Using the Step it UP! Game to increase physical activity during physical-education classes

The Step it UP! Game is an interdependent group reinforcement contingency based on the Good Behavior Game. We evaluated the effects of the Step it UP! Game on the number of steps taken by 3rd-grade students during physical-education (PE) classes at a local public elementary school. We divided the class into 2 teams and awarded a “Step it UP! Champ” badge to the members of the team with the highest mean step totals at the end of each game. We used a reversal design to compare the mean number of steps taken while playing the game and during regular PE classes. Overall, participants took more steps while playing the game than they did during class periods without the game. When given the opportunity to choose playing the Step it UP! Game or having regular PE class during a follow-up session, 16 of 18 participants voted to play the game.     

Additional effects of a cognitive task on dual-task training to reduce dual-task interference

ObjectiveWhen we perform dual-tasks in daily life, task performance is generally reduced. As these reductions in performance (i.e., dual-task interference) are responsible for various accidents such as falls, the repeated practice of dual-task (i.e., dual-task training) is often implemented to reduce dual-task interference. However, the risk of various accidents increases with longer dual-task training, as dual-task interference cannot be avoided. Therefore, it is important to achieve training goals more rapidly during dual-task training. This study sought to determine whether a combination of dual-task training and cognitive tasks would accelerate training effects.DesignThe experimental design included four groups: 1) cognitive task training group, 2) dual-task training group, 3) cognitive task and dual-task training group, and 4) non training group.MethodWe assessed single- and dual-task performance before and after the 2-week training sessions. We adopted a dual-task involving knee extension and an auditory reaction, and used N-back task as a cognitive task. On the other hand, dual-task training was the same method to assess dual-task performance.ResultDual-task interference was reduced in all groups in both the tasks. However, the number of participants in the cognitive task and dual-task training group who achieved a reduction in dual-task cost was significantly higher than those in other groups.ConclusionThese findings could contribute to the development of an effective method for reducing dual-task interference and resolving issues caused by dual-task interference in daily life.     

Collective decision making reduces metacognitive control and increases error rates,particularly for overconfident individuals

This research aimed to investigate the changes in judgment accuracy, confidence, control thresholds, and decision outcomes when people act in two-person groups (dyads) compared with acting individually. First, we used interacting dyads to determine the metacognitive and behavioral outcomes of collective decision making and compared them with those of individuals. Second, we examined whether these changes were related to the trait-confidence and bias of individuals working together. Using a within-person design, undergraduate psychology students (N = 116) completed a General-knowledge Test individually, then together as a dyad. Each question was accompanied by a confidence rating and a decision to bet $10 on the answer. Dyads had significantly higher confidence and lower control thresholds than individuals. They were also significantly more decisive (made more bets) and reckless (lost a higher rate of bets) than when working alone. Thus, we observed a higher rate of decision errors for groups than individuals. The results also demonstrated the important role of individual differences: Overconfident individuals became even more confident, decisive, and reckless when working together compared with less confident or underconfident individuals working together. These findings have important theoretical and applied implications for collective decision making; metacognitive bias and potentially control thresholds may be targeted to alleviate the larger error rates and guide the formation of more effective groups.     

Beyond the Sociobiological Dilemma: Social Emotions and the Evolution of Morality

Is morality biologically altruistic? Does it imply a disadvantage in the struggle for existence? A positive answer puts morality at odds with natural selection, unless natural selection operates at the level of groups. In this case, a trait that is good for groups though bad (reproductively) for individuals can evolve. Sociobiologists reject group selection and have adopted one of two horns of a dilemma. Either morality is based on an egoistic calculus, compatible with natural selection; or morality continues tied to psychological and biological altruism but not as a product of natural selection. The dilemma denies a third possibility—that psychological altruism evolves as a biologically selfish trait. I discuss the classical treatments of the paradox by Charles Darwin ([1871] 1989) and Robert Trivers (1971), focusing on the role they attribute to social emotions. The upshot is that both Darwin and Trivers sketch a natural‐selection process relying on innate emotional mechanisms that render morality adaptive for individuals as well as for groups. I give additional reasons for viewing it as a form of natural, instead of only cultural, selection.     

The context of intergroup belief cross wherein minority members maintain consistency: Belief minority and majority in a categorical in‐group and out‐group1

Abstract: The present study investigated the social conditions required for minority members to preserve their attitudinal and behavioral consistency in an intergroup context. In the experiment, intergroup belief crosses wherein a belief minority (or majority) in a categorical in‐group was reversed as a majority (or minority) in an out‐group were manipulated. It was hypothesized that individuals supported by the majority in the categorical in‐group would preserve their attitudes and behavioral intentions even though they were a minority in the categorical out‐group. The results supported the hypothesis. Specifically, members of a majority in the categorical in‐group had more consistent behavioral intentions and less attitude changes although they were located as a minority in the out‐group. In contrast, members of a minority within the in‐group preserved consistency on the basis of support from the majority in the out‐group. The theoretical implications of these results are discussed with reference to future research.     

Dual identities in intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change

To explore the effects of various categorization strategies on intergroup bias within and beyond a contact situation, two experiments were conducted involving groups of different size and/or status that worked together on a cooperative task. Three categorization strategies (decategorization, recategorization, and dual identity) were compared, and bias was measured through symbolic reward allocations to people who were and were not actually encountered. In Experiment 1 (N = 129), we varied group size (minority or majority) and found that it affected bias within the contact situation—minority groups were more biased than majority groups. All of the categorization strategies limited bias and they did so equally well. Outside the contact situation, however, only the recategorization and dual identity strategies limited bias. In Experiment 2 (N = 156), we varied both group status (low or high) and group size. Both of these variables affected bias within the contact situation—high status groups were more biased than low status groups, and minority groups were again more biased than majority groups. Once again, all three categorization strategies limited bias and they did so equally well. Outside the contact situation, however, an interaction among the independent variables was observed. For minority groups, only the dual identity strategy limited bias, but none of the categorization strategies limited bias for majority groups.     

Behavioural coherence in group robbery: a circumplex model of offender and victim interactions

The behaviour of offenders and victims in 116 cases of group robbery (61 commercial, 55 personal) was examined. Four interpersonal themes were evident: dominance, submission, co‐operation and hostility. These themes are governed by the principles of complementarity such that offender dominance elicits victim submission (reciprocity) and vice versa, while co‐operative offenders tend to elicit victim co‐operation (correspondence). Hostile offences were hypothesised as eliciting hostility in victims, but few victims in the sample demonstrated active resistance. The existence of behavioural themes suggests that offenders within the same group behave in a homogenous fashion, which is explained by reference to group norms and processes of modelling. Further, differences in interpersonal themes were evident between commercial and personal robberies. Commercial robberies tend to involve greater levels of co‐operation than personal robberies, while personal robberies involve more hostility than commercial robberies. This is discussed in terms of situational and motivational elements of the robberies. Aggr. Behav. 32:330–342, 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Achieving relationship harmony in groups and its consequence for group performance

Relationships are formed to meet individual goals, and one consequence of this joint effort towards mutual goal fulfillment will be a level of relationship harmony achieved between the interaction partners. The present study investigated the personality correlates associated with the achievement of relationship harmony in a group setting and its consequences for group performance. Students from a social psychology course formed groups for completing task assignments. After a 3-month collaboration, each student evaluated his or her level of relationship harmony attained with each of his or her other group members. It was found that a member's agreeableness positively predicted his or her achievement of relationship harmony in the group, but that conscientiousness and openness to experience had detrimental effects on the relationship harmony achieved with other group members. A group whose members attained higher relationship harmony performed better on its group assignments, suggesting that relationship harmony among members of a group might have beneficial effects on group processes like performance focus and shared exchange at least in a collectivist, Chinese culture.