Suchergebnisse

This volume examines the phenomenon of fake news by bringing together leading experts from different fields within psychology and related areas, and explores what has become a prominent feature of public discourse since the first Brexit referendum and the 2016 US election campaign. Dealing with misinformation is important in many areas of daily life, including politics, the marketplace, health communication, journalism, education, and science. In a general climate where facts and misinformation blur, and are intentionally blurred, this book asks what determines whether people accept and share (mis)information, and what can be done to counter misinformation? All three of these aspects need to be understood in the context of online social networks, which have fundamentally changed the way information is produced, consumed, and transmitted. The contributions within this volume summarize the most up-to-date empirical findings, theories, and applications and discuss cutting-edge ideas and future directions of interventions to counter fake news. Also providing guidance on how to handle misinformation in an age of "alternative facts", this is a fascinating and vital reading for students and academics in psychology, communication, and political science and for professionals including policy makers and journalists.

Zusammenfassung: Menschen unterscheiden sich in ihrer individuellen Maximierungstendenz, dem Streben nach optimalen versus zufrieden stellenden Entscheidungen. Die hier vorgestellte Skala zur Erfassung der Maximierungstendenz stellt eine Übersetzung der maximizing scale dar, welche von Schwartz et al. (2002) für den angloamerikanischen Raum entwickelt wurde. Ebenfalls berichtet wird die Übersetzung einer Skala zur Erfassung von dispositionellem Bedauern, die zusammen mit der Maximierungsskala veröffentlicht wurde. In zwei Studien (N = 317, 219) wurden die Faktorenstruktur, die Reliabilität sowie die Validität der deutschen Version der Maximierungsskala untersucht. Erstmals konnte gezeigt werden, dass Maximierer im Vergleich zu Satisfizierern eher das Optimum anstreben und intensiver nach passenden Optionen suchen.

Abstract

Investigates the influence of mood and brand favorability on the evaluation of brand extensions. It is argued that affective states have an impact on the likelihood that the evaluation of a new product is based on the implications of the brand rather than on the implications of the features of the new product. Specifically, participants reported more positive evaluations of a new product when it was introduced by a positive rather than a negative brand – and this differential impact of category information was more pronounced for participants in a positive compared to a neutral or a negative mood.

Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This edited volume provides an up-to-date review of current research on ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection. The book shows why exclusion and rejection occur, how they affect the excluded individuals, and the consequences they might have for individuals and organizations. Ostracism, social exclusion, and rejection are common phenomena, both at the individual level, such as ostracism in the classroom or at the workplace, as well as on a societal or even global scale, such as immigration or asylum policies. Examining key concepts such as the long-term effects of ostracism, the developmental and cultural perspective on ostracism, and the detrimental impact that social exclusion may have on individuals and societies, the authors provide an up-to-date overview of the research field and present new conceptual models and methodological approaches. Featuring discussion of promising areas, novel pathways for research, and cutting-edge developments, this is the most comprehensive bringing-together of research on this topic. The book gives both a broad state-of-the-art overview of the field as well as discussing cutting-edge ideas and promising areas for future research; it is essential for students, researchers of social psychology, and policy makers interested in this field

Phubbing—ignoring another person in order to use a smartphone instead—is an increasingly common behavior that disrupts interactions and harms relationships. Using the frameworks of the theory of planned behavior and an interaction value approach, we examined the driving factors of phubbing frequency. Four preregistered predictors were tested: attitudes toward phubbing, subjective norms of phubbing, interaction value, that is, the extent of valuing a social interaction, and the perceived interaction value of the partner. After having had lunch together, a total of 128 participants in 64 dyads filled out a survey assessing the four predictors. Dyadic linear mixed model analyses confirmed that a more positive attitude toward phubbing increases phubbing, as well as being phubbed. Moreover, we disentangled screen-sharing time (i.e., using a phone together), phone use, co-present phone use (i.e., using a phone alone), and phubbing: we found that valuing the social interaction more decreased phone use, but not phubbing, and holding more accepting subjective norms on phubbing increased co-present phone use, but not phone use in general. We further found that the person that used their phone first, phubbed more. Overall, this research extends our understanding of the factors driving phubbing and may be fruitfully harnessed to reduce phubbing.

AbstractAt the beginning of the COVID‐19 vaccination campaign, many countries faced a mismatch between the demand and supply of vaccines. Particularly in countries where different rights were granted to vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, this situation may have fostered what we here refer to as policy‐induced feelings of social exclusion. Using data from Germany in spring 2021, we investigate how individuals' vaccination status related to feelings of (1) being excluded by others (interpersonal level) and (2) being excluded by the government (societal level) at a time when vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals had different rights. We find that being unvaccinated is associated with feeling excluded by others and by the government and that individuals generally report higher levels of exclusion by the government than by other people. These findings have important implications for policymakers not only in times of a pandemic but in light of major crises more generally.

Abstract. Previous work has shown that self-generating arguments is more persuasive than reading arguments provided by others, particularly if self-generation feels easy. The present study replicates and extends these findings by providing evidence for fluency effects on behavioral intention in the realm of helping. In two studies, participants were instructed to either self-generate or read two versus ten arguments about why it is good to help. Subsequently, a confederate asked them for help. Results show that self-generating few arguments is more effective than generating many arguments. While this pattern reverses for reading arguments, easy self-generation is the most effective strategy compared to all other conditions. These results have important implications for fostering behavioral change in all areas of life.