Combined Effects of Knowledge About Others' Opinions and Anticipation of Group Discussion on Confirmatory Information Search

There is conclusive evidence that information search processes are typically biased in favor of the information seeker’s own opinion (confirmation bias). Less is known about how knowledge about others’ opinions affects this confirmatory information search. In the present study, the authors manipulated feedback about others’ opinions and anticipation of group interaction. As predicted, the effect of knowledge about others’ opinions on confirmatory information search depended on whether participants anticipated interacting with these others. Specifically, minority members anticipating a group discussion exhibited a particularly strong confirmation bias, whereas minority members who did not anticipate a discussion predominantly sought information opposing their opinion. For participants not anticipating group interaction, confidence about the correctness of one’s decision mediated the impact of knowledge about others’ opinions on confirmatory information search. Results are discussed with regard to the debiasing effect of preference heterogeneity on confirmatory information search in groups

A Conceptual Framework of How Meeting Mindsets Shape and Are Shaped by Leader–Follower Interactions in Meetings

In this conceptual paper, we define a person's meeting mindset as the individual belief that meetings represent opportunities to realize goals falling into one of three categories: personal, relational, and collective. We propose that in alignment with their respective meeting mindsets, managers use specific leadership claiming behaviors in team meetings and express these behaviors in alignment with the meeting setting (virtual or face-to-face) and their prior experiences with their employees. Employees’ responses, however, are also influenced by their meeting mindsets, the meeting setting, and prior experiences with their managers. The interplay between managers’ leadership claiming behavior and their employees’ responses shapes leader–follower relations. Embedded in the team context, the emerging leader–follower relations impact the meaning of meetings. We outline match/mismatch combinations of manager–employee meeting mindsets and discuss the influence that a manager and employee can have on each other's meeting mindset through their behavior in a meeting. Plain Language Summary Have you ever had the experience of entering a team meeting and quickly realizing that your idea of how the meeting conversation should be approached did not align with your boss's understanding of the meeting purpose? This is indeed a common experience in meetings between managers and their employees. While we understand much about the communication dynamics that occur in meetings, we know less about what motivates people to communicate in certain ways in meetings. In this conceptual paper, we classify people's understanding of meetings as being driven by one of three purposes: [1] to strategically position and promote themselves (which reflects a personal meeting mindset), [2] to shape collaborations and to ensure reciprocation (which reflects a relational meeting mindset), or [3] to strengthen the team identity and increase the willingness to go the extra mile for the team (which reflects a collective meeting mindset). Meeting mindsets shape how people enact their leader or follower role in meetings—that is, how a manager exhibits leadership and how employees react. However, managers’ and employees’ meeting mindsets may not necessarily match, which can trigger tensions and may ultimately change the way in which managers or employees define the meaning of meetings. Our research helps managers to comprehend the reasoning behind their own and other people's meeting behavior and may promote reflection on one's leadership approach, particularly in a team meeting context. It can also help employees to grasp the power they can have in terms of actively shaping their managers’ meeting mindsets

Loss of control as a violation of expectations: Testing the predictions of a common inconsistency compensation approach in an inclusionary cyberball game

Personal control relies on the expectation that events are contingent upon one’s own behavior. A common ‘inconsistency compensation approach’ posits that a violation of expectancies in social interaction triggers aversive arousal and compensatory effort. Following this approach, we tested the hypothesis that interventions affecting participants' decisions violate the expected personal control. In a modified version of the established cyberball paradigm, participants were not excluded, but consistently included. However, their decisions regarding the recipient of a ball throw in the virtual game were occasionally overruled (expectancy violation). We hypothesized that this intervention will trigger a P3 response in event-related brain potentials (ERP). Since this component is related to subjective expectancies, its amplitude was assumed to depend on the frequency of interventions (independent factor: loss of control). Further, we manipulated the vertical position of the participants’ avatar on the computer screen (independent factor: verticality). Building on research showing that verticality is related to the self-assigned power and influences the expected level of control, we hypothesized that the ERP effects of intervention should be more pronounced for participants with avatars in superior position. As predicted, both experimental factors interactively affected the expression of the ERP response: In case of low intervention frequency, P3 amplitudes were significantly pronounced if the participants’ avatar was positioned above as compared to below co-players (high > low self-assigned power). The effect of verticality could be traced back to a lack of adaptation of P3 amplitudes to recurring aversive events. By demonstrating that loss of control triggers ERP effects corresponding to those triggered by social exclusion, this study provides further evidence for a common cognitive mechanism in reactions to aversive events based on an inconsistency in expectancy states

Cooperation and confusion in public goods games: confusion cannot explain contribution patterns

People behave much more cooperatively than predicted by the self-interest hypothesis in social dilemmas such as public goods games. Some studies have suggested that many decision makers cooperate not because of genuine cooperative preferences but because they are confused about the incentive structure of the game—and therefore might not be aware of the dominant strategy. In this research, we experimentally manipulate whether decision makers receive explicit information about which strategies maximize individual income and group income or not. Our data reveal no statistically significant effects of the treatment variation, neither on elicited contribution preferences nor on unconditional contributions and beliefs in a repeated linear public goods game. We conclude that it is unlikely that confusion about optimal strategies explains the widely observed cooperation patterns in social dilemmas such as public goods games

Beyond group-level explanations for the failure of groups to solve hidden profiles: The individual preference effect revisited

The individual preference effect supplements the predominant group-level explanations for the failure of groups to solve hidden profiles. Even in the absence of dysfunctional group-level processes, group members tend to stick to their suboptimal initial decision preferences due to preference-consistent evaluation of information. However, previous experiments demonstrating this effect retained two group-level processes, namely (a) social validation of information supporting the group members’ initial preferences and (b) presentation of the additional information in a discussion format. Therefore, it was unclear whether the individual preference effect depends on the co-occurrence of these group-level processes. Here, we report two experiments demonstrating that the individual preference effect is indeed an individual-level phenomenon. Moreover, by a comparison to real interacting groups, we can show that even when all relevant information is exchanged and when no coordination losses occur, almost half of all groups would fail to solve hidden profiles due to the individual preference effect

Unpacking the Role of Feedback in Virtual Team Effectiveness

Feedback is a cornerstone of human development. Not surprisingly, it plays a vital role in team development. However, the literature examining the specific role of feedback in virtual team effectiveness remains scattered. To improve our understanding of feedback in virtual teams, we identified 59 studies that examine how different feedback characteristics (content, source, and level) impact virtual team effectiveness. Our findings suggest that virtual teams benefit particularly from feedback that (a) combines performance-related information with information on team processes and/or psychological states, (b) stems from an objective source, and (c) targets the team as a whole. By integrating the existing knowledge, we point researchers in the direction of the most pressing research needs, as well as the practices that are most likely to pay off when designing feedback interventions in virtual teams

From Loss of Control to Social Exclusion: ERP Effects of Preexposure to a Social Threat in the Cyberball Paradigm

Previous studies indicated that the onsets of different social threats, such as threats to ”belonging” and “control”, are inconsistent with the subjective beliefs of social participation and require readjustment of expectations. Because a common cognitive system is assumed to be involved, the adjustment triggered by the experience of a single social threat should affect the processing of subsequent social interactions. We examined how preexposure to a loss of control affected social exclusion processing by using the Cyberball paradigm. An event-related brain component (P3) served as a probe for the state of the expectancy system, and self-reports reflected the subjective evaluations of the social threats. In the control group (n = 23), the transition to exclusion elicited a significant P3 effect and a high threat to belonging in the self-reports. Both effects were significantly reduced when the exclusion was preceded by preexposure to a loss of control (EG1disc, n = 23). These effects, however, depend on the offset of the preexposure. In case of a continuation (EG2cont, n = 24), the P3 effect was further reduced, but the threat to belonging was restored. We conclude that the P3 data are consistent with predictions of a common expectancy violation account, whereas self-reports are supposed to be affected by additional processes

Preexposure to one social threat alters responses to another social threat: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence

A recent Cyberball study has indicated that the experience of loss of control can affect how people process subsequent social exclusion. This “preexposure effect” supports the idea of a common cognitive system involved in the processing of different types of social threats. To test the validity of this assumption in the current study, we reversed the sequence of the preexposure setup. We measured the effects of social exclusion on the subsequent processing of loss of control utilizing event-related brain potentials (ERPs) and self-reports. In the control group (CG, n = 26), the transition to loss of control elicited significant increases in both the P3 amplitude and the self-reported negative mood. Replicating the results of the previous preexposure study, these effects were significantly reduced by the preexposure to an independent social threat (here: social exclusion). In contrast to previous findings, these effects were not modulated by the discontinuation (EG1disc, n = 25) or continuation (EG2cont, n = 24) of the preexposure threat. Given that the P3 effect is related to the violation of subjective expectations, these results support the notion that preexposure to a specific social threat has widespread effects on the individuals’ expectancy of upcoming social participation and control

Violated Expectations in the Cyberball Paradigm: Testing the Expectancy Account of Social Participation With ERP

Previous social exclusion experiments identified two factors affecting the participants’ evaluation of participation in a virtual ball tossing game (cyberball): ball reception probability and vertical position of the participant’s avatar on the screen. The P3 component in the event-related brain potentials (ERPs) indicated that both factors moderate subjective expectancies on social participation. The present research builds on an expectancy model explaining these effects and tests whether its predictions – established in a within-participant design – also hold in a between-participant design more common in behavioral cyberball studies. Participants were randomly assigned to four conditions which differed in ball reception probability (16% vs. 26%) and the avatar’s vertical position (inferior vs. superior). To track the state of expectancy of involvement online, we recorded the ERP response evoked by ball receptions of the participant. Retrospectively, social involvement and social need threat were rated in a questionnaire. As hypothesized, low ball reception probability elicited enlarged P3 amplitudes in the ERPs, increased negative mood, and threatened social needs. For participants at inferior position, ERP and questionnaire effects were less expressed. This effect of verticality can be traced back to an adjustment in the expected involvement as signaled by a differential adaptation of the P3 amplitude within an experimental run. These results confirm that the predictions of an expectancy model also apply to cyberball studies using a between-participant design. However, the comparison with the results of previous within-participant design studies suggests that the sensitivity of the adjustment processes critically depends on the choice of the experimental design

Electrophysiological evidence for sensitization effects elicited by concurrent social threats

Experiencing a social threat, such as social exclusion, is a painful event. In contrast to previous studies providing insight into the processing of a single short-termed threat, we exposed healthy individuals to the simultaneous onset of different social threats. This approach allowed us to track whether these threats are processed independently—or whether they interact in a common system. Using a virtual ball-throwing game (Cyberball), electrophysiological (event-related brain potentials, ERPs) and behavioral (self-reports) responses were collected. We assigned undergraduates to three experimental groups: single threat exclusion (n = 24), single threat loss of control (n = 26), and joint onset of both threats (dual-threat, n = 25). Self-reports indicated an increase in threats (i.e., in perceived exclusion and loss-of-control) in the latter group. The ERPs disentangled the neural responses to each threat: In the dual-threat group, the amplitudes of the P3 responses to exclusionary and intervention events were enhanced. This indicates that individuals are sensitized to each of the threats when the other threat is present simultaneously. Our findings support the theoretical notion of a common cognitive system responding to violations in subjective expectations