What are the mechanisms? The black box of neoliberalism

In this response to Bal and Doci's (2018) commentary on neoliberal ideology in work and organizational psychology (Bal, P. M., & Dóci, E. (2018)). Neoliberal ideology in work and organizational psychology. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. Online first publication, https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1449108), we argue that neoliberalism can only be a distal exogenous influence on psychological processes. It remains unclear which mechanisms might translate this ideology into work and organizational psychology science and practice. Researchers need to move beyond black box explanations and provide clarity about the nature of concepts, how they manifest, and the mechanisms that translate ideology into psychological phenomena.     

Help Giving and Aggression From an Attributional Perspective: Why and When We Help or Retaliate1

Two studies were conducted to test Weiner's (1995) theory of responsibility, both in the domains of prosocial (help giving) and antisocial behavior (aggression). Experiment 1 revealed that for both behavioral domains, a positive relation exists between perceived controllability and anger, whereas a negative relation was found between controllability and sympathy. In addition, help giving is promoted by feelings of sympathy and inhibited by feelings of anger, and the reverse is true for aggression. However, the present results also reveal that for aggression, there is a direct influence of cognitions (perceived controllability) on behavioral reactions, whereas for help giving, cognitions have an indirect effect on behavior, mediated by emotions. Thus, for help giving, thoughts determine what we feel, and feelings determine what we do. In contrast, for aggression, an additional influence of thoughts on actions is present. Experiment 2, in which different scenarios were used, replicated this pattern of results.     

Daniel has fallen into a muddy puddle – Schadenfreude or sympathy?

The present study investigated the experience of schadenfreude among children. Participants were 4‐ to 8‐year‐old children (n = 100) who were told stories of another child experiencing a misfortune while pursuing a morally positive versus morally negative goal. Schadenfreude, sympathy, and helping behaviour towards the suffering child were assessed. Results showed that beginning at the age of 4, emotional and behavioural reactions towards a misfortune of another child were predicted by the moral valence of the other child's goal. Furthermore, morally negative goals decreased helping behaviour and morally positive goals increased helping behaviour. Multilevel mediation analysis revealed that the relation between goal valence and helping behaviour was mediated by both schadenfreude and sympathy. However, those effects were especially pronounced in older children.     

A meta‐analytic review of help giving and aggression from an attributional perspective: Contributions to a general theory of motivation

The present review syntheses 64 investigations on the determinants of helping and aggression involving more than 12,000 subjects, providing empirical tests of Weiner's (1986, 1995) theory of social conduct. A meta‐analytic test of the proposed causal cognition‐emotion‐behaviour sequence reveals that judgements of responsibility determine the emotional reactions of anger and sympathy, and that these emotional reactions, in turn, directly influence help giving and aggression. Results are highly consistent across several potential moderator variables including type of culture, sample characteristics, publication year, and publication status. Moreover, the present analyses suggest that the hypothesised model holds true for real events as well as for simulated data. Exploratory comparisons between the helping versus the aggression domain suggest that comparable results are obtained for these two domains, except that perceptions of responsibility are more likely to exert an additional proximal role in aggressive retaliation as compared to help giving. The implications of these findings for a general theory of motivation in the interpersonal and the intrapersonal domains are discussed.