An eye fixation analysis of choice and judgment with multiattribute stimuli

The present paper examined the selection of processing heuristics for choice and judgment across a range of stimuli. Eye fixations were monitored while six subjects made choices or judgments of pairs of gambles, vacations, or gifts. Each stimulus was represented by three attributes that varied in the amount of dimensional interdependency. The two heuristics of interest were dimensional and holistic evaluation. Each manifested a characteristic pattern of eye fixations. Dimensional evaluation required alternating fixations from a single attribute of one stimulus to the same attribute of the other stimulus. Holistic evaluation was characterized by transitions from attribute to attribute within a single stimulus. The results demonstrated that when the stimulus attributes were either interdependent (gambles) or dissimilar (gifts), the processing heuristic was determined by stimulus characteristics. When the stimulus dimensions were neither interdependent nor dissimilar (vacations), the selection of a processing strategy was determined by the prescribed task. This study suggests that any global theory of choice or judgment must be validated over a wide range of stimuli.     

Balancing the ledger: An application of Nagy's theories to the study of continuity and change among generations

This study uses an interpretive interview method to examine the micro-processes of generational continuity and change among a group of social activists. Boszormenyi-Nagy's theory of responsibility between generations, alternative models outside the family, and choice are used to explain the instances of change. Implications for research and practice are addressed.     

Suicidal Behaviors in Surviving Monozygotic and Dizygotic Co‐Twins: Is the Nature of the Co‐Twin's Cause of Death a Factor?

Genetically informative samples can address hereditary and experiential influences on suicide‐related behaviors. The frequency of suicide‐related behaviors was compared in twins from two survivor groups: (1) those whose co‐twins' deaths were suicides (monozygotic [MZ]: n = 47; dizygotic [DZ]: n = 31), and (2) those whose co‐twins' deaths were nonsuicides (MZ: n = 347; DZ: n = 170). The frequency of suicide attempts among suicide survivors was significantly higher in MZ than DZ twins, while the frequency of suicide attempts among nonsuicide twin survivors did not differ between MZ and DZ twins. Twin concordance for suicide attempts more likely reflects a genetic predisposition than a behavioral reaction to the loss.     

Single-Stage Prediction Models Do Not Explain the Magnitude of Syntactic Disambiguation Difficulty

The disambiguation of a syntactically ambiguous sentence in favor of a less preferred parse can lead to slower reading at the disambiguation point. This phenomenon, referred to as a garden-path effect, has motivated models in which readers initially maintain only a subset of the possible parses of the sentence, and subsequently require time-consuming reanalysis to reconstruct a discarded parse. A more recent proposal argues that the garden-path effect can be reduced to surprisal arising in a fully parallel parser: words consistent with the initially dispreferred but ultimately correct parse are simply less predictable than those consistent with the incorrect parse. Since predictability has pervasive effects in reading far beyond garden-path sentences, this account, which dispenses with reanalysis mechanisms, is more parsimonious. Crucially, it predicts a linear effect of surprisal: the garden-path effect is expected to be proportional to the difference in word surprisal between the ultimately correct and ultimately incorrect interpretations. To test this prediction, we used recurrent neural network language models to estimate word-by-word surprisal for three temporarily ambiguous constructions. We then estimated the slowdown attributed to each bit of surprisal from human self-paced reading times, and used that quantity to predict syntactic disambiguation difficulty. Surprisal successfully predicted the existence of garden-path effects, but drastically underpredicted their magnitude, and failed to predict their relative severity across constructions. We conclude that a full explanation of syntactic disambiguation difficulty may require recovery mechanisms beyond predictability.     

Why and for whom does the pressure to help hurt others? Affective and cognitive mechanisms linking helping pressure to workplace deviance

Scholars are paying increasing attention to the “dark side” of citizenship behavior. One aspect of this dark side that has received relatively scant attention is “helping pressure”—an employee's perception that s/he is being encouraged to, or otherwise feels that s/he should, enact helping behavior at work. Drawing from theory associated with work stress, we examine affective and cognitive mechanisms that potentially explain why helping pressure, counterintuitively, may lead employees to engage in deviant behavior instead. Beyond examining these possible mechanisms, we also answer calls to identify a potential buffer to these effects. Drawing from self-determination theory, we examine how an employee's intrinsic motivation for citizenship may lessen the deleterious consequences of helping pressure at work. In two studies (a within-individual experience-sampling study and a two-wave between-individual study), we find consistent evidence that helping pressure has a positive indirect relationship with deviant behavior through increased negative affect. Further, we find evidence that intrinsic motivation for citizenship weakens the positive relationship of helping pressure with negative affect, buffering the indirect effect on subsequent deviant behavior. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings for the study of helping pressure at work are discussed.