Showing papers on "Schadenfreude published in 2005"
26 Sep 2005
TL;DR: In this article, the authors report an exploratory investigation to integrate emotions into the study of post-crisis communication, examining the amount of sympathy, anger, and schadenfreude generated by a variety of crisis types.
Abstract: This manuscript reports an exploratory investigation to integrate emotions into the study of post-crisis communication. Using the discussion of the role of affect in Attribution Theory, the research integrates emotion into Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT), one approach to post-crisis communication. SCCT uses crisis responsibility, how much people believe the organization is responsible for the crisis, to determine the most effective post-crisis communication strategy for protecting the organization's reputation. The research examines the amount of sympathy, anger, and schadenfreude generated by a variety of crisis types. The focus is on the connection between these three emotions and perceptions of crisis responsibility. The results suggest how emotion can be integrated into post-crisis communication and supports the value of including emotion in future research.
241 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors tested the hypothesis that Schadenfreude, pleasure at another's misfortune, results when a misfortune is perceived as deserved, and they found that responsibility for the misfortune increased Schadenfrude and this effect was mediated by the perceived deservingness of the misfortune.
Abstract: The present study tested the hypothesis that Schadenfreude, pleasure at another's misfortune, results when a misfortune is perceived as deserved. Participants responded to interviews in which information was provided about a student who suffered a misfortune. The male or female student had either high or average achievements and was either responsible or not responsible for the misfortune. Results showed that responsibility for the misfortune increased Schadenfreude and this effect was mediated by the perceived deservingness of the misfortune. © 2005 Psychology Press Ltd.
110 citations
TL;DR: This paper investigated how perceptions by a low-status observer that his or her low status is deserved or undeserved affects the observer's envy and resentment towards a deserving or undeserving high achiever, and schadenfreude and sympathy when the high- achiever suffers a subsequent failure.
Abstract: This study used deservingness theory (Feather, 1999) to investigate how perceptions by a low status observer that his or her low status is deserved or undeserved affects the observer's envy and resentment towards a deserving or undeserving high achiever, and schadenfreude and sympathy when the high achiever suffers a subsequent failure. Deservingness was manipulated by varying the amount of effort, high or low, that led to a low achievement or a high achievement. Participants were 197 undergraduates who role-played a deserving or undeserving low performing student. In this role they first responded to a scenario involving either a deserving or undeserving high achiever and then to a subsequent epilogue in which the high achiever suffered failure. Results showed that resentment about the role-player's low performance affected both envy and resentment towards the high achiever, and that both resentment about the high achiever's success and a wish to denigrate the high achiever fuelled schadenfreude about th...
107 citations
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: In this paper, a series of studies were conducted to examine the scope and limitations of the underdog effect and found that most people do not hesitate to align themselves with underdogs, a phenomenon called "the underdog effect" and that resources play a crucial role in forming alliances with those whom we perceive to have the lower chance to succeed.
Abstract: From politics to sports to business, people are quick to categorize those at a competitive disadvantage as ‘underdogs’. Moreover, there is ample anecdotal support that most people do not hesitate to align themselves with underdogs, a phenomenon called “the underdog effect”. A series of studies were conducted to examine the scope and limitations of the underdog effect. The first study explored the extent of the underdog effect and determined that resources play a crucial role in forming alliances with those whom we perceive to have the lower chance to succeed. A second series of experiments assessed whether participants, who demonstrated the underdog effect, did truly support those at a competitive disadvantage or merely rooted against the favorite. The first experiment in this series framed questions in terms of either losing or winning, thus forcing the responders to pick the more salient of their perceptions of a novel competition scenario. Support for the underdog was found to be more extreme than rooting against the top-dog. The next experiment in this series explored the human perception under “spoiler” condition, when the underdog does not have much to gain from winning the competition, but the stakes are high for the top dog due to possible adverse repercussions above and beyond of the present competition. Spoilers were not supported more than non-spoilers. Finally, the last series of studies used memory as an
6 citations