Representations of the Self-Concept and Identity-Based Choice

We propose a novel approach to identity-based choice that focuses on peoples’ representations of the cause-effect relationships that exist among features of their self-concepts. More specifically, we propose that people who believe that a specific aspect of identity, such as a social category, is causally central (linked to many other features of the self-concept) are more likely to engage in behaviors consistent with that aspect than those who believe that the same aspect is causally peripheral (linked to fewer other features). Across three studies, we provide evidence for our approach to identity-based choice. We demonstrate that among people who belong to the same social category, those who believe that the associated identity is more causally central are more likely to engage in behaviors consistent with the social category

The role of causal beliefs in political identity and voting

An emerging literature in psychology and political science has identified political identity as an important driver of political decisions. However, less is known about how a person’s political identity is incorporated into their broader self-concept and why it influences some people more than others. We examined the role of political identity in representations of the self-concept as one determinant of people’s political behaviors. We tested the predictions of a recent theoretical account of self-concept representation that, inspired by work on conceptual representation, emphasizes the role of causal beliefs. This account predicts that people who believe that their political identity is causally central (linked to many other features of the self-concept) will be more likely to engage in behaviors consistent with their political identity than those who believe that the same aspect is causally peripheral (linked to fewer other features). Consistent with these predictions, in a study run when political identity was particularly salient—during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election—we found that U.S. voters who believed their political party identity was more causally central (vs those who believe it was causally peripheral) were more likely to vote for their political party’s candidate. Further, in 2 studies, we found that U.K. residents who believed that their English or British national identity was more causally central were more likely to support the U.K. leaving the European Union (Brexit) than those who believed the same identities were more causally peripheral

We Do What We Are: Representation of the Self-Concept and Identity-Based Choice

The current research proposes a novel approach to identity-based choice that focuses on consumers’ representations of the self-concept, as captured by the perceived cause-effect relationships among features of an individual consumer’s self-concept. More specifically, the studies reported here test the proposal that the causal centrality of an identity—the number of other features of a consumer’s self-concept that the consumer believes influenced or were influenced by the identity—underlies identity importance and is a determinant of identity-based consumer behaviors. Across seven studies, using both measured and manipulated causal centrality, the current research provides evidence for the role of causal centrality in identity-based choice. Among consumers who share an identity (belong to the same social category), those who believe that the identity is more causally central perceive the identity as more important and are more likely to engage in behaviors consistent with the norms of the social category

Time matters less when outcomes differ: uni-modal versus cross-modal comparisons in intertemporal choice

Uni-modal intertemporal decisions involve comparing options of the same type (e.g. apples now versus apples later), and cross-modal decisions involve comparing options of different types (e.g. a car now versus a vacation later). As we explain, existing models of intertemporal choice do not allow time preference to depend on whether the comparisons to be made are uni-modal or cross-modal. We test this restriction in an experiment using the delayed-compensation method, a new extension of the standard method of eliciting intertemporal preferences that allows for assessment of time preference for non-monetary and discrete outcomes, as well as for both cross-modal and uni-modal comparisons. Participants were much more averse to delay for uni-modal than cross-modal decisions. We provide two potential explanations for this effect: one drawing on multi-attribute choice, the other drawing on construal level theory

Beliefs About the Causal Structure of the Self-Concept Determine Which Changes Disrupt Personal Identity

Personal identity is an important determinant of behavior, yet how people mentally represent their self-concepts and their concepts of other people is not well understood. In the current studies, we examined the age-old question of what makes people who they are. We propose a novel approach to identity that suggests that the answer lies in people’s beliefs about how the features of identity (e.g., memories, moral qualities, personality traits) are causally related to each other. We examined the impact of the causal centrality of a feature, a key determinant of the extent to which a feature defines a concept, on judgments of identity continuity. We found support for this approach in three experiments using both measured and manipulated causal centrality. For judgments both of one’s self and of others, we found that some features are perceived to be more causally central than others and that changes in such causally central features are believed to be more disruptive to identity