The Application of Social Role Theory to the Study of Gender in Politics

Social role theory provides a framework to help understand the complexity of gender in the political sphere. We demonstrate how SRT both helps to explain extant research findings and to generate future research that will help explain the complicated ways in which gender shapes U.S. politics. This article considers two broad categories of behavior: the gendered opinions and engagement of the citizenry and the gendered evaluations of political actors by elites and voters. Within each category, we propose moving beyond the male‐female binary and consider the effects of gender in conjunction with other key political identities, such as race, ethnicity, age, as well as examining the effects of (dis)ability, and class. As well, our work demonstrates how masculinity encompasses the U.S. political system and serves as a backdrop in front of which gender roles shape political behavior, and role incongruity can lead to prejudice. This project lays the groundwork for future work to apply theories from psychology to a gendered analysis of U.S. politics. Through a better understanding of sex, gender, and their combined effects with race and other intersectional identities, we contribute to a broader goal of creating a more inclusive U.S. politics.     

Predicting the Personal Appeal of Marketing Images Using Computational Methods

Images play a central role in digital marketing. They attract attention, trigger emotions, and shape consumers’ first impressions of products and brands. We propose that the shift from one‐to‐many mass communication to highly personalized one‐to‐one communication requires an understanding of image appeal at a personal level. Instead of asking “How appealing is this image?” we ask “How appealing is this image to this particular consumer?” Using the well‐established five‐factor model of personality, we apply machine learning algorithms to predict an image's personality appeal—the personality of consumers to which the image appeals most—from a set of 89 automatically extracted image features (Study 1). We subsequently apply the same algorithm on new images to predict consequential outcomes from the fit between consumer and image personality. We show that image‐person fit adds incremental predictive power over the images’ general appeal when predicting (a) consumers’ liking of new images (Study 2) and (b) consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions (Study 3).     

Procedural justice and intragroup status: Knowing where we stand in a group enhances reactions to procedures

The current research investigates the role of relative intragroup status as a moderator of people’s reactions to procedural justice. Based on a review of the procedural justice literature, the authors argue that information about intragroup status influences people’s reactions to variations in procedural justice. In correspondence with predictions, two experiments show that reactions of people who have been informed about their intragroup status position (either low, average, or high) are influenced more strongly by voice as opposed to no-voice procedures than people who are not informed about their intragroup status. It is concluded that knowing where we stand in a group enhances reactions to procedural justice.     

Fairness heuristic theory is an empirical framework: a reply to Arnadóttir

In this article on fairness heuristic theory, we point out some important flaws in Arnadóttir's (2002) claim that fairness heuristic theory is "not empirical," by which Arnadóttir meant that theory's predictions are knowable a priori, and are not contingent upon circumstances. To this end, we demonstrate that empirically testing effects predicted by fairness heuristic theory was and is important because this showed that the theory's propositions are not necessarily knowable a priori and are contingent upon circumstances. This implies that, according to Arnadóttir's definition, fairness heuristic theory clearly is an empirical framework. It would have been helpful if Arnadóttir had studied the fairness literature more thoroughly (as this would have easily revealed fairness heuristic theory to be not knowable a priori and to be contingent upon circumstances) and also if she had pointed out which of our studies fail to follow her line of reasoning. Our reply was written not as an attempt to defend fairness heuristic theory as we applaud, indeed are honored by, attempts to scrutinize our work in progress. Our only aim here was to point at some important flaws in the Arnadóttir article, because we think these will hamper rather than advance the science of psychology of justice.     

The inaction effect in the psychology of regret

Previous research showed that decisions to act (i.e., actions) produce more regret than decisions not to act (i.e., inactions). This previous research focused on decisions made in isolation and ignored that decisions are often made in response to earlier outcomes. The authors show in 4 experiments that these prior outcomes may promote action and hence make inaction more abnormal. They manipulated information about a prior outcome. As hypothesized, when prior outcomes were positive or absent, people attributed more regret to action than to inaction. However, as predicted and counter to previous research, following negative prior outcomes, more regret was attributed to inaction, a finding that the authors label the inaction effect. Experiment 4, showing differential effects for regret and disappointment, demonstrates the need for emotion-specific predictions.     

Procedural justice and status: status salience as antecedent of procedural fairness effects

The current article explores status as an antecedent of procedural fairness effects (the findings that perceived procedural fairness affects people's reactions, e.g., their relational judgments). On the basis of the literature, the authors proposed that salience of the general concept of status leads people to be more attentive to procedural fairness information and that, as a consequence, stronger procedural fairness effects should be found. In correspondence with this hypothesis, Experiment 1 showed stronger procedural fairness effects on people's relational treatment evaluations in a status salient condition compared with a control condition. Experiment 2 replicated this effect and, in further correspondence with the hypothesis, showed that status salience led to increased cognitive accessibility of fairness concerns. Implications for the psychology of procedural justice are discussed.     

A silent antipode: The making and breaking of psychoanalyst Wilhelm Stekel

Wilhelm Stekel, one of Freud's earliest followers , was expelled from the psychoanalytic movement in 1912 ostensibly because he did not know how to behave himself. Although he remained active as a psychoanalyst, his post-1912 work was mostly neglected, and consequently his historic import is seriously undervalued. The author reviews recent literature, reexamines the Freud-Stekel break, and focuses on Stekel's role as silent antipode. Freud's reference to an unnamed individual in his 1907 Gradiva paper (S. Freud, 1907/1959b) - commonly believed to be Jung - is now identified as Stekel. This not - unimportant correction of the historical record begins the exploration of a hitherto-undocumented antagonistic dialogue between Stekel and Freud.     

Personality characteristics of ADHD adults assessed with the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II: evidence of four distinct subtypes

This study compared the personality characteristics of 104 adults diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Personality features were assessed with the MCMI-II (Millon, 1987). Participants were divided into 4 groups based on the presence of persisting oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) or other comorbid diagnoses (ADHD only, ADHD-comorbid, ADHD-ODD, ADHD-ODD-comorbid). Significant differences between these groups were present for 9 of the 13 MCMI-II personality scales, resulting in 4 modal personality styles. ADHD-only adults evidenced mild histrionic traits, whereas the ADHD-comorbid group was more often avoidant and dependent in personality style. ADHD-ODD adults showed histrionic, narcissistic, aggressive-sadistic, and negativistic traits whereas the ADHD-ODD-comorbid group had a combination of avoidant, narcissistic, antisocial, aggressive-sadistic, negativistic, and self-defeating personality features. Implications for treatment are discussed.     

A test of psychotherapists' and nontherapists' recognition of correct and incorrect process in managing client resistance

Objective

Psychotherapist management of client resistance (i.e., opposition to change or the therapy process) has a significant impact on therapy outcomes. This study aimed at assessing psychotherapists' and nontherapists' abilities to recognise empirically supported correct and erroneous therapist responses to client resistance.

Method

Seventy-eight therapists and 111 nontherapists completed a rapidly administered novel skills test, Therapist Errors in Resistance Management (TERM), assessing recognition of correct and erroneous resistance management.

Results

Participants were, on average, less than half as accurate at recognising therapist errors (recognised below chance levels) compared with correct therapist responses to resistance (recognised above chance levels). Therapists outperformed nontherapists in accurate recognition of therapist responding. However, among the therapist group, greater clinical experience did not predict superior recognition of therapist errors.

Conclusion

These results indicate that therapists and nontherapists alike may have difficulty detecting erroneous therapist responses to resistance, tending to mistake empirically contraindicated directive responses for correct responding. This may reflect the difficult and unintuitive nature of correct resistance responding and may suggest a need for increased training in process acuity and resistance management in therapist education.     

Predictors of Antisocial and Prosocial Behaviour of Bystanders in Workplace Mobbing

When will bystanders of workplace mobbing show antisocial or prosocial behaviour toward the victim? Results of a 2 × 2 vignette study (N = 177) suggest that high perceived responsibility of the victim for the onset of the mobbing evokes anger and consequently antisocial bystander behaviour, whereas low perceived responsibility generates sympathy and consequently prosocial bystander behaviour. The results further indicate that bystanders will show more antisocial behaviour and less prosocial behaviour toward the victim when they anticipate stigma by association. The implications of these results for interventions seeking to influence bystanders' behaviour in the context of workplace mobbing and for further research on this bystander behaviour are discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.