Remembering Friends as Not So Friendly in Competitive and Bargaining Social Interactions

From children's schoolyard play to executives' boardroom negotiations, competitive and bargaining interactions are common to everyday life. Sometimes, the interacting parties are socially close and sometimes not. In this research, we examine how friendship influences memory for actions in such interactions. Dyads consisting of either friends or strangers played a competitive card game (Study 1) or the ultimatum game (Studies 2 and 4) and then recalled the interaction. We find that participants remembered friends' play as more competitive (Study 1) and less generous (Studies 2 and 4) than strangers' play, even when friends' actual play was more generous than that of strangers (Studies 2 and 4). Friendship did not affect recall for one's own play. In a workplace setting, Study 3 reveals people expect more of work colleagues who are friends than of work colleagues who are acquaintances. Study 4 tests our complete model and shows that people expect more of friends than of strangers and that this difference in expectations explains the less favorable memory for friend's actions. Our findings are consistent with a negative disconfirmation account whereby people expect their friends to be less competitive and more generous, and when these expectations are violated, people remember friends' actions more negatively than they actually were. Much research shows positive effects of friendship norms on actual behavior. We demonstrate a negative effect on people's memory of friends' behavior in competitive and bargaining social interactions. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

"With a little help from my friends...": the role of co-witness relationship in susceptibility to misinformation

Inaccuracies in eyewitness accounts can occur when witnesses are exposed to post-event misinformation via discussion with a co-witness. The current study examined the role of co-witness relationship by comparing the memory performance of pairs of romantic couples, friends and previously unacquainted strangers with that of individuals. Ninety-six participants viewed an event and then discussed the witnessed event with a stranger, a romantic partner or a friend. One member of each pair saw a theft take place during the witnessed event. Individual group participants did not discuss the witnessed event with anyone. Results indicate that all co-witness dyads produced less accurate recall accounts than participants who did not interact with another witness. However, witnesses who were previously acquainted with their co-witness (either in a friendship or romantic relationship) were significantly more likely to report information obtained from their co-witness that they had not seen themselves. Prior acquaintance also led to an increased number of incorrect attributions of both guilt and innocence.     

Empathic Blushing in Friends and Strangers

Three volunteers watched a previously recorded video of one of them singing, as cheek sensors monitored their blushing. When performers watched videotapes of their performance, they blushed significantly more than strangers, but not more than their own friends, watching with them. Friends and strangers did not differ significantly in blushing, however. Skin conductance arousal responses of performers and friends, but not performers and strangers, or friends of performers and strangers, were correlated. In a second experiment, strangers who sang before watching another person sing blushed more than strangers who did not sing first, or who sang and then watched a neutral video. This suggests that performing the embarrassing act may have predisposed people to blush, perhaps empathically, later. No gender differences were seen in blushing. Embarrassability questionnaire scores did not correlate with blushing. Empathic accuracy, and associative learning, are proposed to account for the results.     

Mistaking randomness for free will

Belief in free will is widespread. The present research considered one reason why people may believe that actions are freely chosen rather than determined: they attribute randomness in behavior to free will. Experiment 1 found that participants who were prompted to perform a random sequence of actions experienced their behavior as more freely chosen than those who were prompted to perform a deterministic sequence. Likewise, Experiment 2 found that, all else equal, the behavior of animated agents was perceived to be more freely chosen if it consisted of a random sequence of actions than if it consisted of a deterministic sequence; this was true even when the degree of randomness in agents’ behavior was largely a product of their environments. Together, these findings suggest that randomness in behavior—one’s own or another’s—can be mistaken for free will.     

The Receiver's Dilemma: Impressions Formed in Response to Impression Management

Two studies examined the extent to which individuals' racial attitudes are influenced more by interdependent others' attitudes than people with whom they do not mutually depend. Study 1 demonstrated that participants significantly changed their racial attitudes when they received disagreement feedback from an ingroup friend, whereas there was no change in attitudes when participants received disagreement feedback from an ingroup stranger, agreement feedback, or no feedback. Furthermore, feelings of interdependence mediated the relationship between feedback from a friend versus stranger and changes in racial attitudes. In Study 2, we manipulated interdependence and found that interdependent partners altered their racial attitudes after receiving disagreement information, whereas independent partners did not. The importance of interdependent others' attitudes in reducing prejudice is discussed.     

Negotiation Teamwork: The Impact of Information Distribution and Accountability on Performance Depends on the Relationship among Team Members

We examined how the distribution of information among team members and accountability pressures affected the quality of negotiated settlements reached among teams of friends negotiating against teams of strangers. The main conclusions of the experiment may be summarized by the following findings: (1) Teams of strangers reaped a greater share of the joint profit than did teams of friends when teammates were accountable to a supervisor as opposed to negotiating strictly on their own behalf. (2) Teams of strangers also reaped a marginally greater share of the joint profit than did teams of friends when teammates possessed unique, as opposed to common, information about their own team's preferences. (3) Not surprisingly, teams of friends were more cohesive than were teams of strangers; however, teams of friends were also more concerned about maintaining their relationship than were teams of strangers. (4) Teams of friends felt least cohesive when they were accountable to a supervisor, whereas teams of strangers felt most cohesive when they were accountable. Similarly, friends indicated greater relationship concerns when having to deal with distributed information, whereas information distribution had no effect on the relationship concerns of strangers. (5) For teams of strangers, greater team cohesiveness was positively correlated with better performance. (6) Moreover, when teams of strangers felt more cohesive than their opponents, they earned more than teams of strangers who felt less cohesive.     

The benefits of knowing what you know (and what you don’t): How calibration affects credibility

People tend to believe, and take advice from, informants who are highly confident. However, people use more than a mere “confidence heuristic.” We believe that confidence is influential because—in the absence of other information—people assume it is a valid cue to an informant’s likelihood of being correct. However, when people get evidence about an informant’s calibration (i.e., her confidence-accuracy relationship) they override reliance on confidence or accuracy alone. Two experiments in which participants choose between two opposing witnesses to a car accident show that neither confidence nor accuracy alone explains judgments of credibility; rather, whether a person is seen as credible ultimately depends on whether the person demonstrates good calibration. Credibility depends on whether sources were justified in believing what they believed.     

Unattractive people are unaware of their (un)attractiveness

Past research has shown that how people rate their physical attractiveness is only moderately correlated with how they are rated by others, suggesting that at least some people have little insight into their true level of attractiveness. The present research tests the hypothesis that unattractive people are not aware of their unattractiveness. In fact, six studies (overall N = 1,180) showed that unattractive participants considerably overestimated their attractiveness compared to ratings by strangers. In contrast, attractive participants were more accurate. If anything, they underestimated their attractiveness. It was also examined why unattractive people overestimate their attractiveness. As expected, unattractive participants differentiated less between attractive and unattractive stimulus persons than did attractive participants. They were also more likely than attractive participants to select unattractive stimulus persons to compare themselves to. However, these tendencies did not account for why unattractive participants overestimated their attractiveness, nor did affirming participant’s self-worth. Limitations and avenues for future research are discussed.     

Fairness in Children's Resource Allocation Depends on the Recipient

ABSTRACT— Sixty-six children between 4.5 and 6 years of age were tested in a resource-allocation game with three different recipients. When the recipient was a friend, children made equitable decisions and shared as much when there was a cost to themselves as when there was no cost. When the recipient was another familiar child who was not a friend, children were less likely to allocate resources to that child. When the recipient was a stranger, children allocated resources as much as with a friend and more than with a nonfriend when there was no cost to themselves. However, when there was a cost to themselves, children treated strangers like nonfriends. These results show that resource-allocation decisions made by young children depend on the recipient. Young children prefer equitable division of resources with friends, treat nonfriends less well, and make prosocial moves with strangers when the cost to self is not high.     

College women: eating behaviors and help-seeking preferences

Late adolescent women at a large, mid-Atlantic university were surveyed. Of the 578 who completed the survey, 17% were found to have eating disorders as defined by a score of 20 or above on the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-26; Garner, Olmstead, Bohr, & Garfinkel, 1982). Participants who scored 20 or above were younger and more likely to be white, in a sorority, and Christian than were those who scored below 20 on the EAT-26. No correlation was found between EAT-26 scores and participation in organized athletics. In addition, the participants were asked about their choice of help and support should they have any worries about their eating. They were most likely to say that they would prefer a close friend to support them when dealing with disordered eating, followed by their parents and their significant other. In terms of professional services, most women reported that they would prefer individual assistance such as a consultation with a physician, a nutritionist, or a therapist, followed by family therapy, if they ever had questions about eating or thought they needed professional help with disordered eating.     

Valuing thoughts, ignoring behavior: The introspection illusion as a source of the bias blind spot

People see themselves as less susceptible to bias than others. We show that a source of this bias blind spot involves the value that people place, and believe they should place, on introspective information (relative to behavioral information) when assessing bias in themselves versus others. Participants considered introspective information more than behavioral information for assessing bias in themselves, but not others. This divergence did not arise simply from differences in introspective access. The blind spot persisted when observers had access to the introspections of the actor whose bias they judged. And, participants claimed that they, but not their peers, should rely on introspections when making self-assessments of bias. Only after being educated about the importance of nonconscious processes in guiding judgment and action—and thereby about the fallibility of introspection—did participants cease denying their relative susceptibility to bias.     

Don’t hate me because I’m beautiful: Self-enhancing biases in threat appraisal

We compare people’s intuitive judgments about how the self and others respond to threat. We propose that people hold a self-enhancing belief in ”threat immunity,” i.e., they see themselves as more secure than other people in the face of threat. In Study 1, people assumed that they threatened others more than others threatened them. In Study 2, people on project teams estimated that both they and their teammates provoked roughly equal levels of threat in others, although they experienced less threat than did other people. Study 3 experimentally manipulated threat perceptions in an interactive context and revealed that when people held self-enhancing threat appraisals, those with whom they interacted experienced lower satisfaction with the outcome and relationship. Finally, Study 4 demonstrated that, as compared to people who affirmed themselves and thus focused on the self, people who affirmed another person displayed lower threat immunity. The self-enhancing nature of these threat appraisals reveals how competition and envy emerge in organizations—or at least, how people imagine they emerge.     

Asymmetrical friendships? People are willing to risk COVID-19 infection from friends but are reluctant to pass it on to them

Although most protective behaviors related to the COVID-19 pandemic come with personal costs, they will produce the largest benefit if everybody cooperates. This study explores two interacting factors that drive cooperation in this tension between private and collective interests. A preregistered experiment (N = 299) examined (a) how the quality of the relation among interacting partners (social proximity), and (b) how focusing on the risk of self-infection versus onward transmission affected intentions to engage in protective behaviors. The results suggested that risk focus was an important moderator of the relation between social proximity and protection intentions. Specifically, participants were more willing to accept the risk of self-infection from close others than from strangers, resulting in less caution toward a friend than toward a distant other. However, when onward transmission was the primary concern, participants were more reluctant to effect transmission to close others, resulting in more caution toward friends than strangers. These findings inform the debate about effective nonclinical measures against the pandemic. Practical implications for risk communication are discussed.     

The Influence of Public Self-Consciousness and the Audience's Characteristics on Withdrawal from Embarrassing Situations

ABSTRACT Two studies examined the impact of public self-consciousness (PSC) and the audience's characteristics on withdrawal from embarrassing situations In Study 1 subjects verbally responded to a series of hypothetical events of an embarrassing nature before audiences described as either strangers or friends Subjects high in PSC expressed similar tendencies to withdraw no matter who the audience was, whereas low PSC subjects reported that they were less likely to withdraw when the audience was composed of friends as compared to strangers Study 2 had high and low PSC subjects perform an embarrassing act in front of either a friend or two types of strangers–those they either would or would not interact with in the future Low PSC subjects withdrew sooner from an audience of strangers they would have to interact with than from either an audience of friends or strangers they would never see again Again, high PSC subjects responded similarly to the three audiences They tended to withdraw quickly no matter who the audience was Discussion focuses on the role situational and dispositional factors play in withdrawal from embarrassing situations     

社会距离对成败行为性别归因偏差的影响

在陌生人和熟人两种社会距离下,让被试对同、异性成败行为进行归因,考查性别归因偏差现象(对异性美化、对同性贬损的归因)在社会距离上的变化。结果发现:(1)对于成功行为:被试对陌生异性做出的美化归因(能力-运气)显著高于陌生同性,出现性别归因偏差;被试对同、异性好友做出的美化归因差异不显著。(2)对于失败行为:被试对陌生同、异性做出的美化归因(运气-能力)差异不显著;被试对异性好友做出的美化归因显著高于同性,出现性别归因偏差。结论:性别归因偏差,在远社会距离他人表现成功时出现,表现失败时消失;在近社会距离他人表现成功时消失,表现失败时出现。结合相关研究和进化理论对结果进行了讨论。     

Direct Gaze Blurs Self-Other Boundaries

Self-other merging can arise not only between acquainted people but also between strangers. To date, the factors determining self-other merging between strangers remain to be elucidated. We investigate whether strangers’ facial appearance (i.e. gaze direction) modulates such initial processes of self-other merging. In the two experiments, participants viewed strangers’ faces whose gaze either directed to or averted from them. The extent of self-other merging was measured in terms of perception of face resemblance, Inclusion of the Other in the Self (IOS) scale, and correlations of personality judgments. We found that direct gaze blurred the self-other boundaries at both facial and conceptual levels. Participants felt a stranger who directly gazed at them to be closer and more similar to themselves about face and personality.     

Moral credentialing by association: the importance of choice and relationship closeness

People express more prejudice if they have established their "moral credentials." Five studies explored the acquisition of moral credentials through associations with racial minorities, particularly close relationships that are personally chosen. Participants choosing to write about a positive experience with a Black person (Study 1) or Hispanic person (Study 2) subsequently expressed more preference for Whites and tolerance of prejudice than did other participants. In Study 3, the credentialing effect of choice was diminished when participants were given an incentive for that choice. Participants in Study 4 who wrote about a Black friend were more credentialed than those who wrote about a Black acquaintance, regardless of whether the experience was positive or negative. Study 5 suggested that participants strategically referred to close associations with minorities when warned of a future situation in which they might appear prejudiced.     

Looking a gift horse in the mouth as a defense against increasing intimacy

The authors hypothesize that people who fear dependence evidence a particular defensive bias by perceiving benefits received to have been less voluntarily given, which justifies not depending upon their partner. In Study 1, both members of married couples completed daily diaries regarding benefits they gave and received and the extent to which each was given involuntarily versus voluntarily. Avoidant attachment measured before marriage predicted perceiving one’s spouse to have given benefits less voluntarily, controlling for that spouse’s reports of how voluntarily benefits had been given. In Study 2, participants identified three specific benefits received from a friend. Days later, participants were primed with avoidant feelings or not before reporting the extent to which the benefits identified earlier had been given voluntarily. Participants primed to feel avoidant perceived their friend to have given them benefits less voluntarily than did the remaining participants.     

The effect of information overlap on communication effectiveness

It makes sense that the more information people share, the better they communicate. To evaluate the effect of knowledge overlap on the effectiveness of communication, participants played a communication game where the "director" identified objects to the "addressee". Pairs either shared information about most objects' names (high overlap), or about the minority of objects' names (low overlap). We found that high-overlap directors tended to use more names than low overlap directors. High overlap directors also used more names with objects whose names only they knew, thereby confusing their addressees more often than low-overlap directors. We conclude that while sharing more knowledge can be beneficial to communication overall, it can cause communication to be locally ineffective. Sharing more information reduces communication effectiveness precisely when there is an opportunity to inform-when people communicate information only they themselves know.     

Bystander Responses to Risk for Rape Perpetrated by a Friend,Acquaintance, or Stranger

This study explored bystander responses to risk for an alcohol-facilitated rape perpetrated by a friend, acquaintance, or stranger. Undergraduates (N = 331) were randomly assigned to read 1 of 3 scenarios in which an apparently sober male friend, acquaintance, or stranger leads an intoxicated woman into a bedroom. Participants completed self-report measures of intent to directly intervene and barriers to intervention. Compared to men, women reported greater intent to help the potential victim and fewer barriers to intervention. Participant gender moderated the effect of the bystander’s relationship with the potential perpetrator on intent to confront and responsibility to intervene. Men reported more confrontation and more responsibility to intervene when perpetrators were identified as either friends or acquaintances than strangers. In contrast, women reported more confrontation when perpetrators were identified as friends than either strangers or acquaintances. Bystander education programs that address specific barriers to intervening with strangers and acquaintances could promote more frequent bystander behavior.