Direct and vicarious censure in the control of interracial aggression1

An experiment explored the relative effectiveness of two strategies for controlling interracial aggression: observing other individuals censured for aggression and potential direct censure of the aggressor himself. Subjects were provided with an opportunity to aggress under conditions designed to maximize or reduce each type of censure. A principal components analysis of the data revealed two orthogonal variates: direct aggression and indirect aggression. It was found that both observed censure and potential direct censure were effective in modifying directly aggressive responses. However, these forms of censure interacted in their effect on indirect aggression, such that observed censure was effective in reducing indirect aggression only under conditions of potential direct censure.     

The effects of experimenter's instructions, feedback, and praise on teacher praise and student attending behavior

Systematic use of experimenter's instructions, feedback, and feedback plus social praise was used to increase teacher praise for student attending behavior of three elementary school teachers. Experimenter's verbal interactions with teachers, teacher's verbal praise for student behaviors, and pupil attending behavior were recorded during baseline conditions. As the three successive experimental conditions were introduced first with Teacher A, then with Teacher B, in a multiple baseline design, behaviors of the experimenter, the two teachers, and eight students were measured and recorded. In the cases of Teachers A and B, experimental condition one (Instructions) and experimental condition two (Feedback) produced inconclusive results. Experimental condition three (Feedback Plus Social Praise) produced more teacher praise for student attending behavior. The entire "Package" of Experimenter's Instructions, Feedback, and Feedback Plus Social Praise was introduced to Teacher C in a single experimental condition. As in the cases of Teachers A and B, behaviors measured were: (1) the experimenter's verbal interactions, (2) the teacher's praise of students, and (3) the student's attending behavior. Introduction of the "Package" also produced more teacher praise for student attending behavior.     

Mitigating circumstance information, censure, and aggression

One hundred men received one of two levels of mitigating circumstance information either before or after being insulted or not insulted by a co-worker. Participants were then provided with an opportunity ostensibly to deliver aversive noise to the co-worker under either high or low social censure conditions. Physiological data and self-report measures revealed that participants who learned of mitigating circumstance information before being provoked exhibited smaller increases in physiological arousal and reported less annoyance than did those who learned of mitigating circumstance information after insult. Aggression data showed that angered participants evaluated their provoker more favorably and retaliated less when they learned of mitigation before rather than after being insulted. These findings supported attribution theory assumptions that mitigating circumstance information known before the provoking incident influences the individual's interpretation of harm, thereby reducing anger and the instigation to aggression. The reduced impact of information on aggression that is acquired after provocation may reflect the provoked individual's shift of attention from cues surrounding harm to a consideration of inhibitory factors for aggression.     

In praise of vagueness: malleability of vague information as a performance booster

Is the eternal quest for precise information always worthwhile? Our research suggests that, at times, vagueness has its merits. Previous research has demonstrated that people prefer precise information over vague information because it gives them a sense of security and makes their environments more predictable. However, we show that the fuzzy boundaries afforded by vague information can actually help individuals perform better than can precise information. We document these findings across two laboratory studies and one quasi-field study that involved different performance-related contexts (mental acuity, physical strength, and weight loss). We argue that the malleability of vague information allows people to interpret it in the manner they desire, so that they can generate positive response expectancies and, thereby, perform better. The rigidity of precise information discourages desirable interpretations. Hence, on certain occasions, precise information is not as helpful as vague information in boosting performance.