Conscientiousness makes effort less frustrating

Effort is both rewarded by attainment and powerfully aversive – the “effort paradox”. Here, we test the idea that Conscientiousness (C) decouples effort from aversive affect, permitting effort to proceed to goal attainment rather than being derailed by frustration. Study 1 (N = 1202) induced a workload using cognitive ability items. A strong association of effort with frustration was found (β = 0.40). Moreover, more difficulty predicted significantly higher felt effort (β = 0.12) and, more strongly, frustration (β = 0.32). Study 2 (N = 501) tested effects of C. Importantly, C significantly reduced frustration, and a significant C × effort interaction on frustration emerged in the easier task (β = −0.15). Study 3 (N = 700) replicated the main effect of C in the difficult task. Study 4 (N = 400) replicated both the main effect and significant C × effort interaction for the easier task. Results support the idea that C decouples frustration from effort and is adaptive, permitting high-C subjects to engage in higher goal-directed effort with less negative affect, especially for reliably completed tasks. This mechanism may reduce procrastination and increase persistence, potentially accounting for higher attainment and avoidance of “easy” lures leading to pitfall-strewn life paths

Transitions to Entrepreneurship and Industry-Specific Barriers

Drivers of entrepreneurial entry are investigated in this study by examining how entry into small-business ownership is shaped by industry-specific constraints. The human- and financial-capital endowments of potential entrepreneurs entering firms in various industries are shown to differ profoundly, depending on the type of venture entered. The educational credentials of highly educated potential entrepreneurs, in particular, predict avoidance of small-firm ownership in some industries as well as attraction to others. Recognizing that individuals choose an industry sector jointly with their decision to enter entrepreneurship, we find that the conventional practice of conflating different industry types in empirical analyses of transitions to entrepreneurship generates misleading findings about the determinants of entrepreneurship.entrepreneurship, self-employment, capital constraints, transitions, entry barriers, business start-ups

Psychological pillars of support for free speech:Tolerance for offensive, disagreeing, socially divisive, and heterodox speech

Freedom of speech is a core value in free and democratic societies, but its psychological characteristics are not well understood. Here, we test a model of support for freedom of speech consisting of four correlated dimensions: 1) Tolerance of offensive speech, 2) Tolerance of disagreement, 3) Tolerance of heterodox speech, and 4) Tolerance of socially divisive speech. Study 1 (N = 809) supported this model, finding that freedom of speech measures fit this four-factor structure well and showed strong external validity. Replication (Study 2, N = 721) confirmed this four-factor structure and its external validity. The scales also showed strong discriminant validity, e.g., MFQ-2 moral foundations accounted for &lt;3 % of freedom of speech variance. A third study confirmed the 7-month test-retest reliability of the scales. In summary, support for free speech could be measured validly and reliably, spanning multiple dimensions and providing a firm base for research on this essential trait. It was robust to potential confounders of personality and moral domains, suggesting that variation in support for freedom of speech may index a separate “liberty” moral foundation.</p

Testing heritability of moral foundations:Common pathway models support strong heritability for the five moral foundations

Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) predicts that moral behaviour reflects at least five foundational traits, each hypothesised to be heritable. Here, we report two independent twin studies (total n = 2020), using multivariate multi-group common pathway models to test the following three predictions from the MFT: (1) The moral foundations will show significant heritability; (2) The moral foundations will each be genetically distinct and (3) The clustering of moral concerns around individualising and binding domains will show significant heritability. Supporting predictions 1 and 3, Study 1 showed evidence for significant heritability of two broad moral factors corresponding to individualising and binding domains. In Study 2, we added the second dataset, testing replication of the Study 1 model in a joint approach. This further corroborated evidence for heritable influence, showed strong influences on the individualising and binding domains (h2 = 49% and 66%, respectively) and, partially supporting prediction 2, showed foundation-specific, heritable influences on Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity and Purity/ Sanctity foundations. A general morality factor was required, also showing substantial genetic effects (40%). These findings indicate that moral foundations have significant genetic bases. These influenced the individual foundations themselves as well as a general concern for the individual, for the group, and overall moral concern

Free to choose:Mutualist motives for partner choice, proportional division, punishment, and help

Mutualism–the disposition to cooperate in ways that benefit both actor and recipient–has been proposed as a key construct in the evolution of cooperation, with distinct adaptations for 1) partner choice, 2) division, 3) punishment, and 4) helping. However, no psychological validation of this 4-fold psychological structure exists, and no measure of the trait is available. To fill this need, in two pre-registered studies (total N = 902), we: (A) Develop and administer items assessing each of the four mutualist adaptations; (B) Show good fit to the predicted four factor model; (C) Demonstrate reliability and stability across time; (D) Evidence discriminant validity from existing constructs, including compassion and utilitarianism; (E) Establish external validity by predicting proportional choices in catch division, opposition to partner coercion, and reduced support for redistribution; and (F) Replicate each of these findings. Jointly, these results support the validity of mutualism, including a motive to maintain the freedom to choose, and provide reliable scales for use in integrating, further developing, and applying mutualism

Support for redistribution is shaped by motives of egalitarian division and coercive redistribution

The three-player evolutionary model of support for redistribution is compatible with a fairness motive; however, existing research has found near-zero effects of fairness. Here we propose an egalitarian division fairness motive, solving the problem of reward for collaboration and impacting support for redistribution. Study 1 (N = 403) showed egalitarian division fairness had additional predictive power predicting support for redistribution (β = 0.14), as well as discriminant validity from self-interest, compassion, and envy. Robustness was supported by a replication (N = 402), yielding a significant and larger effect size (β = 0.25) of egalitarian division with support for redistribution. We also examined support for coercive redistribution. In both studies, willingness to use coercive redistribution was predicted by egalitarian division fairness (S1 β = 0.15, S2: β = 0.31) and, independently, by instrumental harm (S1 β = 0.21, S2: β = 0.16). These motives expand the three-player model to include fairness and coercive enforcement, and suggest applications of evolution in developing better political, economic, and ethical knowledge. Evolved motives accounted for ~45 % of support for redistribution