Suchergebnisse

Abstract
This research is based on the insight that the language we use to describe our choices serves as a feedback mechanism that either enhances or impedes our goal-directed behavior. Specifically, we investigate the influence of a linguistic element of self-talk, in which a refusal may be framed as "I don't" (vs. "I can't"), on resisting temptation and motivating goal-directed behavior. We present a set of four studies to demonstrate the efficacy of the "don't" (vs. "can't") framing (studies 1–3) when the source of the goal is internal (vs. external; studies 2A and 2B), as well as the mediating role of psychological empowerment (studies 1, 2A, and 2B). We demonstrate this novel and effective refusal strategy with actual choice (study 1) and with behavioral intent (studies 2A and 2B) and also illustrate its applicability in the real world in a longitudinal intervention-based field study (study 3).

Abstract
Past research on social influence finds that, all else being equal, a group of people engaged in a particular behavior is generally more influential than a single individual in inspiring others to adopt that behavior. The current research challenges this seemingly intuitive idea by showing that its validity depends on whether the focal behavior is selfish. Seven experiments show that while multiple people are indeed more influential than a single individual in encouraging unselfish behavior, a single individual can be just as influential as multiple people in encouraging selfish behavior. We present evidence that this phenomenon occurs because people generally have a preference for the selfish option and seek justification for their actions. Selfish behavior, whether exhibited by a single individual or a group of people, provides a convenient justification consistent with their preference for selfish behavior. When it comes to unselfish behavior, however, a larger group of influencers is required to counteract their self-benefiting tendencies. Supporting this mechanism, the effect is reversed when people have a pre-existing preference for unselfishness or when selfish behavior is difficult to justify.

Abstract
A model's eyes are a powerful and ubiquitous visual feature in virtually any advertisement depicting a person. But does where the ad model's eyes look matter? Integrating insights from social psychology and performance and visual art theory, we demonstrate that when the ad model's gaze is averted (looking away from the viewer), the viewer is more readily transported into the ad narrative and responds more favorably to the ad than when the ad model's gaze is direct (looking directly at the viewer). Five multi-method experiments (field and lab studies) illustrate that averted gaze (direct gaze) enhances narrative transportation (spokesperson credibility) to boost the effectiveness of emotional (informative) ads. Study 1 is a Facebook field study that demonstrates the effect of averted (vs. direct) gaze direction on advertising effectiveness using a real brand. Studies 2a and 2b implicate enhanced narrative transportation as the underlying process mechanism by measuring (study 2a) and manipulating (study 2b) narrative transportation. Studies 3a and 3b examine ad contexts in which direct gaze can enhance ad effectiveness: when the ad has informational (vs. emotional) appeal (study 3a), and when the viewer prefers not to identify with the negative emotional content of the ad (study 3b).