When far becomes near: Shared environments activate action simulation

It has been proposed that one means of understanding a person's current behaviour and predicting future actions is by simulating their actions. That is, when another person's actions are observed, similar motor processes are activated in the observer. For example, after observing a reach over an obstacle, a person's subsequent reach trajectory is more curved, reflecting motor priming. Importantly, such motor states are only activated if the observed action is in near (peripersonal) space. However, we demonstrate that when individuals share action environments, simulation of another person's obstacle avoiding reach path takes place even when the action is in far (extrapersonal) space. We propose that action simulation is influenced by factors such as ownership. When an “owned” object is a potential future obstacle, even when it is viewed beyond current action space, simulations are evoked, and these leave a more stable memory capable of influencing future behaviour.     

Friendly or just polite? The effect of self-esteem on attributions

Studied the effect of a person's self-esteem on his inferences about another person's feelings toward him. Fifty-six mule and female college student subjects of high or low chronic self-esteem (median split; modified version of Janis and Field's ‘Feelings of Inadequacy Scale’) received either a negative or a positive evaluation of themselves. They were told that the evaluation had been written by another subject who had acted either under ‘sincere’ instructions, which allowed him to give his own opinion, or under ‘role-playing’ instructions, which assigned him to write either a positive or a negative evaluation. The subject's take was to decide under which instruction his evaluation had been written. It was predicted from a self-concistency logic that low self-esteem subjects would attribute negative evaluations to ‘sincere’ and positive evaluations to ‘role-playing’ instructions, while high self-esteem subjects would make the reverse attributions. A significant self-esteem × evaluation positivity interaction (p <.01) supported this prediction.     

Priming of reach trajectory when observing actions: Hand-centred effects

When another person's actions are observed it appears that these actions are simulated, such that similar motor processes are triggered in the observer. Much evidence suggests that such simulation concerns the achievement of behavioural goals, such as grasping a particular object, and is less concerned with the specific nature of the action, such as the path the hand takes to reach the goal object. We demonstrate that when observing another person reach around an obstacle, an observer's subsequent reach has an increased curved trajectory, reflecting motor priming of reach path. This priming of reach trajectory via action observation can take place under a variety of circumstances: with or without a shared goal, and when the action is seen from a variety of perspectives. However, of most importance, the reach path priming effect is only evoked if the obstacle avoided by another person is within the action (peripersonal) space of the observer.     

Human physical aggression as a function of alcohol and threat of harm

The present study investigated the effect of threat of physical harm on the aggressive behavior of intoxicated and nonintoxicated subjects. Forty male undergraduates competed in a reaction time task in which they could deliver shock to an increasingly provocative opponent. In the threat condition, subjects could be hurt by the opponent (they wore a shock electrode), while in the no-threat condition, they could not be hurt by the opponent (the electrode was removed prior to the competition). The results indicated that under conditions of low provocation, the intoxicated subjects behaved more aggressively than the nonintoxicated subjects in both the threatening and nonthreatening condition. However, under conditions of increasing provocation, only the intoxicated subjects in the threatening condition increased their shock settings.     

Thinking through uncertainty: nonconsequential reasoning and choice.

When thinking under uncertainty, people often do not consider appropriately each of the relevant branches of a decision tree, as required by consequentialism. As a result they sometimes violate Savage's sure-thing principle. In the Prisoner's Dilemma game, for example, many subjects compete when they know that the opponent has competed and when they know that the opponent has cooperated, but cooperate when they do not know the opponent's response. Newcomb's Problem and Wason's selection task are also interpreted as manifestations of nonconsequential decision making and reasoning. The causes and implications of such behavior, and the notion of quasi-magical thinking, are discussed.     

Relating covariation information to causal dimensions through principles of contrast and invariance

This paper examines the proposition that covariation information guides judgments about the dimensionality of attributions on the basis of causal principles of contrast and invariance, which are derived from Mill's methods of difference and agreement respectively. It is argued that the standard attribution categories specified in earlier research (e.g. person, occasion and stimulus) represent just one extreme of the attributional dimensions and require the principle of contrast, whereas additional attributional categories reflecting the opposite extreme of the dimensions (e.g. external, stable, general) require the principle of invariance. In three studies, subjects were given covariation information, and were asked to rate the properties of the likely cause along the dimensions of locus, stability, globality and control. In line with the predictions, consensus with others, consistency in time, distinctiveness between stimuli and contingency of one's actions showed the strongest effects on judgments of locus, stability, globality and control respectively. Similar results were obtained in a fourth study, where subjects had to judge the influence of eight causes with varying dimensional properties. Moreover, these judgments were rated somewhat higher given causes requiring the principle of invariance rather than the principle of contrast.     

People are more likely to be insincere when they are more likely to accidentally tell the truth

Although people lie often, and mostly for self-serving reasons, they do not lie as much as they could. The “fudge factor” hypothesis suggests that one reason for people not to lie is that they do not wish to self-identify as liars. Accordingly, self-serving lies should be more likely when they are less obvious to the liars themselves. Here we show that the likelihood of self-serving lies increases with the probability of accidentally telling the truth. Players in our game could transmit sincere or insincere recommendations to their competitors. In line with the fudge factor hypothesis, players lied when their beliefs were based on flimsy evidence and did not lie when their beliefs were based on solid evidence. This is the first demonstration of a new moral hypocrisy paradox: People are more likely to be insincere when they are more likely to accidentally tell the truth.     

College Students’ Perceptions of Peers Who Cheat1

Two studies investigated the efficacy of 3 theoretical models in explaining college students judgments of peers who cheat and of accomplices who assist cheaters. The value pluralism model predicted that accomplices who acted for money would be judged more harshly than those who acted from friendship; the attributional model predicted that cheaters whose actions were caused by internal controllable factors would be judged more harshly than those who actions were caused by external uncontrollable factors, and the relative preference model predicted that students who saw themselves as more likely to act as the cheater and accomplice did would make less harsh judgments. Overall, the results provided the best support for the relative preference model.     

Improving the Performance of Failing Students by Overcoming Their Self-Serving Attributional Biases

The causal impact of attributions on academic performance was examined by changing low-scoring students' attributions regarding their poor performances. Initially, when students who were failing a college course identified the cause of the performance, they emphasized external, uncontrollable causes. Because these self-serving attributions could have perpetuated poor performance on subsequent examinations, students in the experimental condition were exposed to information that suggested that grades in college are caused by internal, controllable factors such as effort and motivation. As predicted, on subsequent tests and on the final examination, these students earned higher grades than control students who received no attributional information. These findings lend support to an attributional model of academic achievement and also suggest that educational interventions that shift attributions away from a self-serving pattern to a performance-facilitating pattern may improve academic outcomes.     

Effects of Perceived Consensus on Selective Reinforcement of Other People's Stated Opinions

Three studies tested whether perceived consensus affects selective reinforcement of other people's stated opinions on important social issues. Participants who perceived relatively high consensus for their opinions were more likely than participants who perceived low consensus to reward another person's agreeing statements more than the person's disagreeing statements about gun control (Study 1) and to prolong interrogating another student about abortion (Study 2). In Study 3, participants who were told they were in a two-thirds majority regarding gay scout troop leaders were more likely than participants who were told they were in a one-third minority to practice selective reinforcement. The results have implications for settings in which interrogators believe they can exercise power over the person who is being questioned.     

Impression management in behavior toward handicapped patients]

A previous study (Tr?ster, 1989) showed that nonhandicapped persons preferred a physically handicapped interaction partner to a nonhandicapped partner in an attributionally unambiguous situation. In order to test whether this "sympathy effect of physical handicap" is based on tendencies of impression management, 48 female subjects had to choose to sit next to either a physically handicapped or nonhandicapped female interaction partner in order to view a film together. Attributional ambiguity was varied by either confounding the choice of an interaction partner with a second, socially acceptable alternative (attributionally ambiguous situation: a choice between two films) or not confounding it (attributionally unambiguous situation: no choice between films). Public responsibility was manipulated by informing the subjects about their freedom to choose where they wished to sit either in public (public responsibility) or in private (no public responsibility). The results supported the impression management hypothesis: The handicapped interaction partner (in a wheelchair) was only preferred when the subjects had to anticipate that observers would deduce a preference of the chosen partner from the subjects' choices because of the attributionally unambiguous situation and the public announcement of their freedom of choice. Results suggest that the nonhandicapped strive to exhibit positive and nondiscriminative behavior toward the handicapped in order to avoid creating a disadvantageous impression in an observer.     

When a compliance without pressure strategy fails due to a minority dissenter: A case of “behavioral conversion”

While a strategy of compliance without pressure (Joule, 1987) had the effect of inducing almost all of a group of smoking subjects to stop smoking first for 18 hours then for 3 days, simply observing someone (an accomplice) break his or her own initial agreement to abstain from smoking for 18 hours was enough to bring about a substantial reduction in the willingness of other subjects to later abstain for 3 days. However, subjects did not follow the lead of the accomplice immediately, and persisted in their agreement to abstain for 18 hours. This pattern of indirect, but not direct influence, suggests that there may be a type of minority influence at work here that represents a sort of behavioral conversion.     

Secondhand information and social judgment

This research investigates how secondhand impressions of other people differ from those based on firsthand information. It was hypothesized that secondhand impressions are often more extreme because secondhand accounts of another person's actions frequently fail to convey adequately the role of mitigating circumstances and situational constraints in producing that person's behavior. Experiments 1 and 2 tested this hypothesis by exposing “first generation” subjects to information about a target person, having them rate the target on several trait and attribution scales, and having them describe the target person's actions to a group of “second generation” subjects. As predicted, second generation subjects made more extreme ratings of the target than their first generation counterparts. Content analyses of the accounts transmitted by first generation subjects indicated that they did indeed underemphasize various situational qualifications of the target persons' behavior. Experiment 3 extended these findings by demonstrating that people's impressions of someone they have often heard about from a friend (but never met) are more extreme than their friends' more informed impressions.     

Imagination inflation for action events: Repeated imaginings lead to illusory recollections

In two experiments, subjects heard simple action statements (e.g., “Break the toothpick”), and, in some conditions, they also performed the action or imagined performing the action. In a second session that occurred at a later point (10 min, 24 h, 1 week, or 2 weeks later), subjects imagined performing actions one, three, or five times. Some imagined actions represented statements heard, imagined, or performed in the first session, whereas other statements were new in the second session. During a third (test) phase, subjects were instructed to recognize statements only if they had occurred during the first session and, if recognized, to tell whether the action statement had been carried out, imagined, or merely heard. The primary finding was that increasing the number of imaginings during the second session caused subjects to remember later that they had performed an action during the first session when in fact they had not (imagination inflation). This outcome occurred both for statements that subjects had heard but not performed during the first session and for statements that had never been heard during the first session. The results are generally consistent with Johnson, Hashtroudi, and Lindsay’s (1993) source monitoring framework and reveal a powerful memory illusion: Imagining performance of an action can cause its recollection as actually having been carried out.     

Asymmetric attributions for compliance: Reward vs punishment

It was proposed that people attribute an individual's behavior more to internal factors when that individual's actions are influenced by reward than when those actions are influenced by punishment. Previous research has failed to control for the power of reward versus punishment which, in effect, creates a confounding of behavioral base rates (consensus) with the reward-punishment manipulation. The current research created reward and punishment contingencies that were equal in their base rates for producing a compliant response. In Experiment 1, subjects (n = 63) who produced the base-rate data also made attributions regarding a compliant target person. The results supported the reward-punishment attributional asymmetry hypothesis in that the target person was held more responsible for his actions in the reward than in the punishment conditions. A second experiment (n = 72) provided some attributors with information regarding base rates for compliance and measured perceived base rates for compliance. Knowledge of the base rates for compliance eliminated the reward-punishment attributional asymmetry phenomenon. Subjects not provided with such knowledge erroneously assumed different base rates for reward and punishment and maintained the perception of reward-punishment attributional asymmetry. Using subjects' estimates of base rate for compliance as a covariate eliminated the attributional asymmetry effect. It is suggested that erroneous base-rate assumptions mediate the attributional asymmetry phenomenon.     

The effects of expectation and feedback on speech to foreigners

The effects of speaker expectation of listener competence and the feedback indicative of the listener's comprehension were compared on their power to elicit simplifed speech. The experiment used 2×2 design and a “foreigner” accomplice as a listener in an interview situation. Expectation was varied by having the accomplice introduce herself using either highly accented, dysfluent English or slightly accented, fluent English. The verbal feedback was varied by having the accomplice signal comprehension success (yeah, Ok, or nods) or comprehension failure (what? huh? or frowns and quizzical looks). Forty adult subjects spoke to the accomplice in one of the four conditions. The interviews were taped, transcribed, and scored for measures of mean length of utterance (MLU), false starts/dysfluencies, repetitions/rephrasals, and questions. Analyses revealed that the subjects used shorter MLUs, more repetitions/rephrasals, and more questions when the accomplice signaled comprehension difficulty. When the subjects expected the listener to be linguistically incompetent, they tended to repeat and rephrase more often than when they expected listener competence. It was clear that regardless of the speaker's initial expectation of the listener's linguistic competence, verbal feedback during conversation will elicit simplified speech.     

Effect of context on perception of emotion among psychiatric patients

The purpose of this research was to examine the extent to which verbal statements of context influence psychiatric patients' perception of photographs of emotion (fear, anger, sadness, and happiness). The major findings showed that, when photographs were paired congruently with context statements, there were significant changes in agreement among subjects on two of the four emotion stimuli. There was significantly less agreement on the meaning of facial expressions when the stimuli for fear, anger, and happiness were accompanied by incongruent verbal statements than when they were viewed alone. These data appear to have implications for practitioners working with this population.     

Controllability and Stability in the Self-Serving Attributions of Sport Spectators

Abstract

Spectators often attribute their athletic team's victories to internal causes and its losses to external causes (e.g., A. H. Hastorf & H. Cantril, 1954; R. R. Lau, 1984; L. Mann, 1974). This self-serving attributional pattern is most common among fans with a strong psychological attachment to their team (D. L. Wann & T. J. Dolan, 1994). The authors examined the relationships among identification, game outcome, and controllable and stable attributions. Their 1st hypothesis was that high-identification fans after a victory, compared with high-identification fans after a loss and low-identification fans after either outcome, would be more likely to exhibit self-serving attributional patterns by attributing their team's successes to controllable and stable causes. Their 2nd hypothesis was that high-identification fans would be more likely than low-identification fans to attribute their team's successes to internal causes and its failures to external causes. U.S. college students high and low in identification first watched their university's men's basketball team win or lose a contest and then completed measures of identification and attribution. The results confirmed the hypotheses.     

Physical aggression: Effects of ethnicity of target and directionality of aggression

Physical aggression of members of a powerful majority ethnic group against an opponent either from a powerless and discriminated against minority or from their own group was tested as a function of aggression directionality and aggressor's attitudes. It was hypothesized that under bidirectional aggression where the opponent could aggress as well, members of the powerful majority group would adjust their aggressive responses to that of their opponent's regardless of his ethnic origin and regardless of aggressor's attitudes. However. under unidirectional aggression where the opponent was powerless, it was expected that those subjects who held unfavourable attitudes toward members of the minority group would be more aggressive against an opponent of that group than against an opponent of his own ethnic group. Subjects who had neutral attitudes would be equally aggressive toward all opponents. Ninety-six 11th grade vocational high school male students of Western origin, were given the opportunity to administer electric shocks to an opponent who was either of Western or Oriental origin in a competitive situation, Subjects were selected according to their attitudes toward Oriental Jews. Half expressed negative attitudes, the other half neutral attitudes. Half of the subjects expected their opponent to reciprocate shocks, the others did not. Contrary to expectations it was found that the attitudes of subjects of Western origin towards Orientals did not effect their aggressive behaviour. When aggression could not be reciprocated, all subjects were more aggressive toward an opponent of Oriental than of Western origin. The findings showed that when aggression was bidirectional, all subjects adjusted their aggressive behaviour, to their opponents'. However, they were less aggressive towards an opponent of Oriental than of Western origin.