自发社会比较中的威胁效应及自我平衡策略

个体通常利用社会比较进行自我评价, 而比较对象的选择及其对个体自我的影响是一个内隐的过程, 研究基于选择通达理论, 通过三个实验考察了个体自发比较时威胁效应的来源及其消解, 结果表明：(1)威胁效应来源于自主条件下比较对象的选择。个体在比较后的自我评价过程中激活了周围优秀人物的信息, 比较后自我评价水平降低, 引发社会比较的威胁; (2)中国文化背景下的个体在比较后存在威胁“泛化”现象, 不论操作任务是否与自我相关, 均会出现社会比较的威胁效应; (3)与周围优秀人物进行比较所导致的威胁效应, 可以通过自我肯定策略得以缓解, 使个体的整体自我系统重新恢复平衡。     

Different and similar at the same time: when the activation of dissimilarity makes people look more similar

Whether two people are presented as similar or different may have a strong impact on the outcome of their comparison. In the present research, we examined the counterintuitive hypothesis that activating dissimilarity increases the perception of similarities between people, in other words increases perceived feature overlap, during the comparison process. We investigated this prediction by asking people to judge the perceived similarity between two faces with a suboptimally related or unrelated morph inserted in between (to influence joint categorization), and with similar or different facial expressions (to vary the salience of similar or different features). The results confirmed our expectations: In the similarity (joint categorization) condition, two faces that differed in expression were perceived as more dissimilar than faces with the same expression. More important for our prediction, in the dissimilarity condition two faces with different expressions were no longer perceived as more dissimilar than two faces with the same expression. We discuss implications of these findings for the mechanisms underlying comparisons between people. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Comparison processes in social judgment: mechanisms and consequences

This article proposes an informational perspective on comparison consequences in social judgment. It is argued that to understand the variable consequences of comparison, one has to examine what target knowledge is activated during the comparison process. These informational underpinnings are conceptualized in a selective accessibility model that distinguishes 2 fundamental comparison processes. Similarity testing selectively makes accessible knowledge indicating target-standard similarity, whereas dissimilarity testing selectively makes accessible knowledge indicating target-standard dissimilarity. These respective subsets of target knowledge build the basis for subsequent target evaluations, so that similarity testing typically leads to assimilation whereas dissimilarity testing typically leads to contrast. The model is proposed as a unifying conceptual framework that integrates diverse findings on comparison consequences in social judgment.     

Risk it? Direct and collateral impacts of peers' verbal expressions about hazard likelihoods*

When people encounter potential hazards, their expectations and behaviours can be shaped by a variety of factors including other people's expressions of verbal likelihood (e.g., unlikely to harm). What is the impact of such expressions when a person also has numeric likelihood estimates from the same source(s)? Two studies used a new task involving an abstract virtual environment in which people learned about and reacted to novel hazards. Verbal expressions attributed to peers influenced participants’ behaviour toward hazards even when numeric estimates were also available. Namely, verbal expressions suggesting that the likelihood of harm from a hazard is low (vs. higher) yielded more risk taking with respect to said hazard. There were also inverse collateral effects, whereby participants’ behaviour and estimates regarding another hazard in the same context were affected in the opposite direction. These effects may be based on directionality and relativity cues inferred from verbal likelihood expressions.     

Surface‐ and deep‐level dissimilarity effects on social integration and individual effectiveness related outcomes in work groups: A meta‐analytic integration

Prior research linking demographic (e.g., age, ethnicity/race, gender, and tenure) and underlying psychological (e.g., personality, attitudes, and values) dissimilarity variables to individual group member's work‐related outcomes produced mixed and contradictory results. To account for these findings, this study develops a contingency framework and tests it using meta‐analytic and structural equation modelling techniques. In line with this framework, results showed different effects of surface‐level (i.e., demographic) dissimilarity and deep‐level (i.e., underlying psychological) dissimilarity on social integration, and ultimately on individual effectiveness related outcomes (i.e., turnover, task, and contextual performance). Specifically, surface‐level dissimilarity had a negative effect on social integration under low but not under high team interdependence. In return, social integration fully mediated the negative relationship between surface‐level dissimilarity and individual effectiveness related outcomes under low interdependence. In contrast, deep‐level dissimilarity had a negative effect on social integration, which was stronger under high and weaker under low team interdependence. Contrary to our predictions, social integration did not mediate the negative relationship between deep‐level dissimilarity and individual effectiveness related outcomes but suppressed positive direct effects of deep‐level dissimilarity on individual effectiveness related outcomes. Possible explanations for these counterintuitive findings are discussed.     

Interpersonal consequences of joint food consumption for connection and conflict

For centuries, the preparation and eating of a meal has brought people together, making food consumption an inherently social process. Yet the way in which people connect over food is changing. Rising health concerns, due in part to the increase in food allergies and obesity, have shifted attention away from the social aspects of food to food's nutritional aspects. Recognizing the social context in which food consumption takes place, this article reviews research highlighting the interpersonal consequences of joint food consumption. We first examine research on how sharing food connects people together, both via the type of food consumed (e.g., incidental food similarity) and the manner in which people serve and eat food (e.g., from shared vs. separate plates). We then turn to research that addresses the opposite side of the coin, discussing how the inability to share in a meal can be isolating, as well as how people navigate conflicting preferences when making food decisions with others. We conclude with a discussion of promising future directions for research on joint food consumption.     

Trying Hard or Hardly Trying: An Analysis of Context Effects in Choice

Several studies have shown that consumer choice is often influenced by the context or the set of alternatives under consideration. Context effects have largely been explained in terms of constructive preferences that are consistent with 2 theoretical accounts—effort minimization and perceptual contrast—that emphasize different underlying motivations. We propose that the effect of time pressure on context effects can be used as a moderating variable to determine which of the 2 motives is supported. Specifically, if context effects bias preferences due to effort minimization, time pressure should increase the magnitude of such effects. In contrast, if context effects arise due to an excessive focus on the relational characteristics of the alternatives provided, time pressure should reduce the magnitude of such effects. We examine this proposition in relation to the compromise effect and a choice between an extreme and an all‐average option. We find that the compromise effect and the preference for an all‐average alternative are both reduced under time pressure. A study using Mouselab provides additional support for the underlying decision mechanisms. We discuss the theoretical implications of this research and explore its consequences for marketers.     

Less is more: the lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt

The present research shows that although people believe that learning more about others leads to greater liking, more information about others leads, on average, to less liking. Thus, ambiguity--lacking information about another--leads to liking, whereas familiarity--acquiring more information--can breed contempt. This "less is more" effect is due to the cascading nature of dissimilarity: Once evidence of dissimilarity is encountered, subsequent information is more likely to be interpreted as further evidence of dissimilarity, leading to decreased liking. The authors document the negative relationship between knowledge and liking in laboratory studies and with pre- and postdate data from online daters, while showing the mediating role of dissimilarity.     

A Story About a Stupid Person Can Make You Act Stupid (or Smart): Behavioral Assimilation (and Contrast) as Narrative Impact

Media priming refers to the residual, often unintended consequences of media use on subsequent perceptions, judgments, and behavior. Previous research showed that the media can prime behavior that is in line with the primed traits or concepts (assimilation). However, assimilation is expected to be less likely and priming may even yield reverse effects (contrast) when recipients have a dissimilarity testing mindset. Based on previous research on narrative comprehension and experience as well as research on media priming, a short-term influence of stories on cognitive performance is predicted. In an experimental study, participants (N = 81) read a story about a stupid soccer hooligan. As expected, participants who read the story without a special processing instruction performed worse in a knowledge test than a control group who read an unrelated text. Participants with a reading goal instruction to find dissimilarities between the self and the main protagonist performed better than participants who read the story without this instruction. The effects of reported self-activation and story length were further considered. Future inquiries with narratives as primes and contrast effects in media effects research are discussed.     

Visual judgments of kinship: an alternative perspective

Following other researchers, we investigated the premise that visual judgment of kinship might be modelled as a signal-detection task, strictly related to similar facial features. We measured subjects' response times to face-pair stimuli while they performed visual judgments of kinship, similarity, or dissimilarity, and examined some priming effects involved. Our results show that kinship judgment takes longer on average than either similarity or dissimilarity judgment-which is compatible with existing models, yet might also suggest that kinship judgments are of a more complex character. In our priming study we observed selective suppression/enhancement of the efficacy of dissimilarity judgments whenever they followed similarity and kinship judgments. This finding confounds the notion, inherent in previous models, of resemblance cues signalling for kinship, since similarity and dissimilarity cannot be considered just as opposite concepts, and observed priming effects need to be explicitly modelled, including dissimilarity cues. To model kinship judgments across faces that are perceived as dissimilar, a new framework may be required, perhaps accepting the perspective of a task-driven use of the visual cues, modulated by experience and cultural conditioning.     

Automatic contrast: Evidence that automatic comparison with the social self affects evaluative responses

The aim of the present research was to investigate whether unconsciously presented affective information may cause opposite evaluative responses depending on what social category the information originates from. We argue that automatic comparison processes between the self and the unconscious affective information produce this evaluative contrast effect. Consistent with research on automatic behaviour, we propose that when an intergroup context is activated, an automatic comparison to the social self may determine the automatic evaluative responses, at least for highly visible categories (e.g. sex, ethnicity). Contrary to previous research on evaluative priming, we predict automatic contrastive responses to affective information originating from an outgroup category such that the evaluative response to neutral targets is opposite to the valence of the suboptimal primes. Two studies using different intergroup contexts provide support for our hypotheses.     

Olympic medals as fruits of comparison? Assimilation and contrast in sequential performance judgments

The authors investigated the evaluative consequences of sequential performance judgments. Recent social comparison research has suggested that performance judgments may be influenced by judgments about a preceding performance. Specifically, performance judgments may be assimilated to judgments of the preceding performance if judges focus on similarities between the two. If judges focus on differences, however, contrast may ensue. The authors examined sequential performance judgments, using data gathered from the 2004 Olympic Games as well as data gathered in the laboratory with students or experienced gymnastics judges as participants. Sequential performance judgments were influenced by previously judged performances, and the direction of this influence depended on the degree of perceived similarity between the successive performances.     

Assessing dissimilarity relations under missing data conditions: evidence from computer simulations

The extensive research examining relations between group member dissimilarity and outcome measures has yielded inconsistent results. In the present research, the authors used computer simulations to examine the impact that a methodological feature of such research, participant nonresponse, can have on dissimilarity-outcome relations. Results suggest that using only survey responders to calculate dissimilarity typically results in underestimation of true dissimilarity effects and that these effects can occur even when response rates are high.     

Are selective adaptation and contrast effects really distinct?

Although there is evidence that selective adaptation and contrast effects in speech perception are produced by the same mechanisms, Sawusch and Jusczyk (1981) reported a dissociation between the effects and concluded that adaptation and contrast occur at separate processing levels. They found that an ambiguous test stimulus was more likely to be labeled b following adaptation with [pha] and more likely to be labeled p following adaptation with [ba] or [spa] (the latter consisting of [ba] preceded by [s] noise). In the contrast session, where a single context stimulus occurred with a single test item, the [ba] and [pha] contexts had contrastive effects similar to those of the [ba] and [pha] adaptors, but the [spa] context produced an increase in b responses to the test stimulus, an effect opposite to that of the [spa] adaptor. One interpretation of this difference is that the rapid presentation of the [spa] adaptor gave rise to "streaming," whereby the [s] was perceptually segregated from the [ba]. In our experiment, we essentially replicated the results of Sawusch and Jusczyk (1981), using procedures similar to theirs. Next, we increased the interadaptor interval to remove the likelihood of stream segregation and found that the adaptation and contrast effects converged.     

Forgiveness and defense style

Within the literature on the psychology of forgiveness, researchers have hypothesized that the 1st stage in the process of being able to forgive is the role of psychological defense. To examine such a hypothesis, the authors explored the relationship between forgiveness and defense style. The 304 respondents (151 men, 153 women) completed measures of forgiveness (likelihood, presence of positive forgiveness, absence of negative forgiveness) and defense style. Among respondents, all measures of forgiveness shared a significant negative association with a neurotic defense style. The finding is discussed within the context of the consequences for those who may be experiencing barriers to forgiveness when dealing with conflict resolution in interpersonal situations.     

Goal-Driven Cognition and Functional Behavior: The Fundamental-Motives Framework

Fundamental motives have direct implications for evolutionary fitness and orchestrate attention, memory, and social inference in functionally specific ways. Motivational states linked to self-protection and mating offer illustrative examples. When self-protective motives are aroused, people show enhanced attention to, and memory for, angry male strangers; they also perceive out-group members as especially dangerous. In contrast, when mating motives are aroused, men show enhanced attention to and memory for attractive members of the opposite sex; mating motives also lead men (but not women) to perceive sexual arousal in attractive members of the opposite sex. There are further functionally specific consequences for social behavior. For example, self-protective motives increase conformity among both men and women, whereas mating motives lead men (but not women) to engage in anticonformist behavior. Other motivational systems trigger different adaptive patterns of cognitive and behavioral responses. This body of research illustrates the highly specific consequences of fitness-relevant motivational states for cognition and behavior, and highlights the value of studying human motivation and cognition within an evolutionary framework.     

Experimental Tests of Risk Ladders in the Elicitation of Perceived Likelihood

Risk ladders have the potential to improve numeric judgments of low‐likelihood events by providing information about the likelihoods of comparison risks, thereby letting respondents make risk estimates “in context.” However, to date this tool has been studied systematically only in communication of risk, not in elicitation of perceived likelihoods. In three studies, we evaluated the benefits of risk ladders on the consistency, validity, and mean‐level accuracy of elicited likelihood judgments. When estimates for low‐likelihood hazards were elicited using different numeric response scales (e.g., “1 in x” and “x in 100,000”), scale type had a strong effect on the magnitudes of the elicited estimates, and viewing a risk ladder (Experiment 1) or comparison risks (Experiments 2 and 3) did not attenuate this effect of scale type. Similarly, we found no evidence that risk ladders or comparison risks improved the convergent validity of numeric estimates, as measured using correlations with risk ratings made on alternative scale types. Finally, viewing comparison risks tended to reduce gross overestimation of rare events, with relatively less change in estimates for mid‐likelihood and high‐likelihood hazards. This suggests that comparison risks can spread responses to cover a wider range of values but do not ameliorate scale effects. In the elicitation of numeric risk estimates, how you ask matters, even if you let people make estimates “in context” through the use of comparative risk information. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Phantastic objects and the financial market's sense of reality: a psychoanalytic contribution to the understanding of stock market instability

This paper sets out to explore if standard psychoanalytic thinking based on clinical experience can illuminate instability in financial markets and its widespread human consequences. Buying, holding or selling financial assets in conditions of inherent uncertainty and ambiguity, it is argued, necessarily implies an ambivalent emotional and phantasy relationship to them. Based on the evidence of historical accounts, supplemented by some interviewing, the authors suggest a psychoanalytic approach focusing on unconscious phantasy relationships, states of mind, and unconscious group functioning can explain some outstanding questions about financial bubbles which cannot be explained with mainstream economic theories. The authors also suggest some institutional features of financial markets which may ordinarily increase or decrease the likelihood that financial decisions result from splitting off those thoughts which give rise to painful emotions. Splitting would increase the future risk of financial instability and in this respect the theory with which economic agents in such markets approach their work is important. An interdisciplinary theory recognizing and making possible the integration of emotional experience may be more useful to economic agents than the present mainstream theories which contrast rational and irrational decision-making and model them as making consistent decisions on the basis of reasoning alone.     

Retracted: Correction or comparison? The effects of prime awareness on social judgments

In previous research on the effects of accessible information on social judgments, divergent explanations have been offered for contrast effects that occur as a consequence of prime awareness. Some authors favor a comparison explanation, whereas others favor a correction explanation. In two studies, we successfully disentangled comparison and correction contrast by demonstrating that whereas correction for unwanted influences is a general process that leads to contrast on various dimensions on which a target is judged, comparison effects are prime specific and occur mainly on comparison relevant dimensions. In addition, our findings indicate that for correction attempts to occur and succeed, respondents must have the feeling that these primes contaminate their target judgments and should be removed from their “true” reaction to the target. When people are not suspicious of the potential contaminating influences of priming stimuli, prime awareness is more likely to lead to prime‐target comparisons than to correction efforts. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The ups and downs of social comparison: mechanisms of assimilation and contrast

Social comparisons influence self-evaluations in multiple ways. Sometimes self-evaluations are assimilated toward a given standard. At other times, they are contrasted away from the standard. On the basis of the selective accessibility model (T. Mussweiler, 2003a), the authors hypothesized that assimilation results if judges engage in the comparison process of similarity testing and selectively focus on similarities to the standard, whereas contrast occurs if judges engage in dissimilarity testing and selectively focus on differences. If these alternative comparison mechanisms are indeed at play, then assimilative and contrastive social comparisons should be accompanied by diverging informational foci on similarities versus differences. Results of 5 studies support this reasoning, demonstrating that assimilation results under conditions that foster similarity testing, whereas contrast occurs under conditions that foster dissimilarity testing. Furthermore, assimilative social comparisons are accompanied by a general informational focus on similarities, whereas contrastive comparisons are accompanied by a focus on differences.