Why do people self-harm?

The accuracy of perceptions about self-harm that are presented in the psychological and psychiatric literature was assessed with a sample of self-harmers. A list of 20 statements containing ten myths and ten accurate statements about self-harm behaviour was incorporated into an internet-based questionnaire. Respondents (n?=?243) rated their extent of agreement with each statement. Factor analysis confirmed the a priori classification of statements as being accurate. Only one item, regarding the relationship of self-harm to previous sexual abuse, did not confirm a priori classification; this statement was considered by self-harmers to be an accurate perception of self-harm. It was concluded that this questionnaire could be a useful aid for group-work training with professionals who are involved in working with people who engage in self-harm.     

Can ingroup affirmation relieve outgroup derogation?

Intergroup hostilities are an important social concern in multicultural societies and the global community. Individuals with dispositionally high Personal Need for Structure (PNS) are particularly inclined toward outgroup derogation [Schaller, M., Boyd, C., Yohannes, J., O’Brien, M. (1995). The prejudiced personality revisited: Personal need for structure and formation of erroneous group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 544-555]. The present research demonstrates that ingroup affirmation can eliminate high PNS individuals’ tendency toward outgroup derogation. Spontaneous (Study 1) and experimentally manipulated affirmations (Study 2) of consensual, positive ingroups eliminated the high PNS tendency to derogate outgroup targets. Study 3 experimentally manipulated the two key elements that are presumably bolstered by ingroup affirmations—self-certainty and self-worth—independent of the group context. The high PNS tendency to derogate outgroups was relieved only in the combined certainty and worth affirmation condition, just as it had been relieved in Study 2 by the ingroup affirmation. Results suggest a paradoxical strategy for relieving derogation of outgroups by affirming ingroups.     

Can imagined intergroup contact change (internal) dialogues on differences between ingroup and outgroup?

Several positive functions have been ascribed to integrative internal dialogues (IDs), which are based on mutual openness to a partner's viewpoint and a readiness to consider his/her arguments in order to potentially modify one's own stance. As the technique of imagined intergroup contact (IIC) favorably influences attitudes towards outgroup members, it was hypothesized that IIC would have a beneficial impact on IDs with an outgroup member when the dialogue is focused on differences between ingroup and outgroup. In the experiment, 151 people (80 women) participated. It revealed that after IIC, both the dialogue author's confrontational attitude and the interlocutor's integrative attitude decreased. Thus, IIC made participants less inclined to gain an advantage over their imagined outgroup interlocutors and more inclined to give them freedom in IDs. However, the effect was significant only when the author's involvement in ID was high or medium.     

Why do people need self-esteem? A theoretical and empirical review

Terror management theory (TMT; J. Greenberg, T. Pyszczynski, & S. Solomon, 1986) posits that people are motivated to pursue positive self-evaluations because self-esteem provides a buffer against the omnipresent potential for anxiety engendered by the uniquely human awareness of mortality. Empirical evidence relevant to the theory is reviewed showing that high levels of self-esteem reduce anxiety and anxiety-related defensive behavior, reminders of one's mortality increase self-esteem striving and defense of self-esteem against threats in a variety of domains, high levels of self-esteem eliminate the effect of reminders of mortality on both self-esteem striving and the accessibility of death-related thoughts, and convincing people of the existence of an afterlife eliminates the effect of mortality salience on self-esteem striving. TMT is compared with other explanations for why people need self-esteem, and a critique of the most prominent of these, sociometer theory, is provided.     

Why do people behave immorally when drunk?

Alcohol intoxication is a major source of antisocial behavior in our society, strongly implicated in various forms of interpersonal aggression. Yet, moral philosophers have paid surprisingly little attention to the literature on alcohol and its effects. In part, this is because philosophers who have adopted a more empirically informed approach to moral psychology have gravitated toward moral sentimentalism, while the literature on alcohol intoxication fits very poorly with the sentimentalist account. Most contemporary research on the psychological effects of alcohol is focused upon variants of the “disinhibition” theory, which suggests that alcohol does not provoke any specific affect, it merely weakens executive control. This research, we argue, lends support to a deontic moral psychology, which identifies our ability to suppress behavioral impulses as a central feature of moral agency.     

Why do people remain in abusive relationships?

Increasingly ministers and pastoral counselors are being consulted by people who are in abusive relationships. Consequently, it is important for all ministers and pastoral counselors to develop both an intellectual and an emotional appreciation for the complexities involved in remaining in, or leaving, abusive relationships. This article discusses six basic reasons why people choose to remain in abusive relationships, and concludes with three pastoral implications for ministers who counsel people in such relationships.     

Why do people rideshare? An experimental study

Enabled by mobile technologies and fueled by the economic downturn, ridesharing has emerged in recent years as a private transportation facet of the shared economy. Our study investigates the motives for participation in situated ridesharing. We propose a theoretical model that includes economic benefits, time benefits, transportation anxiety, trust, and reciprocity either as direct antecedents of ridesharing participation intention, or mediated through attitude towards ridesharing. We conduct a scenario-based survey, with 300 participants. Our findings indicate that, in situations where transportation anxiety is high (e.g. construction on the road), if people can trust the ridesharing service providers and participants, in the presence of economic and time benefits, they will have a strong intention to participate in ridesharing.     

Why do people perform thrilling activities? A study based on reversal theory

The present study was aimed at testing the assumption based on reversal theory, according to which people perform frightening activities to induce high anxiety, which in turn can give rise to pleasant excitement, provided that a metamotivational reversal occurs. The Tension and Effort Stress Inventory was administered to 46 individuals just before and just after a frightening ride on a cable (Fantasticable). A 30-subject control group was given the same inventory in a safe context, with a 2-min. rest between the two periods of completion. Ratings of Tension Stress, Anxiety, and overall Unpleasant Emotions were significantly decreased after the ride for the Fantasticable group. Conversely, significant increases in Preferred Arousal, Excitement, Transactional Emotions, and overall Pleasant Emotions were found after the ride. Also, pre-activity anxiety correlated with postactivity excitement (r = .79) for the Fantasticable group only. This supports the reversal theory contention about how one's involvement in arousal-seeking leisure may improve one's emotional state. No time effect was noted in the ratings for the control group, suggesting an association of participation in a frightening activity and emotional enhancement.     

Can we explain why some people do and some people do not act on their intentions?

Behavioural theorists have identified attitudes, perceived norms and self-efficacy as the important determinants of people's intentions to engage in a given behaviour. Because intentions predict behaviour, these same variables also account for a considerable amount of the variation in behaviour. Nevertheless, there is often a substantial proportion of the population who do not act on their intentions. While a recently proposed integrative theory of behaviour suggests that these 'failures' are due either to a lack of skills and/or to the presence of environmental constraints, it has also been argued that the determinants of intention may have a direct, as well as in indirect, effect on behaviour. This paper uses data from a longitudinal study (Project RESPECT) to explore the extent to which attitudes, perceived norms and self-efficacy explain why some people do and others do not act on their intentions to engage in a health protective behaviour. Although the data provide further evidence that these three variables account for a significant proportion of the variance in intentions (and behaviour), they perform poorly when predicting behaviour for persons with pre-existing high intentions. It may be reasonable to ask whether a 'new' theory is needed to explain why some people do, and some people do not, act on their intentions.     

Why do young people become Jihadists? A theoretical account on radical identity development

Identity status theory and Lofland and Starks' (1965, Becoming a world-saver: A theory of conversion to a deviant perspective, American Sociological Review, 30, 862–875) model of religious conversion were used to explain why young people become jihad fighters. Both theories maintain that young people with unclear commitments are vulnerable for radical identity change. A religious problem-solving perspective, along with a self-definition as religious seeker, steers this potential identity change into the direction of religious conversion. This may lead young Muslims or young people with an uncertain identity and a religious orientation to move closer to radical Islam and jihad. Also, research from both traditions found that absence of positive affective bonds with relevant others go together with unstable identity. A new group with a clear defined mission may therefore be able to solve their problems in two ways: it offers warm interpersonal bonds, as well as potential new personal goals and commitments. Groups of jihadists are perfectly fit to serve this twofold purpose.     

How context-independent is the outgroup homogeneity effect? A response to Bartsch and Judd

Bartsch and Judd (1993) argue that outgroup homogeneity effects occur independently of any tendency for members of minority groups to see their ingroup as more homogeneous than the majority outgroup. This argument is based on evidence of an underlying outgroup homogeneity effect in a study which purports to unconfound the roles of judged group size and ingroup–outgroup judgement by presenting subjects first with a small or large ingroup (or outgroup) and then a small comparison outgroup (or ingroup). However, from the perspective of self-categorization theory (SCT), such a procedure actually introduces a confound as SCT predicts that when an ingroup is judged first it should be perceived as relatively heterogeneous due to the intragroup nature of this judgemental context. Close examination of Bartsch and Judd's data bears this point out: the tendency to see the ingroup as less homogeneous than the outgroup when the ingroup was judged first was extinguished when the ingroup was judged second even when the judged groups were of equal size. Consistent with SCT, this re-analysis suggests that manifestations of outgroup homogeneity are not independent of contextual factors which determine the relative appropriateness of category-based perception of ingroup and outgroup.     

Impact of gendered ingroup/outgroup ostracism on women’s academic performances

This study investigated the impact of ostracism (vs. inclusion) for women in a same-sex vs. opposite-sex group on their cognitive performances. Female participants played Cyberball with other women or men and were either included or excluded. Participants then had to engage in the performance tasks. Results showed that women’s performance was decreased by ostracism in a math task (but not a verbal task) yet only in the same-sex condition. Furthermore, this result was obtained only among participants who did the numeric task first. No effect was observed in the verbal task. Two replications of the initial study were conducted using the math task. The result of the first study has been replicated one time. A meta-analysis revealed a small effect of ostracism on performance in the ingroup condition, whereas the effect seems to be non-existent in the outgroup condition. Results are discussed and future perspectives are proposed.     

Why do people like bicycling? Modeling affect toward bicycling

Studies show that the way an individual feels about bicycling – the degree to which they like bicycling – is an important predictor of whether or not they bicycle. But why do some people like bicycling and others don’t? This study explores factors that may influence an individual’s liking of bicycling, or more formally, their bicycling affect. We analyze a rich dataset from a cross-sectional survey of residents of six small U.S. cities using an ordered logit model. Results show that bicycling behavior has the strongest association with liking bicycling, with bicycling constraints following as the second most important factor. Individual cognitions, including perceptions and normative beliefs, also play important roles in predicting bicycling affect. Individual measures of the physical environment do not correlate with liking of bicycling, but the perception that biking to various destinations is safe does. Social environment factors influence liking of bicycling as well. Longitudinal research is needed to better understand the reciprocal relationship between bicycling affect and bicycling behavior as well as the effect over time of factors such as the physical environment. Nevertheless, this study offers an initial understanding of the potential determinants of bicycling affect that provides a starting point for further research as well as direction for the development of policies for getting more people on bicycles.     

Why do people change in therapy? A preliminary study

Why do people change in therapy? A preliminary study. This work represents the beginning of a new way to study the processes that can explain the therapeutic change. The method used is the observation and analysis of therapeutic sessions directly recorded and developed inside a behavioural approach. The category system tries to carry out a functional analysis of the therapist-client interaction which enables the identification of learning processes that work in clinical setting and explain success in therapy. Outcomes are provisional but show the utility of this initial trend of investigation to the comprehension of clinical phenomenon. Conclusions also emphasize the importance of associative learning processes on the therapeutic change.     

Comparing to ingroup and outgroup members: Do we assimilate,contrast, or neither?

Previous work studying social comparisons suggests that people are likely to assimilate to ingroup members (e.g. Ledgerwood & Chaiken, 2007) but can also contrast from ingroup members if outgroup members are present (Blanton, Miller, & Dye, 2002). The present research built upon these findings by including a no-comparison control group to test for true contrast and assimilation effects. Across two studies, women primed with a gender-math stereotype received false feedback about their performance on a math task; and in some conditions, they learned of the performance of ostensible male and/or female co-participants. Relative to a no-comparison control, we did not see evidence of ingroup assimilation in either study. However, in both studies, we found that participants were likely to contrast their self-evaluations away from downward targets, regardless of group membership. This suggests that self-enhancement motivations may be stronger than the drive for ingroup assimilation.     

Why do people give? The role of identity in giving

Why do people give to others? One principal driver involves one's identity: who one is and how they view themselves. The degree to which identities are malleable, involve a readiness to act, and help make sense of the world have significant implications determining whether and how much people give. Drawing on the Identity-Based Motivation model (IBM; Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: Implications for action-readiness, procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19.), we provide a tripartite framework to help advance the research on the psychology of giving.     

How do people respond to health news? The role of personality traits

When a patient receives a health diagnosis, their response (e.g. changes in behaviour, seeking support) can have significant consequences for long-term health and well-being. Characteristics of health news are known to influence these responses, but personality traits have been omitted from this line of research. The current study examines the role of personality traits in predicting response to health news. Participants (N = 298) read scenarios in which they received health news that was manipulated to vary in severity, controllability and likelihood of outcomes. Participants then rated how likely they were to engage in a number of response behaviours. We examined the main effects and interaction of situational manipulations and personality traits on ratings of these behaviours. Both situations and personality traits influenced behavioural responses to health events. In particular, conscientiousness predicted taking action and seeking social support. Neuroticism predicted both maladaptive and adaptive behavioural responses, providing support for the ‘healthy neurotic’ hypothesis. Moreover, personality traits predicted best in weak (unlikely, controllable) situations. Both personality traits and situational characteristics contribute to behavioural responses to health news.     

Should I invite them? Bystanders' inclusivity judgements towards outgroup victims and ingroup bullies in intergroup bullying

This study examined bystanders' judgements of bullying and their inclusivity towards refugee victims and ingroup bully peers. Participants included 587 Turkish adolescents (M_age = 13.14, SD = 1.60) who were presented with two stories: intergroup (Syrian refugee victim) and intragroup (Turkish victim) bullying. They indicated acceptability of bullying, retaliation, and how likely they would be to include victims and bullies in different social contexts. Empathy, prejudice, desired social distance, and peer norms towards Syrian refugees were examined as predictors. Adolescents in schools with a higher number of Syrian peers were more likely to expect they would include the Syrian victim than adolescents in schools with a lower number of Syrian peers. Further, adolescents with higher empathy were more likely to include the Syrian victim while adolescents with higher prejudice and desired social distance were less likely to include the Syrian victim. The results highlight the importance of attending to bystanders' future interactions with victims and bullies, as bystanders have the opportunity to challenge injustice by promoting inclusive school climates in diverse societies. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement .