Operationalizing the effect of the group on the individual: A self-attention perspective

The effect of the group on the individual is considered from the perspective of self-attention theory. It is proposed that group members will become more self-attentive, and thus become more concerned with matching to standards of appropriate behavior, as the relative size of their subgroup decreases. A simple algorithm, termed the Other-Total Ratio, is presented which numerically describes this effect of the group on the individual. An analysis of group effects on individuals' self-attention supports this perspective, as do analyses of the results of 42 previous studies in four other areas (conformity, prosocial behavior, social loafing, and antisocial behavior). This orientation to the effect of the group on the individual is linked to recent developments in self-attention theory and compared to Latané's social impact theory.     

Exploring the psychological underpinnings of the moral mandate effect: motivated reasoning, group differentiation, or anger?

When people have strong moral convictions about outcomes, their judgments of both outcome and procedural fairness become driven more by whether outcomes support or oppose their moral mandates than by whether procedures are proper or improper (the moral mandate effect). Two studies tested 3 explanations for the moral mandate effect. In particular, people with moral mandates may (a) have a greater motivation to seek out procedural flaws when outcomes fail to support their moral point of view (the motivated reasoning hypothesis), (b) be influenced by in-group distributive biases as a result of identifying with parties that share rather than oppose their moral point of view (the group differentiation hypothesis), or (c) react with anger when outcomes are inconsistent with their moral point of view, which, in turn, colors perceptions of both outcomes and procedures (the anger hypothesis). Results support the anger hypothesis.     

The problem behavior model: the development of a stalkers clinic and a threateners clinic

Traditionally, forensic mental health services have focused on the assessment and treatment of offenders with serious mental disorders. In recent years, there has been growing recognition that forensic clinicians have an important role to play for those offenders who engage in criminal acts driven by psychological or/and social problems, which may, or may not, occur in conjunction with a major mental disorder. This is especially true for specific offenses such as stalking and threatening. This article describes the innovation of the problem behavior model. This model uses a reductionist approach and the nexus between psychiatry and psychology to address the complex phenomena associated with specific problem behaviors that often culminate in offenses. The model is illustrated by describing the development of specialist clinics for the problem behaviors of stalking and threatening.     

Accuracy in perceptions of consensus: Differential tendencies of people with majority and minority positions

When people are interested in how common one or more of their attributes is in a reference population, they must often generate their own comparison information based on a limited sample of acquaintances and experiences. Subjects in the present research were asked to describe themselves in terms of a variety of attributes, and were also asked to estimate the percentage of other college students who would indicate possession of each attribute. For each attribute, subjects were assigned a majority or minority status, depending on whether the majority of the population did or did not share their attribute. The principle findings were (1) the majority subjects generated more accurate comparison information than did the minority; (2) the majority subjects were better than chance and better than minority subjects in distinguishing between attributes for which there was high versus moderate consensus; and (3) the minority subjects tended to overestimate the consensus for their attributes, while the majority subjects tended to err in the direction of underestimation of their Consensus. The discussion focused on possible causes of these tendencies, and on research implications involving attributional biases and intergroup conflict.     

Anxiety symptom interpretation in high-anxious, defensive high-anxious, low-anxious and repressor sport performers

For the first time in a sport setting this study examined the intensity and direction of the competitive state anxiety response in collegiate athletes as a function of four different coping styles: high-anxious, defensive high-anxious, low-anxious and repressors. Specifically, the study predicted that repressors would interpret competitive state anxiety symptoms as more facilitative compared to high-anxious, defensive high-anxious, and low-anxious performers. Separate Multivariate Analyses of Variance (MANOVA) were performed on the intensity and direction subscales of the modified Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2). A significant main effect was identified for trait worry revealing that low trait anxious athletes reported lower intensities of cognitive and somatic anxiety and higher self-confidence and interpreted these as more facilitative than high trait anxious athletes. The prediction that performers with a repressive coping style would interpret state anxiety symptoms as more facilitative than performers with non-repressive coping styles was not supported.     

Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: Strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes

Two experiments investigated the hypothesis that strategic behavioral mimicry can facilitate negotiation outcomes. Study 1 used an employment negotiation with multiple issues, and demonstrated that strategic behavioral mimicry facilitated outcomes at both the individual and dyadic levels: Negotiators who mimicked the mannerisms of their opponents both secured better individual outcomes, and their dyads as a whole also performed better when mimicking occurred compared to when it did not. Thus, mimickers created more value and then claimed most of that additional value for themselves, though not at the expense of their opponents. In Study 2, mimicry facilitated negotiators’ ability to uncover underlying compatible interests and increased the likelihood of obtaining a deal in a negotiation where a prima facie solution was not possible. Results from Study 2 also demonstrated that interpersonal trust mediated the relationship between mimicry and deal-making. Implications for our understanding of negotiation dynamics and interpersonal coordination are discussed.