Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Whether people compete or cooperate with each other has consequences for their own performance and that of organizations. To explain why people compete or cooperate, previous research has focused on two main factors: situational outcome structures and personality types. Here, we propose that—above and beyond these two factors—situational cues, such as the format in which people receive feedback, strongly affect whether they act competitively, cooperatively, or individualistically. Results of a laboratory experiment support our theorizing: After receiving ranking feedback, both students and experienced managers treated group situations with cooperative outcome structures as competitive and were in consequence willing to forgo guaranteed financial gains to pursue a—financially irrelevant—better rank. Conversely, in dilemma situations, feedback based on the joint group outcome led to more cooperation than ranking feedback. Our study contributes to research on competition, cooperation, interdependence theory, forced ranking, and the design of information environments.     

Variations on the Ramsey test: More triviality results

The purpose of this note is to formulate some weaker versions of the so called Ramsey test that do not entail the following unacceptable consequenceIf A and C are already accepted in K, then if A, then C is also accepted in K. and to show that these versions still lead to the same triviality result when combined with a preservation criterion.     

Autobiographical memory impairment in chronic schizophrenia: Significance and clinical correlates

Previous studies of autobiographical memory (AM) in schizophrenia yielded a reduction of specificity, richness of details and conscious recollection, which indicate both, quantitative and qualitative AM changes. However, their associations with psychopathological symptoms and neuropsychological deficits were not resolved. Therefore, we sought to investigate AM with respect to psychopathology and neuropsychology in patients with chronic schizophrenia to rule out the influence of different courses of the disease. AM of four lifetime periods was examined in 75 patients and 50 healthy controls by using a semi-structured interview. The recalled episodes were rated for memory specificity. Subsequently, one single event of each period of life was rated for details and experiential aspects of reliving (originality, vividness/visual imagery, emotional re-experiencing and emotional valence). When contrasted with healthy controls, patients recalled a significantly reduced number of episodes and personal semantic facts; moreover, memory specificity of AM was significantly lower in patients than controls. While the richness of details calculated for single events showed only minor, non-significant group differences, vividness and emotional re-experiencing were significantly less pronounced in the patient group. Along with this, AM performance correlated significantly with negative symptoms including apathy as well as verbal memory and executive functions. Our results underline the significance of overgenerality as a key feature of AM in schizophrenia as well as a dissociation between intact number of details of single events and reduced vividness and emotional re-experiencing. The extent of negative symptoms including apathy and impairments of verbal memory/executive functions may explain AM deficits in chronic schizophrenia.     

Stereotypes of Suicide Causes for Three Age/Gender Cohorts

On the basis of open-ended questions and interviews using vignettes of fictitious male and female suicide committers of ages 15, 40, and 60, a list of reasons attributed to their suicides was obtained. From this list, a 45-item (5-point Likert scale) checklist was developed. This checklist was administered to a total of 232 respondents in a factorial design. The subjects were asked to respond to items concerning the fictitious suicide committer of their own age and gender, as well as to items for the other two age/gender cohorts. Thus, two groups of subjects answered the checklist. One group of respondents rated the checklist separately for the 3 age cohorts of fictitious male committers (15-year-old male, 40-year-old male, and 60-year-old male). The other group rated the checklist for the three fictitious female committers. The rank of endorsement for each cause was tabulated separately for age/gender cohorts, and indices of overall agreement were computed. The results indicated high agreement among all respondents on the causes of suicide considered to be most likely for a given cohort, as well as a distinct differentiation among cohorts and gender groups. The findings were discussed with reference to cultural stereotypes about suicide causes, and arguments were elaborated on the contribution of these shared beliefs to an individual's decision to commit suicide.