Social Distance
Frequent Interpersonal Stress and Inflammatory Reactivity Predict Depressive-Symptom Increases: Two Tests of the Social-Signal-Transduction Theory of Depression
Annelise Madison et al.
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
The social-signal-transduction theory of depression asserts that people who experience ongoing interpersonal stressors and mount a greater inflammatory response to social stress are at higher risk for depression. The current study tested this theory in two adult samples. In Study 1, physically healthy adults (N = 76) who reported more frequent interpersonal tension had heightened depressive symptoms at Visit 2, but only if they had greater inflammatory reactivity to a marital conflict at Visit 1. Similarly, in Study 2, depressive symptoms increased among lonelier and less socially supported breast-cancer survivors (N = 79). This effect was most pronounced among participants with higher inflammatory reactivity to a social-evaluative stressor at Visit 1. In both studies, noninterpersonal stress did not interact with inflammatory reactivity to predict later depressive symptoms.
Keep talking: (Mis)understanding the hedonic trajectory of conversation
Michael Kardas, Juliana Schroeder & Ed O'Brien
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
People regularly interact with new acquaintances, yet little research has examined the hedonic dynamics of these conversations or the extent to which people are aware of them. Five preregistered laboratory experiments (N = 1,093 participants, including 966 spoken conversations) address these gaps. We find that people misunderstand the hedonic trajectory of conversation: After enjoying the initial minutes of conversation with a new acquaintance, participants expected their enjoyment to decline as their conversations continued, but experienced stable or increasing enjoyment in reality. This miscalibration arose at least partly because participants underestimated how much they would have to discuss. Thus, instructing participants to mentally simulate the conversation in detail drew their attention to the conversation material they could discuss and helped to calibrate their enjoyment predictions. When left uncorrected, misunderstanding the hedonic trajectory of conversation can undermine well-being. In one study, participants preferred to spend less time in conversation and more time alone than was optimal for their enjoyment - a finding that emerged even among participants who reported wanting to enjoy themselves. Throughout our experiments we assessed various conversational contexts (including whether participants had one long conversation with a single partner or several short conversations with different partners), and features of conversation (including participants' perceived and actual interest in talking to each other, fatigue, and the intimacy of conversation), thus shining novel light on conversational dynamics more broadly. People hold incorrect assumptions about how social interaction changes over time and, consequently, may avoid longer-lasting conversations that would forge closer connections.
Unseen Preferences: Homophily in Friendship Networks
David Zuckerman
Stanford Working Paper, July 2021
Abstract:
Homophily is typically measured using a single dimension to define groups. However, people generally display preferences over multiple dimensions. I develop a simple model that characterizes agents both by a (discrete) "type" and a (continuous) "personality" value. Agents have preferences-for-similarity over both dimensions, but homophily is only measured with respect to type. I identify sufficient conditions on preferences such that a strongly stable matching exists, and show via simulations that the friendship patterns generated by these matchings qualitatively line up with several patterns noted in the data. The matchings can be calculated via an algorithm where agents "search" through utility space for friends. Increasing costs to friendship cause both within-group and systematic across-group heterogeneity in the extent of students' search through utility space. Majority-group "outliers" -- those who must search an extensive amount in utility space for friends -- form a disproportionate number of cross-group friendships. These outliers are the key reason why mid-sized groups exhibit the highest levels of homophily bias, a distinctive feature noted in prior literature.
A genetically-controlled, cross-lagged study of the association between friends' deviance and participants' delinquency during adolescence: A replication
Frank Vitaro et al.
Developmental Psychology, December 2021, Pages 2011-2021
Abstract:
The goal of the present study was to replicate Burt et al. (2009) and Hou et al. (2013) findings by determining the contribution of peers' deviance to changes in participants' (monozygotic [MZ] twins') self-reported delinquency from mid- to late adolescence while controlling for possible gene-environment correlations (rGE) through the use of the cotwin method in the context of a cross-lagged design. Two separate samples were used to this purpose. The first sample included 289 MZ-twin pairs (48.42% female; 65.5% of European descent, 21.7% of African descent, 12.8% other; average age at first assessment = 16.20 years) and relied on perceived measures of peer deviance, as in the two original studies. The second sample comprised 181 MZ-twin pairs (50.67% female; 84% of European descent, 3% of African descent, 2% of Asian descent, 2% Native North Americans, and 9% unspecified; average age at first assessment = 13.05 years) and used direct measures to assess peers' deviance. Participants in the first sample were part of a large representative sample of American adolescents, whereas the second sample included families with twins born in a large Canadian city. Results showed that within-pair differences in self-reported delinquency were stable from midadolescence to late adolescence in both samples. As in Burt et al. (2009) and Hou et al. (2013) within-pair differences in peer deviance did not predict changes in within-pair differences in self-reported delinquency in both samples (i.e., no socialization effect). In contrast to Burt et al. (2009) and Hou et al. (2013), however, we found no predictive link from twins' self-reported delinquency to peers' deviance (i.e., no selection effect). Finally, as in Burt et al. (2009) we found that peers' deviance was stable from middle to late adolescence and that peers' deviance and participants' delinquency were cross-sectionally correlated in the first sample, but not in the second sample. These results are interpreted in the context of the ongoing debate in regard to peers' socialization vs selection effects.
Speakers Align With Their Partner's Overspecification During Interaction
Jia Loy & Kenny Smith
Cognitive Science, December 2021
Abstract:
Speakers often overspecify by encoding more information than is necessary when referring to an object (e.g., "the blue mug" for the only mug in a group of objects). We investigated the role of a partner's linguistic behavior (whether or not they overspecify) on a speaker's own tendency to overspecify. We used a director-matcher task in which speakers interacted with a partner who either consistently overspecified or minimally specified in the color/size dimension (Experiments 1, 2, and 3), as well as with a partner who switched behaviors midway through interaction (Experiments 4 and 5). We found that speakers aligned with their partner's linguistic behavior to produce overspecific or minimally specific descriptions, and we saw little evidence that the alignment was enhanced by lexical or semantic repetition across prime and target trials. Time-course analyses showed that alignment increased over the course of the interaction, and speakers appeared to track a change in the partner's linguistic behavior, altering their reference strategy to continue matching that of their partner's. These results demonstrate the persistent influence of a partner's behavior on speakers across the duration of an interaction.
Fear in groups: Increasing group size reduces perceptions of danger
Ellen Tedeschi et al.
Emotion, October 2021, Pages 1499-1510
Abstract:
When we face danger or stress, the presence of others can provide a powerful signal of safety and support. However, despite a large literature on group living benefits in animals, few studies have been conducted on how group size alters subjective emotional responses and threat perception in humans. We conducted 5 experiments (N = 3,652) to investigate whether the presence of others decreases fear in response to threat under a variety of conditions. In Studies 1, 2 and 3, we experimentally manipulated group size in hypothetical and real-world situations and found that fear responses decreased as group size increased. In Studies 4 and 5 we again used a combination of hypothetical and real-world decisions to test whether increased anxiety in response to a potential threat would lead participants to choose larger groups for themselves. Participants consistently chose larger groups when threat and anxiety were high. Overall, our findings show that group size provides a salient signal of protection and safety in humans.