Showing papers in "Social and Personality Psychology Compass in 2018"

The behavioral immune system: Current concerns and future directions

Abstract: Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2018;12:e12371. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12371 w Abstract The behavioral immune system is a motivational system that helps minimize infection risk by changing cognition, affect, and behavior in ways that promote pathogen avoidance. In the current paper, we review foundational concepts of the behavioral immune system and provide a brief summary of recent social psychological research on this topic. Next, we highlight current conceptual and empirical limitations of this work and delineate important questions that have the potential to drive major advances in the field. These questions include predicting the ontological development of the behavioral immune system, specifying the relationship between this system and the physiological immune system, and distinguishing conditions that elicit direct effects of situational pathogen threats versus effects that occur only in interaction with dispositional disease concerns. This discussion highlights significant challenges and underexplored topics to be addressed by the next generation of behavioral immune system research.

Context is Everything (in Emotion Research)

Abstract: As in many areas of psychological inquiry, context matters for how emotion is experienced, expressed, perceived, and regulated. While this may sound like a truism, emotion research does not always directly theorize, manipulate, or measure emotion with context in mind. To facilitate this process, we present a framework of contextual features that shape emotion-related processes, and highlight several key factors that have been shown to matter in emotion research. We make four recommendations which we believe will help to better integrate context in emotion science. We argue that a deeper collective understanding, interrogation, and integration of context will propel the field forward theoretically and methodologically, and enhance researchers' ability to probe the mechanisms of human psychological experience. While our focus is on emotion research, we believe that the context framework and associated recommendations will also be useful to other fields of social psychological and personality science.

Seeking and avoiding intergroup contact: Future frontiers of research on building social integration

Abstract: Over 60 years of research and comprehensive reviews now support Gordon Allport's contact hypothesis that face‐to‐face interactions between members of opposing groups should be promoted to lessen prejudice and improve intergroup relations. Society however does not yet enjoy the full prejudice‐reducing benefits of intergroup contact because opportunities for contact are often not taken up, and segregation persists in the face of diversity. In this article, we review recent investigations on the social psychology of individuals' seeking and avoiding intergroup contact and set the stage for new research in this area. We call for a new generation of research on intergroup contact that addresses a novel and critical research question: What personal, situational, and wider social factors move individuals towards or away from engaging in intergroup contact? This research can help us design intervention strategies to ensure that opportunities for, and benefits of, intergroup contact are fully enjoyed by individuals and groups in increasingly diverse societies.

A review of multiracial malleability: Identity, categorization, and shifting racial attitudes

Abstract: Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2018;1–15. w Abstract The majority of social perception research to date has focused on perceptually obvious and prototypical representations of social categories. However, not all people belong to social categories that are easily discernable. Within the past decade, there has been an upsurge of research demonstrating that multifaceted identities (both one's own and perceptions of others' identities) influence people to think about social categories in a more flexible manner. Here, we specifically review research on multiracial identity and perceptions of multiracial individuals as 2 domains where researchers have documented evidence of the flexible nature of social identities and social categorization. Integrating frameworks that argue race is a dynamic and interactive process, we provide evidence that studying multiracial perceivers and targets helps reveal that race changes across situations, time, and depending on a number of top‐down factors (e.g., expectations, stereotypes, and cultural norms). From the perspective of multiracial individuals as perceivers, we review research showing that flexible identity in multiracial individuals influences the process of social perception driven by a reduced belief in the essential nature of racial categories. From the perspective of multiracial individuals as targets, we review research that top‐down cues influence the racial categorization process. We further discuss emerging work that reveals that exposure to multiracial individuals influences beliefs surrounding the categorical (or noncategorical) nature of race, itself. Needed directions for future work are discussed.

Motivation and self-regulation: The role of want-to motivation in the processes underlying self-regulation and self-control

Abstract: Research on self-regulation has largely focused on the idea of effortful self-control, which assumes that exerting willpower will lead to greater success. However, in recent years, research has challenged this perspective and instead proposes that effortless self-regulation is more adaptive for long-term goal pursuit. Taking into consideration the burgeoning literature on effortless self-regulation, here we propose that motivation—or the reasons why we pursue our goals—plays an integral role in this process. The objective of the present paper is to highlight how motivation can play a role in how self-regulation unfolds. Specifically, we propose that pursuing goals because you want-to (vs. have-to) is associated with better goal attainment as a function of experiencing less temptations and obstacles. While the reason why want-to motivation relates to experiencing fewer obstacles has yet to be thoroughly explored, here we propose some potential mechanisms drawing from recent research on self-regulation. We also provide recommendations for future research, highlighting the importance of considering motivation in the study of self-regulatory processes.

The strategic value of essentialism

Abstract: Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2018;12:e12370. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12370 w Abstract Social essentialism—the belief that individuals contain an underlying essence determined by the social categories they belong to—has generally been regarded as a harmful cognitive process that results in prejudice and other forms of injustice at the group level. Trait essentialism, also termed a fixed mindset—the belief that people's trait levels are determined and relatively unchangeable—has been construed as a parallel impediment to self‐improvement at the individual level. However, each of these domains contains findings that do not fit this narrative, suggesting that such essentialized thinking is not always detrimental at either the group or individual level and that its effects may instead depend on motivation and context. Incorporating advances in research on moral judgment and identity allow for a reconciliation of the variable effects of social and trait essentialism. In some instances, essentialism can be a strategy for reducing blame over uncontrollable aspects of individuals and groups and for identity formation.

Affective processes as mediators of links between close relationships and physical health

Abstract: Close relationships are known to predict physical health outcomes. The time has come for a shift toward achieving a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms. One promising group of psychological mechanisms is affective processes, such as discrete emotions, emotion regulation, and affect reactivity. In this paper, we discuss the evidence linking relationship functioning with both the positive and negative valences of each affective process, considering the contributions of different types of close relationships across the lifespan, and the evidence for each affective process impacting physical health. We note evidence suggesting that affective processes may also have a causal impact on relationship function. When available, we review literature testing full mediational pathways, from relationship functioning to affective processes to physical health, as the ideal methodology for testing these links. Finally, we identify core themes and propose key future directions for this research.

Becoming us and them: Social learning and intergroup bias

Abstract: In recent years, research has demonstrated that the basic features of prejudice and discrimination emerge early in children’s development. These discoveries call into question the role of social learning in intergroup bias. Specifically, through what means do we learn to distinguish “us” from “them”? Here we explore this question, focusing on three key issues: how children respond to biased information they receive from others, how children selectively seek out certain types of biased information, and how children communicate biased information to others. We close by discussing the implications of this research for interventions to reduce stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination.

When does power trigger approach motivation? Threats and the role of perceived control in the power domain

Abstract: It is widely believed that power activates the behavioral approach system (BAS; Guinote, 2017; Keltner, Gruenfeld & Anderson, 2003), however, findings are inconsistent. Here we discuss evidence suggesting that perceived threats to control in the power domain are key determinants of the association between power and approach motivation. We propose that objective or subjective threats to the exercise of power trigger behavioral inhibition, conflicts between approach and behavioral inhibition, and reactive, negatively valenced approach motivation. Furthermore, threatened power holders reassert power – in particular by using coercion – as defense against threat. We discuss literature in support of these hypotheses involving external threats (e.g., instability, illegitimacy; uncertainty) and subjective states (anxiety, motivation to maintain power, perceived incompetence, submissiveness and perceptions of low power) that trigger the perception of lack of control in the power domain, and undermine the positive tone of power holders’ approach motivation.

Quotas and affirmative action: Understanding group-based outcomes and attitudes

Abstract: More and more countries are adopting quotas to incr ease group-based equality in the boardroom and the political sphere. Nevertheless, a ffirm tive action in general, and quotas in particular, remain a highly controversial subject – eliciting negative reactions from privileged groups, while support among minority and lower-stat us groups is generally higher. Focusing on gender, we take a broad approach to the topic and d iscuss (a) the effects of quotas and affirmative action on the underrepresentation of minority group s and on perceptions of their competence, (b) the effects of quotas and affirmative action on org anisational performance, and (c) predictors of attitudes towards affirmative action and quotas. We conclude that the benefits of quotas outweigh their costs and that they are an effective way of t ackling group-based inequality. We also discuss strategies that can be used to elicit more support among those groups that are particularly critical o f quotas.

Culture, emotion suppression and disclosure, and health.

Abstract: Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2018;12:e12373. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12373 w Abstract Researchers have examined cultural differences in the psychological and physiological health consequences of emotion suppression. The goal of this review is to clarify the state of the science on this growing area of research by summarizing patterns of findings, identifying limitations, and providing recommendations for future research. First, we review the framework that provides the theoretical foundation for explaining cultural differences, and then we present findings on how culture influences the psychological and physiological health consequences of emotion suppression. Next, we review the expressive writing intervention as a culturally sensitive intervention that facilitates emotion disclosure for cultural groups that prioritize emotional restraint. Finally, we end by providing theoretical and methodological recommendations for future research.

Buying well-being: Spending behavior and happiness

Abstract: Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2018;e12386. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12386 w Abstract The relationship between money and happiness is complex. While a large literature demonstrates a small but significant positive association between overall income and well‐being, a relatively new area of research explores the emotional consequences of everyday spending choices. Here we review this recent but rapidly growing area of investigation. We begin by briefly summarizing the link between money and happiness. Then, through the lens of 2 dominant models of human happiness, we suggest that seemingly inconsequential spending choices may provide an underappreciated and underutilized route to greater well‐being. Finally, we review new empirical evidence demonstrating that individuals can use their disposable income to increase their happiness by investing in experiential (rather than material) purchases, more free time, routine, self‐expression, and generosity.

Towards a critical psychology of human–animal relations

Abstract: This article argues that critical psychological engagement with the field of human–animal relations is largely absent, but of potential significance, and begins to outline more concretely what such a perspective might contribute, especially as a form of social psychology. The article provides a brief overview of the emerging psychology of human–animal relations and the extent to which it emphasises situated human–animal interactions in real‐world settings, including from the standpoint of animal participants. Recent elaborations of the “animal turn” outside of the discipline of psychology are considered, as they place fresh emphasis on human–animal interaction and interdependence and might further extend the boundaries of what counts as relations that matter in critical and social psychology. These foundations are argued to offer an invitation to critical psychology to engage more fully in the study of human–animal relations and enliven it as a result.

A critical review of the (un)conscious basis for system‐supporting attitudes of the disadvantaged

Abstract: Is support for societal systems amongst the disadvantaged driven by an (un)conscious system justification motive that is independent from self-interests? System justification theory (SJT) is unique in its affirmative answer to this question. SJT proposes (a) that support for societal systems operates in the service of maintaining the status quo, (b) that the evidence for this system justification motive lies with the fact that members of disadvantaged groups (un)consciously support societal systems that are detrimental to their interests, and (c) that these processes are most apparent when group interests are weak. The present article reviews emerging evidence for these propositions and concludes that (a) an unconscious manifestation of system justification is unlikely based on SJT's "strong" dissonance-based predictions, which assumes that competing group and system motives are cognitively salient, and (b) a conscious system justification motive is also unlikely amongst the disadvantaged when group interests are weak. In addition, we suggest ways in which to explain system justification effects amongst the disadvantaged without recourse to an (un)conscious system justification motive.

Joint action and joint attention : drawing parallels between the literatures

Abstract: Two of the most important milestones in children’s development are joint action (acting with others) and joint attention (attending with others). These are popular fields in both psychology and philosophy, but have formed surprisingly independent literatures despite the close similarities they share in terms of theoretical and methodological issues. This article systematically compares these fields and draws attention to specific and more general ways in which each could benefit from the other if communication between them were increased. We highlight a clear opportunity within these fields, but this could be a useful approach in cognitive science more generally. Joint action and joint attention 3 Social interaction is a crucial and pervasive component of human behaviour, and is consequently a skill at which we are highly adept. As a result, cognitive development research has focussed heavily on the developmental milestones that allow us to perform both simple and more complex joint behaviours. Two of the most important of these milestones are joint action and joint attention. These abilities have attracted a huge amount of interest from both philosophers and psychologists, studying both children and adults, but have each become the centre of largely independent literatures. Despite the relative lack of communication between these literatures, they have evolved in very similar ways and stumbled across similar issues. We argue that they would benefit from direct comparison, particularly where each area has identified different solutions that could be shared. Here we thus aim to initiate the building of a bridge between the fields of joint action and joint attention from both a psychological and a philosophical perspective. We start by highlighting the similar problems these fields have come across when attempting to define these concepts, particularly when defining what level of interaction constitutes “jointness.” We go on to discuss how researchers in each field have attempted to identify jointness using experimental studies, pointing out where cross-over could be beneficial. This is followed by a discussion of how we achieve jointness when acting and/or attending together. We then highlight some additional issues that can be compared across fields, and provide ways in which comparison can aid progress in both methodology and theory. Difficulties with definition Joint action refers to the co-ordination of actions between two or more individuals. There are different definitions of joint action that stipulate lower vs. higher levels of processing of the other’s mental states. For example, Sebanz, Bekkering and Knoblich (2006) use an inclusive definition, proposing that joint action is “any form of social interaction whereby two or more Joint action and joint attention 4 individuals coordinate their actions in space and time to bring about a change in the environment” (p. 70). This could include coordinated acts such as birds flocking, which do not necessarily involve understanding of the intentions of the other individuals in the group, but instead can be achieved by reactions to perceptual information from the other group members (e.g. direction of flight). At the other end of the scale, Bratman (1992) defines a specific type of joint action, Shared Cooperative Activity, as requiring both actors to understand the intentions of the other to achieve a shared goal, to be committed to the joint activity, to have common knowledge that this is the case and to be committed to supporting the partner. This is clearly a much more cognitively demanding definition involving bidirectional understanding of mental states and obligations. Similarly, definitions of joint attention also range from very inclusive to very restrictive. For example, Butterworth (1995) simply defined joint attention as “looking where others are looking” (p. 29). This would include behaviours of non-human animals where both parties are attending to the same thing, but there is not necessarily any common knowledge between the two that they are doing so. In contrast, Tomasello (1995) specifies a more restrictive definition in which it is necessary that the individuals not only attend to the same object, but also both know together that they are attending to the object and each other’s attention. This maps directly onto the common knowledge requirement in Bratman’s (1992) definition of joint action. It should be noted that for both joint action and joint attention it is not the case that one definition is correct and others are incorrect, in the sense that there is in fact a range of different levels of ‘joint’ behaviour. For example, within joint attention there are many other definitions that lie between the most inclusive and most restrictive (e.g. see Bakeman & Adamson, 1984; Leavens & Racine, 2009). One possibility suggested by Emery (2000) is to split these types of Joint action and joint attention 5 behaviours into two categories: “joint attention”, which includes behaviours without shared knowledge, versus “shared attention”, which includes behaviours with shared knowledge. It would already be extremely helpful if researchers would use the terms “joint” and “shared” in this way universally in both fields. However, this distinction still may not be thorough enough to eradicate confusion entirely where further ranges of behaviours exist within each category (see Siposova & Carpenter, forthcoming, for a more detailed typology of different levels of joint attention and joint action). In short, it would be helpful if there was agreement both within and across fields about terminology so that the same terms are not used to describe different ranges of behaviour. This variation in definitions causes confusion in the literature (e.g. see Leavens & Racine, 2009, versus Carpenter & Call, 2013: each argue for or against joint attention in great apes, respectively, but use different definitions of joint attention). This variation in definitions also leads to some of the issues outlined below, such as how to fulfil a criterion of true jointness. Interestingly, the qualities about which scholars disagree are highly comparable across both literatures, for example with regard to the criterion of common knowledge. Thus, an important first step for both fields is to establish agreement on how to define the different levels of each phenomenon. Once this has been achieved, it will be easier to identify further parallels between the two literatures that can aid progress in both. How can we identify jointness? As individuals, it may seem trivially clear to us when we are involved in joint action and/or joint attention with another person (Reddy, 2003). However, this may not always be so easy to distinguish as an empirical observer. Here we outline two ways that researchers have come up with to overcome this problem: exploiting unwanted side-effects of jointness, such as self-other interference, and experimentally manipulating factors that might increase jointness and Joint action and joint attention 6 measuring the corresponding changes in behaviour. Both of these approaches enable us to test the criteria laid out by the different definitions outlined above, to see whether fulfilling a given criterion produces changes in behaviour. If so, then the criterion can be assumed to be meaningful to jointness in some way. Self-Other Interference. One particularly interesting phenomenon that is frequently cited as evidence of jointness is self-other integration and interference. This is the phenomenon that when individuals are participating in joint action, they often experience a merging of representations of self and other. This has been identified in several different fields, including joint task representations (Sebanz, Knoblich & Prinz, 2003), joint focus of attention (Böckler, Knoblich & Sebanz, 2012), perspective-taking (Surtees & Apperly, 2012), motor representations (Brass, Ruby & Spengler, 2009) and emotion understanding (Steinbeis, 2016). Influence between self and other can occur bidirectionally, so that an individual may either egocentrically project representations of the self onto another person, or alternatively find their own self representations influenced by representations of the other. This mechanism has been argued to aid us in predicting a coordination partner’s actions and adapting our own accordingly (Vesper et al., 2010). Interestingly, it can actually result in reduced performance in some tasks. For example, individuals are less able to judge their own visual perspective on a scene if another individual is present who holds a different perspective (Samson, Apperly, Braithwaite & Andrews, 2010). This kind of interference from another person has been exploited in empirical research to demonstrate the presence of self-other influence, as well as to demonstrate its automaticity. The phenomenon of self-other interference is evidence for a degree of jointness, and as such it is useful to study across development to see when children can be considered to be acting Joint action and joint attention 7 jointly. Egocentrism in children is a well-established phenomenon, whereby individuals assume that their own thoughts and emotions are shared by others. This has been established in the fields of visual perspective-taking (Piaget & Inhelder, 1956) and mental state attribution (Wimmer & Perner, 1983), with children younger than around 3-4 years tending to respond as though others have the same perspective or mental state as they do even when this is not the case. However, egocentrism (influence from self to other) is less indicative of jointness than influence in the opposite direction, because egocentrism does not necessarily require representation of the other person at all. In contrast, interference from other to self is direct evidence that the other is represented, and that this representation influences the pre-existing representation of one’s own perspect