Search

Three groups of undergraduates (42 senior graduating psychology majors, 27 first-year premajors taking introductory psychology, and 24 first-year, high-performing nonmajors taking introductory psychology) completed the Psychology Major Field Test (MFT) and a short-answer (SA) essay test on reasoning about core knowledge in psychology. Graduating majors significantly outperformed both first-year groups using raw and covariate-corrected scores (adjusted for group differences in SAT-Verbal and high school grade point average). On the MFT, graduating majors scored above the 50th percentile, whereas high-performing nonmajors and premajors scored in the 25th and 20th percentiles, respectively. On the SA test, graduating majors averaged "good"-to-"excellent" quality responses, whereas premajors and high-performing nonmajors averaged only "fair"-to-"good" quality responses. Discussion focuses on the design and implementation of value-added, academic program assessments with limited data collection resources.

Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness. Keywords: leadership, discontinuity, accountability, guilt-proneness, norms

Two experiments used a 3-choice variation of the prisoner's dilemma game to explore the paradoxical implications of expected cooperation of other groups and individuals for competitiveness and cooperativeness. Experiment I found that an experimental manipulation of opponent trustworthiness influenced the tendency of both groups and individuals to cooperate but had no significant effect on the tendency of groups and individuals to compete--possibly because of the perceived unfairness of competing with a trustworthy other. Experiment 2 found that an experimental manipulation of categorization increased the tendency of same-category groups and individuals to cooperate (as in Experiment 1) and also increased the tendency of same-category groups, but not individuals, to compete (unlike in Experiment 1). It was further found that the tendency of same-category groups to compete more than same-category individuals was relatively stronger for participants high in guilt proneness.

This quantitative review of 130 comparisons of interindividual and intergroup interactions in the context of mixed-motive situations reveals that intergroup interactions are generally more competitive than interindividual interactions. The authors identify 4 moderators of this interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect, each based on the theoretical perspective that the discontinuity effect flows from greater fear and greed in intergroup relative to interindividual interactions. Results reveal that each moderator shares a unique association with the magnitude of the discontinuity effect. The discontinuity effect is larger when (a) participants interact with an opponent whose behavior is unconstrained by the experimenter or constrained by the experimenter to be cooperative rather than constrained by the experimenter to be reciprocal, (b) group members make a group decision rather than individual decisions, (c) unconstrained communication between participants is present rather than absent, and (d) conflict of interest is severe rather than mild.

We present a model of intergroup relations focused on the role of the in-group-favoring norm as capable of facilitating positive intergroup relations. We begin by defining the in-group-favoring norm and describing how it affects self-evaluations and evaluations of out-group members. We then outline how positive intergroup relations may result via the implementation of specific techniques fundamental to the in-group-favoring norm, including emphasizing the value of interactions with the out-group, establishing cooperative intergroup norms, and establishing superordinate goals. In so doing, we discuss how classic moderators of intergroup relations, including leadership, guilt, and in-group norms are facilitators of positive intergroup relations once in-group interests are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The multifaceted-self effect is the ascription of more traits to self than others. Consensus is that this effect occurs for positive, but not negative, traits. We propose that the effect also occurs for negative traits when they can be endorsed with low intensity (“I am a little bit lazy”), thereby circumventing self-protection concerns. In Experiment 1, the multifaceted-self effect occurred for positive, but not negative, traits on a high-intensity trait-endorsement measure. However, it occurred irrespective of trait valence on a low-intensity trait-endorsement measure. In Experiment 2, the multifaceted-self effect occurred for positive, but not negative, traits on a strong trait-endorsement measure. However, it occurred irrespective of trait valence on a diminuted trait-endorsement measure—a finding conceptually replicated in Experiment 3. In Experiment 4, participants spontaneously adopted diminutive terms (“a little bit”) when describing their negative traits. Individuals reconcile negative self-knowledge with self-protection concerns by expressing it in muted terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An altruistic rationalization explanation of the interindividual–intergroup discontinuity effect proposes that intergroup interactions are more competitive than interactions between individuals because group membership creates an opportunity to rationalize selfishly motivated competitiveness as being enacted for the ingroup’s sake. To test this explanation, we compared participants whose decisions did not influence the earnings of other participants, and who therefore had no opportunity for altruistic rationalization of competitiveness, with participants whose decisions did influence the earnings of other participants, and who therefore did have an opportunity for altruistic rationalization. Competition in a prisoner’s dilemma game was greater when opportunities for altruistic rationalization were present, but this effect was significant only for participants who were low in dispositional proneness to guilt, a trait that motivates prosocial behavior. In other words, we found that dispositionally selfish individuals were most likely to become more competitive when opportunities for altruistic rationalization were present. These findings provide evidence for an additional mechanism driving the discontinuity effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Negative self-referent information about central traits is recalled relatively poorly. Such mnemic neglect-a form of self-protective memory-entails the selective processing of threatening information. Here, we hypothesize a specific mechanism whereby it occurs: nonthreatening information gets integrated with stored self-knowledge, whereas threatening information gets separated from it. In two experiments participants read behavioral information in tandem with a processing instruction designed to either separate it from, or integrate it with, stored self-knowledge. As hypothesized, information recall (but not recognition) was reduced following separation as opposed to integration instructions. Moreover, although concurrent mnemic neglect effects emerged in Experiment 2, the recall of central negative information was less boosted by integration instructions than the recall of central positive information was impaired by separation instructions, consistent with greater striving to self-protect than to self-enhance. Overall, the results implicate the separation of self-threatening information from stored self-knowledge as a mechanism underlying mnemic neglect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For 40 years researchers have studied minimal groups using a variety of induction procedures which, surprisingly, have never been formally evaluated. This article reports two experiments that compared minimal group induction procedures based on: (1) memorization of novel ingroup names; (2) an imagination instruction; (3) random assignment; and (4) false feedback from painting preferences. The memorization procedure produced the largest ingroup favoritism effects on implicit measures of attraction and identification, whereas all procedures produced comparable ingroup favoritism effects on explicit measures of attraction and identification and bonus money allocation. The memorization procedure is recommended as a practical and effective minimal group induction procedure, particularly in cases in which implicit assessments are of primary interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People selectively forget feedback that threatens central self-conceptions, a phenomenon labeled mnemic neglect. Such forgetting serves to protect the self-system, but its rigid application may be associated with liabilities such as failing to learn about one's weaknesses. Two experiments tested the extent to which mnemic neglect is rigid or flexible. In Experiment 1, where self-improvement strivings were primed, mnemic neglect was absent: threatening and non-threatening feedback was recalled equally. In Experiment 2, participants received feedback either from a stranger or a close relationship. Participants recalled poorly threatening stranger feedback but recalled well threatening close-relationship feedback. Self-protection is flexible and strategic. Individuals recall well self-threatening feedback when they are concerned with self-improvement and when the feedback has ramifications for long-term relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An experiment assessed the prisoner's dilemma game (PDG) choices of a set of three persons who interacted with another supposed set of three persons. There were four conditions: (1) group-on-group (both three-person sets constrained by a majority vote), (2) group-on-one (only own three-person set constrained by a majority vote), (3) one-on-group (only other three-person set constrained by a majority vote), (4) one-on-one (neither three-person set constrained by a majority vote). The four conditions were compared with three orthogonal contrasts. Consistent with the assumption that interindividual interactions are less competitive than interactions involving groups, the first contrast indicated that there were fewer competitive choices in the one-on-one condition than in the other three conditions pooled. Consistent with the assumption that competitiveness can flow either from acting as a group or interacting with a group, the second contrast found no significant difference between the group-on-one and one-on-group conditions. Finally, consistent with the assumption that the interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect is a joint function of acting as a group and interacting with a group, the third contrast revealed that there were more competitive choices in the group-on-group condition than in the one-on-group and group-on-one conditions pooled. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The mnemic neglect effect is the phenomenon of disproportionately poor recall for threatening (rather than non-threatening) feedback that refers to the self (rather than another person). Does trait modifiability moderate mnemic neglect? We hypothesized that mnemic neglect will be present for feedback on unmodifiable traits, but absent for feedback on modifiable traits. In the latter case, the feedback would be lower in threat potential because its consequences are fleeting and steps to prevent its reoccurrence are possible. Participants received mixed (threatening and non-threatening) feedback that referred either to the self or another person. The feedback pertained to (central and peripheral) self-conceptions that were either unmodifiable or modifiable. In support of the hypothesis, mnemic neglect emerged for feedback on unmodifiable, but not modifiable, traits. The findings illustrate the selective and strategic nature of self-protection. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Briefly studying names of four members of a hypothetical group produces identification with and attraction to that group, a finding labeled implicit partisanship (IP; Greenwald, Pickrell, & Farnham, 2002). The original demonstration of IP used human groups in a competitive context. Experiments 1 and 2 varied these procedures by using, respectively, a cooperative intergroup context and non-human group members (fictitious car brands). Neither of these variations eliminated the IP effect, indicating unanticipated robustness. Experiment 3 revealed a substantial reduction of the IP effect's magnitude when the studied names represented a rival university. The reduction of IP through identity opposition supports the interpretation that spontaneous group identification effects carry psychological significance that is comparable to that of more ordinary group identifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although Glowacki proposed that peace developed from the relatively recent advent of intergroup norms and tolerance for out-group members, we submit that (a) positive intergroup relations developed from a psychology grounded in the regulation of intragroup relations, (b) the "default" intergroup orientation is uncertainty, and (c) positive intergroup relations likely existed early in our evolutionary history.