Search

Counterfactual thoughts inherently imply a comparison of a given reality to an alternative state of affairs. Previous research mainly considered consequences of different counterfactual types, namely focus (other vs. self), structure (additive vs. subtractive), and direction (upward vs. downward). The current work investigates whether a ‘more-than’ versus ‘less-than’ comparative nature of counterfactual thoughts alters judgments of their impact. Four experiments demonstrated that self-generated other- (Studies 1 and 3) and self-focused (Study 2) upward counterfactuals are judged more impactful when they entail ‘more-than’ rather than ‘less-than’ comparisons. Judgments include plausibility and persuasiveness, as well as counterfactuals' likelihood to change future behavior and feelings. Self-reported ease of thought generation and (dis)fluency gauged by difficulty in thought generation was similarly affected. This more-less asymmetry reversed in Study 3 for downward counterfactual thoughts, with ‘less-than’ counterfactuals being judged more impactful and easier to generate. Further attesting to the role of ease, when spontaneously generating comparative counterfactuals, participants correctly provided more ‘more-than’ upward counterfactuals, but more ‘less-than’ downward counterfactuals (Study 4). These findings delineate one of the to date few conditions for a reversal of the more-less asymmetry and provide support for a correspondence principle, the simulation heuristic, and thus the role of ease in counterfactual thinking. They suggest that especially ‘more-than’ counterfactuals following negative events, and ‘less-than’ counterfactuals following positive events, are likely to have an important impact on people.

Human judgments are inherently comparative. Recently, a so-called more-less asymmetry in comparative communication has been demonstrated: ‘more than’ comparisons are preferred to corresponding ‘less than’ comparisons. Here we show that a ubiquitous social-structural factor – social power – shapes biases in such comparisons. Powerholders, relative to powerless individuals, liked more, agreed more with and considered more likely to be true ‘more than’ compared to ‘less than’ statements. This was true despite the fact that the differently formulated statements were logically equivalent. In Study 1 (N = 153), induced high power (vs. control or low power) led to believing that ‘more than’ statements were more likely to be true. In Studies 2A/B (N = 449) the judgments of participants in high power conditions were more favorable when comparisons were made using ‘more than’ comparisons. This was also the case in a pilot study (N = 149) in which individual differences in chronic sense of power were assessed. These findings suggest that powerholders’ decisions based on comparative information are especially prone to the more-less judgmental bias resulting in asymmetry. They are in line with approaches positing that power increases and lack of power decreases reliance on subjective experiences, including – but not limited to – ease of information processing, and the use of fast and frugal strategies in judgment and decision-making.

Visual perspective taking (VPT), the ability to adopt another person's viewpoint, entails two distinct processes, Level‐1 (L1)‐VPT and Level‐2 (L2‐VPT), referring to the ability to perceive whether and how a target sees an object, respectively. Whereas previous efforts investigated the impact of targets' social characteristics on L1‐VPT, the present work is the first to do so regarding L2‐VPT. Specifically, we investigate the impact of targets' membership in outgroups varying in perceived competence and warmth, the two fundamental dimensions of social perception. Participants in four experiments engaged in a L2‐VPT task. Avatars belonged to a low competence low warmth group (LCLW; e.g. the homeless) or to a high competence low warmth group (HCLW; e.g. bankers) in Experiments 1–3, and to a LCLW or high competence high warmth group (HCHW; e.g. female students) in Experiment 4. Participants answered as quickly as possible whether a cued number matched a number present in a scene from either their own or the avatar's perspective. We consistently found support for the presence of both egocentric and altercentric interference, but this was not modulated by group competence and warmth, suggesting that membership in outgroups varying in competence and warmth does not influence L2‐VPT. We discuss the findings' implications in the light of recent views on VPT.

Les pensées contrefactuelles (PCFs) impliquent naturellement une comparaison entre une réalité donnée et une réalité alternative. Des recherches antérieures ont examiné l'impact des différents contenus des PCFs: le focus – sur soi-même (vs. autrui), la structure – PCFs ajoutant (vs. soustrayant) des éléments, et la direction – PCFs ascendantes (vs. descendantes) comparant un résultat donné à un résultat meilleur (vs. pire). Par ailleurs, des recherches constatent que les individus sont plus susceptibles d'évaluer favorablement, de considérer comme vraies et d'être d'accord avec des comparaisons formulées de manière ‘plus-que' plutôt que ‘moins-que' parce qu'elles sont plus fluides (i.e., plus faciles à traiter ; Hoorens & Bruckmüller, 2015). En s'appuyant sur les points communs établis entre les différentes pensées comparatives (contrefactuelles, sociales et temporelles ; Markman & McMullen, 2003), le présent travail examine – à travers focus, structure et direction – l'impact de la formulation comparative des PCFs. Dans cinq études (N1=224, N2=118, N3A=202, N3B=96, N4=210), les participants jugeaient des PCFs générées par autrui ou par eux-mêmes, avec la formulation plus-que versus moins-que manipulée intra- (étude 1) et inter-participants (études 2–4). Ces études ont montré que les PCFs ascendantes-soustractives (étude 1) et -additives (études 2–4), ainsi que les PCFs focalisées sur autrui (études 1, 2, 4) et sur soi-même (études 3A, 3B) sont évaluées comme étant plus faciles à générer (i.e., plus fluides) lorsqu'elles sont formulées en termes ‘plus-que' plutôt que ‘moins-que' (p.ex., Elle aurait dû être plus attentive vs. moins distraite). En conséquence, elles sont jugées plus percutantes. Les jugements de leur impact comprenaient leur plausibilité et caractère persuasif, ainsi que leur probabilité de modifier le comportement futur. En outre, le principe de correspondance (Roese et al., 1999) prédit qu'il est relativement facile de penser à la façon dont le fait

Similarity with others in need regarding various attributes [e.g., social group membership] has been shown to increase individuals’ empathic responses, willingness to help and prosocial behaviour. We tested whether a subtle similarity, namely of observers’ and targets’ self-regulatory orientation in terms of a promotion or prevention regulatory focus [i.e., interpersonal regulatory fit], would entail similar effects. Interpersonal regulatory [mis]fit was conveyed through focus-congruent or -incongruent emotional reactions which targets, facing distressing situations, expressed. We predicted that when observer participants’ regulatory focus fits with targets’ negative emotional reaction [i.e., promotion focus—dejection or prevention focus—agitation], they would be more likely to express empathy, willingness to help, and to engage in prosocial behaviour towards this target compared to conditions of misfit. Five studies relied on observers’ chronic regulatory focus [Study 1, 3, & 4] and situationally induced regulatory focus [Study 2 & 5] and presented different distressing scenarios with targets conveying focus [in]congruent negative emotions. Inconsistent results emerged across the studies, which indicated misfit, fit and no effects. Study characteristics did not suggest a moderator explaining these inconsistent findings. An internal meta-analysis across all studies indicated that overall there was no evidence of either a fit or a misfit effect. This work sheds light on the technical challenges of exploring relations between subtle interpersonal regulatory [mis]fit and prosocial reactions. Implications for future research are discussed, including the importance of creating stronger interpersonal [mis]fit experiences by means of incorporating descriptions of distressed targets’ hindered goal pursuits as well as negative reactions.

Des études antérieures montrent que l'influence des leaders sur leurs suiveurs est plus ou moins efficace selon que leur style de leadership corresponde (‘fit’) ou non avec l’orientation d’autorégulation des suiveurs. Les présents travaux s’intéressent à ce ‘fit’ sous l’angle du mode régulateur (MR). La théorie du MR définit deux orientations d’autorégulation : l’évaluation, qui reflète une préoccupation pour l’analyse critique et la comparaison, et la locomotion, qui traduit une préoccupation pour le mouvement d'un état à un autre et le changement. À ce jour, la recherche sur la théorie du MR révèle certaines incohérences. Dans certains cas, les suiveurs avec un mode d’évaluation (vs. locomotion) préfèrent un style de leadership participatif (vs, directif ; cf., Kruglanski et al., 2007) alors que, dans d’autres cas, les préférences s’inversent (cf., Pierro et al., 2009). Nous avons tenté de réconcilier ces résultats contradictoires concernant l’influence du MR des suiveurs sur leurs préférences de style de leadership en investiguant le possible rôle modérateur de deux caractéristiques contextuelles : la perspective temporelle d’une tâche (i.e., si elle est accomplie à court ou à long terme) et la définition des critères de qualité (i.e., s'il existe ou non des normes prédéfinies pour évaluer la performance à une tâche). Dans trois études préenregistrées, nous avons mesuré le MR des suiveurs et manipulé la perspective temporelle de la tâche, en intra- (Étude1a, N=305 ; Étude1b, N=368) ou inter-participants (Étude1c, N=371). De plus, dans deux autres études préenregistrées, nous avons mesuré (Étude2a, N=503) et induit expérimentalement (Étude2b, N=497) le MR des suiveurs et manipulé inter-participants la définition des critères de qualité. Contrairement aux prédictions, ni la perspective temporelle ni la définition des critères de qualité ne modèrent la relation entre le MR des suiveurs et leurs préférences de leadership. Indépendamment des caractéristiques contextu

Leaders are often presented as the main targets followers seek orientation from. However, depending on their characteristics and motives, followers might also prefer to seek orientation from other targets, such as their peers. Regarding characteristics, we considered regulatory mode (RM), that is locomotion mode (a concern for movement from state to state and maintaining action flow) versus assessment mode (a concern for critical analysis and comparison) of followers. Regarding social orientation motives, we considered their self-evaluation, self-improvement, self-enhancement, and emulation motives. We investigated how they jointly influence who followers prefer to seek orientation from. In three preregistered studies, we measured participants’ RM and manipulated the social orientation motives within-subjects. Participants indicated if they would rather seek orientation from their leader or a peer (Study1, N=280; Study2, N=280), or from their leader, a peer or nobody (Study3, N=272). Supporting our predictions, locomotion positively predicted preferences to seek orientation from a leader rather than a peer – independently of the social orientation motives. In addition, and also in line with predictions, assessment mode and social orientation motives interacted, such that assessment positively predicted preferences to seek orientation from peers rather than leaders for self-enhancement motive, whilst not predicting leader or peer preferences for the other motives. Implications for how different targets are relevant to motivating followers at work are discussed.

Human judgments are inherently comparative. At the same time, responses to comparative information are biased, with “more than” rather than “less than” framed comparisons being favored (i.e., the fluency based more-less asymmetry; Hoorens & Bruckmüller, 2015). The current research investigated whether a ubiquitous social-structural factor – social power – impacts this bias. In an initial study, induced high power (vs. control and low power) led to believing that fictitious gender differences framed in “more than” rather than in “less than” terms were more likely to be true (Study 1; N=152). In line with recent recommendations (e.g., Kenny & Judd, 2019), the results of several smaller studies were meta-analyzed to allow gauging a more precise estimate of the real effect size of the phenomenon, independent of heterogeneity in effects and operationalizations. In these studies, people’s chronic sense of power was positively associated with, and induced high (vs. low) power increased, agreement with funding decisions after reading “more than” rather than “less than” comparisons in arguments about funding different art forms (Studies 2A/2B; N=149/208). Also, managers (vs. employees) evaluated more positively articles involving “more than” rather than “less than” statements comparing allergy medicines (Study 3; N=233). Meta-analytic findings indicate a replication of the more-less asymmetry and that it indeed is exacerbated by power. This dovetails with approaches positing that power increases reliance on subjective experiences, including ease of information processing and the use of heuristics in judgment and decision-making.

Messages are often tailored to individual differences, as fit is believed to influence behavior. We examine the effects of regulatory fit (i.e., matching message framing in terms of promotion/prevention to people’s natural promotion/prevention orientation) and individuals’ priority of nature values, on the evaluation of climate change messages and donations to pro-environmental charities. We measured participants’ (n=570) regulatory focus on ensuring positive outcomes (promotion) versus avoiding negative outcomes (prevention), and the importance they attributed to nature values. Participants evaluated a promotion- or prevention-framed text (highlighting ensuring the environment’s welfare or avoiding its destruction) and were then invited to donate part of their remuneration to pro-environmental or other charities. Participants prioritizing nature values evaluated the promotion-framed text more favorably the stronger their promotion focus was, but only endorsement of the nature values predicted donations. This highlights the importance of measuring actual pro-environmental behavior, as positive message evaluations did not materialize into donations.

Prior work showed that leadership preferences depend not only on followers’ characteristics, but also on contextual features. We investigated how regulatory mode (assessment – a concern with “getting things right” vs. locomotion – a concern with “getting things done” in goal pursuit) and the definition of quality criteria (i.e., whether or not there are predefined standards to evaluate task or work performance) jointly influence followers’ preferences for directive and participative leadership. We measured (Study 1, N = 503) and experimentally induced (Study 2, N = 497) followers’ regulatory mode before presenting them with task instructions that either clearly defined quality criteria or left them undefined. In both studies, participants were led to believe that they would work on a task with a supervising leader and indicated their preferred leader style for the task. Contrary to predictions, results do not suggest that the definition of quality criteria moderates the influence of followers’ regulatory mode on their leadership preferences. Independent of quality criteria conditions, both chronic assessment and locomotion predicted preferences for directive leadership; additionally, chronic locomotion strongly predicted preferences for participative leadership. However, induced regulatory mode did not influence leadership preferences. Further work is needed to better understand the role of context on self-regulatory dynamics and leadership style preferences.

Past research showed that people project their goals onto unknown others. The present research investigates whether they also rely on their motivational orientation in terms of regulatory mode (locomotion vs. assessment). In line with work on self‐judgments, a stronger chronic personal focus on locomotion over assessment decreased predictions of others' experiences of nostalgia (Study 1) and increased predictions of others' preference for, motivation by, and evaluation of a transformational over a transactional leader (Study 2). Furthermore, an experimentally induced locomotion mode compared to an assessment mode increased peoples' predictions of others' motivation to reconcile after interpersonal conflict (Study 3). We examined process evidence via the Testing‐Process‐by‐Interaction‐Strategy: As predicted, effects only emerged under time pressure (vs. ample deliberation; Study 2) and for ingroup (vs. outgroup) members (Study 3). These findings suggest that people's regulatory mode is a basis for predicting others' reactions and preferences. We discuss implications and future research directions.

Human judgments are inherently comparative and often based on quantitative dimensions. The current research demonstrates that a ubiquitous social-structural factor, social power, increases biases in such comparisons. Across four studies, powerholders liked more, agreed more with and considered more likely to be true “more than” compared to “less than” information. Specifically, managers (vs. employees) evaluated more favourably articles involving “more than” rather than “less than” statements (Study 1; N=233). People’s chronic sense of power was positively associated with, and induced high (vs. low) power increased, agreement with funding options after reading “more than” rather than “less than” comparisons (Studies 2A/2B; Ns=149/208). Finally, induced high power (vs. control and low power) led to believing that “more than” statements are more likely to be true than “less than” statements (Study 3; N=152). The findings replicate previous work (Hoorens & Bruckmüller, 2015) and suggest that powerholders’ decisions based on comparative information are especially prone to the more-less judgmental heuristic resulting in asymmetry (favouring “more than” rather than “less than” statements). They are in line with approaches positing that power increases reliance on subjective experiences, including ease of information processing and the use of heuristics in judgment and decision-making. Implications of this research for other comparative processes impacted by power are discussed.

Civil war, flight, escape and expulsion are extremely stressful and assert a negative impact on refugees’ mental health. However scientific research about resilience and coping of refugees is scarce. Especially in the recent refugee crisis, calls have been made to consider factors contributing to coping and resilience in this vulnerable population. Therefore, the current research sought to investigate individual differences that could serve as antecedents of coping and contextual factors that might moderate these effects. Specifically, it took into account individual’s self-regulatory differences in terms of regulatory focus (i.e., a promotion focus on nurturance needs, ideals and gains vs. a prevention focus on security needs, oughts and losses). It furthermore explored contextual influences by considering Syrian refugees in Turkey (Sample 1, N = 273) and Germany (Sample 2, N = 169). Compared to Syrian refugees in Turkey, those in Germany had a stronger promotion focus. They also reported more problem-focused and less maladaptive coping, as well as less symptoms. Both promotion and prevention focus were positively related to problem-focused coping. Problem-focused coping, in turn, predicted more symptoms in Turkey but not in Germany. Furthermore, a stronger promotion focus was associated with less symptoms and maladaptive coping was associated with more symptoms in both samples. These results contribute to the coping literature in demonstrating that under certain conditions problem-focused coping can be maladaptive and extend the scarce previous work on self-regulation and coping. Most importantly, they highlight a promotion focus as a clear resilience factor and the role of maladaptive coping in increasing vulnerability. As such, they might inform the design of effective interventions among Syrian refugees and beyond.

Objective: Values are often phrased as ideals that people seek to approach, but they can also be conceptualized as counter-ideals that people seek to avoid. We aimed to test whether individuals endorse more strongly values that are framed in line with their predominant self-regulatory motivation, using individual difference scales in promotion/prevention (Higgins, 1997) and in behavioral approach/inhibition (Carver & White, 1994). To address this systematically, we developed approach- and avoidance-framed versions of the Portrait Value Questionnaire-RR (PVQ-RR; Schwartz et al., 2012). Method: Participants completed approach- and avoidance-framed PVQ-RR versions in two studies measuring regulatory focus or motivational orientation (together 414 U.S. adults, 48% female, ages 18-69) and one study manipulating motivational orientation (39 UK high school students, 79% female, ages 16-19). Results: Value framing consistently interacted with both self-regulation variables. However, a fit between self-regulation and value framing resulted in greater value endorsement only for promotion-focused and approach-oriented (not prevention-focused and avoidance-oriented) participants. This may be because values are more naturally understood as ideal states that people seek to approach. Conclusions: Our findings provide first insights into the psychological process of person-value framing fit affecting value endorsement. We discuss implications for cross-cultural value research and research on value-congruent behavior.

Four studies show that power (induced via situational recall) increases reliance on motor fluency experiences (from motoric resonance, extraocular muscle training, dominant hand restriction, chronic inter-individual differences) in aesthetic preference judgments concerning a variety of targets (pictures, movements, objects, letters).

This research explored the relation of self-regulation and coping strategies on mental well-being amongst Syrian refugees in different contexts to provide insight into how self-regulation might be linked to successful coping (Grant & Higgins, 2003) and inform potential interventions. Syrian refugees in Turkey (N = 273) and Germany (N = 169) completed the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (measuring promotion and prevention focus; Higgins et al., 2001), the COPE Scale (measuring problem-focused, emotion-focused, and maladaptive coping; Carver et al., 1989) and the Hopkins Physical Symptoms Checklist-25 (measuring symptoms of anxiety and depression; Derogatis et al., 1974). Compared to refugees in Turkey, those in Germany had a stronger promotion focus, reported more problemand emotion-focused but less maladaptive coping, and less symptoms. Regarding the indirect effects of regulatory focus on these symptoms via coping strategies, moderated mediation analyses revealed that both foci were positively related to problem-focused coping, but this strategy increased symptoms in the Turkey sample and was unrelated to symptoms in the German sample (whilst in both samples promotion was related to reduced symptoms). Both foci were positively related to emotion-focused coping, which was unrelated to reported symptoms. Promotion (and in the Turkey sample also prevention) had an indirect effect on reduced symptoms via reduced maladaptive coping, These findings suggest that promotion focus is a resilience factor among refugees, that problem-focused coping is counter-productive in certain situations, and that generally a focus on reducing maladaptive coping (especially aided by promotion focus) is desirable. They provide insights for targeted interventions among refugees.

The current work tested the hypothesis that power increases reliance on experiences of motor fluency in forming aesthetic preferences. In 4 experiments, participants reported their aesthetic preferences regarding a variety of targets (pictures, movements, objects, and letters). Experiments 1, 2, and 3 manipulated power and motor fluency (via motoric resonance, extraocular muscle training, and dominant hand restriction). Experiment 4 manipulated power and assessed chronic interindividual differences in motor fluency. Across these experiments, power consistently increased reliance on motor fluency in aesthetic preference judgments. This finding was not mediated by differences in mood, judgment certainty, perceived task-demands or task-enjoyment, and derived from the use of motor simulations rather than from power differences in the acquisition of motor experiences. This is the first demonstration suggesting that power changes the formation of preference judgments as a function of motor fluency experiences. The implications of this research for the links between power and action, as well as the understanding of fluency processes are discussed.

We show that social power increases reliance on motor fluency experiences in the formation of aesthetic preferences regarding various targets (pictures, letters, movements). Two experiments manipulated motor fluency (via motoric resonance and muscle training) and one assessed chronic differences. Thus, differences in the use of motor fluency drove effects.

People often work together in groups that have to reach goals in a given time frame. Nonetheless, the impact of deadlines on group members’ self-control has not been studied so far. Here this topic is addressed by integrating the action-phase model (Heckhausen, 1999), which postulates the use of different self-control strategies during individual-level goal pursuit, with the social identity approach. It was predicted and found in two studies that highly identified group members, in contrast to those who were only weakly identified, responded to a group’s deadline phase (pre vs. post) by showing phase-appropriate patterns of engagement and disengagement. Study 1 measured identification and assessed intentions and behavioral indicators of self-control. Study 2 manipulated identification and assessed self-reports of intended self-control strategies. Overall, the findings corroborate the notion that the social self can serve as a basis for self-regulation.

Experiences of disflueny have been found to increase estimations of spatial and conceptual distance (Alter & Oppenheimer, 2009; Oppenheimer & Frank, 2008). This research tested similar effects of both target-related and -unrelated perceptual disfluency experiences (i.e., blurred faces or difficult to read fonts) on social distance. Compared to experiences of fluency, experiences of perceptual disfluency produced perceptions of greater self-other dissimilarity on explicit judgments (Experiment 1) and perceptions of greater self-other distance on rather indirect judgments (i.e., self vs. other ratings of various preferences; Experiment 2). Further studies considered behavioral indicators of self-other distance and (dis)similarity perceptions. In line with research showing decreased resource-allocation to and informational conformity with dissimilar and distant others (e.g., Brock, 1965; Stephan et al., 2011), when experiencing perceptual disfluency rather than fluency participants allocated fewer resources to various social targets (Experiment 3) and they also demonstrated less informational conformity with peers (Experiment 4). Finally, recent research demonstrated that people show a preference for using words (vs. pictures) when communicating with socially distal (vs. proximal) others (Amit et al., 2013). Similarly, participants experiencing disfluency (vs. fluency) preferred a verbal communication medium, indicating social distance, to a pictorial communication medium, indicating social proximity, when choosing means for averagely distal others (Experiment 5). Across studies effects were not mediated by mood, task-enjoyment, or task-difficulty. Disfluency thus impacted social distance and similarity perceptions in similar ways as other dimensions of psychological distance. This research sheds light on how social distance can be exacerbated by a previously unaddressed psychological factor.

The current research investigated whether in their predictions of others people egocentrically rely on their motivational orientation in terms of a promotion focus on achievement and growth versus a prevention focus on safety and security (i.e., their regulatory focus; Higgins, 1997, 1998). In Exp. 1 participants’ regulatory focus predicted estimations of a social target’s strategic promotion versus prevention inclinations. In Exp. 2, regulatory focus impacted on participants’ predictions of a targets’ choice when faced with enriched (fitting promotion) versus impoverished (fitting prevention) options. Two further experiments demonstrated boundary conditions. Participants in Exp. 3 only relied on their regulatory focus if doing so did not run counter stereotypic beliefs. In Exp. 4 participants only relied on their regulatory focus in making promotion versus prevention products preference-predictions when they did not have particularistic target knowledge. Regulatory focus was measured (Exp. 1) and manipulated (Exp. 2-4) and across studies effects were not mediated by mood, judgment certainty, perceived task-enjoyment or -difficulty. Implications of these findings for research on social projection and interpersonal consequences are delineated.