5 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Not All Bad Apples Spoil the Bunch: Order Effects on the Evaluation of Groups
When group members are encountered in a random sequential order, people expect the first (vs. middle or last) member to be more diagnostic of the group. Therefore, they weigh the performance of the first (vs. middle or last) more heavily in their predictions and decisions about the whole group
Recommended from our members
The First-Member Heuristic: Group Members Labeled “First” Influence Judgment and Treatment of Groups
People often make judgments about a group (e.g., immigrants from a specific country) based on information about a single group member. Seven studies (N = 1,929) tested the hypothesis that people will expect the performance of an arbitrarily ordered group to match that of the group member in the first position of a sequence more closely than that of group members in other positions. This greater perceived diagnosticity of the first member will in turn affect how people treat the group. This pattern of judgment and treatment of groups, labeled the “firstmember heuristic,” generalized across various performance contexts (e.g., gymnastic outine, relay race, job performance), and regardless of whether the focal member performed poorly or well (Studies 1-3). Consistent with the notion that first members are deemed most informative, participants were most likely to turn to the member in the first (vs. other) position to learn about the group (Study 4). Further, through their disproportionate influence on the expected performance of other group members, first members’ performances also influenced participants’ support of policies that would benefit or hurt a group (Study 5) and their likelihood to join a group (Study 6). Finally, perceived group homogeneity moderated the first-member heuristic, such that it attenuated for nonhomogeneous groups (Study 7)
Recommended from our members
Feeling Judged? The Presence of Outgroup Members Promotes Virtuous Choices
We investigate whether the presence of an ingroup vs. outgroup observer influences consumer choices of virtuous versus indulgent foods. In seven studies, we find that consumers make healthier choices in the presence of outgroup (vs. ingroup) others, mediated by the anticipation of being judged negatively by outgroup members
Recommended from our members
Feeling Judged? How the Presence of Outgroup Members Promotes Healthier Food Choices
The present article examines how the presence of others from a different social group (i.e., outgroup audience) influences consumers’ food choices relative to the presence of others from their own social group (i.e., ingroup audience). In four studies, using various types of group memberships (race, university affiliation, and work affiliation), we first find that consumers are more likely to make healthy food choices in the presence of racial (Study 1) and university (Study 2) outgroup (vs. ingroup) audiences. Then, using an experimental causal-chain mediation approach, we show this effect occurs because consumers anticipate more negative judgment from outgroup (vs. ingroup) audiences (Studies 3a and 3b). We discuss the possible role of outgroup contact and diversity in promoting healthy eating