Beneficial effects of communicating intentions when delivering moral criticism: Cognitive and neural responses

People often do not accept criticism on their morality, especially when delivered by outgroup members. In two preregistered studies, we investigated whether people become more receptive to such negative feedback when feedback senders communicate their intention to help. Participants received negative feedback from ostensible others on their selfish (rather than altruistic) decisions in a donation task. We manipulated the identity of a feedback sender (ingroup vs. outgroup) and the intention that they provided for giving feedback. A sender either did not communicate any intentions, indicated the intention to help the feedback receiver improve, or communicated the intention to show moral superiority. We measured participants' self-reported responses to the feedback (Study 1, N = 44) and additionally recorded an EEG in Study 2 (N = 34). Results showed that when no intentions were communicated, participants assumed worse intentions from outgroup senders than ingroup senders (Study 1). However, group membership had no significant effect once feedback senders made their intentions explicit. Moreover, across studies, when feedback senders communicated their intention to help, participants perceived feedback as less unfair compared with when senders tried to convey their moral superiority. Complementing these results, exploratory event-related potential results of Study 2 suggested that communicating the intention to help reduced participants' attentional vigilance toward negative feedback messages on their morality (i.e., decreased P200 amplitudes). These results demonstrate the beneficial effects of communicating the intention to help when one tries to encourage others' moral growth through criticism.

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Gender Identification Beyond the Binary and Its Consequences for Social Well-Being

Recent societal initiatives (e.g., gender-neutral toilets, clothing, and language) highlight the ongoing shift of gender away from binary categories: "man" and "woman." We identified and investigated two reasons for this shift: that many people may not identify with strictly binary categories and that this may have negative social consequences. Employing a multiple-identification model, we measured intergroup self-categorization with both men and women (Studies 1 and 2), as well as with a "third gender" (Study 3) and investigated how multiple identifications are related to social well-being (Studies 2 and 3). In Study 1 (N = 182, mean age = 32.74, 121 women), we found that a binary model was not the best fit for our gender identification data. In Study 2 (N = 482, mean age = 30.98, 240 AFABs), we found four clusters of gender identification, replicating previous research. Furthermore, we found that gender non-conforming participants reported being less able to be their authentic selves than binary participants. We also found that participants who identified lowly with both binary genders reported lower well-being in general (belongingness, self-esteem, life satisfaction, positive affect). In Study 3 (N = 280, mean age = 36.97, 140 AFABs), we found that asking about a third gender seemed to change how much participants reported identifying with men and women. We also found that gender non-conforming participants reported lower authenticity, belongingness, and self-esteem. We conclude that moving away from binary categories of gender may be beneficial to many non-conforming people of different nationalities, including cisgender, heterosexual people.

Human cooperation in changing groups in a large-scale public goods game

How people cooperate to provide public goods is an important scientific question and relates to many societal problems. Previous research studied how people cooperate in stable groups in repeated or one-time-only encounters. However, most real-world public good problems occur in groups with a gradually changing composition due to old members leaving and new members arriving. How group changes are related to cooperation in public good provision is not well understood. To address this issue, we analyze a dataset from an online public goods game comprising approximately 1.5 million contribution decisions made by about 135 thousand players in about 11.3 thousand groups with about 234 thousand changes in group composition. We find that changes in group composition negatively relate to cooperation. Our results suggest that this is related to individuals contributing less in the role of newcomers than in the role of incumbents. During the process of moving from newcomer status to incumbent status, individuals cooperate more and more in line with incumbents.

The integration of subgroups at the supranational level: The relation between social identity, national threat, and perceived legitimacy of the EU

Previous research suggests that social identity influences public attitudes about the European Union, but little is known about the role of social identity for perceived legitimacy of the EU. This article explores the relation between different forms of identification (national, EU, dual) and EU legitimacy perceptions, and the moderation of this relationship by experienced threat to national power and sociocultural identity. A survey was conducted in six countries (N = 1136). A factor analysis of legitimacy items resulted in two subscales (institutional trust and duty to obey). Separate regression analyses were therefore run on these subscales. All forms of identification were positively related to perceived EU legitimacy, while threat was a strong and universal negative predictor. However, the results suggest that national identification only positively predicted legitimacy when participants experienced no threat to their nation by the EU, while dual identification positively predicted legitimacy even when participants experienced threat. Overall, respect for national identities and their values may offer opportunities to safeguard and improve the perceived legitimacy of the EU. Findings are discussed in terms of the literature on the ingroup projection model and the common ingroup model.

Does National Context Matter When Women Surpass Their Partner in Status?

There is growing evidence that couples in non-traditional relationships in which the woman attains higher status than her male partner experience more negative relationship outcomes than traditional couples. A possible reason is that non-traditional couples violate persisting gender stereotypes that prescribe men to be breadwinners and women to be caregivers of the family. In the current study (N = 2,748), we investigated whether a country's gender-stereotypical culture predicts non-traditional men and women's relationship and life outcomes. We used the European Sustainable Workforce Survey, which is conducted in nine European countries. Two indicators of countries' gender-stereotypical culture are used: Gender Empowerment Measure and implicit gender stereotypes. We found that women's income and -to a lesser extent- education degree relative to their male partner affected outcomes such as relationship quality, negative emotions, and experienced time pressure. Furthermore, men and women living in countries with a traditional gender-stereotypical culture (e.g., Netherlands, Hungary) reported lower relationship quality when women earned more than their partners. Relative income differences did not affect the relationship quality of participants living in egalitarian countries (e.g., Sweden, Finland). Also, couples in which the woman is more highly educated than the man reported higher relationship quality in egalitarian countries, but not in traditional countries. Our findings suggest that dominant beliefs and ideologies in society can hinder or facilitate couples in non-traditional relationships.

Trust predicts COVID-19 prescribed and discretionary behavioral intentions in 23 countries

The worldwide spread of a new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) since December 2019 has posed a severe threat to individuals' well-being. While the world at large is waiting that the released vaccines immunize most citizens, public health experts suggest that, in the meantime, it is only through behavior change that the spread of COVID-19 can be controlled. Importantly, the required behaviors are aimed not only at safeguarding one's own health. Instead, individuals are asked to adapt their behaviors to protect the community at large. This raises the question of which social concerns and moral principles make people willing to do so. We considered in 23 countries (N = 6948) individuals' willingness to engage in prescribed and discretionary behaviors, as well as country-level and individual-level factors that might drive such behavioral intentions. Results from multilevel multiple regressions, with country as the nesting variable, showed that publicized number of infections were not significantly related to individual intentions to comply with the prescribed measures and intentions to engage in discretionary prosocial behaviors. Instead, psychological differences in terms of trust in government, citizens, and in particular toward science predicted individuals' behavioral intentions across countries. The more people endorsed moral principles of fairness and care (vs. loyalty and authority), the more they were inclined to report trust in science, which, in turn, statistically predicted prescribed and discretionary behavioral intentions. Results have implications for the type of intervention and public communication strategies that should be most effective to induce the behavioral changes that are needed to control the COVID-19 outbreak.

Science as collaborative knowledge generation

The COVID-19 pandemic points to the need for scientists to pool their efforts in order to understand this disease and respond to the ensuing crisis. Other global challenges also require such scientific cooperation. Yet in academic institutions, reward structures and incentives are based on systems that primarily fuel the competition between (groups of) scientific researchers. Competition between individual researchers, research groups, research approaches, and scientific disciplines is seen as an important selection mechanism and driver of academic excellence. These expected benefits of competition have come to define the organizational culture in academia. There are clear indications that the overreliance on competitive models undermines cooperative exchanges that might lead to higher quality insights. This damages the well-being and productivity of individual researchers and impedes efforts towards collaborative knowledge generation. Insights from social and organizational psychology on the side effects of relying on performance targets, prioritizing the achievement of success over the avoidance of failure, and emphasizing self-interest and efficiency, clarify implicit mechanisms that may spoil valid attempts at transformation. The analysis presented here elucidates that a broader change in the academic culture is needed to truly benefit from current attempts to create more open and collaborative practices for cumulative knowledge generation.

Heterogeneous groups cooperate in public good problems despite normative disagreements about individual contribution levels

Norms can promote human cooperation to provide public goods. Yet, the potential of norms to promote cooperation may be limited to homogeneous groups in which all members benefit equally from the public good. Individual heterogeneity in the benefits of public good provision is commonly conjectured to bring about normative disagreements that harm cooperation. However, the role of these normative disagreements remains unclear because they are rarely directly measured or manipulated. In a laboratory experiment, we first measure participants' views on the appropriate way to contribute to a public good with heterogeneous returns. We then use this information to sort people into groups that either agree or disagree on these views, thereby manipulating group-level disagreement on normative views. Participants subsequently make several incentivized contribution decisions in a public goods game with peer punishment. We find that although there are considerable disagreements about individual contribution levels in heterogeneous groups, these disagreements do not impede cooperation. While cooperation is maintained because low contributors are punished, participants do not use punishment to impose their normative views on others. The contribution levels at which groups cooperate strongly relate to the average normative views of these groups.

Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups

Social evaluation occurs at personal, interpersonal, group, and intergroup levels, with competing theories and evidence. Five models engage in adversarial collaboration, to identify common conceptual ground, ongoing controversies, and continuing agendas: Dual Perspective Model (Abele & Wojciszke, 2007); Behavioral Regulation Model (Leach, Ellemers, & Barreto, 2007); Dimensional Compensation Model (Yzerbyt et al., 2005); Stereotype Content Model (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002); and Agency-Beliefs-Communion Model (Koch, Imhoff, Dotsch, Unkelbach, & Alves, 2016). Each has distinctive focus, theoretical roots, premises, and evidence. Controversies dispute dimensions: number, organization, definition, and labeling; their relative priority; and their relationship. Our first integration suggests 2 fundamental dimensions: Vertical (agency, competence, "getting ahead") and Horizontal (communion, warmth, "getting along"), with respective facets of ability and assertiveness (Vertical) and friendliness and morality (Horizontal). Depending on context, a third dimension is conservative versus progressive Beliefs. Second, different criteria for priority favor different dimensions: processing speed and subjective weight (Horizontal); pragmatic diagnosticity (Vertical); moderators include number and type of target, target-perceiver relationship, context. Finally, the relation between dimensions has similar operational moderators. As an integrative framework, the dimensions' dynamics also depend on perceiver goals (comprehension, efficiency, harmony, compatibility), each balancing top-down and bottom-up processes, for epistemic or hedonic functions. One emerging insight is that the nature and number of targets each of these models typically examines alters perceivers' evaluative goal and how bottom-up information or top-down inferences interact. This framework benefits theoretical parsimony and new research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Neuroscience and the Social Origins of Moral Behavior: How Neural Underpinnings of Social Categorization and Conformity Affect Everyday Moral and Immoral Behavior

Neuroscientific evidence identifies the brain networks and cognitive processes involved in people’s thoughts and feelings about their behavior. This helps individuals understand the judgments and decisions they make with regard to their own and others’ moral and immoral behavior. This article complements prior reviews by focusing on the social origins of everyday moral and immoral behavior and reviewing neuroscientific research findings related to social conformity, categorization, and identification to demonstrate (a) when people are motivated by social norms of others to follow particular moral guidelines, (b) what prevents people from considering the moral implications of their actions for others, and (c) how people process feedback they receive from others about the appropriateness of their behavior. Revealing the neural mechanisms involved in the social processes that influence the moral and immoral behaviors people display helps researchers understand why and when different types of interventions aiming to regulate moral behavior are likely to be successful or unsuccessful.

The Queen Bee phenomenon in Academia 15 years after: Does it still exist, and if so, why?

Fifteen years ago, the British Journal of Social Psychology published a set of studies on male and female academics, documenting that female faculty members were more likely than male faculty members to express stereotyped views of women at the beginning of their academic careers (PhD candidates; Ellemers et al., 2004, Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 43, 3). At the same time, the self‐descriptions of female faculty members were just as masculine as those of their male colleagues. Ellemers and colleagues (2004, Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 43, 3) referred to this combination of results as indicating the existence of a ‘Queen Bee (QB) phenomenon’ in academia. The present contribution investigates whether the QB phenomenon is also found among current generations of academics, investigating this in two recent samples of academic professionals (N = 462; N = 339). Our findings demonstrate that the phenomenon first documented in 2004 still exists: Advanced career female academics are more likely than their male counterparts to underestimate the career commitment of women at the beginning of their academic careers. At the same time, both male and female academics at advanced career stages describe themselves in more masculine terms than those at early career stages. We argue this indicates a response pattern in which successful women emulate the masculinity of the work environment. To indicate this, the term ‘self‐group distancing’ might be more appropriate than ‘Queen Bee effect’.

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.

Looking Beyond Our Similarities: How Perceived (In)Visible Dissimilarity Relates to Feelings of Inclusion at Work

We investigated how the perception of being dissimilar to others at work relates to employees' felt inclusion, distinguishing between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity. In addition, we tested the indirect relationships between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity and work-related outcomes, through social inclusion. Furthermore, we tested the moderating role of a climate for inclusion in the relationship between perceived dissimilarity and felt inclusion. We analyzed survey data from 887 employees of a public service organization. An ANOVA showed that felt inclusion was lower for individuals who perceived themselves as deep-level dissimilar compared to individuals who perceived themselves as similar, while felt inclusion did not differ among individuals who perceived themselves as surface-level similar or dissimilar. Furthermore, a moderated mediation analysis showed a negative conditional indirect relationship between deep-level dissimilarity and work-related outcomes through felt inclusion. Interestingly, while the moderation showed that a positive climate for inclusion buffered the negative relationship between deep-level dissimilarity and felt inclusion, it also positively related to feelings of inclusion among all employees, regardless of their perceived (dis)similarity. This research significantly improves our understanding of how perceived dissimilarity affects employees by distinguishing between surface-level and deep-level dissimilarity and by demonstrating the importance of a climate for inclusion.

The Psychology of Morality: A Review and Analysis of Empirical Studies Published From 1940 Through 2017

We review empirical research on (social) psychology of morality to identify which issues and relations are well documented by existing data and which areas of inquiry are in need of further empirical evidence. An electronic literature search yielded a total of 1,278 relevant research articles published from 1940 through 2017. These were subjected to expert content analysis and standardized bibliometric analysis to classify research questions and relate these to (trends in) empirical approaches that characterize research on morality. We categorize the research questions addressed in this literature into five different themes and consider how empirical approaches within each of these themes have addressed psychological antecedents and implications of moral behavior. We conclude that some key features of theoretical questions relating to human morality are not systematically captured in empirical research and are in need of further investigation.

Stimulating interethnic contact in Kosovo: The role of social identity complexity and distinctiveness threat

The positive effects of intergroup contact on prejudice reduction have been widely validated by now. However, the potential of contact for intergroup relations is only available when there is readiness to have contact with outgroup members to begin with. In two correlational studies with the main ethnic groups in postconflict Kosovo, Albanian majority (Study 1, N = 221) and Serb minority (Study 2, N = 110), we examine how social identity complexity mechanism and distinctiveness threat contribute to predicting more readiness to have contact with outgroup members. As the establishment of a new national identity unfolds, we show that while there are different processes that work for each of the groups, distinctiveness threat is a central concern to both as it mediates the relationship between identity and intergroup outcomes. For the Albanian majority group, having more complex identities (or perceiving less identity overlap between national and ethnic identity) predicts more readiness to have contact and feeling more positively towards members of the outgroup via reduced distinctiveness threat. For the Serb minority, however, threat is predicted only by strength of ethnic identification, which in turn predicts negative feelings towards members of the ethnic outgroup and less readiness to contact them. We conclude by comparing results for the majority and the minority groups and discuss strategies needed to reduce threat and improve intergroup relations in this segregated context struggling for reconciliation.

Naar effectief diversiteitsbeleid: het bouwen van bruggen tussen wetenschap en praktijk

Hoewel veel organisaties actief diversiteitsbeleid voeren, zijn diversiteitsinterventies niet altijd even effectief gebleken. In dit artikel bespreken wij verschillende knelpunten bij het succesvol implementeren van diversiteitsmaatregelen. Hierbij constateren we dat wetenschap en praktijk zowel inhoudelijk als methodisch niet altijd goed op elkaar aansluiten en dat het nodig is deze gaten te dichten om effectief diversiteitsbeleid vorm te geven en om wetenschappelijke kennis te vergroten. Specifiek stellen we dat, om effectief te zijn, diversiteitsbeleid zich niet alleen dient te richten op het vergroten van de diversiteit van het werknemersbestand (focus op aantallen), maar ook op het creëren van een inclusief werkklimaat (focus op cultuur). Daarnaast beargumenteren we dat succesvol diversiteitsbeleid zich niet alleen richt op het creëren en managen van zichtbare verschillen (bijv. geslacht, leeftijd en etniciteit), maar ook op het omgaan met onzichtbare verschillen (bijv. persoonlijkheid, werkervaring en seksuele oriëntatie). Vervolgens stellen we dat een belangrijk deel van de oplossing ligt in de gebruikte methodiek en presenteren we een model van onderzoeksgestuurd diversiteitsbeleid. We constateren dat het in de praktijk niet altijd duidelijk is hoe organisaties dit kunnen realiseren en bespreken de mogelijke oorzaken hiervan. We sluiten af met concrete handvatten om dit model in de praktijk te brengen.

Kenmerken en valkuilen van effectief beleid voor genderdiversiteit in de wetenschap

Genderdiversiteit is een speerpunt geworden in beleid gericht op inclusie en gelijke kansen, ook in de academische wereld. Genderdiversiteit van wetenschappers kan dan ook bijdragen aan kennisontwikkeling en -benutting. Toch is het voor vrouwen nog steeds moeilijker dan voor mannen om succesvol te zijn in de wetenschap. Zelfs als er geen prestatieverschillen waarneembaar zijn, is er een leiderschaps-, loon- en financieringskloof. Dit wordt vaak toegeschreven aan impliciete gender bias: de neiging om academische prestaties van vrouwen minder op te merken of minder te waarderen. Dit gebeurt meestal onbewust, en op elk niveau zijn de verschillen in kansen voor mannen en vrouwen vaak relatief klein. Vrouwen kunnen hierdoor in een vicieuze cirkel terechtkomen: zij ervaren motivatie- en prestatieverlies vanwege achterblijvende kansen en gebrekkig rendement van hun toewijding en behaalde successen. Dit maakt het lastig om het optreden van impliciete discriminatie en de gevolgen ervan te herkennen. Diversiteitsinterventies hebben dan ook vaak niet het gewenste effect, onder andere vanwege onvoldoende draagvlak. We bespreken enkele valkuilen die de effectiviteit van diversiteitsinterventies kunnen belemmeren. Daarnaast geven we suggesties om de effectiviteit van interventies te optimaliseren. Met een evidence-based en context-afhankelijk genderdiversiteitsbeleid is het mogelijk om een gender-diverse academie te bevorderen.

Nothing Changes, Really: Why Women Who Break Through the Glass Ceiling End Up Reinforcing It

Two correlational studies conducted in Switzerland ( N = 222) and Albania ( N = 156) explained the opposition of female managers to gender quotas by examining the origins and consequences of the "Queen Bee (QB)-phenomenon," whereby women who have been successful in male-dominated organizations do not support the advancement of junior women. Results disconfirm previous accounts of the QB-phenomenon as indicating competitiveness among women. Instead, the tendency of women managers to consider themselves as different from other women, and their opposition to gender quotas, emerged when junior women were addressed but not when they considered their direct competitors, other women managers. Personal sacrifices women managers reported having made for career success predicted self-distancing from junior women and opposition to gender quotas targeting these women. We provide a more nuanced picture of what the QB-response is really about, explaining why women managers oppose quotas for junior women, while supporting quotas for women in the same rank.

The Burden of Power: Construing Power as Responsibility (Rather Than as Opportunity) Alters Threat-Challenge Responses

Power usually lowers stress responses. In stressful situations, having high (vs. low) power heightens challenge and lowers threat. Yet, even power-holders may experience threat when becoming aware of the responsibility that accompanies their power. Power-holders can construe (i.e., understand) a high-power position primarily as opportunity to "make things happen" or as responsibility to "take care of things." Power-holders construing power as responsibility (rather than opportunity) may be more likely to experience demands-such as taking care of important decisions under their control-as outweighing their resources, resulting in less challenge and more threat. Four experiments with subjective and cardiovascular threat-challenge indicators support this. Going beyond prior work on structural aspects (e.g., power instability) that induce stress, we show that merely the way how power-holders construe their power can evoke stress. Specifically, we find that power construed as responsibility (vs. opportunity) is more likely to imply a "burden" for the power-holder.

Gender Stereotypes

There are many differences between men and women. To some extent, these are captured in the stereotypical images of these groups. Stereotypes about the way men and women think and behave are widely shared, suggesting a kernel of truth. However, stereotypical expectations not only reflect existing differences, but also impact the way men and women define themselves and are treated by others. This article reviews evidence on the nature and content of gender stereotypes and considers how these relate to gender differences in important life outcomes. Empirical studies show that gender stereotypes affect the way people attend to, interpret, and remember information about themselves and others. Considering the cognitive and motivational functions of gender stereotypes helps us understand their impact on implicit beliefs and communications about men and women. Knowledge of the literature on this subject can benefit the fair judgment of individuals in situations where gender stereotypes are likely to play a role.

Highly identified power-holders feel responsible: The interplay between social identification and social power within groups

Power relations affect dynamics within groups. Power-holders' decisions not only determine their personal outcomes, but also the outcomes of others in the group that they control. Yet, power-holders often tend to overlook this responsibility to take care of collective interests. The present research investigated how social identification - with the group to which both the powerful and the powerless belong - alters perceived responsibility among power-holders (and the powerless). Combining research on social power and social identity, we argue that power-holders perceive more responsibility than the powerless when strongly (rather than when weakly) identifying with the group. A study among leaders and an experiment supported this, highlighting that although power-holders are often primarily concerned about personal outcomes, they do feel responsible for considering others' interests when these others are included in the (social) self.

Gender Stereotypes

There are many differences between men and women. To some extent, these are captured in the stereotypical images of these groups. Stereotypes about the way men and women think and behave are widely shared, suggesting a kernel of truth. However, stereotypical expectations not only reflect existing differences, but also impact the way men and women define themselves and are treated by others. This article reviews evidence on the nature and content of gender stereotypes and considers how these relate to gender differences in important life outcomes. Empirical studies show that gender stereotypes affect the way people attend to, interpret, and remember information about themselves and others. Considering the cognitive and motivational functions of gender stereotypes helps us understand their impact on implicit beliefs and communications about men and women. Knowledge of the literature on this subject can benefit the fair judgment of individuals in situations where gender stereotypes are likely to play a role.

A matter of focus: Power-holders feel more responsible after adopting a cognitive other-focus, rather than a self-focus

Social power implies responsibility. Yet, power-holders often follow only their own interests and overlook this responsibility. The present research illuminates how a previously adopted cognitive focus guides perceived responsibility when a person receives high (vs. low) power. In three experiments, adopting a cognitive focus on another person (vs. on the self or taking over another person's perspective) promoted perceived responsibility among individuals receiving high (but not low) power in a subsequent context. This effect was specific for perceived responsibility - a cognitive focus on another person did not change the perceived opportunity to pursue goals or the perceived relationship to an interaction partner (e.g., interpersonal closeness). While prior research examined how social values (i.e., chronically caring about others) guide responsibility among those holding power, the current findings highlight that mere cognitive processes (i.e., situationally focusing attention on others) alter perceived responsibility among those just about to receive power.

On sanction-goal justifications: How and why deterrence justifications undermine rule compliance

Authorities frequently justify their sanctions as attempts to deter people from rule breaking. Although providing a sanction justification seems appealing and harmless, we propose that a deterrence justification decreases the extent to which sanctions are effective in promoting rule compliance. We develop a theoretical model that specifies how and why this occurs. Consistent with our model, 5 experiments demonstrated that-compared with sanctions provided without a justification or sanctions provided with a just-deserts justification-sanction effectiveness decreased when sanctions were justified as attempts to deter people from rule breaking. This effect was mediated by people feeling distrusted by the authority. We further demonstrated that (a) the degree to which deterrence fostered distrust was attenuated when the sanction was targeted at others (instead of the participant) and (b) the degree to which distrust undermined rule compliance was attenuated when the authority was perceived as legitimate. We discuss the practical implications for authorities tasked with promoting rule compliance, and the theoretical implications for the literature on sanctions, distrust, and rule compliance. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mastering moral misery: Emotional and coping responses to intragroup morality (vs. competence) evaluations

In social groups, individuals are often confronted with evaluations of their behaviour by other group members and are motivated to adapt their own behaviour accordingly. In two studies we examine emotional responses towards, and perceived coping abilities with, morality vs. competence evaluations individuals receive from other in-group members. In Study 1, we show that evaluations of one's immoral behaviour primarily induce guilt, whereas evaluations of incompetent behaviour raise anger. In Study 2, we elaborate on the psychological process associated with these emotional responses, and demonstrate that evaluations of immorality, compared to incompetence, diminish group members' perceived coping abilities, which in turn intensifies feelings of guilt. However, when anticipating an opportunity to restore one's self-image as a moral group member, perceived coping abilities are increased and the experience of guilt is alleviated. Together these studies demonstrate how group members can overcome their moral misery when restoring their self-image.

The Impact of Anonymity and Group Identification on Progroup Behavior in Computer-Mediated Groups

To contribute to the examination of the effects of computer-mediated communication (CMC) on collaborative work, the impact of anonymity on willingness to exert effort on behalf of a group was examined. Two aspects of anonymity were independently manipulated: visibility of respondents (not visible, visible) and visibility of responses (not visible, visible) to the in-group. The role of degree of identification as moderator of anonymity effects was also examined. The results show that anonymity manipulations affect group members’effort on behalf of the group, but only when group identification is low. Low identifiers chose to work harder with the group either when they were totally anonymous or when they were totally visible to other in-group members. The implications of the results for the understanding of group processes through CMC are discussed.

The Asymmetrical Perception of Men and Women

This study examines the individuation versus categorization of men and women. Several researchers have argued for structural status differences between men and women - men occupy societal positions of high status, and women positions of low status. This line of research predicts that male participants will individuate other men, but categorize women. Conversely, female participants will individuate men as well as women. In the present study, male and female participants were presented with eight stimulus persons, four men and four women, each described by four attributes. In addition, stimulus-category fit was manipulated such that the attributes were either stereotypical of the gender group they described or gender neutral. Information clustering in free recall and name-matching were main dependent measures. The results support the hypotheses and are discussed in terms of status differentials and contemporary theories of person perception.

What hostile and benevolent sexism communicate about men’s and women’s warmth and competence

Ambivalent sexism theory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) distinguishes between two interrelated forms of sexism: Hostile and benevolent. Although this theory motivated a large body of work examining how endorsement of these views impacts on social interactions and women’s performance, no research has yet examined what these forms of sexism are seen to communicate about men and women. We report three studies examining the image that benevolent and hostile sexist messages are seen to describe (Studies 1 and 2) and prescribe for men and women (Study 3). Results show that both benevolent and hostile sexism were seen to convey that women are and should be less competent than men. Additionally, benevolent sexism was seen as describing and prescribing women to be warmer than did hostile sexism. Across all studies men and women agreed about what the messages communicate about men and women. We discuss the implications of these results for the understanding of how stereotypical beliefs are perpetuated.

Continuing and Changing Group Identities: The Effects of Merging on Social Identification and Ingroup Bias

A social identity approach to the investigation of group-based reactions to a merger is outlined, in which a merger is analyzed in terms of the continuation or change of the pre-merger group identity. In two experiments, the relationship between pre-merger identification, post-merger identification, and ingroup bias was investigated using a minimal group paradigm. Results from both studies showed that the perceived continuation of the premerger group identity in the post-merger group strengthened the positive relationship between pre-merger identification and identification with the superordinate post-merger group. Moreover, perceived continuation strengthened, rather than reduced, ingroup bias at the subordinate level of the merged groups. Some theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The Impact of Respect Versus Neglect of Self-Identities on Identification and Group Loyalty

How do targets deal with a discrepancy between their choice of identity and the way they are categorized by others? In this article, the authors demonstrate that participants’ reactions to this discrepancy depend on whether the way they are actually treated by others respects their chosen identity. Participants whose choice of identity was neglected expressed low identification and little loyalty to the group to which they had been assigned. By contrast, identification and group loyalty were stronger among participants whose choice of identity was respected and who did not differ from controls on these measures. Of importance, only participants whose self-identity was respected also were willing to self-categorize in and express willingness to cooperate with the ascribed group. The implications of these results for the understanding of identity processes in pluralist societies are discussed.

Striving for Success in Outgroup Settings: Effects of Contextually Emphasizing Ingroup Dimensions on Stigmatized Group Members’ Social Identity and Performance Styles

For members of stigmatized groups, being confronted with highstatus outgroup members threatens social identity and undermines performance on status-relevant dimensions. Two experiments examined whether the negative effects of outgroup contexts are alleviated when value is expressed for a dimension on which the stigmatized ingroup excels. Specifically, the authors assessed whether ingroup versus outgroup context and contextual value for ingroup dimensions affects group members’ reactions to failure on status-relevant dimensions and subsequent performance. Experiment 1 showed that in comparison to ingroup contexts, outgroup contexts induce stigmatized group members to protect social identity and to feel more agitated following negative performance feedback. Experiment 2 showed that when others in the context emphasize the importance of a dimension on which the ingroup excels, the negative effects of outgroup contexts are alleviated, stigmatized group members feel more cheerful concerning an upcoming task, and task performance is characterized by a focus on success.

Bias in Intergroup Perceptions: Balancing Group Identity with Social Reality

This study illuminates how social reality affects in-group favoritism in group perceptions. Members of two student associations (which were expected to have differential status) as well as nonmembers participated in this study (total N = 103). Participants rated the perceived status of the two groups and indicated to what extent they identified with each group. They also rated the two groups on typical and nontypical traits and evaluated these traits. In support of predictions, members of the group with lower perceived status displayed more in-group-favoring biases than members of the group with higher perceived status. However, biased ratings did not violate consensual definitions of social reality as indicated by nonmembers. The observed biases correlated substantially with participants' group identifications.

Self-Stereotyping in the Face of Threats to Group Status and Distinctiveness: The Role of Group Identification

In four studies, effects of self-perceived or public-perceived threats to group status or group distinctiveness on self-stereotyping (defined as similarity to prototypical in-group members) were investigated for people with high or low in-group identification. The main prediction was that high and low identifiers will respond differentially when their group's status or distinctiveness is threatened such that self-stereotyping is reduced for low identifiers but enhanced for high identifiers. Although the four studies investigated different comparison groups and different kinds of group threat, the results of all studies provided support for the prediction, and this was confirmed by a meta-analysis. This supports the authors' argument that the initial level of group identification determines whether group members are likely to set themselves apart from the rest of their group or to show group solidarity when their identity as group members is threatened.