74 research outputs found

    Doing good vs. avoiding bad in prosocial choice: a refined test and extension of the morality preference hypothesis

    Get PDF
    Prosociality is fundamental to human social life, and, accordingly, much research has attempted to explain human prosocial behavior. Capraro and Rand (Judgment and Decision Making, 13, 99-111, 2018) recently provided experimental evidence that prosociality in anonymous, one-shot interactions (such as Prisoner’s Dilemma and Dictator Game experiments) is not driven by outcome-based social preferences – as classically assumed – but by a generalized morality preference for “doing the right thing”. Here we argue that the key experiments reported in Capraro and Rand (2018) comprise prominent methodological confounds and open questions that bear on influential psychological theory. Specifically, their design confounds: (i) preferences for efficiency with self-interest; and (ii) preferences for action with preferences for morality. Furthermore, their design fails to dissociate the preference to do “good” from the preference to avoid doing “bad”. We thus designed and conducted a preregistered, refined and extended test of the morality preference hypothesis (N=801). Consistent with this hypothesis, our findings indicate that prosociality in the anonymous, one-shot Dictator Game is driven by preferences for doing the morally right thing. Inconsistent with influential psychological theory, however, our results suggest the preference to do “good” was as potent as the preference to avoid doing “bad” in this case

    The heart trumps the head:Desirability bias in political belief revision

    Get PDF

    The relationship between salivary C-reactive protein and cognitive function in children aged 11-14 years: Does psychopathology have a moderating effect?

    Get PDF
    Elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), a non-specific biomarker of systemic bodily inflammation, has been associated with more pronounced cognitive impairments in adults with psychiatric disorders, particularly in the domains of memory and executive function. Whether this association is present in early life (i.e., the time at which the cognitive impairments that characterise these disorders become evident), and is specific to those with emerging psychiatric disorders, has yet to be investigated. To this end, we examined the association between salivary CRP and cognitive function in children aged 11- 14 years and explored the moderating effect of psychopathology. The study utilised data from an established longitudinal investigation of children recruited from the community (N=107) that had purposively over-sampled individuals experiencing psychopathology (determined using questionnaires). CRP was measured in saliva samples and participants completed assessments of cognition (memory and executive function) and psychopathology (internalising and externalising symptoms and psychotic-like experiences). Linear regression models indicated that higher salivary CRP was associated with poorer letter fluency (β=-0.24, p=0.006) and scores on the inhibition (β=-0.28, p=0.004) and inhibition/switching (β=-0.36, p<0.001) subtests of the colour-word interference test, but not with performance on any of the memory tasks (working, visual, and verbal memory tasks). Results were largely unchanged after adjustment for psychopathology and no significant interactions between CRP and psychopathology were observed on any cognitive measure. Our findings provide preliminary evidence that elevated salivary CRP is associated with poorer cognitive function in early life, but that this association is not moderated by concurrent psychopathology. These findings have implications for early intervention strategies that attempt to ameliorate cognitive deficits associated with emerging psychiatric disorders. Further research is needed to determine whether salivary CRP levels can be used as a valid marker of peripheral inflammation among healthy adolescents

    Barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation in pregnancy and following childbirth: literature review and qualitative study

    Get PDF
    Background: Although many women stop smoking in pregnancy, others continue, causing harm to maternal and child health. Smoking behaviour is influenced by many factors, including the role of women’s significant others (SOs) and support from health-care professionals (HPs). Objectives: To enhance understanding of the barriers to, and facilitators of, smoking cessation and the feasibility and acceptability of interventions to reach and support pregnant women to stop smoking. Design: Four parts: (1) a description of interventions in the UK for smoking cessation in pregnancy; (2) three systematic reviews (syntheses) of qualitative research of women’s, SOs’ and HPs’ views of smoking in pregnancy using meta-ethnography (interpretative approach for combining findings); (3) semistructured interviews with pregnant women, SOs and HPs, guided by the social–ecological framework (conceptualises behaviour as an outcome of individuals’ interactions with environment); and (4) identification of new/improved interventions for future testing. Setting: Studies in reviews conducted in high-income countries. Qualitative research was conducted from October 2013 to December 2014 in two mixed urban/rural study sites: area A (Scotland) and area B (England). Participants: Thirty-eight studies (1100 pregnant women) in 42 papers, nine studies (150 partners) in 14 papers and eight studies described in nine papers (190 HPs) included in reviews. Forty-one interviews with pregnant women, 32 interviews with pregnant women’s SOs and 28 individual/group interviews with 48 HPs were conducted. Main outcome measures: The perceived barriers to, and facilitators of, smoking cessation in pregnancy and the identification of potential new/modified interventions. Results: Syntheses identified smoking-related perceptions and experiences for pregnant women and SOs that were fluid and context dependent with the capacity to help or hinder smoking cessation. Themes were analysed in accordance with the social–ecological framework levels. From the analysis of the interviews, the themes that were central to cessation in pregnancy at an individual level, and that reflected the findings from the reviews, were perception of risk to baby, self-efficacy, influence of close relationships and smoking as a way of coping with stress. Overall, pregnant smokers were faced with more barriers than facilitators. At an interpersonal level, partners’ emotional and practical support, willingness to change smoking behaviour and role of smoking within relationships were important. Across the review and interviews of HPs, education to enhance knowledge and confidence in delivering information about smoking in pregnancy and the centrality of the client relationship, protection of which could be a factor in downplaying risks, were important. HPs acknowledged that they could best assist by providing support and understanding, and access to effective interventions, including an opt-out referral pathway to Stop Smoking Services, routine carbon monoxide screening, behavioural support and access to pharmacotherapy. Additional themes at community, organisational and societal levels were also identified. Limitations: Limitations include a design grounded in qualitative studies, difficulties recruiting SOs, and local service configurations and recruitment processes that potentially skewed the sample. Conclusions: Perceptions and experiences of barriers to and facilitators of smoking cessation in pregnancy are fluid and context dependent. Effective interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy should take account of the interplay between the individual, interpersonal and environmental aspects of women’s lives. Future work: Research focus: removing barriers to support, improving HPs’ capacity to offer accurate advice, and exploration of weight concerns and relapse prevention. Interventions focus: financial incentives, self-help and social network interventions

    A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

    Get PDF
    The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

    A Many-analysts Approach to the Relation Between Religiosity and Well-being

    Get PDF
    The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

    Study 3 data and analysis script

    No full text

    Data and analysis script

    No full text
    corecore