Why people self-verify.

Why do people choose interaction partners who see them as they see themselves? Self-verification theorists propose that a desire to bolster perceptions of predictability and control underlies such activities. In contrast, advocates of positivity strivings argue that people choose such interaction partners in the hope of making themselves feel good. Two studies tested these competing explanations by examining the spontaneous verbalizations of participants as they chose interaction partners. The results suggested that positivity as well as self-verification strivings caused participants with positive self-views to choose partners who appraised them favorably. The epistemic considerations underlying self-verification processes, however, best explained why people with negative self-views chose partners who appraised them unfavorably.     

Weighting systems for linear functions of correlated variables when there is no dependent variable

When no criterion variable is available, the combination of tests or other variables by the use of multiple correlation is not possible. Three methods of combining variables are described mathematically, and discussed with reference to the linear combination of tests. Iterative computational schemes are outlined and illustrated.     

Why do people factor?

This is a very simple explanation of factor analysis primarily for the factorial layman. The interpretation of factors and the comparisons of various factor solutions are illustrated with a hypothetical example so designed that the reader can visualize all the relationships in a two-dimensional graph.     

Empathy gaps for social pain: why people underestimate the pain of social suffering

In 5 studies, the authors examined the hypothesis that people have systematically distorted beliefs about the pain of social suffering. By integrating research on empathy gaps for physical pain (Loewenstein, 1996) with social pain theory (MacDonald & Leary, 2005), the authors generated the hypothesis that people generally underestimate the severity of social pain (ostracism, shame, etc.)--a biased judgment that is only corrected when people actively experience social pain for themselves. Using a social exclusion manipulation, Studies 1-4 found that nonexcluded participants consistently underestimated the severity of social pain compared with excluded participants, who had a heightened appreciation for social pain. This empathy gap for social pain occurred when participants evaluated both the pain of others (interpersonal empathy gap) as well as the pain participants themselves experienced in the past (intrapersonal empathy gap). The authors argue that beliefs about social pain are important because they govern how people react to socially distressing events. In Study 5, middle school teachers were asked to evaluate policies regarding emotional bullying at school. This revealed that actively experiencing social pain heightened the estimated pain of emotional bullying, which in turn led teachers to recommend both more comprehensive treatment for bullied students and greater punishment for students who bully.     

Why people are reluctant to tempt fate

The present research explored the belief that it is bad luck to "tempt fate." Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated that people do indeed have the intuition that actions that tempt fate increase the likelihood of negative outcomes. Studies 3-6 examined our claim that the intuition is due, in large part, to the combination of the automatic tendencies to attend to negative prospects and to use accessibility as a cue when judging likelihood. Study 3 demonstrated that negative outcomes are more accessible following actions that tempt fate than following actions that do not tempt fate. Studies 4 and 5 demonstrated that the heightened accessibility of negative outcomes mediates the elevated perceptions of likelihood. Finally, Study 6 examined the automatic nature of the underlying processes. The types of actions that are thought to tempt fate as well as the role of society and culture in shaping this magical belief are discussed.     

Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition

It is commonly held that people believe themselves to be better than others, especially for outcomes under their control. However, such overconfidence is not universal. This paper presents evidence showing that people believe that they are below average on skill-based tasks that are difficult. A simple Bayesian explanation can account for these effects and for their robustness: On skill-based tasks, people generally have better information about themselves than about others, so their beliefs about others’ performances tend to be more regressive (thus less extreme) than their beliefs about their own performances. This explanation is tested in two experiments that examine these effects’ robustness to experience, feedback, and market forces. The discussion explores the implications for strategic planning in general and entrepreneurial entry in particular.     

Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence

Successful negotiation of everyday life would seem to require people to possess insight about deficiencies in their intellectual and social skills. However, people tend to be blissfully unaware of their incompetence. This lack of awareness arises because poor performers are doubly cursed: Their lack of skill deprives them not only of the ability to produce correct responses, but also of the expertise necessary to surmise that they are not producing them. People base their perceptions of performance, in part, on their preconceived notions about their skills. Because these notions often do not correlate with objective performance, they can lead people to make judgments about their performance that have little to do with actual accomplishment.     

Predictors of how often and when people fall in love

A leading theory of romantic love is that it functions to make one feel committed to one's beloved, as well as to signal this commitment to the beloved (Frank, 1988). Because women tend to be skeptical of men's commitment, this view entails that men may have evolved to fall in love first, in order to show their commitment to women. Using a sample of online participants of a broad range of ages, this study tested this sex difference and several related individual difference hypotheses concerning the ease of falling in love. There was mixed evidence for sex differences: only some measures indicated that men are generally more love-prone than are women. We also found that men were more prone to falling in love if they tended to overestimate women's sexual interest and highly valued physical attractiveness in potential partners. Women were more prone to falling in love if they had a stronger sex drive. These results provide modest support for the existence of sex differences in falling in love, as well as initial evidence for links between several individual difference variables and the propensity to fall in love.     

Why people make friends: The nature of friendship

Friendship constitutes an important facet of human behavior, and the current research investigated the reasons that motivate people to make friends. First, a combination of qualitative research methods were used to identify 41 perceived reasons why people make friends. Using a sample of 1,316 Greek‐speaking participants, these reasons were classified into five broad factors. Participants indicated that the most important reasons for making friends were to receive social input, support, and because of someone else's good qualities. Sex differences and age effects were found in most factors. Finally, the five factors were classified into two broader domains, the first reflecting motivation to make a true friendship and the second to gain opportunistic benefits.     

Why people engage in parasuicide: a cross-cultural study of intentions

Information obtained at interview from 1,646 parasuicide patients in 14 regions in 13 European countries participating in the WHO/EURO Multicentre Study on Suicidal Behaviour was used to study self-reported intentions involved in parasuicide. Comparisons were made across cultures, genders, and age groups. Although some statistically significant differences were found, the effect sizes were very small. The main finding from this study is thus that parasuicide patients in different countries tend to indicate that similar types of intentions are involved in their acts of parasuicide, and that the intentions do not vary greatly with gender or age. The hypothesis that rates of suicide and parasuicide vary between regions with the frequency with which suicidal intention is indicated by the patients was also tested, but was supported only for women and in relation to national suicide rates. The findings from this study are likely to be generalizable to other settings and have implications for clinical practice.     

Multiple objective programming with piecewise linear functions

An approach to generating all efficient solutions for multiple objective programs with piecewise linear objective functions and linear constraints is presented. The approach is based on the decomposition of the feasible set into subsets, referred to as cells, so that the original problem reduces to a series of single objective linear programs and feasibility tests over the cells. The concepts of cell-efficiency and complex-efficiency are introduced and their relationship with efficiency is examined. A generic algorithm for finding efficient solutions for bi-objective piecewise linear programs is proposed. Applications in location theory as well as in worst case analysis are highlighted. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Why most people disapprove of me: experience sampling in impression formation

Individuals are typically more likely to continue to interact with people if they have a positive impression of them. This article shows how this sequential sampling feature of impression formation can explain several biases in impression formation. The underlying mechanism is the sample bias generated when the probability of interaction depends on current impressions. Because negative experiences decrease the probability of interaction, negative initial impressions are more stable than positive impressions. Negative initial impressions, however, are more likely to change for individuals who are frequently exposed to others. As a result, systematic differences in interaction patterns, due to social similarity or proximity, will produce systematic differences in impressions. This mechanism suggests an alternative explanation of several regularities in impression formation, including a negativity bias in impressions of outgroup members, systematic differences in performance evaluations, and more positive evaluations of proximate others.     

Why and when justice sensitivity leads to pro- and antisocial behavior

People differ in how injustice-sensitive they are either as victims or as observers. Whereas observer sensitivity is positively related to cooperative behavior, victim sensitivity promotes antisocial and egoistic behavior. The present article investigates the dynamics underlying these effects. Participants played an online-based public goods game and were informed about the number of people who violated a fairness rule in previous rounds of the game (no, some, or many violators). High victim-sensitive participants contributed less to the public good even in the “some violators” condition. High observer-sensitive participants contributed more to the public good even in the “many violators” condition. The findings correspond with the sensitivity to mean intentions model and cannot be explained by individual differences in general trust.     

Spontaneous adaptation explains why people act faster when being imitated

The human ability to perform joint actions is often attributed to high-level cognitive processes. For example, the finding that action leaders act faster when imitated by their partners has been interpreted as evidence for anticipation of the other’s actions (Pfister, Dignath, Hommel, & Kunde, 2013). In two experiments, we showed that a low-level mechanism can account for this finding. Action leaders were faster when imitated than when counterimitated, but only if they could observe their partner’s actions (Exp. 1). Crucially, when due to our manipulation the partner’s imitative actions became slower than the counterimitative actions, leaders also became slower when they were imitated, and faster when counterimitated (Exp. 2). Our results suggest that spontaneous temporal adaptation is a key mechanism in joint action tasks. We argue for a reconsideration of other phenomena that have traditionally been attributed solely to high-level processes.     

Why people convert: A balance theoretical approach to religious conversion

This paper presents a model of religious conversion that integrates process models in the tradition of Lofland and Stark (1965) with the cognitive balance model of Gartrell and Shannon (1985). By placing balance theoretical principles in the context of a process model, the model presented here seeks to explain conversion as a process that is facilitated through the cognitive states of individuals. This technique, it is argued, produces a view of conversion that denies neither individual agency nor the structural constraints placed on the individual by the group. Implications for the study of conversion are discussed.Many thanks to the participants in the Emory University Sociology Department's presentation seminar for helpful comments. You know who you are. Thanks also Nancy Ammerman, Sonya Gamble, Karen Hegtvedt, and Frank Lechner.BITNET: SOCY7182 & EMUVM1.     

Why people resort to coercion: the role of utility and legitimacy

This study focuses on why people may resort to coercive tactics. We tested the proposition that considerations of utility and legitimacy mediate effects of a powerholder's competence and reward structure on the use of coercion. Results showed that in general coercive tactics are employed less often than softer tactics, that coercive tactics are used more by more competent individuals than by less competent individuals, and that coercive tactics are used more often when the revenues of task performance benefited the agent of power than when they benefited both agent and target or when they benefited the target solely. Results identified perceived utility and perceived legitimacy as mediators of the decision to coerce the other or not. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Tangible pictures: viewpoint effects and linear perspective in visually impaired people

Perception of raised-line pictures in blindfolded-sighted, congenitally blind, late-blind, and low-vision subjects was studied in a series of experiments. The major aim of the study was to examine the value of perspective drawings for haptic pictures and visually impaired individuals. In experiment 1, subjects felt two wooden boards joined at 45 degrees, 90 degrees, or 135 degrees, and were instructed to pick the correct perspective drawing from among four choices. The first experiment on perspective found a significant effect of visual status, with much higher performance by the low-vision subjects. Mean performance for the congenitally blind subjects was not significantly different from that of the late-blind and blindfolded-sighted subjects. In a further experiment, blindfolded subjects drew tangible pictures of three-dimensional (3-D) geometric solids, and then engaged in a matching task. Counter to expectations, performance was not impaired for the 3-D drawings as compared with the frontal viewpoints. Subjects were also especially fast and more accurate when matching top views. Experiment 5 showed that top views were easiest for all of the visually impaired subjects, including those who were congenitally blind. Experiment 5 yielded higher performance for 3-D than frontal viewpoints. The results of all of the experiments were consistent with the idea that visual experience is not necessary for understanding perspective drawings of geometrical objects.     

Retaliatory motivation enhances attributions of hostility when people process ambiguous social stimuli

We hypothesized that provocation and readiness to aggress (Retaliatory Motivation) would increase the tendency to construe the ambiguous actions of others as reflecting hostile intent. Male undergraduates were either verbally provoked or not provoked by a male experimenter and half were led to believe that they would be allowed to retaliate anonymously against the provoker in the form of a potentially damaging written evaluation. Participants then rated the hostility and aggressive intent of the characters in brief ambiguous scenarios of interpersonal conflict. According to prediction, men who were provoked and anticipated retaliation against their provoker rated the scenarios as containing hostility and aggression to a significantly greater extent than did non‐provoked or merely provoked participants. Results are discussed within a motivation‐based affective relevance model of perception. Aggr. Behav. 29:155–172, 2003. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.