Search

To understand human prosocial behaviour, one must consider not only the helpers and the requesters, but also the characteristics of the beneficiaries. To this aim, this articles reviews research on beneficiary effects in prosocial decision making, which implies that some human lives are valued higher than others. We focus on eight beneficiary attributes that increase willingness to help: (1) Temporal proximity, (2) Young age, (3) Female gender, (4) Misery, (5) Innocence, (6) Ingroup, (7) Identifiability (8) High proportion. We demonstrate that different psychological mechanisms explain different beneficiary effects, that the size and direction of beneficiary effects varies as a function of response mode (separate evaluation, joint evaluation, or forced choice), and outcome measure (attitudes or helping behaviour). We propose that beneficiary attributes differ in their evaluability, justifiability, and prominence, and conclude by discussing theoretical, moral, and applied aspects of beneficiary effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study questions the indiscriminate use -- or misuse -- of job performance self-rating measures in work and organizational psychology. We provide evidence for systematic cognitive distortions in the traditional predictors (i.e., work engagement and work experience) of self-ratings of job performance. A cross-sectional study was conducted (N = 470) where employees were asked to fill in a questionnaire composed of self-report measures on job performance, work engagement, and systematic cognitive distortions. Findings suggest that highly engaged older (i.e., aging) employees tend to have optimistic judgments of their job performance which was reflected in higher levels of self-rated task performance. Likewise, adults with higher work experience (i.e., long-tenured) tend to adhere to social and organizational conventions in line with cognitive decision rules and systematic distortions which may lead to misjudgment of their contextual performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research makes increasing use of eye-tracking methodologies to generate and test process models. Overall, such research suggests that attention, generally indexed by fixations (gaze duration), plays a critical role in the construction of preference, although the methods used to support this supposition differ substantially. In two studies we empirically test prototypical versions of prominent processing assumptions against one another and several base models. We find that general evidence accumulation processes provide a good fit to the data. An accumulation process that assumes leakage and temporal variability in evidence weighting (i.e., a primacy effect) fits the aggregate data, both in terms of choices and decision times, and does so across varying types of choices (e.g., charitable giving and hedonic consumption) and numbers of options well. However, when comparing models on the level of the individual, for a majority of participants simpler models capture choice data better. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

In April 2021, the use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID‐19 vaccine was paused to investigate whether it had caused serious blood clots to a small number of women (six out of 6.8 million Americans who had been administered that vaccine). As these events were unfolding, we surveyed a sample of Americans (N = 625) to assess their reactions to this news, whether they supported the pausing of the vaccine, and potential psychological factors underlying their decision. In addition, we employed automated text analyses as a supporting method to more classical quantitative measures. Results showed that political ideology influenced the support for the pausing of the vaccine; liberals were more likely to oppose it than conservatives. In addition, the effect of political ideology was mediated by the difference between perceived benefit and risk and the language style used to produce reasons in support (or against) the decision to pause the vaccine. Liberals perceived the benefit of vaccines higher than the risk, used a more analytic language style when stating their reasons, and had a more positive attitude toward the vaccine. We discuss the implications of our findings considering vaccine hesitancy and risk perception during the COVID‐19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated whether different Mortality Rate Formats used to express the same objective probability affected people's Emotional reactions, Risk perception, and protective behavioral intentions. A sample from the Italian population (N = 604) was exposed to six different formats (i.e. Absolute value; Raw ratio; 1 in X; Verbal; Percentage; Probability) to report the mortality rate of COVID-19 in a between-subject design. In line with expectations, the Probability format led to lower emotional reactions compared to all the other formats. Moreover, results from a path analysis revealed that emotional reactions predicted risk perception. The Mortality Rate Formats also had an indirect effect on Behavioral Intentions to protect oneself, which was mediated by emotional reactions and risk perception. The effect sizes of these indirect effects ranged from small to medium. The direct effect of risk on intentions was found to differ among two dimensions of risk. Affective Risk led to higher Behavioral Intentions, while Deliberative Risk had the opposite effect. We discuss these results in line with the ongoing debate regarding the role played by risk scientists during the pandemic and offer practical implications for risk management during health crises like COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The evolution of quality expectations over time is an important driver of customer satisfaction and retention. This study investigated the dynamic properties of customers' quality expectation updating from an analytical perspective and provides new evidence on the psychological correlates of the discrepancies between expectations and experiences in the realm of consumer decision making. In doing so, we focus on the dynamics of expectation formation by adopting a nonlinear complex systems approach based on well-established behavioral theories. Using stability analysis, we find analytical results which are supported empirically by an experiment that there is considerable heterogeneity in how consumers calibrate their quality expectations. Specifically, we demonstrate analytically that in some cases individuals will converge to a specific quality expectation (reach a stable fixed point), while in other cases their expectations will oscillate between a small number of points periodically. This is remarkable because the existence of the latter is not due to changes in quality performance but merely accrue endogenously and depend on individuals' disconfirmation functions. To our knowledge, this is the first time in the marketing literature that the corresponding gaps between quality expectations and quality provided are analyzed in the long run. Our analytical and empirical findings also suggest that being more responsive to a person's expectations can increase the portion of those individuals that are able to better calibrate. Finally, we also demonstrate that calibration ability is associated with how thoughtful or impulsive information is used to update one's expectation. A more deliberative processing style, which includes using a wider range of information, seems to be related to fewer unrealistic expectations and better calibrations, while a more impulsive processing style is related to more unrealistic expectations. In addition to providing a better understanding of dynamic expectation formation, these results can pave the way for interventions that foster more accurate quality expectations. From a managerial perspective, our findings imply that communicating quality perceptions are only to a certain extent under managerial control. To recognize this, firms are advised to segment customers based on their information processing style and to customize their marketing actions accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report the results of a diary study to determine whether a diary approach could be used as a successful way of retrieving a) the user's learning contexts, b) which learning contexts are significant for consideration within an m-learning application, and c) which learning materials are appropriate for which learning situation. Analyses of data provided by 32 participants have helped us to establish the applicability of using a learning schedule for retrieving a learner's location and available time contexts. This understanding was required in order to determine the realistic usability and potential deployment of our mobile context-aware learning schedule (mCALS) framework, which uses a learner's schedule (i.e. electronic organizer) to retrieve their location and available time contexts. The purpose of this framework is to suggest appropriate learning materials to students based on the values of the proposed contexts (including learning styles, knowledge level, concentration level and frequency of interruption, at the point of usage). The study suggests that the framework should include verification methods to counter against the possibility of students not adhering precisely to their planned learning schedules. Motivation was established as a crucial learning context which should be incorporated into adaptive mobile learning applications. (Contains 1 table and 3 figures.)

Five experiments examined the role of resource evaluability on giving. We systematically varied participants' resources they and another potential donor received and whether they could donate to a recipient either by themselves or with the other donor. Participants in the relative advantage condition received more resources than the other donor, and those in the relative disadvantage condition received fewer resources than the other donor. The presence of the other donor made participants' resources evaluable and shaped giving: Relatively disadvantaged participants were proportionally more generous than advantaged participants but only when they could evaluate their resources. Neither the mere presence of others nor reputational concerns could explain the results. Exploratory mediation and moderation analyses further showed that relatively disadvantaged participants give proportionally more the higher and the more equal they perceive their status to the advantaged donor. This shows that the generosity of those who have less does depend on how they evaluate their status compared to other donors. Our results provide insights into the question of why and when resource asymmetries between donors result in prosocial giving and can influence fundraising strategies of charitable organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]