Average R2 for each number of BJT5 items with the validating scales (Step 1)

<p>Average R2 for each number of BJT5 items with the validating scales (Step 1)</p

Pattern/scale loadings and communalities for the BJT5 scale for self and others (Step 1).

<p>Pattern/scale loadings and communalities for the BJT5 scale for self and others (Step 1).</p

Estimated reliabilities for general factor and subscales, based on bifactor models for self and others in Step 2 (including bifactor models adjusted for covariation between God–Nature).

<p>Estimated reliabilities for general factor and subscales, based on bifactor models for self and others in Step 2 (including bifactor models adjusted for covariation between God–Nature).</p

Summary of linear regression analyses examining effects of the BJT with regard to self and other on perceptions of responsibility for life events (Step 4).

<p>Summary of linear regression analyses examining effects of the BJT with regard to self and other on perceptions of responsibility for life events (Step 4).</p

Correlations between the BJT5 and fate control, life satisfaction, self-esteem, protestant ethic, intrinsic religion, spirituality, conservatism, extraversion, emotional stability, socio political control and social dominance orientation (SDO) in Step 3.

<p>Correlations between the BJT5 and fate control, life satisfaction, self-esteem, protestant ethic, intrinsic religion, spirituality, conservatism, extraversion, emotional stability, socio political control and social dominance orientation (SDO) in Step 3.</p

Summary of hierarchical regression analyses examining effects of the combined BJW self and other scale (Lipkus et al., 1996) and the BJT5 on action type (Step 5).

<p>Summary of hierarchical regression analyses examining effects of the combined BJW self and other scale (Lipkus et al., 1996) and the BJT5 on action type (Step 5).</p

Alphas, means, standard deviations and correlations between the BJT5 and the just world scales (Step 3).

<p>Alphas, means, standard deviations and correlations between the BJT5 and the just world scales (Step 3).</p

Data_Sheet_1_You and me versus the rest of the world: the effects of affiliative motivation and ingroup partner status on social tuning.docx

Bandura argues that individuals are more likely to engage in social learning when they identify with a social model and when they are motivated or rewarded. Therefore, in the present work, we investigate how these two key factors, perceived similarity and affiliative motivation, influence the extent to which individuals engage in social tuning or align their views with an interaction partner—especially if their partner’s attitudes differ from the larger social group. Experiment 1 (170 participants) explored the role of perceived similarity through group membership when needing to work collaboratively with a collaboration partner whose climate change beliefs differed from a larger social group. Experiment 2 (115 participants) directly manipulated affiliative motivation (i.e., length of interaction time) along with perceived similarity (i.e., Greek Life membership) to explore if these factors influenced social tuning of drinking attitudes and behaviors. Experiments 3 (69 participants) and 4 (93 participants) replicated Experiment 2 and examined whether tuning occurred for explicit and implicit attitudes towards weight (negative views Experiment 3 and positive views Experiment 4). Results indicate that when individuals experience high affiliative motivation, they are more likely to engage in social tuning of explicit and implicit attitudes when their interaction partner belongs to their ingroup rather than their outgroup. These findings are consistent with the tenets of Social Learning Theory, Shared Reality Theory, and the affiliative social tuning hypothesis.</p