Moral judgments of the powerless and powerful in violent intergroup conflicts

The present research examined observers' moral judgments of groups in conflict. Study 1 found support for the prediction that actions are interpreted as more moral in the context of low power. People judged the violent actions of a fictitious group as more moral and justifiable when done by a smaller, less powerful country compared to a larger one. However, a second study found that violence may undermine the moral advantage accorded underdog groups. People reading about Israeli construction of settlements in Palestinian territories judged the Israeli actions to be more moral when Palestinians resisted violently compared to when they used non-violent resistance tactics. Together, these studies demonstrate how moral judgments of the actions of groups in conflict are influenced by contextual factors independent of the actions themselves.     

The experience of ego threat in the public arena: A study of air ball shots performance in collegiate basketball

Performance following ego threat has often been studied in the laboratory under conditions, which may limit external validity. In the current investigation, Men’s college basketball games were studied focusing on attempts at shot that completely missed the basket and are thus known colloquially as “air ball” shots (ABS). When an away player launches an ABS, the home crowd is likely to recite in unison an “air ball, air ball” chant (ABC) to single him out for a uniquely subpar performance. Similar poor performance by a home player is almost always ignored. An archival exploration showed that away players who shot an ABS had a lower success rate in the shot immediately after, as compared to home players launching an ABS, however, this difference was unrelated to ABC. Also, players with a better shooting ability were better able to deal with the debilitating effects. The results expand ego threat research and are discussed in the context of ego‐depletion and a model is proposed to predict performance quality in social context when the negative feedback is delivered by partisans and one’s knowledge of his skill level is known.     

Appraising Loftus and Palmer (1974) post-event information versus concurrent commentary in the context of sport

Two experiments were conducted to examine framing effects in sport. In Experiment 1, a conceptual replication [Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(5), 585–589], participants watched a hockey collision, with the hit described later in a written format as a “contact”, “bump”, or “smash”. This manipulation resulted in no differences in participants’ report of how fast the players were skating, their intentions, and the outcome of the hit. In Experiment 2, participants watched the same video clip with ongoing commentary. Those who heard the announcer describing the event as “contact” estimated a higher skating speed than participants who were exposed to the “smash” commentary. Participants who were exposed to the “bump” commentary rated the repercussions of the collision as less severe than did those exposed to the other commentaries. These findings show that the perception of magnitude hierarchy may be domain specific and suggest future avenues for exploring framing effects when one is exposed to visual stimuli.     

The Advantage of Disadvantage: Underdogs in the Political Arena

Political candidates are often labeled as underdogs, either by the press or themselves. This paper explores connotations associated with the underdog label in the political arena. We argue that being labeled an underdog has a strategic advantage because it is associated with positive qualities, particularly likeability. The current studies demonstrate that partisan supporters prefer to see their favored candidate as an underdog compared to people not aligned with the candidate, and underdog-labeled entities are perceived to be warmer, and no less competent, than frontrunners. Discussion focuses on the advantages and risks of carrying the underdog label in the political arena.     

The Future is Bright: The Underdog Label,Availability, and Optimism

Research suggests that people support underdogs. Three studies examined how laypeople conceptualize the underdog label. Study 1 used a free association method to create a semantic network map of the underdog construct. In Study 2, participants provided their own definitions and selected the entity that best exemplified an underdog. In the two studies, the underdog term was linked to both disadvantage and successful qualities. In Study 3, participants read fictional stories about competing entities unlikely to succeed. When targets were labeled as underdogs, participants predicted that they would perform significantly better than expectations. We suggest that, although dictionaries define underdogs as unlikely to prevail, a layperson's conceptions, shaped by inspirational archetypal stories of odds overcome, are more optimistic.     

The appeal of the underdog

When people observe competitions, they are often drawn to figures that are seen as disadvantaged or unlikely to prevail. The present research tested the scope and limits of people's support for underdogs. The first two studies demonstrated, in the context of Olympic matches (Study 1) and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (Study 2), that observers' support for a competitor increased when framing it as an underdog. The final two studies explored mechanisms underlying support for underdogs. Study 3 showed that participants attributed more effort to a team when they believed it to be an underdog, and perceptions of effort mediated liking. In Study 4, participants reading a hypothetical sporting event supported a team with a low probability of success and labeled it an underdog unless it had greater resources than an opponent, suggesting that low expectations by themselves do not engender support if positive outcomes are not seen as deserved.