Effects of self-instructed stimulus-affect plans on indirectly measured and self-reported evaluative responses☆

Repeatedly experiencing a specific stimulus-affect contingency influences subsequent evaluative responses towards the respective stimulus (e.g., evaluative conditioning). In the present research, we provide further evidence that verbally processed stimulus-affect contingencies in the form of if-then plans have comparable evaluative consequences. We present three studies (N = 323) in which participants verbally linked cupcakes to either a positive (“delicious”) or a negative (“disgusting”) affective response while being instructed with the same health-related goal. We tested the evaluative consequences of processing these verbal stimulus-affect plans in a valence-based response-compatibility paradigm (Implicit Association Test, IAT) and self-reported liking ratings. We failed to observe the predicted effect in the first study and updated the methodology for the following two studies. With the updated procedure (two studies, N = 239), we found the hypothesized effect that processing a verbal stimulus-affect plan influences subsequent responses in the IAT and self-reported ratings in an evaluatively congruent direction. We discuss these results in relation to similar effects following directly experienced stimulus-affect contingencies and instructed evaluative conditioning. Furthermore, our present research high-lights the potential to use verbal self-instruction in a stimulus-affect format to self-regulate one's evaluative responses towards specific stimuli (e.g., unhealthy snacks)

Brexit: Threat or Opportunity? nationalist Identification Is related to the perceived likelihood of a United Ireland

Northern Ireland has long been a contested territory. The 1998 Belfast/Good Friday Agreement seemed to offer a resolution to the long-standing conflict. However, it has been reawakened by Brexit. Brexit presents a threat in Northern Ireland because it raises the divisive question of the United Kingdom’s sovereignty over the region and the issue of the border. However, despite Nationalists’—a political identity group associated with the political ideology of Irish reunification—initial opposition to Brexit, many in this group now view Brexit as a potential opportunity to achieve their political goal of Irish unity. The aim of the present research is to examine the combined influence of the Nationalist’s identity and perceived Brexit threat on people’s understanding of the proximity of this political goal. We specifically test whether Nationalists’ strength of group identification, and the threat of Brexit, is linked to how likely people believe a United Ireland has become. In two studies, we found evidence for the prediction that strong ingroup identification is related to the perception that a United Ireland is more likely. In the second study, path analysis showed that this relationship is conditional on perceived threat. For Nationalists with stronger ingroup identification, the threat of Brexit is greater. Combined, these factors are linked to an increased sense that a United Ireland is likely. In the discussion, we consider the implications of our findings for polarization in this postagreement society </p

A cognitive balance approach to understanding intergroup attitudes in post-Brexit Northern Ireland

Cognitive balance theory posits that a drive for cognitively consistent thoughts modulates interpersonal relations. We extended cognitive balance theory to intergroup relations and tested it in a real-life setting where intergroup relations are under strain: Northern Ireland in the wake of the UK's withdrawal from the EU. We predicted that when the groups of Irish people and British people in Northern Ireland are perceived as more compatible, intergroup bias would be lower than when groups are perceived as less compatible. We collected data of residents of Northern Ireland before the UK's official withdrawal from the EU (N=604) and after (N=350). As hypothesized, attitudes towards British people positively related to attitudes towards Irish people when participants perceived the groups as more compatible. We found the opposite relationship at low levels of perceived compatibility. Exploratory cross-lagged panel analyses did not show that these effects occurred longitudinally, suggesting that cognitive balance does not drive judgements over time possibly because people are less likely to notice inconsistent responses across different time points. The present research demonstrates that intergroup attitudes assessed at a certain point in time follow cognitive balance principles.</p

Moved by social justice: The role of kama muta in collective action toward racial equality

Participation in collective action is known to be driven by two appraisals of a social situation: Beliefs that the situation is unfair (injustice appraisal) and beliefs that a group can change the situation (collective efficacy appraisal). Anger has been repeatedly found to mediate the relationship between injustice appraisals and collective action. Recent work suggests that the emotion of being moved mediates the relationship between efficacy appraisals and collective action. Building on this prior work, the present research applies kama muta theory to further investigate the relationship between efficacy appraisals and collective action. Kama muta is a positive emotion that is evoked by a sudden intensification of communal sharing, and largely overlaps with the English concept being moved. We investigated its relationship with collective action in both advantaged and disadvantaged racial groups in the context of the Black Lives Matter Movement (BLM) in Spring of 2020. In one pilot study (N = 78) and one main study (N = 215), we confirmed that anger toward the system of racial inequalities mediated between injustice and collective action intentions, and that kama muta toward the movement mediated between collective efficacy and collective action intentions. Both mediations were found for both Black and White participants. We also observed additional unpredicted paths from anger to kama muta and from efficacy to anger. Together, this provides evidence for the pivotal role of emotions in collective action intentions, but also points out that appraisals need to be better understood.</p

Biased perception of distributions: anchoring, interpolation and smoothing as potential causes

Perceiving the degree of variation in the social and non-social environment is a cognitive task that is important  for many judgments and decisions. In the present research, we investigated cognitive underpinnings of how  people estimate the average value of segments of a statistical distribution (e.g., what is the average income of the  richest 25% of a population?). In three experiments (total N = 222), participants learned about the values of  experimentally created distributions of income values and city sizes and later estimated the mean value of the  four quarters of values. We expected participants to draw on heuristic shortcuts to generate such judgments.  More specifically, we hypothesized that participants use the endpoints of the distributions as anchors and  determine the mean values by linear interpolation. In addition, we tested the contribution of three further  processes (Range-Frequency adjustments, Normal Smoothing, Linear Smoothing). Quantitative model tests  suggest that anchoring and Linear Smoothing both affected mean interquartile judgments. This conclusion is  corroborated by tests of qualitative predictions of the models under consideration. </p

Moral Identity predicts adherence to COVID-19 mitigation procedures depending on political ideology: A comparison between the USA and New Zealand

 Reducing the spread of infectious viruses (e.g., COVID-19) can depend on societal compliance with effective  mitigations. Identifying factors that influence adherence can inform public policy. In many cases, public health  messaging has become highly moralized, focusing on the need to act for the greater good. In such contexts, a  person’s moral identity may influence behavior and serve to increase compliance through different mechanisms:  if a person sees compliance as the right thing to do (internalization) and/or if a person perceives compliance  as something others will notice as the right thing to do (symbolization). We argue that in societies that are more  politically polarized, people’s political ideology may interact with their moral identity to predict compliance.  We hypothesized that where polarization is high (e.g., USA), moral identity should positively predict compliance  for liberals to a greater extent than for conservatives. However, this effect would not occur where polarization is  low (e.g., New Zealand). Moral identity, political ideology, and support for three different COVID-19 mitigation  measures were assessed in both nations (N  =  1,980). Results show that while moral identity can influence  compliance, the political context of the nation must also be taken into account </p

Solidarity matters: prototypicality and minority and majority adherence to national COVID-19 health advice

The effectiveness of measures introduced to minimise the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome CoronaVirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19) depends on compliance from all members of society. The Irish response to COVID-19 has been framed as a collective effort, fostering national solidarity. However, dominant representations of the national community often unreflexively reaffirm the prototypicality of majority group members, implicitly marginalizing minority group members. This may have implications for adherence behaviours. We propose that majority/minority membership of the national community predicts adherence to COVID-19 health advice via prototypicality and national solidarity. In Study 1, we collected data online from Irish residents (N = 1,185) during the first wave of restrictions in Ireland’s response. In Study 2, we collected data from Irish residents (N = 537) during the second wave of restrictions, with more targeted sampling of minority groups. Based on these two studies, there is no difference between minority and majority group members’ adherence behaviours. However, mediation analysis showed that greater adherence to COVID-19 health advice is shown when group members perceive themselves to be prototypical of the Irish national community, and thereby show greater national solidarity. In Study 3, we manipulated an appeal to adhere to restrictions (N = 689) and show that an inclusive solidarity appeal increased reported intentions to adhere to COVID-19 restrictions compared to an exclusive solidarity appeal among minority group members. These findings suggest that appeals to national solidarity in response to COVID-19 will be most successful when they reference the diversity of the nation