On the benign qualities of behavioral disinhibition: because of the prosocial nature of people, behavioral disinhibition can weaken pleasure with getting more than you deserve

This article focuses on social situations in which people are surprised about what is happening and inhibited about how to respond to the situation at hand. We study these situations by examining a classic topic in social psychology: how people respond to receiving better outcomes than are deserved. In these situations, the actions of an authority or a coworker push in the direction of accepting and enjoying the unfair outcome, whereas personal values for most people push in the direction of rejecting or being displeased with the outcome. This conflict may inhibit people's response to the advantageous but unfair outcomes. If people are indeed inhibited about how to respond to these kinds of outcomes, then lowering behavioral inhibition by reminding people of having acted in the past without inhibitions (in a manner that is unrelated to the outcomes participants subsequently receive) should affect reactions to the outcomes. Specifically, we hypothesize that because many people are prosocial and want to adhere to principles of fairness, reminders of behavioral disinhibition will lead to less pleasure with the unfairly obtained outcomes. The results of 8 experiments (conducted both inside and outside the psychology laboratory) revealed evidence for this benign disinhibition effect on various reactions to outcomes that are better than deserved. In further accordance with our line of reasoning, the effect is particularly pronounced among those who adhere to a prosocial orientation or who have adopted a prosocial mindset and is not observed among those with proself orientations or mindsets.     

Pink Noise in Language Production: A Nonlinear Approach to the Multilingual Lexicon

Most theories of (second) language processing are based on component-dominant models that assume linear relationships between linguistic factors affecting language production and language comprehension. In this contribution we argue that in the wake of current nonlinear approaches to cognition, language processing must be seen in terms of interaction-dominant dynamics manifested in 1/f scaling relations. Our study showed that increased experience in second language use leads to scaling relations that more and more tend toward pink noise. Moreover, our data tentatively show that intensive immersion in a second-language context leads to steeper spectral slopes in response time series of that same language. These findings demonstrate the significant contribution of nonlinear analyses to the study of real-time language processing in multilinguals.     

on the clinical validity of the maslach burnout inventory and the burnout measure

Abstract

Current knowledge about burnout suffers from a healthy worker bias since only working - and thus relatively healthy - employees have been investigated. The main objective of this study is to examine - for the first time among employees who sought psychological treatment - the validity of the two most widely used burnout instruments; the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and the Burnout Measure (BM). Two groups were distinguished: a “burned out” group (n = 71) that suffers from work-related neurasthenia (according to ICD-10 criteria), and a “non-burned out” group (n = 68). Results show that: (1) the validity of the three-factor structure of the MBI and the BM is confirmed; (2) burnout can partly be differentiated from other mental syndromes (e.g., anxiety and depression); and (3) two MBI-scales (Emotional Exhaustion and Depersonalization) and one BM-scale (Exhaustion) are able to discriminate between burned out and non-burned out employees. The practical implications of these results are discussed.     

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.     

Cognitive Response Repertoires to Child Noncompliance by Mothers of Aggressive Boys

Cognitive response repertoires to videotaped child noncompliance episodes were examined in mothers of aggressive (MAs) and nonaggressive 4–6-year-old boys. Mothers provided open-ended solutions to three subtypes of child noncompliance under conditions of time pressure, or after they waited for 15 s to consider alternatives. Solutions were coded as assistance/facilitation, coercion, deference, or explanation/clarification. Compared with controls, MAs offered fewer explanation/clarification responses, more coercive responses, and fewer unique solutions during pressured responding. Two to 6 weeks later, mothers were videotaped while participating with their sons in a challenging block-building task. Maternal responses to the vignettes predicted conflict escalation during block building, even after rates of concurrent and past child noncompliance were partialled out. Implications for parent-training models are considered.     

Exposure and response prevention in the natural environment: A comparison with obsessive-compulsive patients

Thirteen obsessive-compulsive clients were treated with different methods of response prevention. Four experimental conditions were obtained through a 2 × 2 factorial design, in which the two main variables were varied: (1) gradual treatment vs flooding; and (2) modeling vs no-modeling. Clients were treated at their homes, three times weekly. Each session lasted 2 hr. Results at the post-test revealed, that modeling was superior to no-modeling (p < 0.05) on avoidance-other compulsions, therapist-rating only. On anxiety-main compulsions, clients rating the gradual method of treatment had been superior to flooding (p < 0.05). No other significant differences were found.     

Hindsight bias and outcome bias in judging directors’ liability and the role of free will beliefs

Following a corporate disaster such as bankruptcy, people in general and damaged parties, in particular, want to know what happened and whether the company's directors are to blame. The accurate assessment of directors’ liability can be jeopardized by having to judge in hindsight with full knowledge of the adverse outcome. The present study investigates whether professional legal investigators such as judges and lawyers are affected by hindsight bias and outcome bias when evaluating directors’ conduct in a bankruptcy case. Additionally, to advance our understanding of the mechanisms underlying these biases, we also examine whether free will beliefs can predict susceptibility to hindsight bias and outcome bias in this context. In two studies (total N = 1,729), we demonstrate that legal professionals tend to judge a director's actions more negatively and perceive bankruptcy as more foreseeable in hindsight than in foresight and that these effects are significantly stronger for those who endorse the notion that humans have free will. This contribution is particularly timely considering the many companies that are currently going bankrupt or are facing bankruptcy amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.