Turning social identity threat into challenge: status stability and cardiovascular reactivity during inter-group competition

"The current research examined the occurrence of threat and challenge in low and high status groups resulting from the stability of inter-group status differences during an inter-group competition. It was hypothesized that members of low status groups are relatively threatened when status differences are stable, but that this threat turns into a challenge when status differences become unstable. By contrast, unstable status relations were predicted to lead to threat in members of high status groups. Participants (N = 40) were categorized in minimal groups. Inter-group status differences, and the stability of these differences, were manipulated by providing feedback on three group tasks. During these tasks cardiovascular threat and challenge responses were measured following the biopsychosocial model [BPS; Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1996). The biopsychosocial model of arousal regulation. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 1–51). New York: Academic Press]. Results were in line with expectations and are discussed in terms of the BPS model and social identity theory." [author's abstract

Політичні настрої українського селянства в умовах колективізації сільського господарства (історіографічний огляд)

In social groups, individuals are often confronted with evaluations of their behaviour by other group members and are motivated to adapt their own behaviour accordingly. In two studies we examine emotional responses towards, and perceived coping abilities with, morality vs. competence evaluations individuals receive from other in-group members. In Study 1, we show that evaluations of one's immoral behaviour primarily induce guilt, whereas evaluations of incompetent behaviour raise anger. In Study 2, we elaborate on the psychological process associated with these emotional responses, and demonstrate that evaluations of immorality, compared to incompetence, diminish group members' perceived coping abilities, which in turn intensifies feelings of guilt. However, when anticipating an opportunity to restore one's self-image as a moral group member, perceived coping abilities are increased and the experience of guilt is alleviated. Together these studies demonstrate how group members can overcome their moral misery when restoring their self-image

On the physiology of flow: Bridging flow theory with the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat

We examined the relation between psychological flow and cardiovascular markers of challenge. According to flow theory and the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat (BPS-CT) optimal motivational states (flow, challenge) arise during activities where task demands meet personal resources. Participants (N = 154) played Tetris in either an underload, fit, or overload condition. Cardiovascular responses were measured during the task and a flow state scale was completed afterwards. Unexpectedly, it was in the underload condition where cardiovascular responses developed in the direction of challenge. Moreover, it was under this condition where relative challenge related positively to both task performance and self-reported flow. Similar results were found for cardiovascular markers of task engagement. In line with the BPS-CT, when only selecting clearly task-engaged participants a tendency towards challenge was found in the fit condition. We discuss why flow and challenge might have co-occurred in the underload condition, as well as the further theoretical and methodological implications of the study. We conclude that at least under some circumstances flow and challenge relate to each other but that future research should examine this relation further

Towards Evidence-Based Legitimacy Interventions in EU Law: Challenges and Directions for Empirical Research

As EU institutions are increasingly being asked to address societal challenges, the legitimacy need of the EU becomes more evident. With the aim of complementing the already rich literature on normative EU legitimacy and ultimately enabling evidence-based legitimation strategies, this contribution identifies and addresses gaps in empirical research on perceived EU legitimacy, which pertain to conceptualization, operationalization and explanatory factors. To that end, we first of all define perceived EU legitimacy as the perception among EU citizens that the EU’s exercise of authority is appropriate. Drawing on the relational approach to legitimacy, these perceptions arise from socially held norms about how the EU should rightfully exercise authority, which are in turn influenced by the socio-political context. We then propose ways in which such a conception of legitimacy can be operationalized in empirical research. Finally, we lay the foundation for a theoretical model on the sources of EU legitimacy perceptions, arguing that such a model should consider social psychological processes related to identity and morality, because these factors influence how people process information about the EU, and are increasingly part of the environment in which norms about rightful rule arise. Once empirical research is better equipped to understand these processes underlying citizens’ legitimacy perceptions of the EU, opportunities arise to develop evidence-based interventions and inform legal practices in the EU with extra-legal insights. As EU legitimation through policies, legal reform and institutional design requires knowledge of legal feasibility, social scientists and lawyers should collaborate to embed empirical insights in EU law. Bridging the norm-fact divide in this manner is both normatively desirable and empirically necessary for the EU to strengthen its legitimacy and face societal challenges

Towards evidence-based legitimacy interventions in EU law: Challenges and directions for empirical research

As EU institutions are increasingly being asked to address societal challenges, the legitimacy need of the EU becomes more evident. With the aim of complementing the already rich literature on normative EU legitimacy and ultimately enabling evidence-based legitimation strategies, this contribution identifies and addresses gaps in empirical research on perceived EU legitimacy, which pertain to conceptualization, operationalization and explanatory factors. To that end, we first of all define perceived EU legitimacy as the perception among EU citizens that the EU’s exercise of authority is appropriate. Drawing on the relational approach to legitimacy, these perceptions arise from socially held norms about how the EU should rightfully exercise authority, which are in turn influenced by the socio-political context. We then propose ways in which such a conception of legitimacy can be operationalized in empirical research. Finally, we lay the foundation for a theoretical model on the sources of EU legitimacy perceptions, arguing that such a model should consider social psychological processes related to identity and morality, because these factors influence how people process information about the EU, and are increasingly part of the environment in which norms about rightful rule arise. Once empirical research is better equipped to understand these processes underlying citizens’ legitimacy perceptions of the EU, opportunities arise to develop evidence-based interventions and inform legal practices in the EU with extra-legal insights. As EU legitimation through policies, legal reform and institutional design requires knowledge of legal feasibility, social scientists and lawyers should collaborate to embed empirical insights in EU law. Bridging the norm-fact divide in this manner is both normatively desirable and empirically necessary for the EU to strengthen its legitimacy and face societal challenges

The Integration of Subgroups at the Supranational Level: The Relation Between Social Identity, National Threat, and Perceived Legitimacy of the EU

Previous research suggests that social identity influences public attitudes about the European Union, but little is known about the role of social identity for perceived legitimacy of the EU. This article explores the relation between different forms of identification (national, EU, dual) and EU legitimacy perceptions, and the moderation of this relationship by experienced threat to national power and sociocultural identity. A survey was conducted in six countries (N = 1136). A factor analysis of legitimacy items resulted in two subscales (institutional trust and duty to obey). Separate regression analyses were therefore run on these subscales. All forms of identification were positively related to perceived EU legitimacy, while threat was a strong and universal negative predictor. However, the results suggest that national identification only positively predicted legitimacy when participants experienced no threat to their nation by the EU, while dual identification positively predicted legitimacy even when participants experienced threat. Overall, respect for national identities and their values may offer opportunities to safeguard and improve the perceived legitimacy of the EU. Findings are discussed in terms of the literature on the ingroup projection model and the common ingroup model

It’s a man’s world; right? How women’s opinions about gender inequality affect physiological responses in men

In two experiments, we examined how men respond to women who either challenge or legitimize societal gender inequality, and how gender identification moderates these responses. We hypothesized that men feel less threatened by women who legitimize (vs. challenge) the gender hierarchy, and evaluate these women more positively. To investigate these expectations, we assessed self-reports (Studies 1 and 2) and cardiovascular threat/challenge responses (Study 2). Both studies showed that men experience less negative emotions when presented with a woman who legitimized (vs. challenged) the gender hierarchy. Moreover, among men with a relatively high gender identification, a woman who challenged the gender hierarchy elicited a physiological response pattern indicative of threat, whereas a woman who legitimized the gender hierarchy elicited a pattern indicative of challenge. Results are discussed in terms of social identity theory, status threat, and self-distancing behavior

Threatened by the immoral, challenged by the incompetent: Cardiovascular responses to intragroup morality vs. competence evaluations

In group contexts, moral judgments are used as social influence tactics to regulate the behavior of group members. We argue that communicating moral disapproval with the aim of adapting group members’ behavior might backfire because it elicits (negative) threat rather than (positive) challenge. In two experiments, we examined the motivational consequences of negative morality (vs. competence) evaluations in group contexts. Participants worked on a group task while cardiovascular indices of challenge and threat motivational states were measured following the biopsychosocial model (Blascovich & Tomaka, 1996). In Experiment 1, participants recalled their own prior behavior evaluated as immoral or incompetent; in Experiment 2, participants were exposed to an ingroup member’s prior behavior evaluated as immoral or incompetent. As predicted, in both experiments, reminders of immorality induced a state of threat rather than challenge in a novel group context. These results suggest that moral disapproval intended to motivate group members to adapt their behavior might actually be counterproductive

Construal of power: Review and summary of measures and manipulations

In this overview, we provide a collection of measures and manipulations which we have used to assess vs. induce different construals of social power in our joint program of research. In this work, we rely on the definition of social power as comprising asymmetric control over resources that others value (Fiske & Berdahl, 2007). We have proposed that powerholders can construe (i.e., cognitively appraise) this resource control differently: We contrast the opportunity to “make things happen”, which means that powerholders recognize the different possibilities they have to pursue (their own or their group’s) goals with the responsibility for “taking care of things” (e.g., protecting those with lower power, securing goal achievement, finalizing important decisions) that only they, as the ones in control, can do. As such, people holding power can construe their power differently (in general or depending on the situation), without changing the respective amount of power that they perceive (i.e., without feeling more or less powerful in the case of one construal, compared to the other construal). An elaborate introduction of the concept and summary of the current state of the art about the implications and impact of these different construals, can be found in Scholl et al. (2022)

On being unpredictable and winning

In theory, it can be strategically advantageous for competitors to make themselves unpredictable to their opponents, for example, by variably mixing hostility and friendliness. Empirically, it remains open whether and how competitors make themselves unpredictable, why they do so, and how this conditions conflict dynamics and outcomes. We examine these questions in interactive attacker–defender contests, in which attackers invest to capture resources held and defended by their opponent. Study 1, a reanalysis of nine (un)published experiments (total N = 650), reveals significant cross-trial variability especially in proactive attacks and less in reactive defense. Study 2 (N = 200) shows that greater variability makes both attacker’s and defender’s next move more difficult to predict, especially when variability is due to occasional rather than (in)frequent extreme investments in conflict. Studies 3 (N = 27) and 4 (N = 106) show that precontest testosterone, a hormone associated with risk-taking and status competition, drives variability during attack which, in turn, increases sympathetic arousal in defenders and defender variability (Study 4). Rather than being motivated by wealth maximization, being unpredictable in conflict and competition emerges in function of the attacker’s desire to win “no matter what” and comes with significant welfare cost to both victor and victim