Good for Them
Not Too Far to Help: Residential Mobility, Global Identity, and Donations to Distant Beneficiaries
Yajin Wang, Amna Kirmani & Xiaolin Li
Journal of Consumer Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
Extant research shows that consumers are more likely to donate to close than distant others, making donations to geographically distant beneficiaries a challenge. This paper introduces residential mobility as a novel variable that can lead to increased donations towards distant beneficiaries. This paper proposes that residential mobility (vs. stability) leads consumers to have a stronger global identity, whereby they see themselves as world citizens. This global identity results in higher donations to distant beneficiaries. A multi-method approach provides evidence for this prediction. An analysis of a national panel dataset demonstrates that high residential mobility is correlated with donations to distant beneficiaries. Lab experiments, including one with real monetary donations, replicate these effects using both actual moving experience and a residential mobility mindset.
Are Individuals More Willing to Lie to a Computer or a Human? Evidence from a Tax Compliance Setting
Ethan LaMothe & Donna Bobek
Journal of Business Ethics, November 2020, Pages 157-180
Abstract:
Individuals are increasingly switching from hiring tax professionals to prepare their tax returns to self-filing with tax software, yet there is little research about how interacting with tax software influences compliance decisions. Using an experiment, we examine the effect of preparation method, tax software versus tax professional, on willingness to lie. Results from a structural equation model based on data collected from 211 actual taxpayers confirm the hypotheses and show individuals are more willing to lie to tax software than a human tax professional. Our results also suggest this effect is jointly mediated by perceptions of social presence and the perceived detectability of the lie. Beyond the practical implications for tax enforcement, our findings broadly contribute to accounting and other literatures by examining the theoretical mechanisms that explain why individuals interact differently with computers versus humans. We also extend prior research on interactions between humans and computers by examining economically motivated lies.
Domineering Dispositions and Hierarchy Preferences: Differentiating the Impact of Traits and Social Values in Economic Games
Robin Bergh & Jim Sidanius
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
In this article, we examined the relation between valuing hierarchies (dominant value orientations) and personally wanting to get ahead, without regard for others’ welfare (domineering dispositions). Survey data from five studies (total N > 1,500) indicated differences between being domineering and endorsing dominant value orientations. This distinction was also evident in different strategies in economic games. Domineering individuals typically gave less to a powerless player (dictator game) but changed behaviors when the other party possessed bargaining power (ultimatum game). Individuals endorsing dominant value orientations did not show such “exploitative opportunism.” In a third-party punishment task, in contrast, individuals with dominant value orientations were more likely to intervene against fair decisions (i.e., upholding inequalities between others). Correcting behaviors of others were not predicted by domineering dispositions. We discuss implications for distinguishing between traits and social values more broadly.
Responsibility amplifies empathic forecasts
Fausto Gonzalez, Minah Jung & Clayton Critcher
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, forthcoming
Abstract:
Inspired by theoretical and empirical work on emotion, psychological distance, moral psychology, and people’s tendency to overgeneralize ecologically valid relationships, 3 studies explore whether, why, and for whom responsibility amplifies empathic forecasts (RAEF) - the perception that an intentional agent’s social actions will produce stronger affective responses in others than if those same outcomes were to occur randomly or unintentionally. In Study 1, participants thought that pleasant or aversive videos would elicit stronger reactions when participants themselves (instead of the random determination of a computer) would select the video another would watch. This was explained by responsible agents’ own stronger reactions to the stimuli. Study 2 identified what about agents’ responsibility amplifies empathic forecasts: the combination of clearly causing and intending the other’s outcome. Study 3 demonstrated that RAEF need not extend to all responsible agents equally. Participants considered how to divide (vs. how another participant would divide or how a computer would randomly split) $10 with a recipient. In this context, we found the weight of causal responsibility looms larger in the self’s mind when the self is responsible for the recipient’s fate than when another responsible agent is. Furthermore, the self thought that the recipient’s emotional reaction would be more strongly influenced by the size of the self’s own (compared to another’s or a computer’s) allocation decision. The Discussion focuses on how RAEF relates to other models connecting agency and experience, provides initial evidence that RAEF need not be egocentric, and identifies open questions that remain for future research.
May the odds be ever in your favor: The Hunger Games and the fight for a more equal society. (Negative) Media vicarious contact and collective action
Loris Vezzali et al.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Various studies have found that reading books about positive interactions between ingroup and outgroup characters, known as media vicarious contact, can reduce prejudice. Focusing on the fantasy saga of The Hunger Games, we examined the effects of negative vicarious contact on collective action across two studies. Specifically, we tested whether reading about fantasy characters living in a postapocalyptic conflictual society with large social disparities between advantaged and disadvantaged groups leads advantaged group members to display greater willingness to engage in collective action on behalf of the disadvantaged group. Results from Study 1 (correlational survey in the United Kingdom and United States) and Study 2 (experimental intervention in Italy) revealed that reading The Hunger Games is indirectly associated with greater collective action intentions via increased anger toward injustice. In both studies social dominance orientation (SDO) acted as a moderator, but in opposite directions: mediation was significant for low‐SDOs in Study 1, and for high‐SDOs in Study 2. Results are discussed in relation to the importance of media vicarious contact via book reading for social change, and to the need to identify the contextual conditions allowing to anticipate the specific moderation pattern that is more likely to emerge.
Is an outgroup welcome with open arms? Approach and avoidance motor activations and outgroup prejudice
Irene Razpurker-Apfeld & Lipaz Shamoa-Nir
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, forthcoming
Abstract:
We examined the dynamics through which temporary motor cues of approach or avoidance directed to an outgroup member affect attitudes of majority members toward the minority outgroup. In Study 1 participants activated and maintained either arm flexion or arm extension, while facing a picture of an outgroup person wearing religious trappings. Thereafter, they filled a questionnaire which measured outgroup prejudice. Study 2 replicated this procedure while including a control condition of the arm, and measured intergroup anxiety in addition to prejudice. In the first study outgroup prejudice was significantly higher following arm extension in comparison with arm flexion. The second study revealed that the source of the arm activation effect was due to arm extension increasing prejudice rather than arm flexion reducing it. Moreover, a mediation effect was found: Arm extension (vs. control) increased intergroup anxiety, which in turn was related to higher prejudice toward the outgroup. The results reveal embodiment effects by which temporary motor cues are related to visual religious cues leading to subsequent bias toward the outgroup. Multimodal representation accounts and theories explaining the psychological processes involved in perceiving threat-cues in intergroup relations are discussed. Practical implications of the observed embodied effects are also considered.