Experimental Tests of Normative Group Influence and Representation Effects in Computer‐Mediated Communication

Two experiments addressed the questions of if and how normative social influence operates in anonymous computer‐mediated communication (CMC) and human‐computer interaction (HCI). In Experiment 1, a 2 (public response vs. private response) × 2 (one interactant vs. four interactants) × 3 (textbox vs. stick figure vs. animated character) mixed‐design experiment (N = 72), we investigated how conformity pressure operates in a simulated CMC setting. Each participant was asked to make a decision in hypothetical social dilemmas after being presented with a unanimous opinion by other (ostensible) participants. The experiment examined how the visual representation of interaction partners on the screen moderates this social influence process. Group conformity effects were shown to be more salient when the participant's responses were allegedly seen by others, compared to when the responses were given in private. In addition, participants attributed greater competence, social attractiveness, and trustworthiness to partners represented by anthropomorphic characters than those represented by textboxes or stick figures. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, replacing interaction with a computer(s) rather than (ostensible) people, to create an interaction setting in which no normative pressure was expected to occur. The perception of interaction partner (human vs. computer) moderated the group conformity effect such that people expressed greater public agreement with human partners than with computers. No such difference was found for the private expression of opinion. As expected, the number of computer agents did not affect participants' opinions whether the responses were given in private or in public, while visual representation had a significant impact on both conformity measures and source perception variables.     

Personal Dispositions and Shift‐Work Tolerance: A Longitudinal Study of Municipality Shift Workers

The aim of this study was to investigate how dispositional resistance to change and neuroticism could predict shift‐work tolerance (SWT) over a period of 6 months. Electronic questionnaires were completed by 74 shift workers employed in a municipality in Norway in January 2013 (1st wave of data collection) and in June 2013 (2nd wave of data collection). The findings suggest that individual differences, especially neuroticism, can predict SWT over a period of 6 months.     

Children's interpretive understanding,moral judgments,and emotion attributions: Relations to social behaviour

The study investigated interpretive understanding, moral judgments, and emotion attributions in relation to social behaviour in a sample of 59 5‐year‐old, 123 7‐year‐old, and 130 9‐year‐old children. Interpretive understanding was assessed by two tasks measuring children's understanding of ambiguous situations. Moral judgments and emotion attributions were measured using two moral rule transgressions. Social behaviour was assessed using teachers' ratings of aggressive and prosocial behaviour. Aggressive behaviour was positively related to interpretive understanding and negatively related to moral reasoning. Prosocial behaviour was positively associated with attribution of fear. Moral judgments and emotion attributions were related, depending on age. Interpretive understanding was unrelated to moral judgments and emotion attributions. The findings are discussed in regard to the role of interpretive understanding and moral and affective knowledge in understanding children's social behaviour.     

The Analytic Truth and Falsity of Disjunctions

Disjunctive inferences are difficult. According to the theory of mental models, it is because of the alternative possibilities to which disjunctions refer. Three experiments corroborated further predictions of the mental model theory. Participants judged that disjunctions, such as Either this year is a leap year or it is a common year are true. Given a disjunction such as Either A or B, they tended to evaluate the four cases in its ‘partition’: A and B, A and not‐B, not‐A and B, not‐A and not‐B, as ‘possible’ or ‘impossible’ in ways that bore out the difference between inclusive disjunctions (‘or both’) and exclusive disjunctions (‘but not both’). Knowledge usually concerns what is true, and so when participants judge that a disjunction is false, or contingent, and evaluate the cases in its partition, they depend on inferences that yield predictable errors. They tended to judge that disjunctions, such as follows: Either the food is cold or else it is tepid, but not both, are true, though in fact they could be false. They tended to infer ‘mirror‐image’ evaluations that yield the same possibilities for false disjunctions as those for true disjunctions. The article considers the implications of these results for alternative theories based on classical logic or on the probability calculus.     

Perceived Distributive Fairness of European Transfer Payments and EU‐Taxes in Austria,the Czech Republic,and the United Kingdom

The present research compared a distributive fairness model of EU transfer payments (Hartner, Rechberger, Kirchler, & Wenzel, 2011) between three countries: Austria, the Czech Republic, and the UK. The model postulates an interplay between EU‐tax compliance, distributive fairness, outcome favorability as well as national and European identification. Results across countries showed that EU‐tax compliance was positively related to distributive justice, which was in turn related to outcome favorability and identification. National identifiers perceived EU membership as unfavorable in financial and socio‐political terms, and thus considered the transfer payments as less fair. Dual identifiers perceived the socio‐political outcomes as more favorable, and thus evaluated the transfer payments as fairer. Although the basic structure of the model was valid across all three countries, two country‐specific results were found. First, in the UK individual tax paying behavior was influenced by outcome favorability, whereas in Austria and the Czech Republic this relationship was mediated via distributive fairness. Second, in the Austrian sample, the differentiation between patriots and nationalists proved fruitful since nationalists considered the EU transfer payments as unfair, unlike patriots. In the UK and the Czech Republic the distinction between nationalists and patriots did not add any further information.