Is a partner's competence threatening during dyadic cooperative work? It depends on resource interdependence

Previous studies with university students have shown that resource interdependence during cooperative dyadic work on texts produces two different dynamics in student interaction and learning. Working on complementary information produces positive interactions, but a good quality of information transmission is needed to foster student learning. Working on identical information produces a confrontation of viewpoints but also encourages a threatening social comparison of competence, which can be detrimental for learning. The aim of present study is to test the moderating role of a partner's competence in two peer-learning methods by manipulating a partner's competence through a confederate. Results indicate that a partner's competence is beneficial when students work on complementary information while it is detrimental when students work on identical informatio

Achievement Goals in Social Interactions: Learning with Mastery vs. Performance Goals

Little work has studied achievement goals in social interaction situations. The present experiment aimed at contributing to this matter by showing the potential of social interaction (in particular disagreement) to moderate the effects of achievement goals on learning. Participants were led to think they interacted with a partner, sharing opinions about a text that they were studying. Mastery and performance goals were manipulated. During the "interaction,” they received either disagreement or agreement from this bogus partner. Results showed that a condition in which mastery goals were induced led to better learning than a performance goal condition only when the partner disagreed. No differences between goal conditions were observed when the partner agreed. Implications for achievement goal research are discusse

Portion size tells who I am, food type tells who you are: Specific functions of amount and type of food in same- and opposite-sex dyadic eating contexts

Previous research has shown that women eating small portions of food (vs. eating big portions) are perceived as more feminine, whereas men eating large portions are perceived as more masculine. The specific type of food items have also been shown to carry connotations for gender stereotyping. In addition, matching the co-eater's food quantity is also a means to ingratiate him or her. Thus, a potential motivational conflict between gender identity expression and ingratiation arises when people eat in opposite-sex dyads. Scholars have, thus far, focused their attention on one of these two dimensions at a time, and rarely in relation to the co-eaters\u2019 sex. The present study investigated, through a restaurant scenario, the way in which women and men, when asked to imagine having lunch in dyads, combine food choice and quantity regulation as a function of the co-eater's sex. Results showed that participants use the quantity dimension to communicate gender identity, and the food type dimension to ingratiate the co-eater's preferences by matching her/his presumed choice, following gender-based stereotypes about food. In opposite-sex dyads, dishes that incorporate the two dimensions were chosen above the expected frequency

The chronology of collective cheating: a qualitative study of collective dishonesty in academic contexts

Collective cheating can have serious consequences in professional and educational settings. Existing data show that collective cheating is common and that individuals cheat more when they are in groups, highlighting the existence of some collective organisation in the endeavour. However, little is known about the emergence of this behaviour and the group processing involved. Drawing on qualitative data from 20 semi-structured interviews and a thematic analysis, the present study explored collective cheating in academic contexts. Seven themes emerged that retrace the chronology of collective cheating from its beginning to its impact on the group: reasons, birth and organisation of collective cheating, risk management, concealment strategies, justifications and social impact. Participants emphasised the extrinsic benefits, the interdependence of members and the importance of existing social norms, as well as the positive valence of this kind of dishonesty. In participants' recalls, cheating together means cooperating, showing solidarity, helping and supporting each other

Minority Influence and Degrowth-Oriented Pro-environmental Conflict: When Emotions Betray Our Attachment to the Social Dominant Paradigm

If today the anthropogenic origin of climate change gathers almost total scientific consensus, human pro-environmental action is not changing with sufficient impact to keep global warming within the 1.5° limit. Environmental psychology has traditionally focused on the underlying barriers towards more pro-environmental behaviours. Emotions—like fear or anger—may act as such barriers especially in case of radical change (e.g., degrowth). While minority influence has been extensively applied to understand societal change, it has rarely been applied to understand the emotional responses that may hinder counter-normative pro-environmental messages. However, past literature on emotions shows that, in challenging situations—the likes of radical minority conflict—people will tend to use their emotional reaction to maintain societal status quo. Two studies investigated how participants emotionally react towards a counter-normative pro-environmental minority message (advocating degrowth). A qualitative (thematic analyses) and a quantitative (emotional self-report paradigm) studies showed that participants report emotions that allow them to realign themselves with the cultural backdrop of the social dominant paradigm (growth), thus resisting change. Specifically, although all participants tend to demonstrate higher proportions of control-oriented emotions, men do so more. These effects, as well as questions of cultural and ideological dominance, are discussed considering barriers towards pro-environmentalism

Grades degrade group coordination : deteriorated interactions and performance in a cooperative motor task

International audienceà veni