In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators.

/pdf/the-moderator-mediator-variable-distinction-in-social-2bmijritn2.pdf

The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.

In this chapter a theory of motivation and emotion developed from an attributional perspective is presented Before undertaking this central task, it might be beneficial to review the progression of the book In Chapter 1 it was suggested that causal attributions have been prevalent throughout history and in disparate cultures Studies reviewed in Chapter 2 revealed a large number of causal ascriptions within motivational domains, and different ascriptions in disparate domains Yet some attributions, particularly ability and effort in the achievement area, dominate causal thinking To compare and contrast causes such as ability and effort, their common denominators or shared properties were identified Three causal dimensions, examined in Chapter 3, are locus, stability, and controllability, with intentionality and globality as other possible causal properties As documented in Chapter 4, the perceived stability of a cause influences the subjective probability of success following a previous success or failure; causes perceived as enduring increase the certainty that the prior outcome will be repeated in the future And all the causal dimensions, as well as the outcome of an activity and specific causes, influence the emotions experienced after attainment or nonattainment of a goal The affects linked to causal dimensions include pride (with locus), hopelessness and resignation (with stability), and anger, gratitude, guilt, pity, and shame (with controllability)

/pdf/an-attributional-theory-of-achievement-motivation-and-2eu5g13rxj.pdf

An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.

Customer loyalty is viewed as the strength of the relationship between an individual’s relative attitude and repeat patronage. The relationship is seen as mediated by social norms and situational factors. Cognitive, affective, and conative antecedents of relative attitude are identified as contributing to loyalty, along with motivational, perceptual, and behavioral consequences. Implications for research and for the management of loyalty are derived.

Customer Loyalty: Toward an Integrated Conceptual Framework:

This article develops a conceptual framework for advancing theories of environmentally significant individual behavior and reports on the attempts of the author’s research group and others to develop such a theory. It discusses definitions of environmentally significant behavior; classifies the behaviors and their causes; assesses theories of environmentalism, focusing especially on value-belief-norm theory; evaluates the relationship between environmental concern and behavior; and summarizes evidence on the factors that determine environmentally significant behaviors and that can effectively alter them. The article concludes by presenting some major propositions supported by available research and some principles for guiding future research and informing the design of behavioral programs for environmental protection. Recent developments in theory and research give hope for building the understanding needed to effectively alter human behaviors that contribute to environmental problems. This article develops a conceptual framework for the theory of environmentally significant individual behavior, reports on developments toward such a theory, and addresses five issues critical to building a theory that can inform efforts to promote proenvironmental behavior.

/pdf/new-environmental-theories-toward-a-coherent-theory-of-2bw8ke8b1i.pdf

New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior

Social behavior is ordinarily treated as being under conscious (if not always thoughtful) control. However, considerable evidence now supports the view that social behavior often operates in an implicit or unconscious fashion. The identifying feature of implicit cognition is that past experience influences judgment in a fashion not introspectively known by the actor. The present conclusion--that attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes have important implicit modes of operation--extends both the construct validity and predictive usefulness of these major theoretical constructs of social psychology. Methodologically, this review calls for increased use of indirect measures--which are imperative in studies of implicit cognition. The theorized ordinariness of implicit stereotyping is consistent with recent findings of discrimination by people who explicitly disavow prejudice. The finding that implicit cognitive effects are often reduced by focusing judges' attention on their judgment task provides a basis for evaluating applications (such as affirmative action) aimed at reducing such unintended discrimination.

/pdf/implicit-social-cognition-attitudes-self-esteem-and-2j32pp6h9o.pdf

Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes, Self-Esteem, and Stereotypes.

PART I: INTRODUCTION. 1. Ways of Knowing. The Place of Values in Social Science Research. Contestability in Social and Physical Sciences. Casual Observation. Toward a Science of Social Behavior. Summary. 2. Evaluating Social Science Theories and Research. The Purposes of Research in the Social Sciences. Criteria for Evaluating Social Science Research. Maximizing Construct Validity. Maximizing Internal Validity. Maximizing External Validity. Summary. 3. Ethical Principles. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study. The Belmont Report. Focus on Ethical Issues in Experimental Research: Deception. Focus on Ethical Issues in Quasi?Experimental Research: Confidentiality and Anonymity. Focus on Ethical Issues in Nonexperimental Research: Participant Observation. The Ethics of Not Doing a Study. Case Study of Ethical Review Process. Closing Thoughts. Summary. PART II: MEASUREMENT. 4. Fundamentals of Measurement. From Abstract Concepts to Concrete Representations. Operational Definitions Are Necessary but Rarely Sufficient. Measurement Presupposes a Clearly Defined Construct. Components of an Observed Score Reliability. 5. Modes of Measurement. Modes of Direct Questioning. Other Modes of Measurement. Summary. 6. Single-Item Measure in Questionnaires. Outline of Procedures in Questionnaire Research. Question Content. Question Wording. Question Sequence. Special Techniques for Sensitive Content. Interviewing. Summary. 7. Scaling and Multiple-Item Measures. Advantages of Multiple-Item Measures. Levels of Measurement. Rating Scales for Quantifying Individual Judgements. Developing Multiple- Items Scales. Three Types of Multiple-Items Scales. Scaling and Levels of Measurement. Summary. PART III: SAMPLING. 8. Fundamentals of Sampling. Some Basic Definitions and Concepts. Nonprobabilty Sampling. Probability Sampling. Concluding Remarks About the Two Kinds of Sampling. Sampling Elements Other Than People. Summary. 9. Probability Sampling Methods. Basic Probability Sampling Methods. Sampling Error. Two Examples of Sampling Plans for National Survey. Summary. 10. Experience Sampling. Applications of the Experience Sampling Method. Sampling Strategies and Procedures. Measurement Strategies and Procedures. Summary. PART IV: SOCIAL RESEARCH STRATEGIES. 11. Randomized Experiments. Controlling and Manipulating Variables. Random Assignment. Independent Variables that Vary Within and Between Participants. Threats to Internal Validity. Construct Validity of Independent Variables in a Randomized Experiment. Alternative Experimental Designs. Strengths and Weaknesses of Randomized Experiments. Summary. 12. The Laboratory Setting. When Should The Laboratory Be Used? Types of Laboratory Study. Artifact and Artificiality. Elements of Laboratory Study. Summary. 13. Nonrandomized Designs. Examples of Nonrandomized Designs. Alternative Nonrandomized Designs. Summary. 14. Applied Research. Varieties of Applied Research. Evaluation Research. the Politics of Applied and Evaluation Research. Can We Afford Not to Do Applied Research? Summary. 15. Observational Archival Research. Naturalness in Research. Observation. Archival Research. Summary. 16. Qualitative Research. Narrative Analysis. Focus Groups. Oral History. Participant. Summary. PART V: ANALYSIS AND WRITING. 17. Data Management and Exploration. The Data Matrix. The Codebook. Statistical Software. Exploring Data. Summary. 18. Estimates and Tests of Association. Associations Between Dichotomous Variables. Inferring Associations in Populations from Sample Data. Associations Between Continuous Variables. Associations Between a Continuous Variable and a Dichotomous Variable. Interpreting Associations. Partial Associations. Summary. 19. Reviewing Research Reports and Literatures. Reviewing Research Reports. Searching the Literature. Reviewing the Literature. Reviewing the Literature ? ?Traditionally? and Meta-Analytically. Basic Meta-Analytic Tests: combing and Comparing Studies. Summary. 20. Writing the Research Report. Some Preliminary Considerations. Introduction. Method. Results. Discussion. Summary or Abstract. References. Appendix. Some Suggestions on Procedure and Style. Where to Find Additional Guidance. Summary. Bibliography. Author Index. Subject Index.

Research methods in social relations

Purdue University Three studies tested the idea that when social identity is salient, group-based appraisals elicit specific emotions and action tendencies toward out-groups. Participants' group memberships were made salient and the collective support apparently enjoyed by the in-group was measured or manipulated. The authors then measured anger and fear (Studies 1 and 2) and anger and contempt (Study 3), as well as the desire to move against or away from the out-group. Intergroup anger was distinct from intergroup fear, and the inclination to act against the out-group was distinct from the tendency to move away from it. Participants who perceived the in-group as strong were more likely to experience anger toward the out-group and to desire to take action against it. The effects of perceived in-group strength on offensive action tendencies were mediated by anger. The annals of history and contemporary news sources bear overwhelming witness to the variety of ways in which out-groups are devalued, discriminated against, and sometimes decimated by the members of other groups. One group is shunned and avoided, a second economically exploited, another belittled and scape- goated, and yet another systematically murdered. In contributing a social psychological perspective to the understanding of negative intergroup behavior, social psychologists have typically focused on prejudice---a negative evaluation of a group and its mem- bers-as the cause of discrimination. Despite the insights provided by such an approach (for reviews, see Brewer & Brown, 1998; Dovidio, Brigham, Johnson, & Gaertner, 1996; Fiske, 1998; Macrae, Stangor, & Hewstone, 1996; Mackie & Smith, 1998a), conceptualizing prejudice as a negative evaluation of a group has proved of little help in explaining the wide variety of negative reactions to out-groups (Mackie & Smith, 1998a, 1998b; Schnei- der, 1996; E. R. Smith, 1993). Why does one out-group attract fear or contempt while another becomes the target of anger? If out- groups uniformly attract negative evaluation, what factors explain the impulse, desire, intention, or tendency to move against some groups and away from others? Unfortunately, very little work has been done to differentiate action tendencies elicited in intergroup contexts (Grant & Brown, 1995; Mackie & Smith, 1998a; Messick & Mackie, 1989; Wright, Taylor, & Moghaddam, 1990; important Diane M. Mackie and Thierry Devos, Department of Psychology, Uni- versity of California, Santa Barbara; Eliot R. Smith, Department of Psy- chological Sciences, Purdue University. This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant SBR 9209995, a Swiss National Science Foundation Fellowship, and National Institute of Mental Health Grants RO1 MH46840 and KO2 MH01178. Thierry Devos is now at the Department of Psychology, Yale University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Diane M. Mackie, Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106-9660. Electronic mail may be sent to mackie @psych.ucsb.edu. 602 exceptions are discussed later). The research reported here consti- tutes an initial empirical investigation of a novel theoretical ap- proach to answering these questions. Although intergroup theorists have by and large concentrated on negative attitude or evaluation as a precursor to discrimination, emotion theorists have typically differentiated both the diversity of feelings that may be directed toward a particular target and the specificity of behavior that can follow from those feelings. Ap- praisal theories of emotion (Frijda, 1986; Roseman, 1984; Scherer, 1988; C. A. Smith & Ellsworth, 1985), in particular, conceptualize personal emotions as complex reactions to specific situations or events that include quite differentiated cognitions, feelings, and action tendencies. Specific emotions experienced by an individual are triggered by appraisals (cognitions or interpretations) of whether an event appears to favor or harm the individual's goals or desires and whether the individual has the resources to cope or not, for example. Depending on their particular configuration, cogni- tive appraisals trigger specific emotional experiences (Ellsworth & Smith, 1988; Roseman, Spindel, & Jose, 1990; C. A. Smith & Ellsworth, 1985) and these emotional experiences in turn promote certain behaviors (Frijda, Kuipers, & ter Schure, 1989; Roseman, Wiest, & Swartz, 1994). Anger at another individual, for example, is typically conceptualized as resulting from appraisals that the other has harmed the self and that the self is strong. Such anger in turn leads to tendencies to aggress against that other person. Appraisal theory was developed to explain personal emotions experienced by individuals, and this focus was maintained in an important application of it to the intergroup context. Dijker (1987; Dijker, Koomen, van den Heuvel, & Frijda, 1996) asked native Dutch participants their emotional reactions to individual members of naturally occurring out-groups, with the assumption that these reactions depended on the nature of interpersonal interactions that participants had experienced. Respondents reported feeling a range of distinct negative and positive emotions about out-group mem- bers indicating that their personal emotions were indeed influenced by their individual experiences in encounters with other groups.

Intergroup emotions: explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context.

Models postulating 2 distinct processing modes have been proposed in several topic areas within social and cognitive psychology. We advance a new conceptual model of the 2 processing modes. The structural basis of the new model is the idea, supported by psychological and neuropsychological evidence, that humans possess 2 memory systems. One system slowly learns general regularities, whereas the other can quickly form representations of unique or novel events. Associative retrieval or pattern completion in the slow-learning system elicited by a salient cue constitutes the effortless processing mode. The second processing mode is more conscious and effortful; it involves the intentional retrieval of explicit, symbolically represented rulesfrom either memory system and their use to guide processing. After presenting our model, we review existing dual-process models in several areas, emphasizing their similar assumptions of a quick, effortless processing mode that rests on well-learned prior associations and ...

/pdf/dual-process-models-in-social-and-cognitive-psychology-2z73bvva8r.pdf

Dual-Process Models in Social and Cognitive Psychology: Conceptual Integration and Links to Underlying Memory Systems

Beliefs About Inequality: American's Views of What Is and What Ought To Be

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses social identity and social emotions. Specific stereotypic beliefs may be positive or negative in evaluative tone, and may be thought to characterize virtually all members of the group or just a few of them. This definition of stereotype is widely accepted. Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination—ranging from economic exploitation of outgroup members through genocide—have been among the central historical themes of the 20th century. Social psychologists have been at the forefront among social scientists attempting to understand the nature and sources of intergroup conflicts. The chapter also discusses some of the problems in the traditional conceptualization and some of the theoretical strengths and novel hypotheses implicit in the new one. It describes some directions for research that could provide further empirical support for this new viewpoint on prejudice and related phenomena.

Eliot R. Smith

Papers

Research methods in social relations

Intergroup emotions: explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context.

Dual-Process Models in Social and Cognitive Psychology: Conceptual Integration and Links to Underlying Memory Systems

Beliefs About Inequality: American's Views of What Is and What Ought To Be

Social Identity and Social Emotions: Toward New Conceptualizations of Prejudice