The Influence of Feedback and Expert Status in Knowledge Sharing Dilemmas

Groups and organisations set cooperative goals for their members, yet in reality some team members contribute more than others to these goals. Experts, in particular, face a social dilemma: from the group's perspective they should share their knowledge, whereas individually they are better off not sharing, because acquiring knowledge is costly and they would give up a competitive advantage. Two experiments (N₁ = 96, N₂ = 192) tested the hypothesis, derived from indirect reciprocity theory, that experts contribute more if their status is being recognised. Expert status was manipulated under different performance feedback conditions and the impact on people's contributions in two different knowledge sharing tasks was analysed. In both studies, experts contributed more when feedback was individualised and public, ensuring both individual status rewards and public recognition. In contrast, novices contributed more when performance feedback was collective, regardless of whether it was public or private feedback. Novices did not have to fear negative performance evaluations under group feedback and could gain in social status as members of a successful group. Social value orientation moderated expert contributions in Study 2, with proself‐oriented experts being particularly susceptible to reputation gains. The studies contribute to the neglected aspect of motivation in knowledge sharing dilemmas where collective and individual interests are not necessarily aligned.     

Dysfunctional Attitudes as a Mediator in the Association Between Problematic Internet Use and Depression,Anxiety, and Stress

Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy - The aim of this study was to describe the mediating role of dysfunctional attitudes in the association between problematic internet...     

A ground completely overgrown: Heidegger,Kant and the problem of metaphysics

ABSTRACT

While we endorse Heidegger’s effort to reclaim Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason as a work concerned with the possibility of metaphysics, we hold, first, that his reading is less original than is often assumed and, second, that it unduly marginalizes the critical impetus of Kant’s philosophy. This article seeks to shed new light on Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics and related texts by relating Heidegger’s interpretation of Kant to, on the one hand, the epistemological approach represented by Cohen’s Kant’s Theory of Experience and, on the other, the metaphysical readings put forward by Heimsoeth, Wundt and others in the 1920s. On this basis, we argue that Heidegger’s interpretation of Kant remains indebted to the methodological distinction between ground and grounded that informed Cohen’s reading and was transferred to the problem of metaphysics by Wundt. Even if Heidegger resists a ‘foundationalist’ mode of this distinction, we argue that his focus on the notions of ground and grounding does not allow him to account for Kant’s critique of the metaphysical tradition.     

The Gendered Brain: Implications of Exposure to Neuroscience Research for Gender Essentialist Beliefs

Sex Roles - How fundamentally different do people generally think men and women are? Gender essentialism refers to beliefs that women and men have distinct, innate, and fixed biological essences...     

The face of wrath: The role of features and configurations in conveying social threat

We examined the role of single features and feature configurations in the effect of schematic faces on rated threat. A total of 101 medical students rated their emotional impression of schematic facial stimuli using semantic differential scales (Activity, Negative Valence, and Potency). In different parts of the experiment, the ratings concerned single features, eyebrow‐mouth configurations, or complete faces. Although eyebrows emerged as the overall most important feature, the effect of features was modulated by configuration. Simple configurations of eyebrows and mouth appeared to convey threat and nonthreat in a way highly similar to that of complete faces. In most cases, the configurations of eyebrows and mouth could significantly predict the effect of the complete faces.     

Gender and the Cultural Construction of Good and Bad Suicides

Some cultures distinguish two or more types of suicide which are evaluated differently. The more acceptable or esteemed ones are often not equally accessible to everyone within the same society. This article focuses on gender differences in the cultural construction of suicide options, and on the exclusion of women from superior options. The analysis is based on ethnographic and historical data from Native Americans of the Great Plains, Muslim societies in Southeast Asia, and tribal societies in the Amazon area of South America.