Intergroup Conflict Escalation Leads to More Extremism

Empirical findings in the intergroup conflict literature show that individuals’ beliefs that mark differentiation from out-groups become radicalized as intergroup tensions escalate. They also show that this differentiation is proportional to tension escalation. In this paper, we are interested to develop an agent-based model which captures these findings in order to explore the effect of perceived intergroup conflict escalation on the average number of emergent extremists and opinion clusters in the population. The proposed model builds on the 2-dimensional bounded confidence model proposed by Huet et al (2008). The results show that the average number of extremists has a negative correlation with intolerance threshold and positive correlation with the amount of opinion movement when two agents are to reject each other’s belief. In other words, the more tensions exist between groups, the more individuals getting extremists. We also found that intergroup conflict escalation leads to lower opinion diversity in the population compared with normal situations

Sustainable value creation through corporate entrepreneurship : A case study of Univan Ship Management Limited in Hong Kong

Due to rapid and major economic change in recent years, the need for more flexible, dynamic and innovative companies is widely recognized. Firms must clearly understand and translate customers’ needs in order to foster value creation. Many scholars have focused their attention on the entrepreneurial behavior of owners or top managers and their actions that encourage innovation, venturing and strategic renewal. However, rigorous empirical research examining the factors that support corporate entrepreneurship and lead to sustainable value creation is scarce. The purpose of this study is to identify the factors that support corporate entrepreneurship and lead to sustainable value creation in a ship management company, using a case study approach. In this context, the following research question is addressed: -What factors support corporate entrepreneurship and lead to sustainable value creation in a ship management company? This research uses an interpretive paradigm and utilizes three methods for collecting data, consisting of observational technique, surveys and semi-structured interviews. Findings reveal the factors that support corporate entrepreneurship and lead to sustainable value creation in ship management. These are analyzed in relation to the literature and the ship management sector. The study concludes that corporate entrepreneurship, when conducted effectively, can be a significant contributor of sustainable value creation. However, this may or may not be applicable to other sectors.

The Effect of Accuracy Instructions on Coronavirus-Related Belief Change Following Conversational Interactions

In a high-risk environment, such as during an epidemic, people are exposed to a large amount of information, both accurate and inaccurate. Following exposure, they typically discuss the information with each other. Here, we assess the effects of such conversations on beliefs. A sample of 126 M-Turk participants rated the accuracy of a set of COVID-19 statements (pre-test). They were then paired and asked to discuss these statements (low epistemic condition) or to discuss only the statements they thought were accurate (high epistemic condition). Finally, they rated the accuracy of the initial statements again (post- test). We do not find an effect of the epistemic condition on belief change. However, we find that individuals are sensitive to their conversational partners and change their beliefs according to their partners’ conveyed beliefs. This influence is strongest for initially moderately held beliefs. In exploratory analyses, we find that COVID-19 knowledge is predicted by trusting Doctor Fauci, not trusting President Trump, and feeling threatened by COVID-19, whereas believing COVID-19 conspiracies is predicted by trusting President Trump, not trusting Doctor Fauci, news media consumption, social media usage, and political orientation. Finally, we find that news media consumption positively predicts believing COVID-19 conspiracies, even when controlling for demographic variables including political ideology, and that this effect is not driven by a particular news network, but instead it is a general effect of news media consumption

The Effects of Dyadic Conversations on Coronavirus-Related Belief Change

In a high-risk environment, such as during an epidemic, people are exposed to a large amount of information, both accurate and inaccurate. Following exposure, they typically discuss the information with each other in conversations. Here, we assessed the effects of such conversations on their beliefs. A sample of 126 M-Turk participants first rated the accuracy of a set of COVID-19 statements (pre-test). They were then paired and asked to discuss either any of these statements (low epistemic condition) or only the statements they thought were accurate (high epistemic condition). Finally, they rated the accuracy of the initial statements again (post-test). We did not find a difference of epistemic condition on belief change. However, we found that individuals were sensitive to their conversational partners and changed their beliefs according to their partners’ conveyed beliefs. This influence was strongest for initially moderately held beliefs

The Impact of Information Sources on Covid-19 Knowledge Accumulation and Vaccination Intention

During a global health crisis, people are exposed to vast amounts of information from a variety of sources. Here, we assessed which information sources could increase knowledge about COVID-19 (Study 1) and the COVID-19 vaccines (Study 2). In Study 1, a US census matched sample of 1060 Cloud Research participants rated the accuracy of a set of statements and then were randomly assigned to one of 10 between-subjects conditions of varying sources providing belief-relevant information: a political leader (Trump/Biden), a health authority (Fauci/CDC), an anecdote (Democrat/Republican), a large group of prior participants (Democrats/Republicans/Generic), or no source (Control). Finally, they rated the accuracy of the initial set of statements again. Study 2 involved a replication with a sample of 1876 Cloud Research participants, and focused on COVID-19 vaccine information and vaccination intention. In both studies, we found that participants acquired most knowledge when the source of information was a generic group of people. Surprisingly, knowledge accumulation from the different information sources did not interact with participants’ political affiliation. However, information accumulation interacted with political affiliation in predicting vaccination intention

The Impact of Social Norms on Belief Update

People are constantly bombarded with information they could use to adjust their beliefs. Here, we are interested in exploring the impact of social norms on belief update. To investigate, we recruited a sample of 200 Princeton University students, who first rated the accuracy of a set of statements (pre-test). They were then provided with relevant evidence either in favor or against the initial statements, and they were asked to rate how convincing each piece of evidence was. The evidence was randomly assigned to appear as normative or non-normative, and also randomly assigned to appear as anecdotal or scientific. Finally, participants rated the accuracy of the initial set of statements again (post-test). The results show that participants changed their beliefs more in line with the evidence, when the evidence was scientific compared to when it was anecdotal. More importantly to our primary inquiry, the results show that participants changed their beliefs more in line with the evidence when the evidence was portrayed as normative compared to when the evidence was portrayed as non-normative, pointing to the impactful influence social norms have on beliefs. Both effects were mediated by participants’ subjective evaluation of the convincingness of the evidence, indicating the mechanism by which evidence is selectively incorporated into belief systems

Infectious Cognition: Risk Perception Affects Socially Shared Retrieval-Induced Forgetting of Medical Information

When speakers selectively retrieve previously learned information, listeners often concurrently, and covertly, retrieve their memories of that information. This concurrent retrieval typically enhances memory for mentioned information (the rehearsal effect) and impairs memory for unmentioned but related information (socially shared retrieval-induced forgetting, SSRIF), relative to memory for unmentioned and unrelated information. Building on research showing that anxiety leads to increased attention to threat-relevant information, we explored whether concurrent retrieval is facilitated in high-anxiety real-world contexts. Participants first learned category-exemplar facts about meningococcal disease. Following a manipulation of perceived risk of infection (low vs. high risk), they listened to a mock radio show in which some of the facts were selectively practiced. Final recall tests showed that the rehearsal effect was equivalent between the two risk conditions, but SSRIF was significantly larger in the high-risk than in the low-risk condition. Thus, the tendency to exaggerate consequences of news events was found to have deleterious consequences

Memory accessibility and medical decision-making for significant others: The role of socially-shared retrieval induced forgetting

Medical decisions will often entail a broad search for relevant information. No sources alone may offer a complete picture, and many may be selective in their presentation. This selectivity may induce forgetting for previously learned material, thereby adversely affecting medical decision-making. In the study phase of two experiments, participants learned information about a fictitious disease and advantages and disadvantages of four treatment options. In the subsequent practice phase, they read a pamphlet selectively presenting either relevant (Experiment 1) or irrelevant (Experiment 2) advantages or disadvantages. A final cued recall followed and, in Experiment 2, a decision as to the best treatment for a patient. Not only did reading the pamphlet induce forgetting for related and unmentioned information, the induced forgetting adversely affected decision-making. The research provides a cautionary note about the risks of searching through selectively presented information when making a medical decision