Thinking of others
Loving the Group That Denies You First: Social Identity Effects of Ostracism Before Inclusion
Ethan Dahl, Elizabeth Niedbala & Zachary Hohman
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Ostracism is an aversive situation that occurs frequently in everyday life; however, few empirical studies have investigated multiple experiences of inclusion or ostracism from the same group. The prior work in this area has also not evaluated the influence of subsequent inclusion and ostracism on identification with the group, perceptions of the group, or group member behaviors. Across three experiments, the current study investigated the impact of subsequent inclusion and ostracism on an individual's fundamental needs, identification with the group, perceptions of the group, and risk taking to benefit the group. It was hypothesized that participants who were ostracized and then included would show significant increases in group identification, positive group perceptions, and risk taking to benefit the group. Support for these hypotheses was found. Results are discussed regarding the impact of subsequent experiences of ostracism and inclusion on the individual and his or her relationship with the group.
The Gift of Psychological Closeness: How Feasible Versus Desirable Gifts Reduce Psychological Distance to the Giver
SoYon Rim et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Gift-giving is a common form of social exchange but little research has examined how different gift types affect the psychological distance between giver and recipient. We examined how two types of gifts influence recipients' perceived psychological distance to the giver. Specifically, we compared desirable gifts focused on the quality of the gift with feasible gifts focused on the gift's practicality or ease of use. We found that feasible (vs. desirable) gifts led recipients to feel psychologically closer to givers (Studies 1-4). Further clarifying the process by which receiving a desirable versus feasible gift affects perceived distance, when recipients were told that the giver focused on the gift's practicality or ease of use (vs. the gift's overall quality), while holding the specific features of the gifts constant, they felt closer to the gift-giver (Study 5). These results shed light on how different gifts can influence interpersonal relationships.
Mind Perception of Robots Varies With Their Economic Versus Social Function
Xijing Wang & Eva Krumhuber
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
Abstract:
While robots were traditionally built to achieve economic efficiency and financial profits, their roles are likely to change in the future with the aim to provide social support and companionship. In this research, we examined whether the robot's proposed function (social vs. economic) impacts judgments of mind and moral treatment. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrated that robots with social function were perceived to possess greater ability for emotional experience, but not cognition, compared to those with economic function and whose function was not mentioned explicitly. Study 2 replicated this finding and further showed that low economic value reduced ascriptions of cognitive capacity, whereas high social value resulted in increased emotion perception. In Study 3, robots with high social value were more likely to be afforded protection from harm, and such effect was related to levels of ascribed emotional experience. Together, the findings demonstrate a dissociation between function type (social vs. economic) and ascribed mind (emotion vs. cognition). In addition, the two types of functions exert asymmetric influences on the moral treatment of robots. Theoretical and practical implications for the field of social psychology and human-computer interaction are discussed.
Extraordinary Altruists Exhibit Enhanced Self-Other Overlap in Neural Responses to Distress
Kristin Brethel-Haurwitz et al.
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Shared neural representations during experienced and observed distress are hypothesized to reflect empathic neural simulation, which may support altruism. But the correspondence between real-world altruism and shared neural representations has not been directly tested, and empathy's role in promoting altruism toward strangers has been questioned. Here, we show that individuals who have performed costly altruism (donating a kidney to a stranger; n = 25) exhibit greater self-other overlap than matched control participants (n = 27) in neural representations of pain and threat (fearful anticipation) in anterior insula (AI) during an empathic-pain paradigm. Altruists exhibited greater self-other correspondence in pain-related activation in left AI, highlighting that group-level overlap was supported by individual-level associations between empathic pain and firsthand pain. Altruists exhibited enhanced functional coupling of left AI with left midinsula during empathic pain and threat. Results show that heightened neural instantiations of empathy correspond to real-world altruism and highlight limitations of self-report.
The ecological rationality of helping others: Potential helpers integrate cues of recipients' need and willingness to sacrifice
Daniel Sznycer et al.
Evolution and Human Behavior, forthcoming
Abstract:
Why do humans help others? Many theories focus on dimensions like kinship or reciprocity. On their surface, these theories seem unable to explain help directed at fleeting strangers. In response to this puzzle, researchers have proposed that the mind has ecologically rational systems for providing aid. These systems respond to cues that predicted adaptive behavior during human evolution, regardless of whether such cues continue to be predictive in modern environments. In three studies, we test for two cues that might predict whether a potential benefactor will help a potential recipient: the need of the recipient and the extent to which the recipient is willing to sacrifice for the benefactor. Both cues, in ancestral environments, have the potential to predict whether a long-term relationship might be established. Consistent with past research, we find that both cues matter: Needy people and people willing to sacrifice are helped more. However, the cues are not merely additive: In some cases, the cue of need is ignored and only willingness to sacrifice is used. We discuss these results in terms of recent evolutionary theories of emotions.
Uncertainty about the impact of social decisions increases prosocial behavior
Andreas Kappes et al.
Nature Human Behaviour, August 2018, Pages 573-580
Abstract:
Uncertainty about how our choices will affect others infuses social life. Past research suggests uncertainty has a negative effect on prosocial behaviour by enabling people to adopt self-serving narratives about their actions. We show that uncertainty does not always promote selfishness. We introduce a distinction between two types of uncertainty that have opposite effects on prosocial behaviour. Previous work focused on outcome uncertainty (uncertainty about whether or not a decision will lead to a particular outcome). However, as soon as people's decisions might have negative consequences for others, there is also impact uncertainty (uncertainty about how others' well-being will be impacted by the negative outcome). Consistent with past research, we found decreased prosocial behaviour under outcome uncertainty. In contrast, prosocial behaviour was increased under impact uncertainty in incentivized economic decisions and hypothetical decisions about infectious disease threats. Perceptions of social norms paralleled the behavioural effects. The effect of impact uncertainty on prosocial behaviour did not depend on the individuation of others or the mere mention of harm, and was stronger when impact uncertainty was made more salient. Our findings offer insights into communicating uncertainty, especially in contexts where prosocial behaviour is paramount, such as responding to infectious disease threats.
Friend or Foe? A Reversal of Ingroup Bias
Timothy Dunne
Group Decision and Negotiation, August 2018, Pages 593-610
Abstract:
Research on groups in organizations has regularly identified the presence of favoritism toward members of one's ingroup. Identity with a social group helps understand this bias, yet the mechanisms that may undermine the process have not been well documented. This study investigates the effect that not adhering to group expectations has on the positive bias otherwise awarded ingroup members, thus extending the literature on social identity theory and intragroup dynamics. Given that ingroup members, as compared to outgroup members, are expected to reciprocate loyalty and trust, this study examines what happens to the bias for the ingroup member that does not adhere to group expectations. Results from an intergroup negotiation experiment support the hypotheses that breaching group norms minimizes the ingroup bias effect. More importantly, results revealed a reversal of the ingroup bias, whereby ingroup members who did not uphold group expectations were evaluated more negatively than outgroup members.