Mass Response to the Lewinsky Scandal: Motivated Reasoning or BayesianUpdating?

This study attempts to account for the vastly different trajectories taken by mass andelite opinion in the wake of the Lewinsky affair. Data from a panel study, collected before andjust after the scandal broke, suggest that Clinton's prior popularity indelibly colored massresponse to the scandal, thereby constraining citizens' reactions. As would be predicted bytheories of "motivated reasoning," the influence of various considerations (like thecredibility and importance of the allegations) on reactions to the scandal was conditional uponprior affect for the president. Such findings are difficult to accommodate within the more rational"Bayesian updating" perspective. These data shed light on mass response to theLewinsky scandal in particular and citizen reaction to presidential behavior more generally, aswell as on the cognitive mechanisms that facilitate motivated reasoning in candidate evaluation.     

How do investors make predictions? Insights from analogical reasoning research

Previous work on investor decision making has focused almost exclusively on information specific to the company being judged. Consequently, every decision is viewed as a novel event, disconnected from the investor's existing knowledge. In this study, the analogical reasoning literature provides the theoretical support for arguing that investors frequently utilize existing knowledge as a basis for generating predictions about a company's future. The specific proposal is that investors transfer their existing knowledge via two different forms of analogical reasoning. The first, relational reasoning, is based primarily on structural correspondence between a novel company and an existing schema. The second, literal similarity reasoning, is based primarily on surface correspondence of a novel company and a previously encountered company. Our theoretical framework is tested in a study in which experienced investors predict the outcome of a novel company's strategy after reading about the experiences of other companies who implemented a similar strategy. The results are consistent with the occurrence of both relational and literal similarity reasoning, with relational reasoning emerging as the dominant approach to generating investors' predictions. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Self-Doubt Effects Depend on Beliefs about Ability: Experimental Evidence

Past research has shown negative effects of chronic self-doubt on psychological and performance outcomes. Recent correlational evidence suggests that incremental beliefs about ability ameliorate certain self-doubt effects. The current research examines whether these correlational findings are robust when subjected to experimental testing. In Experiment 1, we manipulated beliefs about ability (incremental vs. entity) and demonstrated that changing beliefs about ability altered responses to self-doubt. For individuals primed with entity beliefs, higher self-doubt was associated with greater nervousness and poorer anagram performance; for individuals primed with incremental beliefs, self-doubt had no significant effects. Experiment 2 was a 2 (manipulated belief: incremental vs. entity) × 2 (self-doubt: doubt induction vs. control) factorial design. The result showed that self-doubt induction lowered self-esteem relative to control when people were primed with entity beliefs but did not affect self-esteem when incremental beliefs were primed. However, Experiment 1 results on affect and performance were not replicated in Experiment 2. Thus, although we provide some causal evidence that inducing individuals to adopt an ability-is-malleable mindset reduces the negative effects of self-doubt, further experimental work is required to study the moderating role of mindsets for self-doubt effects.     

Anxiety Influences the Perceptual-Motor Calibration of Visually Guided Braking to Avoid Collisions

We investigated whether anxiety influences perceptual-motor calibration in a braking to avoid a collision task. Participants performed either a discrete braking task (Experiment 1) or a continuous braking task (Experiment 2), with the goal of stopping before colliding with a stop sign. Half of participants performed the braking task after an anxiety induction. We investigated whether anxiety reduced the frequency of crashing and if it influenced the calibration of perception (visual information) and action (brake pressure) dynamically between-trials in Experiment 1 and within-trials in Experiment 2. In the discrete braking task, anxious participants crashed less often and made larger corrective adjustments trial-to-trial after crashing, suggesting that the influence of anxiety on behavior did not occur uniformly, but rather dynamically with anxiety amplifying the reaction to previous crashes. However, when performing continuous braking, anxious participants crashed more often, and their within-trial adjustments of deceleration were less related to visual information compared to controls. Taken together, these findings suggest that the timescale and nature of the task mediates the influence of anxiety on the performance of goal-directed actions.     

Basic need satisfaction in the parental relationship offsets millennials’ worries about the transition to college

ABSTRACT

Students’ worries about transitioning to college are correlated with long-term reduced psychological well-being, so we investigated how psychological need satisfaction might mitigate millennials’ worries about college. As parents can support or undermine their children’s basic needs, we also examined the influence of autonomy-supportive and helicopter parenting during the transition. Additionally, we compared these outcomes between first- and continuing-generation students. Incoming college students (N = 355) completed measures of parental relationship need satisfaction, parental involvement, worries about college, and family achievement guilt. Higher need satisfaction in the parental relationship was associated with reduced worries and feelings of achievement guilt for both first- and continuing-generation students. Autonomy-supportive parenting moderated the relationship between autonomy and millennials’ worries about college. Helicopter parenting did not moderate any of the relationships examined in this study but was positively associated with students’ transition worries and achievement guilt. We discuss these findings in the context of self-determination theory.     

Political Attitudes and the Processing of Misinformation Corrections

Misinformation often continues to influence people’s memory and inferential reasoning after it has been retracted; this is known as the continued influence effect (CIE). Previous research investigating the role of attitude‐based motivated reasoning in this context has found conflicting results: Some studies have found that worldview can have a strong impact on the magnitude of the CIE, such that retractions are less effective if the misinformation is congruent with a person’s relevant attitudes, in which case the retractions can even backfire. Other studies have failed to find evidence for an effect of attitudes on the processing of misinformation corrections. The present study used political misinformation—specifically fictional scenarios involving misconduct by politicians from left‐wing and right‐wing parties—and tested participants identifying with those political parties. Results showed that in this type of scenario, partisan attitudes have an impact on the processing of retractions, in particular (1) if the misinformation relates to a general assertion rather than just a specific singular event and (2) if the misinformation is congruent with a conservative partisanship.     

The effect of decision timing on the willingness to costly reward cooperation and punish noncooperation: Sanctioning the past,the present,or the future

Numerous studies have demonstrated that sanctions can promote cooperation. However, it is important to know not only that sanctions can work but also under what conditions people are actually willing to sanction cooperation positively (i.e., reward) or noncooperation negatively (i.e., punish). In this article, we demonstrate that people use sanctions less often and sanction more mildly when they decide about sanctioning before (instead of after) the occurrence of others' (non)cooperation (Experiments 1 and 2), regardless of whether they decide directly afterwards or after a time delay (Experiment 2). Moreover, we reveal that beforehand (as compared with afterwards) people have not yet formed clear sanctioning preferences (Experiment 3). These findings corroborate our reasoning that the decision environment beforehand induces nonconsequential reasoning and thereby hampers people's willingness to sanction. We discuss the theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of our work.     

公平感对社会认知的影响:经济因素的调节作用

目的及方法:基于中国综合社会调查2010年数据,采用多层结构方程模型,探究中国民众公平感对社会认知的作用,及经济因素在其中的调节效应。研究结果:第一,公平感越高,则社会冲突感越低,外在政治效能感越高,越倾向于对社会不平等进行内部归因,即对于社会的整体认知更加积极; 第二,经济因素能调节公平感与社会不平等内归因的关系,具体而言,经济水平越低,则公平感对于社会不平等的内部归因正向预测作用越大。     

How does discourse among like-minded individuals affect their thinking about a complex issue?

Is there reason to be concerned about what has been seen as an increasing trend for discourse on complex issues to be confined to an “echo chamber” of like-minded individuals? To investigate how thinking regarding an issue changes in form following concentrated discourse with like-minded peers, we undertook a qualitative examination of changes in the reasoning that 34 older adults used to justify their positions prior to and following such discourse. They showed a divergence of patterns. A minority abandoned mention of previously expressed ideas at odds with their own positions or otherwise narrowed the reasoning used to justify their positions. Consistent with findings from previous studies, only a minority showed increased certainty and/or extremity (polarisation) on quantitative scales. Countering this minority were a larger proportion whose thinking appeared to benefit from such engagement in several respects that we describe. A follow-up study compares results for a sample of young adults.     

Reasoning and normative beliefs: not too sophisticated

Does reasoning to a certain conclusion necessarily involve a normative belief in support of that conclusion? In many recent discussions of the nature of reasoning, such a normative belief condition is rejected. One main objection is that it requires too much conceptual sophistication and thereby excludes certain reasoners, such as small children. I argue that this objection is mistaken. Its advocates overestimate what is necessary for grasping the normative concepts required by the condition, while seriously underestimating the importance of such concepts for our most fundamental agential capacities. Underlying the objection is the observation that normative thoughts do not necessarily cross our minds during reasoning. I show that proponents of the normative belief condition can accommodate this observation by taking the required normative belief to guide the reasoning process and offer a novel account of what such guidance consists in.