Search results

Abstract. This study introduces an easy-to-implement, controlled, vivid, and functional rejection paradigm. Participants empathized with the protagonist of a video who was rejected or accepted individually or as part of a group. In the rejection condition, more perceived exclusion and lower basic need fulfillment were reported. The paradigm also induced nuance in situational factors: Observing somebody being rejected as part of a group led to less pronounced reactions than individual rejection. The video-based rejection paradigm taps into the less studied area of group rejection and offers a new method to test established and novel theoretical predictions.

Zusammenfassung: Die Parteispendenaffäre der christlich-demokratischen Union (CDU) Ende des Jahres 1999 wurde zur Untersuchung selektiver Informationssuche und -bewertungsprozesse im Feld herangezogen. Auf Grundlage der Dissonanztheorie wurde vorhergesagt, dass die Parteispendenaffäre insbesondere bei Wähler/innen der CDU/CSU zu kognitiver Dissonanz führte, welche durch einen verzerrten Umgang mit Informationen abgebaut werden konnte. In Übereinstimmung mit dieser Hypothese zeigten die Ergebnisse, dass CDU/CSU-Wähler/innen im Vergleich zu SPD-Wähler/innen eine stärkere Suche nach konsonanten und eine Vernachlässigung dissonanter Informationen aufwiesen und zugleich konsonante Informationen als wichtiger und interessanter bewerteten. Weiterhin zeigte sich, dass Personen, denen vor der Informationssuche ihre Parteipräferenz bewusst vor Augen geführt wurde, indem sie diese schriftlich darlegen und begründen sollten, im Vergleich zu solchen Personen, die hierzu nicht aufgefordert wurden, nach mehr dissonanten Informationen suchten, - obwohl sie diese bei der Informationsbewertung weiterhin als weniger wichtig bewerteten als die konsonanten Informationen. Dieses Ergebnis wird dahingehend interpretiert, dass Personen, denen Verzerrungen beim Umgang mit Informationen bewusst werden, versuchen gegen zu steuern, um auf diese Weise eine "Illusion der Objektivität" aufrechtzuerhalten. Theoretische und praktische Implikationen der Ergebnisse werden diskutiert.

In this article we suggest that independent vs. interdependent aspects of the self yield different manifestations of psychological reactance and that this is especially relevant in a cross-cultural context. In Studies 1, 2 and 4 we showed that people from collectivistic cultural backgrounds (individuals holding more interdependent attitudes and values) were less sensitive to a threat to their individual freedom than people from individualistic cultural backgrounds (individuals holding more independent attitudes and values), but more sensitive if their collective freedom was threatened. In Study 3 we activated independent vs. interdependent attitudes and values utilizing a cognitive priming method and yielded similar results as the other studies hinting at the important causal role of self-related aspects in understanding reactance in a cross-cultural context.

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.

peer-reviewed ; 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 mean time, 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.

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. ; Peer reviewed

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.