Gossip promotes cooperation only when it is pro-socially motivated

Humans are often shown to cooperate with one another. Most of the mechanisms that foster cooperation among humans rely on reputation, which itself relies on the acquisition of information about other people’s behaviors. Gossip has been proposed as a cheap yet efficient tool to acquire information, and it has largely been proved to be an effective means to foster and maintain cooperation. However, empirical studies supporting this claim have ignored two aspects: (1) they often compared gossip to treatments in which no reputation was available, impeding a direct assessment of whether it is gossip that promotes cooperation or rather the introduction of a reputation system; and (2) they focused on pro-social gossip (e.g., gossip aimed at helping the receiver), neglecting the impact of other types of gossip. We show here that, in contrast with the widespread notion that gossip promotes cooperation, gossip mostly depletes cooperation compared to first-hand information. If lying is fruitful for individuals or if a group’s behavior is largely uncooperative, gossip leads to negative reputational information and decreased cooperation

Gossip and coping with social isolation: the case of migrant truck drivers in Western Europe

This article examines how employees use gossip as a resource to cope with social isolation. Building on a qualitative study with 32 truck drivers in a Western European company, our research identified gossip in close relationships and gossip in distant relationships as distinct patterns playing a different role in coping with social isolation, and a third pattern in which gossip was not beneficial. First, gossiping with close friends at work helped drivers engage in emotion-focused coping by reducing stress and loneliness. Second, gossiping with distant colleagues helped drivers engage in problem-focused coping by exchanging knowledge involving people in the organization. Third, gossip avoidance occurred in distant relationships, where drivers limited gossip exchanges going beyond instrumentally useful information. Overall, these findings show that drivers relied on different layers of their social network to cope with social isolation. Enriching previous research, this study shows that gossip represents an essential resource for emotion-focused and problem-focused coping

When (not) to empathize:The differential effects of combined emotion recognition and empathic concern on client satisfaction across professions

Previous research found inconsistent associations between individuals’ emotion recognition ability and their work-related outcomes. This research project focuses on client satisfaction as a core work-related outcome. We argue that service settings differentially affect clients’ emotional goals, activating either socio-affective goals or goals targeting cognitive clarity. In service settings activating clients’ socio-affective goals, clients are expected to respond favorably if service providers combine emotion recognition with high empathic concern; in service settings activating clients’ cognitive clarity goals, clients are expected to respond more favorably if service providers combine emotion recognition with low empathic concern. Study 1 confirmed that service settings differentially affect clients’ emotional goals, with hairdressing settings activating socio-affective goals and psychotherapy settings triggering cognitive clarity goals. Accordingly, hairdressing clients were more satisfied if service providers combined emotion-recognition ability with high trait empathic concern (Study 2). Conversely, in the context of psychotherapy, clients were more satisfied if therapists’ combined emotion-recognition ability with low trait empathic concern (Study 3). Thus, service contexts moderate the effect of affective responses to clients’ emotional signals in a predictable manner

You can't ‘fake it till you make it’:Cooperative motivation does not help proself trustees

Cooperative motivation can be rooted in individual differences as well as in external factors, such as instructions from superiors, incentive schemes, policy agendas, or social relationships. Whereas cooperative motivation has generally been found to increase trust, in five studies conducted across different contexts (scenario-based, online with monetary consequences that were contingent on participants' decisions, in-class and laboratory face-to face negotiations), convergent evidence was found showing that trustees were trusted more when they were externally motivated to act cooperatively (vs. individualistically), though only when they already had a prosocial (vs. proself) social value orientation – i.e., internally driven positive care for others' (vs. their own) well-being. This finding was observed even when trustors had no explicit information about whether or how trustees were motivated by internal or external factors. The mediation analyses indicate that this effect is driven by trustors' perceptions of trustees' authenticity. Taken together, insight into how trustees' personalities and situations interact in predicting the level of trust granted to them is provided

Expanding the pie or spoiling the cake? How the number of negotiation issues affects integrative bargaining

The present research investigates how the number of issues affects the quality of outcomes in terms of joint gains and impasse rates in integrative negotiations. In the literature, two opposing positions exist reflecting a complexity dilemma regarding the number of negotiation issues: One position suggests that complex negotiations involving higher numbers of issues offer more trade-off opportunities, thereby providing negotiators with greater structural flexibility in reaching mutually beneficial agreements, which improves outcome quality. The opposite position emphasizes that the greater information load inherent in negotiating more issues impedes outcome quality. We propose a third, intermediate position: Negotiating more issues may only improve outcome quality up to a threshold, above which adding further issues results in deteriorated outcomes. We tested these propositions using a quasi-meta-analytic technique by examining the associations between the number of issues, joint gains, and impasse rates across multiple empirical studies on integrative negotiations using various negotiation tasks with different numbers of issues (N = 38,063/21,271 negotiations for joint gains/impasse rates). Moreover, we investigated whether factors related to how negotiators subjectively deal with the increased complexity associated with higher numbers of issues moderate the number-of-issues effect on joint gains. Multilevel analyses revealed no significant number-of-issues effect on joint gains up to a threshold of 3 issues but a negative effect for negotiations involving more than 3 issues. By contrast, we did not find a number-of-issues effect on impasse rates. Moreover, we did not obtain evidence for moderation effects. Findings are discussed with respect to their theoretical and practical implications.</p

When information about one’s counterpart matters:Prevention focus increases the impact of counterpart cues on negotiation behavior

Purpose: To avoid (costly) conflict, it is imperative to uncover when negotiators cooperate. The previous study has shown that negotiators’ cooperative or competitive behavior is oftentimes guided by cues about their counterpart; information about his/her traits or behavior. Using regulatory focus theory, this paper aims to investigate when this is likely to happen. The authors hypothesize and test that because prevention focus (rather than promotion focus) is associated with concerns for safety and concrete surroundings, it strengthens the impact of counterpart cues. Design/methodology/approach: The authors used two scenario studies and one behavioral negotiation study to test the general hypothesis. The authors measured or manipulated participants’ regulatory focus, manipulated counterpart cues by varying the information negotiators received about their counterpart’s traits and behavior, and measured participants’ cooperative or competitive concession making behavior. Findings: Results from the studies confirmed that under prevention focus, negotiators’ cooperative behavior depended on whether they received cooperative versus competitive counterpart cues more than under promotion focus. Furthermore, results also showed that under prevention focus, negotiators’ behavior was relatively unaffected by their own social motivation – i.e. their personal goal to obtain favorable outcomes for oneself or for both negotiation parties. Originality/value: By showing that regulatory focus determines when counterpart cues affect negotiation behavior, this paper furthers the understanding of when contextual factors affect negotiators' behavior. In addition, it contributes to the understanding of the complex effects of prevention focus in interpersonal behavior

Punishing or praising gossipers: how people interpret the motives driving negative gossip shapes its consequences

Sharing negative gossip has been found to be pivotal for fostering cooperation in social groups. The positive function gossip serves for groups suggests that gossipers should be rewarded for sharing useful information. In contrast, gossip is commonly perceived negatively, meaning that gossipers incur more social costs than benefits. To solve this puzzle, we argue that whether receivers interpret gossip as stemming from pro-social versus pro-self motives shapes their reactions towards gossipers. We conducted a pre-registered experimental vignette study (n = 1188) in which participants received negative gossip statements, which we manipulated to reflect either pro-self or pro-social motives. Supporting our predictions, receivers were more likely to mistakenly interpret negative pro-social gossip as stemming from pro-self motives than vice versa. Nevertheless, receivers with a higher ability to overcome intuition were better able to correctly interpret negative gossip as driven by pro-self and pro-social motives. Furthermore, results showed that when receivers interpreted negative gossip as pro-socially (vs. pro-selfishly) motivated, they trusted gossipers more and gossip targets less (for behavioral as well as attitudinal measures of trust)

From Integrated Care to Integrating Care: A Conceptual Framework of Behavioural Processes Underlying Effective Collaboration in Care

Introduction: At all levels, effective collaboration between actors with different backgrounds lies at the heart of integrated care. Much attention has been given to the structural features underlying integrated care, but even under structurally similar circumstances, the effectiveness of collaboration varies largely. Theory and methods: Social and organizational psychological research shows that the extent to which collaboration is effective depends on actors’ behaviours. We leverage insights from these two research fields and build a conceptual framework that helps untangle the behavioural processes underlying effective collaboration. Results: We delineate that effective collaboration can be realized when actors (1) speak up about their interests, values, and perspectives (voice behaviour), (2) listen to the information that is shared by others, and (3) thoroughly process this information. We describe these behaviours and explain the motivations and conditions driving these. In doing so, we offer a conceptual framework that can be used to explain what makes actors collaborate effectively and how collaboration can be enhanced. Discussion and conclusion: Fostering effective collaboration takes time and adequate conditions, fitting the particular context. As this context continuously changes, the processes and conditions require continuous attention. Integrated care, therefore, actually requires a carefully designed process of integrating care

The importance of conceptual clarity and methodological diversity for studying confidential gossip: a response and addition to Fan et al. (2021)

In their essay ‘Confidential gossip and organization studies’, Fan, Grey, and Kärreman (2021) argue that confidential gossip is a distinctive sub-category of gossip that has particular implications for the communicative constitution of organizations and that they provide a methodological platform for studying confidential gossip. We view these claims, written from a phenomenological/ constructivist perspective, from a postpositivist perspective, and propose some amendments and nuance, with the goal of furthering understanding of confidential gossip. Fan et al’s adoption of context-specific and mutable meanings for participants may be adequate for the purposes of their broadly phenomenological analysis, but needs amending if it is to enable the formulation of clear theoretical propositions and testable predictions regarding the effects of confidential gossip in organizations, which from our perspective is essential. We make three suggestions. First, a clear definition of gossip is needed. Second, we emphasize the importance of clear predictions on how confidentiality shapes gossip processes and outcomes by distinguishing (1) sender motives for confidentiality, (2) receiver perceptions of confidentiality, and (3) whether gossip is kept confidential from just the gossip target or also from other parties. Systematically testing such predictions could then lend support for the conclusion that confidential gossip is a distinctive sub-category of gossip that impacts organizations in different ways than non-confidential gossip does. Third, we argue that Fan et al.'s methodological perspective overlooks recent developments in the gossip literature, and that rather than focusing on participant observation as Fan et al. advocate, employing a broader range of research methods is needed to understand confidential gossip and its impact on organizations