Social Questions
Self-Invitation Hesitation: How and Why People Fail to Ask to Join the Plans of Others
Julian Givi et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Spending time with others affords numerous benefits. One way a person can spend time with others is through a self-invitation -- asking to join the plans of others. We address the psychological processes involved with self-invitations to everyday social activities from both the self-inviter's perspective and the perspective of those with the plans ("plan-holders"). Across eight studies (seven preregistered), we demonstrate that potential self-inviters fail to ask to join the plans of others as often as plan-holders would prefer, because potential self-inviters overestimate how irritated plan-holders would be by such self-invitations. Further, we show that these asymmetries are rooted in differing viewpoints about the mindsets of plan-holders when they originally made the plans. Namely, potential self-inviters exaggerate the likelihood that plan-holders had already considered inviting them but decided against it (vs. made plans without considering inviting them). We conclude by discussing the various implications of our findings.
Boomerasking: Answering Your Own Questions
Alison Wood Brooks & Michael Yeomans
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, March 2025, Pages 864-893
Abstract:
Humans spend much of their lives in conversation, where they tend to hold many simultaneous motives. We examine two fundamental desires: to be responsive to a partner and to disclose about oneself. We introduce one pervasive way people attempt to reconcile these competing goals -- boomerasking -- a sequence in which individuals first pose a question to their conversation partner ("How was your weekend?"), let their partner answer, and then answer the question themselves ("Mine was amazing!"). The boomerask starts with someone asking a question, but -- like a boomerang -- the question returns quickly to its source. We document three types of boomerasks: ask-bragging (asking a question followed by disclosing something positive, e.g., an amazing vacation); ask-complaining (asking a question followed by disclosing something negative, e.g., a family funeral); and ask-sharing (asking a question followed by disclosing something neutral, e.g., a weird dream). Though boomeraskers believe they leave positive impressions, in practice, their decision to share their own answer -- rather than follow up on their partner's -- appears egocentric and disinterested in their partner's perspective. As a result, people perceive boomeraskers as insincere and prefer conversation partners who straightforwardly self-disclose.
Bridging Social Capital Potential and Alzheimer's Disease Mortality Rates
Adam Roth, Ashley Railey & Siyun Peng
Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, April 2025
Abstract:
Geographic disparities in Alzheimer's disease are often attributed to sociodemographic differences across communities or unequal access to opportunity structures whose use serves as protective mechanisms. Yet limited research considers the social dynamics between residents that are enabled by these opportunity structures. The authors adopt a population-level approach to evaluate how ethnoracial diversity and opportunity structures function jointly to facilitate the development of bridging social capital (i.e., mixing of dissimilar people) which is hypothesized to predict Alzhiemer's disease mortality rates. Upon analyzing Alzheimer's disease mortality records from 2,469 U.S. counties, the authors find that counties whose sociodemographic composition and opportunity structures combine to encourage bridging capital potential exhibit lower mortality rates than counties with fewer such opportunities. These findings consistently appear in environments whose composition and structure are conducive to social mixing (i.e., workhoods and civic organizations) but inconsistently in environments that are less conducive to social mixing (i.e., residential neighborhoods). The findings highlight the importance of structural factors that create opportunities for social capital.
Blurring Boundaries in Coworker Relationships: How a Nonwork Setting Becomes a Relational Holding Environment
Beth Schinoff et al.
Organization Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Positive work relationships often emerge when coworkers blur the boundaries of their work and nonwork lives in their interactions. A growing body of scholarship suggests that such boundary blurring increasingly occurs in a variety of nonwork settings. However, existing research has drawn mixed conclusions about whether boundary-blurring interactions in nonwork settings lead to beneficial or detrimental outcomes for coworker relationships. Through an inductive study of users of the exercise platform Peloton, we build theory on how and why a nonwork interaction setting facilitates work-nonwork boundary blurring that leads to positive work relationships. Our findings demonstrate that informants perceive Peloton as having a unique set of characteristics that filters out the discomfort of interacting with coworkers in a nonwork setting and provides them with new ways of understanding the potential of their coworker relationships. These two processes enable Peloton to function as a relational holding environment or -- a social context that reduces uncomfortable relational affect and facilitates relational sensemaking. Experiencing Peloton as a relational holding environment motivates informants to deepen their existing positive relationships and forge a broader set of positive relationships across work-related silos. Our theory advances scholarship on work-nonwork boundaries, positive work relationships, and the psychodynamic literature on holding environments. It also has important implications for how managers and employees navigate social contexts to facilitate positive work relationships.
The Digital Community Centers of the 21st Century? A Mixed-Methods Study of Facebook Groups as Fora for Connective Democracy
Mikkeline Thomsen et al.
Social Media + Society, March 2025
Abstract:
Facebook groups hold civic potential as fora for connective democracy. Exploring this claim, we offer a contribution to ongoing debates concerning the democratic value of digital communication. Through a mixed-methods approach, including quantitative mapping of approximately 9,000 Danish Facebook groups, netnographic field studies of select groups, and interviews with group moderators, we investigate the groups as "friendlier spaces" of contemporary civic behaviors. We find that the groups enact two key principles of connective democracy: recognizing common identity invites mundane citizenship and negotiating common norms establishes a training ground for political participation. To conceptualize the civic behaviors that arise in the Facebook groups, we introduce the concept of digital community centers, drawing parallels to the cultural history of Danish community centers, which became ubiquitous in the early 1900s and served as hubs for socializing and political exchange throughout the 20th century. We conclude that citizen-led Facebook groups replicate the political potential of traditional community centers, thus serving as their digital equivalents. The groups not only support connective democracy on the ground but also prepare members for formal political participation, thereby holding potential to revitalize democracy in the digital era.