Relatable
Inferring Whether Officials Are Corruptible From Looking At Their Faces
Chujun Lin, Ralph Adolphs & Michael Alvarez
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
While inferences of traits from unfamiliar faces prominently reveal stereotypes, some facial inferences also correlate with real-world outcomes. We investigated whether facial inferences are associated with an important real-world outcome closely linked to the face bearer’s behavior: political corruption. In four preregistered studies (N = 325), participants made trait judgments of unfamiliar government officials on the basis of their photos. Relative to peers with clean records, federal and state officials convicted of political corruption (Study 1) and local officials who violated campaign finance laws (Study 2) were perceived as more corruptible, dishonest, selfish, and aggressive but similarly competent, ambitious, and masculine (Study 3). Mediation analyses and experiments in which the photos were digitally manipulated showed that participants’ judgments of how corruptible an official looked were causally influenced by the face width of the stimuli (Study 4). The findings shed new light on the complex causal mechanisms linking facial appearances with social behavior.
Hunter-Gatherers Maintain Assortativity in Cooperation despite High Levels of Residential Change and Mixing
Kristopher Smith et al.
Current Biology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Widespread cooperation is a defining feature of human societies from hunter-gatherer bands to nation states, but explaining its evolution remains a challenge. Although positive assortment of cooperators is recognized as a basic requirement for the evolution of cooperation, the mechanisms governing assortment are debated. Moreover, the social structure of modern hunter-gatherers, characterized by high mobility, residential mixing, and low genetic relatedness, undermines assortment and adds to the puzzle of how cooperation evolved. Here, we analyze four years of data (2010, 2013, 2014, 2016) tracking residence and levels of cooperation elicited from a public goods game in Hadza hunter-gatherers of Tanzania. Data were collected from 56 camps, comprising 383 unique individuals, 137 of whom we have data for two or more years. Despite significant residential mixing, we observe a robust pattern of assortment that is necessary for cooperation to evolve; in every year, Hadza camps exhibit high between-camp and low within-camp variation in cooperation. We find little evidence that cooperative behavior within individuals is stable over time or that similarity in cooperation between dyads predicts their future cohabitation. Both sets of findings are inconsistent with models that assume stable cooperative and selfish types, including partner choice models. Consistent with social norms, culture, and reciprocity theories, the strongest predictor of an individual’s level of cooperation is the mean cooperation of their current campmates. These findings underscore the adaptive nature of human cooperation — particularly its responsiveness to social contexts — as a feature that is important in generating the assortment necessary for cooperation to evolve.
The Liking Gap in Conversations: Do People Like Us More Than We Think?
Erica Boothby et al.
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Having conversations with new people is an important and rewarding part of social life. Yet conversations can also be intimidating and anxiety provoking, and this makes people wonder and worry about what their conversation partners really think of them. Are people accurate in their estimates? We found that following interactions, people systematically underestimated how much their conversation partners liked them and enjoyed their company, an illusion we call the liking gap. We observed the liking gap as strangers got acquainted in the laboratory, as first-year college students got to know their dorm mates, and as formerly unacquainted members of the general public got to know each other during a personal development workshop. The liking gap persisted in conversations of varying lengths and even lasted for several months, as college dorm mates developed new relationships. Our studies suggest that after people have conversations, they are liked more than they know.
Too precise to pursue: How precise first offers create barriers-to-entry in negotiations and markets
Alice Lee et al.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, September 2018, Pages 87-100
Abstract:
Prior research shows that precise first offers strongly anchor negotiation outcomes. This precision advantage, however, has been documented only when the parties were already in a negotiation. We introduce the concept of negotiation entry, i.e., the decision to enter a negotiation with a particular party. We predict that precise prices create barriers-to-entry, reducing a counterpart’s likelihood of entering a negotiation. Six studies (N = 1580) and one archival analysis of real estate data (N = 11,203) support our barrier-to-entry prediction: Potential negotiators were less likely to enter a negotiation with precise- versus round-offer makers. Using both statistical mediation and experimental-causal-chain analyses, we establish that perceptions of offer-maker inflexibility underlie the precision barrier. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the precision mechanism (inflexibility) is distinct from the extremity mechanism (being offended) that produces barriers-to-entry from extreme first offers. The discussion theoretically integrates research on first-offer precision and extremity by offering the Precision-Extremity Model of First Offers.
The Effect of Screen Size and E-Communication Richness on Negotiation Performance
Terri Kurtzberg, Sanghoon Kang & Charles Naquin
Group Decision and Negotiation, August 2018, Pages 573–592
Abstract:
Using an empirical study, this paper investigated how each screen size and different presentation modes (video or text-only) can trigger meaningful differences when interacting with a partner in a negotiation. In a simulated multi-issue negotiation between a buyer and a seller, participants were instructed to communicate through either a large (laptop) or small (mobile phone) screen in either a video conversation or a text-based communication. The findings revealed that (a) negotiators communicating through a large screen performed better than negotiators interacting via small screen; (b) negotiators communicating through video conversation performed better than negotiators interacting via text-based communication; (c) negotiators communicating through video conversation formed higher levels of trust and satisfaction than negotiators interacting via text-based communication; and (d) negotiators communicating through video conversations over large screens achieved the highest joint outcome. Implications for the use of technology during negotiations is discussed, with attention given to the need to preserve more naturalistic cues through larger screens and the use of video conversations for best effect.