The Role of a Narrative's Emotional Flow in Promoting Persuasive Outcomes

The study of narrative persuasion has increased dramatically in the past decade. Whereas much of this research focuses on story and character involvement, the role of emotion—and emotional flow specifically—has been understudied. In this article, we explore the multiple ways that the desire for and the experience of emotional shifts may promote the persuasive influence of narratives. First, we propose that the desire for an emotional shift (e.g., mood management) can guide message selection. Then, the emotional flow, or the series of emotional shifts in response to the unfolding story, may promote and sustain continued engagement with the narrative world. As such, influence of the narrative is likely enhanced. We then argue that the heightened state of narrative engagement and its associated emotional states have implications for post-message attitudes, both short-term attitude change as well as over-time change via emotion-driven topic involvement and social sharing. A research agenda for greater integration of emotion into narrative research is proposed.     

‘Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is!’: Effects of Streaks on Confidence and Betting in a Binary Choice Task

Human choice under uncertainty is influenced by erroneous beliefs about randomness. In simple binary choice tasks, such as red/black predictions in roulette, long outcome runs (e.g. red, red, red) typically increase the tendency to predict the other outcome (i.e. black), an effect labeled the “gambler's fallacy.” In these settings, participants may also attend to streaks in their predictive performance. Winning and losing streaks are thought to affect decision confidence, although prior work indicates conflicting directions. Over three laboratory experiments involving red/black predictions in a sequential roulette task, we sought to identify the effects of outcome runs and winning/losing streaks upon color predictions, decision confidence and betting behavior. Experiments 1 (n = 40) and 3 (n = 40) obtained trial‐by‐trial confidence ratings, with a win/no win payoff and a no loss/loss payoff, respectively. Experiment 2 (n = 39) obtained a trial‐by‐trial bet amount on an equivalent scale. In each experiment, the gambler's fallacy was observed on choice behavior after color runs and, in experiment 2, on betting behavior after color runs. Feedback streaks exerted no reliable influence on confidence ratings, in either payoff condition. Betting behavior, on the other hand, increased as a function of losing streaks. The increase in betting on losing streaks is interpreted as a manifestation of loss chasing; these data help clarify the psychological mechanisms underlying loss chasing and caution against the use of betting measures (“post‐decision wagering”) as a straightforward index of decision confidence. © 2014 The Authors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.     

Towards a Conflict Theory of Recognition: On the Constitution of Relations of Recognition in Conflict

In this paper, we develop an understanding of recognition in terms of individuals’ capacity for conflict. Our goal is to overcome various shortcomings that can be found in both the positive and negative conceptions of recognition. We start by analyzing paradigmatic instances of such conceptions—namely, those put forward by Axel Honneth and Judith Butler. We do so in order to show how both positions are inadequate in their elaborations of recognition in an analogous way: Both fail to make intelligible the fundamental nexus between relations of recognition and individuals’ capacity for conflict. We then move on to reconsider aspects of Hegel's view of recognition—ones that, from our viewpoint, have been unjustly neglected in the debate about recognition: his focus on the constitution of relations of recognition in conflict and on the status of being an author of acts of recognition. On this basis, we then spell out in a more systematic way what we take to be a more convincing conception of recognition. This puts us in the position to gesture at some consequences of this conception in practical contexts, above all with regard to the justification, role and structure of political institutions..     

Choosing housemates and justifying age,gender, and ethnic discrimination

This study examines the explanations and justifications offered by those engaged in selecting housemates. The rationale for the research follows the recent housing demographic, whereby shared living has become increasingly popular among young adults in Western countries. This study sought to address the surprising lacuna in the extant research through the application of discursive psychology to understanding prejudice and discrimination within the context of contemporary social and political sanctions against openly discussing prejudice. Data were drawn from interviews with young New Zealanders aged from early twenties to early thirties who were experienced with house sharing. Detailed results are presented involving discrimination based on age, gender, and ethnicity. The study found that rigid narrow preferences were stated with respect to age, gender was less important, and ethnicity was talked about cautiously, especially if there was the possibility of significant cultural differences or language barriers.