Longer-term consequences of anger expression in negotiation: Retaliation or spillover?

Negotiators often concede to angry partners. But what happens when they meet again? According to the spillover hypothesis, negotiators demand less from previously angry partners because they perceive them as tough. According to the retaliation hypothesis, negotiators demand more from previously angry partners because of negative impressions and a desire to get even. Experiment 1 showed that participants demanded less in later negotiations when their partner in a previous negotiation had expressed anger (rather than no emotion) and the later negotiation was with the same (rather than a different) partner. Consistent with the spillover hypothesis, this effect was mediated by inferences regarding the partner’s toughness. Experiment 2 showed that apologies reduce the negative effects of anger on impressions and desire for future interaction. Behavioral reactions were moderated by social value orientation: extending the established might/morality effect, prosocial participants responded cooperatively to an apology, whereas proselfs responded competitively.     

Perception through a perspective-taking lens: Differential effects on judgment and behavior

In contrast to the view that social perception has symmetric effects on judgments and behavior, the current research explored whether perspective-taking leads stereotypes to differentially affect judgments and behavior. Across three studies, perspective-takers consistently used stereotypes more in their own behavior while simultaneously using them less in their judgments of others. After writing about an African-American, perspective-taking tendencies were positively correlated with aggressive behavior but negatively correlated with judging others as aggressive. Similarly, after writing about an elderly man, perspective-takers walked more slowly and became more conservative, but judged others as less dependent. These divergent effects of perspective-taking on judgment and behavior occurred regardless of whether perspective-taking was manipulated or measured, whether judgments were measured before or after behavior, the stereotype that was activated, and participants’ culture (American, Singaporean). These findings support theorizing that judgments and behavior can diverge when individuals’ social strategies are geared towards establishing and maintaining social bonds, as well as provide insight into how perspective-taking helps individuals manage diversity.     

The central tendency of a social group can affect ratings of its intragroup variability in the absence of social identity concerns

People report less variability within in-groups than within out-groups when they make their ratings on traits on which the in-group has a higher central tendency than the out-group. [Simon, 1992a] and [Simon, 1992b] proposed that this effect is motivated by the need to protect a positive social identity. The present research tested the necessity of the social identity motive by using participants who were not members of any of the target groups that they judged. In Study 1 (N = 60), psychology undergraduate students reported significantly less intragroup variability on positive traits among a group of fashion designers that won a fashion competition than among a group that lost. Study 2 (N = 75) found a reverse effect on negative traits and confirmed the mediating role of perceived central tendency. These results demonstrate that the social identity motive is not necessary to explain the effect of central tendency on ratings of intragroup variability, and that the effect is more general than previously reported.     

Implicit learning of social predictions

Humans exchange a range of nonverbal social signals in every interaction. It is an open question whether people use these signals, consciously or unconsciously, to guide social behavior. This experiment directly tested whether participants could learn to predict another person’s behavior using nonverbal cues in a single interaction, and whether explicit knowledge of the cue-outcome relationship was necessary for successful prediction. Participants played a computerized game of rock-paper-scissors against an avatar they believed was another participant. Sometimes the avatar generated a predictive facial cue before the play. On these trials, participants’ win-frequency increased over time, even if they did not acquire explicit knowledge of the predictive cue. The degree to which participants could predict the avatar (wins on cued trials) related to their self-reported liking of the avatar. These findings demonstrate the importance of implicit associative learning mechanisms in guiding social behavior on a moment-to-moment basis during interaction.     

Social status as a cue for tacit coordination

The present paper investigates how and when social status may serve as a cue for tacit coordination. In three experimental studies, we demonstrate that low status individuals are inclined to defer to the preferences of high status individuals, thereby facilitating coordination success. Furthermore, we investigate the boundary conditions of this effect. More specifically, we show that social status only facilitates coordination success when the people involved have asymmetric (or conflicting) preferences (Study 2), and when there is a clear social hierarchy (Study 3). In the general discussion, we relate these findings to earlier research on dominance hierarchies, social power, deference and perspective-taking and we provide suggestions for future research.     

Peer influence on event reports among adolescents and young adults

When two or more people witness an event together, the event report from one person can influence others’ reports. In the current study we examined the role of age and motivational factors on peer influence regarding event reports in adolescents and young adults. Participants (N=249) watched a short video of a robbery then answered questions with no co-witness information or with information believed to be from a co-witness. Public and private response conditions were included to explore motivations for peer influence. Co-witness information influenced participants’ responses, although the effect was equally strong in the private and the public co-witness conditions. Peer influence on event reports was steady across a large age range (11- to 25-year-olds).     

Living in History in Lebanon: The influence of chronic social upheaval on the organisation of autobiographical memories

The Living in History (LiH) effect is a litmus test for the degree to which historical events reorganise autobiographical memory. The LiH effect was studied in two Lebanese samples: a Beiruti sample that lived in the epicentre of the 15-year Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990) and another group from the Bi'qa region who lived in an area that was indirectly exposed for most of the civil war but experienced one short-term period of war during the Israeli invasion. Using the two-phase word-cueing task to elicit dated autobiographical memories, we observed a significantly stronger LiH effect in the Beirut sample but also a significant yet weaker LiH effect in the Bi'qa sample. In addition to the main finding we offer evidence that the LiH effect waxes and wanes with the level of conflict in an area and that reported personal experiences of war exposure predict the strength of the LiH effect. Our findings suggest that collective transitional events which produce a marked change in the fabric of daily living engender historically defined autobiographical periods which give structure and organisation to how individuals remember their past.     

Living in a multicultural world: Intergroup ideologies and the societal context of intergroup relations

In a relatively short time span, issues of ethnic, cultural, and religious diversity have become central topics of discussion in various nations. As a result, the role of broad ideologies that frame and structure relations between groups has received increasing attention by social psychologists. Of particular concern has been the role of these intergroup ideologies in promoting intergroup harmony and reducing prejudice. In this article, we appraise the evidence related to three main intergroup ideologies, assimilation, colourblindness, and multiculturalism. We argue that research in this area has paid insufficient attention to the social and political context. Intergroup ideologies have been studied and conceptualised as being located solely within individual minds. We suggest that the potentially vital aspect of these ideologies is that they are sometimes widely shared by members of a social group. Integrating sociological and political analyses, we discuss the fact that intergroup ideologies are institutionalised as policies and that, as such, they often vary across countries and across time. We present a series of studies to illustrate the theoretical implications of studying the shared nature of these intergroup ideologies, providing insights into the question of when and why national policies can shape individuals’ intergroup attitudes and beliefs and improve intergroup relations.     

How the disadvantaged appraise group-based exclusion: The path from legitimacy to illegitimacy

Although many forms of differential treatment based on group membership are perceived to be legitimate, disadvantaged group members’ responses to discrimination have been studied primarily in contexts in which such treatment is appraised as illegitimate. This has resulted in an impoverished understanding of differential group-based treatment and a failure to illuminate the processes by which discrimination can shift from being seen as legitimate to being viewed as illegitimate. We discuss the determinants of disadvantaged group members’ legitimacy appraisals and the de-legitimisation process, whereby forms of discrimination appraised as legitimate come to be increasingly perceived as illegitimate. Whether group-based exclusion is addressed collectively or individually depends on socio-structural factors such as the pervasiveness of discrimination, impermeability of intergroup boundaries, and the availability of cognitive alternatives to the status quo. We conclude that understanding the antecedents and consequences of legitimacy appraisals is necessary to develop a comprehensive account of disadvantaged group members’ experiences of group-based discrimination.     

The pull of the group: Conscious conflict and the involuntary tendency towards conformity

Is the reason that majorities exert an undue influence on the actions of individuals revealed through changes in subjective experience? Using an adaptation of the response interference paradigm (Morsella, Wilson, et al., 2009) in which participants are trained to introspect on their own experience of conscious conflict, two studies reported here show that the mere act of recalling counter-majority stances or opinions is associated with stronger subjective effects than recalling stances or opinions that coincide with majorities. Thus, an intention to conform to a majority (even when the majority is known to be wrong, as shown in the second study) seems to interfere with people’s recall of their own stance or opinion. These results provide novel evidence for recent yet under-supported suggestions that majorities can influence individuals even when it is improper or illogical because human social cognition is primarily and involuntarily cooperative at the implicit level.