Deservingness,liking relations,schadenfreude, and other discrete emotions in the context of the outcomes of plagiarism

This study investigated effects of like/dislike relations on schadenfreude and other discrete emotions in the context of plagiarism. The predicted emotions were derived from a structural analysis of how the appraisal of deservingness affects emotional reactions to positive or negative outcomes for self or other. One hundred forty‐six undergraduate participants responded to scenarios in which either hypothetical self or other (a classmate) plagiarised information from the internet for a class assignment and either received a high grade (undeserved outcome) or a penalty (deserved outcome). Hypothetical self was represented as either high or low in self‐esteem, other as liked or disliked. As predicted, liking relations moderated perceived deservingness. Schadenfreude (or pleasure) occurred when the disliked classmate received a deserved penalty for detected plagiarism but not when he/she suffered an undeserved positive outcome. This difference was reversed for the emotion of disappointment. Effects on other discrete emotions such as guilt and resentment are also reported.     

Distinguishing between deservingness and entitlement: earned outcomes versus lawful outcomes

Two studies are described that investigated a proposed distinction between deservingness and entitlement. Deservingness was assumed to relate to the evaluative structure of actions and their contingent outcomes and entitlement to an external framework involving rights, rules and social norms. Study 1 investigated reactions to scenarios in which a student running for election in a national student organization exerted either high or low effort, was either eligible or ineligible for election by virtue of age, and was either elected or not elected. Study 2 investigated reactions to a scenario in which a stimulus person suffering from an illness had to decide how much money to leave in a will to a son, nephew, or friend who provided him with either help or limited help. In both studies, student participants (n = 134 in Study 1, n = 236 in Study 2) completed ratings of deservingness and entitlement, as well as other measures. Results of both studies supported the distinction between deservingness and entitlement. Whether an outcome was deserved depended on amount of effort in Study 1 and on amount of help in Study 2. Results are also reported for other justice variables and for reported affect in Study 1, and for the amount allocated in the will in Study 2. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Deservingness and emotions: Testing a structural model that relates discrete emotions to the perceived deservingness of positive or negative outcomes

A study is described that tested a model (Feather in Eur Rev Soc Psychol 17:38–73, 2006) relating emotions to the appraisal of outcome deservingness for self or other person. Outcome deservingness was assumed to depend on the evaluative structure of action/outcome relations (Feather in Values, achievement, and justice: studies in the psychology of deservingness. Kluwer/Plenum Publishers, New York, 1999b). The study tested predictions about relations between this structure and the emotions of pleasure, admiration, pride, resentment, anger, sadness, sympathy, guilt, regret, disappointment, and surprise. The study used a hypothetical scenario involving an applicant for a position in an organization where the applicant could either be other or self. Results that focused on planned comparisons and the action by focus interactions supported the analysis for both the positive outcome and the negative outcome conditions and they were consistent with the hypothesis that the appraisal of outcome deservingness would mediate at least in part the type of emotion that was reported when a positive or negative outcome followed a positive or negative action. Results were discussed in relation to the social psychology of justice and the emotions.     

Better the devil you know? Nonconscious processing of identity and affect of famous faces

The nonconscious recognition of facial identity was investigated in two experiments featuring brief (17-msec) masked stimulus presentation to prevent conscious recognition. Faces were presented in simultaneous pairs of one famous face and one unfamiliar face, and participants attempted to select the famous face. Subsequently, participants rated the famous persons as ”good“ or ”evil“ (Experiment 1) or liked or disliked (Experiment 2). In Experiments 1 and 2, responses were less accurate to faces of persons rated evil/disliked than to faces of persons rated good/liked, and faces of persons rated evil/disliked were selected significantly below chance. Experiment 2 showed the effect in a within-items analysis: A famous face was selected less often by participants who disliked the person than by participants who liked the person, and the former were selected below chance accuracy. The within-items analysis rules out possible confounding factors based on variations in physical characteristics of the stimulus faces and confirms that the effects are due to participants’ attitudes toward the famous persons. The results suggest that facial identity is recognized preconsciously, and that responses may be based on affect rather than familiarity.     

Trait attributions and defense against insult from a dissimilar other

It was hypothesized that subjects would prefer to blame a character assault on negative ability characteristics of a dissimilar attacker as opposed to negative motivational characteristics in order to escape responsibility for the attack. It was reasoned that because we generally think of ourselves as having less potential influence over the abilities as opposed to the motivations of another person, it might be possible to diminish one's responsibility for another's behavior by attributing that behavior to that person's ability characteristics. Subjects in this experiment responded either to an insulting or noninsulting stimulus person who was either similar or dissimilar by selecting from a list of both motivational and ability bipolar trait dimensions, those dimensions they would most prefer to use in rating the stimulus person. As predicted, subjects responding to an insulting and dissimilar stimulus person showed a significantly greater preference for ability trait dimensions than subjects in the other conditions combined and also disliked the stimulus person more. The significance of these results for defensive attribution processes and phenomena such as racism and sexism are discussed.     

How emotions expressed by adults’ faces affect the desire to eat liked and disliked foods in children compared to adults

The aim of this study was to determine whether or not pleasure, neutrality, and disgust expressed by eaters in photographs could affect the desire to eat food products to a greater extent in children than in adults. Children of 5 and 8 years of age, as well as adults, were presented with photographs of liked and disliked foods. These foods were presented either alone or with an eater who expressed three different emotions: pleasure, neutrality, or disgust. Results showed that, compared with food presented alone, food presented with a pleasant face increased the desire to eat disliked foods, particularly in children, and increased the desire to eat liked foods only in the 5‐year‐old children. In contrast, with a disgusted face, the desire to eat the liked foods decreased in all participants, although to a greater extent in children, while it had no effect on the desire to eat the disliked foods. Finally, food presented with a neutral face also increased and decreased the desire to eat disliked and liked foods, respectively, and in each case more for the 5‐year‐olds than for the older participants. In sum, the facial expressions of others influence the desire to eat liked and disliked foods and, to a greater extent, in younger children.     

Domestic violence,gender, and perceptions of justice

This study investigated reactions to a hypothetical scenario describing a domestic dispute that ended in violence. In the scenario either the husband or the wife was the perpetrator of the physical violence, the violence either occurred under stress or after deliberation, and the perpetrator was subsequently jailed for 2 years. Results from 220 participants (109 males, 111 females) from metropolitan Adelaide, South Australia, showed significant main effects of stimulus person. Participants were more negative to the husband than to the wife in regard to responsibility for the offense, deservingness of the penalty, seriousness of the offense, perceived harshness of the penalty, reported positive affect, and reported sympathy. These main effects were qualified by interaction effects involving stimulus person (husband, wife) and situation (stress, deliberation), and stimulus person and gender of participant. The results suggested that there were different patterns of belief about the dynamics of domestic violence as well as a degree of in-group or same gender favoritism when female participants responded to the scenario involving the wife.I am indebted to the Australian Research Council for funding this research.     

Neuroticism in Marriage: II. The Incidence of Neuroticism (Continued)

Abstract

The purpose of the experiment was to demonstrate whether men are more aggressive when disappointed by a woman whom they like rather than dislike. First, 78 men, 19 to 24 years of age, were recruited by using a newspaper advertisement. They were then placed in one of the two conditions: They were confronted by a female confederate that they either liked or did not like; they then received either positive or negative personal evaluations by the particular confederate in relation to prose-reading tasks. Dependent measures on blood pressure, use of bogus electric shock on a person, and evaluation of the confederate were taken as measures of aggression. The following predictions were made: (a) Negative evaluations by the liked confederate would result in more aggression than by either a disliked confederate or by a liked confederate giving a positive evaluation, and (b) subjects would be more aggressive when the female confederate gave them a negative rather than a positive evaluation or when she was disliked rather than liked. Predictions were supported on all the measures of aggression.     

The effect of stimulus person valence on divergent self-other attributions for success and failure

Two experiments investigated self-other attributions for success and failure. In Experiment 1, high and low achievers completed a modified IAR scale either for themselves or another. Regardless of achievement motives, more personal attribution for failure was assigned to oneself than to a neutral other. In Experiment 2, additional scales for liked and disliked others were administered and scale item importance was varied. On global and individual causal measures, neutral and liked others were credited more and disliked others less for success than oneself, and liked others were blamed less and disliked others more for failure than oneself and neutral others. Item importance produced few effects. Results were interpreted in terms of informational considerations in self-other attribution.     

Some situational determinants of the motives attributed to the person who performs a helping act

Two studies were directed at the assessment of donor motives for and appropriateness and evaluation of an unsolicited helping act directed at a high versus a low power person by self or other Results of the first study demonstrated no differences between self and other, but highly significant differences between high and low power on all three dependent measures, with an act directed at a high power person being seen as more self-seeking and being more negatively evaluated. A manipulation of liking for other in the second study resulted in significant differences between self and a disliked other on all three measures, with more negative attributions and evaluations of die disliked other As predicted, there were no differences between self and a liked other Power differences remained significant over all conditions of self and other Results were considered not to be attributable to trans-situational need states of the low power person, however, the act was consistently viewed as more appropriate when directed at a low power person.     

The moderating role of self-monitoring on the interpersonal aspects of attitude ambivalence

Extant research has found a relation between holding conflicting attitudes with a familiar person (interpersonal discrepancy) and subjective attitude ambivalence. In 2 studies, we investigated the role of interpersonal discrepancy in the experience of attitude ambivalence as a function of self-monitoring and level of liking of the other person. Building on balance theory, we proposed and found that high (vs. low) self-monitors feel most comfortable when they are in agreement with liked (vs. disliked) others. In Study 1, 80 university students revealed that when the significant other is a parent, high self-monitors feel more subjective ambivalence when there is more interpersonal discrepancy. In Study 2, 37 university students reported their feelings of subjective ambivalence when considering the interpersonal discrepancy between liked (vs. disliked) familiar people. Again, it was high self-monitors who were most susceptible to increased feelings of subjective ambivalence, particularly for discrepancies between their own attitude and the attitude of liked others. Taken together, our 2 studies broaden our understanding of the interpersonal foundations of subjective ambivalence by suggesting that they may depend on personality differences and the nature of the social relationship.     

Perceived Deservingness of Outcomes as a Function of Religious Fundamentalism and Target Responsibility

We examined the perception of deserved outcomes associated with religious fundamentalism (RF). Interviews with videotaped targets varied in target's religiosity, responsibility, and outcome valence (good/bad). Participants either low (LF) or high (HF) on RF formulated an impression of how deserving a target was for a situational outcome. Participants low in RF held targets to be less deserving of a bad outcome than a good one; the HF group showed this to a lesser degree. HFs believed the target was more deserving of a bad outcome than did LFs, even when the target was not responsible for the outcome. Religious fundamentalism is related to attributing greater deservingness of bad outcomes, possibly because of a greater belief in a just world.     

Nonimmediate language style and inconsistency between private and expressed evaluations

It was hypothesized that certain language style variations would reflect apprehension about affirming the validity of communication content. Wiener and Mehrabian (Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,1968) have identified a cluster of such variations called verbal nonimmediacy, which they describe as indicators of psychological distance between the communicator and his/her communication. Four experiments are reported. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that communication about positive manifestations of disliked traits and negative manifestations of liked traits was more nonimmediate than when positive manifestations of liked traits or negative manifestations of disliked traits were described. This was true both when one's own or another's personality traits were described. In Experiment 3, nonimmediacy was found to increase when communications involved clear fabrications about either one's liked or disliked traits. Experiment 4 showed that when self-regard was experimentally manipulated, low self-regard subjects showed more opinion conformity and nonimmediacy in their disclosures to a confederate than did high self-regard subjects.     

Self-monitoring in communicative interactions: Social cognitive consequences of goal-directed message modification

The hypothesis was examined that previously demonstrated message modification and its subsequent social cognitive effects would be more characteristic of high than low self-monitors. Subjects first read an essay describing a stimulus person and were then requested to communicate a referential message concerning him to a listener who supposedly either liked (positive audience condition) or disliked (negative audience condition) the stimulus person. Subjects were subsequently given, after both a brief and long delay interval, a reproduction, impression, and attitude measure. The results indicated that high self-monitors were more likely to modify their message in a manner that was evaluatively consistent with their listener's attitude. In addition, this message modification had the predicted social cognitive consequences in that it affected the high self-monitor's subsequent impressions of (but not necessarily attitude toward) the target person. The results suggested that the responses obtained from high self-monitors in many experimental contexts may themselves be the results of a self-monitoring strategy. The implications of these results for research examining the effects of “self-monitoring” are discussed.     

Latent inhibition in human affective learning

This study presents the results of a new visual procedure designed to generate affective learning, namely the change in the affective rating of a previously neutral stimulus by simply pairing it with a liked or disliked stimulus. Specifically, an experiment was conducted to evaluate the effect of nonreinforced preexposures to the to-be-conditioned stimulus (a non-sense shape) on affective conditioning. This manipulation, intended to produce latent inhibition, typically results in retarded learning when the preexposed stimulus is paired with the unconditioned stimulus. The results revealed that it is possible to modify the affective value of a previously neutral non-sense shape by pairing it with a liked or disliked unconditioned stimulus, and that latent inhibition affects affective conditioning.     

When increasing liking for a communicator decreases opinion change: An attribution analysis of attractiveness

Fifty-six female subjects were asked to discuss, through passing notes, a personal injury case with a partner. Liking for the partner was manipulated by informing subjects either that their partner was very cold and penurious (low attractiveness), or was very warm and generous (high attractiveness). During the discussions, the partners' notes were replaced by notes that argued for either a very low or a very high amount of compensation. Though the general rule is that influence should mirror liking, attribution theory (Kelley, 1967) leads to the expectation that in this setting the persuasiveness of the liked versus the disliked partner should depend on the amount of compensation advocated, with low compensation arguments being more persuasive when believed to be given by the liked partner, but high compensation arguments more influential when believed to be given by the disliked partner. The results supported attribution theory. Implications for the way attractiveness has been conceptualized in the social psychology literature are discussed.     

Accuracy of familiarity decisions to famous faces perceived without awareness depends on attitude to the target person and on response latency

Stone and Valentine (2004) presented masked 17 ms faces in simultaneous pairs of one famous and one unfamiliar face. Accuracy in selecting the famous face was higher when the famous person was regarded as "good" or liked than when regarded as "evil" or disliked. Experiment 1 attempted to replicate this phenomenon, but produced a different pattern of results. Experiment 2 investigated alternative explanations and found evidence supporting only the effect of response latency: responses made soon after stimulus onset were more accurate to liked than to disliked faces, whereas responses made after a longer delay were equally accurate to disliked faces. It appears that the effect of negative valence was corrected within the space of a few hundred milliseconds. Experiment 3, using an affective priming paradigm, supported the concept that an early-arising effect of valence is corrected if it is misleading to the directed task.     

Every cloud has a silver lining: interpersonal and individual differences determinants of anger-related behaviors

Two studies examined the effect of status and liking of the anger target on anger behavior and individual differences in anger-related behavior. Participants recalled anger instances in which the anger target was of higher/equal/lower status and/or liked/ unfamiliar/disliked; subsequently, they indicated which behaviors they had displayed. In both studies, anger behaviors could be grouped into behaviors that imply approaching the target (anger-out, assertion, reconciliation) and behaviors that reflect avoidance/anger-in or social sharing. The results demonstrated that approach behaviors more likely occur toward lower status or liked targets; avoidance behaviors and social sharing more likely occur when the target is of higher status or disliked. On an individual differences level, an approach and an avoid/social sharing person class were identified. The findings suggest that anger may motivate prosocial behavior or social sharing, depending on the individual and type of relation with the target. Only few gender differences were found.