者不存在显著差异。实验2同时操纵被试的权力和地位水平,探索二者对信任和不信任行为的影响。结果发现:在信任行为上,高权力者比低权力者存在更低的信任水平,与之相反,高地位者比低地位者存在更高的信任水平,并且权力和地位的交互作用不显著;而在不信任行为上,权力和地位的效应均不显著。该研究结果说明,(1)权力负向影响信任行为,而地位正向影响信任行为;(2)权力和地位对信任的影响是独立的。     

Young adolescents' advertising literacy and purchase intention in social network games: Influence of perspective taking and need for cognition

Social network games (SNGs) are popular online venues for young adolescents. The aim of this study is to examine how individual traits, need for cognition (NFC) and perspective taking (PT), are related to young‐adolescents' conceptual (i.e. understanding selling and persuasive intentions) and attitudinal (i.e. critical attitude) advertising literacy in these SNGs. The current study also examines how a child's conceptual and attitudinal advertising literacy is related to purchase intentions after seeing advertising in an SNG. In total, 781 young adolescents (aged 10–14 years) took part in our study. First, participants were shown a 5‐min video clip of an SNG including advertising. After watching the video clip, the participants completed a questionnaire about, among others, NFC, PT, conceptual advertising literacy, attitudinal advertising literacy and purchase intentions. NFC was found predictive of children's understanding of the selling and persuasive intent of SNG advertising. This means that children who score higher on the NFC scale are also more likely to have a higher conceptual knowledge of SNG advertising. PT was found to negatively influence children's critical attitude towards SNG advertising. As expected, critical attitude towards advertising was negatively related to purchase intentions. Finally, purchase intention was only partially related to conceptual advertising literacy. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Election Outcome and Tax Compliance: The Role of Political Party Affiliation,Affect Balance,and Trust in Government

The present study examines partisan reactions to presidential election outcomes. Our model investigates the interactive role of political party affiliation on the relationship between identification with the winning party and affect balance. We subsequently examine how tax compliance intentions are influenced by this moderation relationship through affect balance and trust in government. We conducted a quasi-experiment one week prior to the first mass 2016 presidential primary, where 12 of the 50 US states voted to decide which candidates would represent the Republican and Democratic parties in the 2016 US presidential election. Our sample consisted of 205 Republicans and Democrats. We manipulated press releases showing various presidential candidates winning the presidency to examine how matches / mismatches between partisans’ political party affiliation and the party winning the election influence citizens’ overall feelings, beliefs, and intentions. We find election outcomes generate significant overall positive or negative feelings (i.e., affect balance) among partisans, which influences beliefs about trust in government, and subsequently their tax compliance intentions. Political party moderates the relationship between election outcomes and affect balance in such a way that Democrats experience greater overall positive affect balance when their party wins the election compared to Republicans.     

Don't trust anybody: Conspiracy mentality and the detection of facial trustworthiness cues

Conspiracy theories express mistrust in common explanations and epistemic authorities. Independent of concrete content, the extent of endorsing conspiracy theories has also shown associations with interpersonal mistrust. Arguing from an evolutionary and error-management perspective, this increased interpersonal mistrust could either represent an enhanced sensitivity to untrustworthiness cues, or a limited ability to recognize trustworthiness, or non-specific mistrust without differentiations between (un)trustworthiness cues. In two experimental studies (N = 563), we manipulated facial trustworthiness and tested the differentiation of trustworthiness evaluations as a function of conspiracy mentality. We found that conspiracy mentality was associated with a generalized tendency to perceive others as untrustworthy, independent of facial trustworthiness, speaking to non-specific manifestations of mistrust. However, the association between conspiracy mentality and trust became non-significant once age was accounted for in Study 1. We discuss how conspiracy mentality may be associated with an increased propensity to view the world as having malevolent intentions.     

When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence

The status-enhancement theory of overconfidence proposes that overconfidence pervades self-judgment because it helps people attain higher social status. Prior work has found that highly confident individuals attained higher status regardless of whether their confidence was justified by actual ability ( Anderson, Brion, Moore, & Kennedy, 2012). However, those initial findings were observed in contexts where individuals’ actual abilities were unlikely to be discovered by others. What happens to overconfident individuals when others learn how good they truly are at the task? If those individuals are penalized with status demotions, then the status costs might outweigh the status benefits of overconfidence – thereby casting doubt on the benefits of overconfidence. In three studies, we found that group members did not react negatively to individuals revealed as overconfident, and in fact still viewed them positively. Therefore, the status benefits of overconfidence outweighed any possible status costs, lending further support to the status-enhancement theory.     

The Epistemology of Testimony: Fulfilling the Sincerity Condition

Abstract

In this paper I aim to defend the claim that we are a priori entitled to accept that a speaker is being sincere, unless there are positive reasons not to. I look initially at the trust approach to testimony, which claims affective trust plays an epistemic role in our coming to believe that a speaker is being sincere. My claim is that this view is mistaken, and yet has something important to say in recognising the essential difference between testimony and other forms of evidence. This difference is intentionality. It is my view that in exploring the real intentions behind assertions we can discover why it is that we have an a priori entitlement to accept that a speaker is being sincere. If we recognise that intending to communicate is intending to transfer belief, then we must recognise that intending to communicate entails sincerity. A hearer is entitled to accept that an assertion which is explicitly offered as communication is in fact sincere.     

To be or not to be trusted: The influence of media richness on defection and deception

When business transactions take place between strangers, individuals rely on the cues during communication to determine whether they can trust others’ intentions. How that process occurs in the context of computer-mediated, video-mediated, and face-to-face interactions is still somewhat unknown. We examine how media richness influences both affective-based and cognitive-based trust in the context of two studies with two different social dilemma scenarios. Further, we explore how these two types of trust influence not only non-cooperative behavior (defection) but also lying (deception). Results from the first study suggest cognitive-based trust mediates the relationship between media richness and defection, while results from both studies suggest that affective-based trust mediates the relationship between media richness and deception. Video-mediated communication solves some, but not all, of the problems inherent when interacting via communication technology.     

Two experimental tests of trust in in‐group strangers: The moderating role of common knowledge of group membership

The role that shared group membership plays in decisions to trust others is now well established within social psychology. A close reading of this literature, however, shows that this process is often moderated by other variables. Currently, we examined one potential moderator of this process. In particular, we evaluated the role that common knowledge of a shared social group membership between self and a to‐be‐trusted stranger provides as a basis for trusting this stranger. This common knowledge emerges when the truster knows the group membership of the to‐be‐trusted other, and believes that this other also knows the group membership of the truster. In two experiments, using pre‐existing and minimal groups, we show that people are more likely to trust an in‐group member over an out‐group member under conditions of common group‐membership knowledge rather than private group‐membership knowledge (i.e. other does not know truster's group), even when they could choose not to trust anyone. The manner in which these data add to current understandings of group‐based trust in strangers is discussed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Power motivates interpersonal connection following social exclusion

Research has systematically documented the negative effects of social exclusion, yet little is known about how these negative effects can be mitigated. Building on the approach-inhibition theory of power (Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson, 2003), we examined the role of power in facilitating social connection following exclusion. Four experiments found that following exclusion, high power (relative to low power) individuals intend to socially connect more with others. Specifically, following exclusion, individuals primed with high power sought new social connections more than those primed with low power (Studies 1–4) or those receiving no power prime (Study 1). The intention to seek social connection as a function of power was limited to situations of exclusion, as it did not occur when individuals were included (Studies 3 and 4). Approach orientation mediates the effect of power on intentions to connect with others (Studies 2 and 4).     

Attention to action and awareness of other minds

We have only limited awareness of the system by which we control our actions and this limited awareness does not seem to be concerned with the control of action. Awareness of choosing one action rather than another comes after the choice has been made, while awareness of initiating an action occurs before the movement has begun. These temporal differences bind together in consciousness the intention to act and the consequences of the action. This creates our sense of agency. Activity in the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex is associated with awareness of our own actions and also occurs when we think about the actions of others. I propose that the mechanism underlying awareness of how our own intentions lead to actions can also be used to represent the intentions that underlie the actions of others. This common system enables us to communicate mental states and thereby share our experiences.     

The effects of social comparison,emotion induction,and parent vaccination status on parental intentions for COVID-19 vaccine uptake in children

Parental vaccine hesitancy—delays in vaccine uptake for children—is a significant public health concern. Using an online adult sample of U.S. parents (N = 183), the current research experimentally examined how exposure to cautious or risky social comparison models on social media (in terms of their COVID-19 beliefs and behaviors) influenced parental intentions to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 in the early stages of the pandemic. Additionally, we examined whether the influence of social comparison models was moderated by emotional state (fear or contentment) and parental vaccination status. Overall, we found that parents exposed to cautious (vs. risky) comparison models and vaccinated (vs. unvaccinated) parents reported greater vaccine intentions for their children. We further found that vaccination intentions were highest among unvaccinated parents after exposure to cautious (vs. risky) comparison models, whereas intentions were highest among vaccinated parents after exposure to risky (vs. cautious) comparison models (but only when induced to feel content). Overall, our findings highlight the importance of understanding the additive and interactive impact of psychological and situational factors in shaping parental vaccine hesitancy.