Restoring drinking water acceptance following a waterborne disease outbreak: the role of trust,risk perception,and communication

Although research shows that acceptance, trust, and risk perception are often related, little is known about the underlying patterns of causality among the three constructs. In the context of a waterborne disease outbreak, we explored via zero‐order/partial correlation analysis whether acceptance predicts both trust and risk perception (associationist model), or whether trust influences risk perception and acceptance (causal chain model). The results supported the causal chain model suggesting a causal role for trust. A subsequent path analysis confirmed that the effect of trust on acceptance is fully mediated by risk perception. It also revealed that trust is positively predicted by prior institutional trust and communication with the public. Implications of the findings for response strategies to contamination events are discussed.     

The moral circle as a common motivational cause of cross‐situational pro‐environmentalism

Public engagement in pro‐environmental behavior and support for pro‐environmental policy are essential for achieving sustainable living. We propose that the “moral circle” is a common motivational source for engagement in environmentally beneficial activities across situations and may be thus drawn upon to efficiently promote these activities. Study 1 established an association between chronic moral circle size and nine pro‐environmental activities from different domains. Via experimental manipulation of the moral circle size, Studies 2a–d demonstrated its causal effect on intentions to engage in pro‐environmental activities. Together, these studies offer an important initial demonstration of the beneficial consequences of more expansive moral circle in the domain of pro‐environmentalism. Routes for expanding the moral circle and thus promoting pro‐environmental activities are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The “Saying Is Repeating” Effect: Dyadic Communication Can Generate Cultural Stereotypes

It has been long established that interpersonal communication underpins the existence of cultural stereotypes. However, research has either examined the formation of new or the maintenance of existing stereotypes. In a series of three studies, the present research bridges the gap between these phases by showing that newly formed stereotypes can spread through repeated dyadic communication with others. The stereotypic representation arose due to the audience tuning in to communication to a first audience. Further transmission to two types of subsequent audiences was simulated: a newcomer and an old-timer with an unknown attitude towards the target. A “saying-is-repeating” effect was obtained: the stereotypic representation was invariably transmitted to the newcomer, regardless of whether communicators personally believed in the bias; perceived group-level consensus moderated its transmission to the old-timer. These findings demonstrate that once a stereotypic representation is formed, it is likely to spread in a community and potentially become a cultural stereotype.     

The rich get richer,the poor get even: Perceived socioeconomic position influences micro‐social distributions of wealth

Economic inequality has a robust negative effect on a range of important societal outcomes, including health, wellbeing, and education. Yet, it remains insufficiently understood why, how, and by whom unequal systems tend to be perpetuated. In two studies we examine whether psychological mindsets adopted by the wealthy and the poor in their micro‐social transactions act to perpetuate or challenge inequality. We hypothesized that occupying a wealthier socioeconomic position promotes the pursuit of self‐interest and contributes to inequality maintenance; poorer socioeconomic position, on the other hand, should promote the pursuit of fairness and equality restoration. In Study 1, participants completed an ultimatum game as proposers after being primed to believe they are wealthier or poorer, offering money to either poor or wealthy responders. As expected, the wealthy pursued their self‐interest and the net effect of this behavior contributes to the maintenance of inequality. Conversely, the poor pursued fairness and the net effect of this behavior challenges inequality. In Study 2, participants were responders deciding whether to accept or reject unfair distributions. Compared to the wealthier, the poorer challenged inequality by rejecting unequal offers. The links between micro‐social processes and macro‐societal inequality are discussed.