Sympathy as knowledge of the other in need: An investigation into the roles of need for closure and the moral foundations on sympathy toward immigrants

Natives with a need for cognitive closure can approve of immigrants' economic effect when they trust pro-immigrant epistemic authorities

Previous research on the need for cognitive closure (NFC), or the desire for epistemic certainty, has consistently found that it is associated with negative attitudes toward immigrants, among other outgroups, potentially because they represent agents of change and/or due to a general preference for perceived stability and certainty associated with right-wing politics. However, as individuals with this need theoretically prefer stable and certain knowledge, independent of the specific content, it is also possible that these individuals could have positive attitudes toward immigrants when they are provided with a positive source of information to which they can metaphorically "close" upon. In two studies (n = 397), controlling for participants' political orientation, we found that individuals with an NFC were more likely to accept immigrants when their positive effect was endorsed by an epistemic authority (Study 1), but only when they trusted this source (Study 2).

Moral Foundations, Himpathy, and Punishment Following Organizational Sexual Misconduct Allegations

We build on deontic justice and moral foundations theories to shed light on responses to sexual misconduct at work by proposing a model that explains why some third parties punish accusing victims and support alleged perpetrators. We theorize that when third parties are given conflicting he-said, she-said information, they intuitively evaluate organizational injustice based on moral values. We further theorize that binding moral foundations (loyalty, authority, purity) give rise to sympathy toward men accused of sexual misconduct and anger toward female accusers. Across five studies (total n = 5,413) utilizing archival, field, and vignette designs, we examined third-party responses to sexual misconduct accusations ranging in severity across several industries. Third-party endorsement of binding moral foundations was linked to increased perpetrator-directed sympathy and victim-directed anger (Studies 1–4). These emotions jointly mediated the relationship between binding values and credibility perceptions of the accusing victim and the alleged perpetrator (Studies 2 and 3). Moreover, victim credibility was negatively associated with social sanctions and punishment severity levied toward the accusing victim, and perpetrator credibility was negatively associated with the same punishment outcomes for the alleged perpetrator (Studies 3 and 4). In Study 5, we found that managers framing the accusing victim as disloyal exacerbated negative judgments and emotions toward the victim and positive judgments and emotions toward the perpetrator for individuals who highly ascribe to binding moral foundations. We discuss the theoretical contributions and practical implications of moral concerns on third parties’ emotions, judgments, and motivations to punish actors involved in sexual misconduct allegations.

Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1652 .

Social cohesion and attitudinal changes toward migration: A longitudinal perspective amid the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted social interactions and coexistence around the globe in dimensions that go far beyond health issues. In the case of the Global South, the pandemic has developed along with growing South-South migratory movements, becoming another key factor that might reinforce social conflict in increasingly multicultural areas as migrants have historically served as "scapegoats" for unexpected crises as a way to control and manage diversity. Chile is one of the main destination countries for migrants from the Latin American and Caribbean region, and COVID-19 outbreaks in migrant housing have intensified discrimination. In such a context, there is a need for understanding how the pandemic has potentially changed the way non-migrants perceive and interact with migrant neighbors. Drawing on the national social cohesion panel survey study ELSOC (2016-2021, N = 2,927) the aim is to analyze the changes in non-migrants' attitudes toward migrants-related to dimensions of social cohesion-over the last years and their relation with individual status and territorial factors. We argue that social cohesion in increasingly multicultural societies is partially threatened in times of crisis. The results indicate that after the pandemic, convivial attitudes toward Latin American migrants decreased. Chileans started perceiving them more negatively, particularly those respondents with lower educational levels and who live in increasingly multicultural neighborhoods with higher rates of migrant residents.

The Moral Foundations of Desired Cultural Tightness

People vary on their desire for strict norms, and the moral underpinnings of these differences have yet to be explored. The current research examined whether and how moral beliefs held by individuals would affect the extent to which they want their country to be tight (i.e., having strict social norms) or loose (i.e., having more permissive social norms). In particular, the effects of the “binding” and “individualizing” foundations, which are moral beliefs focused on the importance of groups and individuals, respectively, were examined. We hypothesized that the binding foundations could predict people’s desire for cultural tightness. We also hypothesized that the perception that one’s society is threatened may drive this effect. Three studies were conducted using both cross-sectional (Studies 1 and 3) and two-wave (Study 2) designs. Demographic variables and participants’ political orientation effects were controlled. In Study 1, only the binding foundations significantly predicted higher desired tightness. In Study 2, binding foundations predicted desired tightness measured at follow-up. In Study 3, the positive effect of perceived threat on desired tightness via the binding foundations was confirmed. From additional within-paper analyses we also have some evidence of significant relationships, albeit unstable across studies, between desired tightness and individualizing foundations.

Multivariate morphological brain signatures enable individualized prediction of dispositional need for closure

Need for closure (NFC) reflects stable individual differences in the desire for a quick, definite, and stable answer to a question. A large body of research has documented the association between NFC and various cognitive, emotional and social processes. Despite considerable interest in psychology, little effort has been made to uncover the neural substrates of individual variations in NFC. Herein, we took a data-driven approach to predict NFC trait combining machine learning framework and the whole-brain grey matter volume (GMV) features, which represent a reliable brain imaging measure and have been commonly employed to explore neural basis underlying individual differences of cognition and behaviors. Brain regions contributing to the prediction were then subjected to functional connectivity and decoding analyses for a quantitative inference on their psychophysiological functions. Our results indicated that multivariate patterns of GMV derived from multiple regions across distributed brain systems predicted NFC at individual level. The contributing regions are distributed across the emotional processing network (e.g., striatum), cognitive control network (e.g., lateral prefrontal cortex), social cognition network (e.g., temporoparietal junction) and perceptual processing network (e.g., occipital cortex). The current study provided the first evidence that dispositional NFC is embodied in multiple large-scale brain networks, helping to delineate a more complete picture about the neuropsychological processes that support individual differences in NFC. Beyond these findings, the current interdisciplinary approach to constructing and interpreting neuroimaging-based prediction model of personality traits would be informative to a wide range of future studies on personality.

Men and women who want epistemic certainty are at-risk for hostility towards women leaders

Researchers have spent the past five decades asking why women leaders face disproportionally more disapproval than their men colleagues. We extend recent research by investigating the need for cognitive closure (NCC), or the desire for stable and certain knowledge, to help answer this question. Consistent with Role Congruity Theory, we propose that individuals with this need are more likely to disapprove of women who break traditional gender roles as well as women leaders, a subcategory of nontraditional woman. We studied the NCC effect relative to the effects of gender and political orientation (i.e., women and political liberals are less likely to disapprove of women leaders). In four studies, including state and dispositional treatments of NCC and a brief meta-analyses, we argue that NCC has an indirect effect on negative attitudes toward women leaders through hostile sexism, among both men and women and from both sides of the political spectrum.