Perceptual Harmony in Judgments of Group Prototypicality and Intragroup Respect

Mapping Intimacies ◽

10.31234/osf.io/un5kh ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Joshua D. Wright ◽

L. James Climenhage ◽

Michael T. Schmitt ◽

Nyla Branscombe

Keyword(s):

Common Sense ◽

Interaction Effect ◽

Group Cohesion ◽

Group Members ◽

The Relationship ◽

Group Member ◽

Common Sense Psychology

We test common sense psychology (Heider, 1958) of intragroup relations whereby people assume that intragroup respect and ingroup prototypicality are positively related. In Study 1a, participants rated a group member as more prototypical if they learned that group member was highly respected rather than disrespected. In Study 1b, participants rated a group member as more respected by other group members if they learned that group member was prototypical rather than unprototypical. As a commonsense psychology of groups, we reasoned that the perceived relationship between prototypicality and intragroup respect would be stronger for cohesive groups compared to incohesive groups. The effect of intragroup respect on perceptions of prototypicality (Study 2a & 2c) and the effect of prototypicality on perceptions of intragroup respect (Study 2b) were generally stronger for participants considering cohesive groups relative to incohesive groups. However, the interaction effect of prototypicality and group cohesion on intragroup respect did fail to replicate in Study 2d. In Studies 3, 4a, and 4b we manipulated the relationship between prototypicality and intragroup respect and found that when these variables were in perceptual harmony participants perceived groups as more cohesive. The results of eight out of nine studies conducted are consistent with the prediction that people make inferences about intragroup respect, prototypicality, and group cohesion in a manner that maintains perceptual harmony.

Download Full-text

Perceptual harmony in judgments of group prototypicality and intragroup respect

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0243821 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 (12) ◽

pp. e0243821

Author(s):

Joshua D. Wright ◽

L. James Climenhage ◽

Michael T. Schmitt ◽

Nyla R. Branscombe

Keyword(s):

Common Sense ◽

Interaction Effect ◽

Group Cohesion ◽

Group Members ◽

The Relationship ◽

Group Member ◽

Common Sense Psychology

We test common sense psychology of intragroup relations whereby people assume that intragroup respect and ingroup prototypicality are positively related. In Study 1a, participants rated a group member as more prototypical if they learned that group member was highly respected rather than disrespected. In Study 1b, participants rated a group member as more respected by other group members if they learned that group member was prototypical rather than unprototypical. As a commonsense psychology of groups, we reasoned that the perceived relationship between prototypicality and intragroup respect would be stronger for cohesive groups compared to incohesive groups. The effect of intragroup respect on perceptions of prototypicality (Study 2a & 2c) and the effect of prototypicality on perceptions of intragroup respect (Study 2b) were generally stronger for participants considering cohesive groups relative to incohesive groups. However, the interaction effect of prototypicality and group cohesion on intragroup respect did fail to replicate in Study 2d. In Studies 3, 4a, and 4b we manipulated the relationship between prototypicality and intragroup respect and found that when these variables were in perceptual harmony participants perceived groups as more cohesive. The results of eight out of nine studies conducted are consistent with the prediction that people make inferences about intragroup respect, prototypicality, and group cohesion in a manner that maintains perceptual harmony.

Download Full-text

Coping With Group Members Who Insult the In-Group

Social Psychological and Personality Science ◽

10.1177/1948550617732392 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 234-244

Author(s):

Tina C. DeMarco ◽

Anna-Kaisa Newheiser

Keyword(s):

Political Party ◽

Presidential Election ◽

Presidential Campaign ◽

Party Affiliation ◽

Intragroup Conflict ◽

Group Members ◽

Political Party Affiliation ◽

The Relationship ◽

University Affiliation ◽

Group Member

How do people cope with group members who insult the in-group? The 2016 U.S. Presidential election provided an opportunity to examine this question among group members experiencing unprecedented within-group strife. Participants read an essay written by an in-group or out-group member (Study 1, university affiliation; Study 2, U.S. political party affiliation, conducted at the height of the 2016 Presidential campaign), in which the author insulted his or her in-group. Participants reported the extent to which and reasons why they wanted to confront and avoid the target. Desire to rebuke the target, but not desire to protect oneself and the in-group, mediated the relationship between exposure to in-group (vs. out-group) deviance and confrontation. Desires to rebuke and protect jointly mediated the relationship with avoidance. Whereas people may differ on how they react to in-group deviance, they are primarily motivated by wanting to reprimand deviants, with implications for coping with intragroup conflict.

Download Full-text

Crossover of engagement in groups

Career Development International ◽

10.1108/cdi-03-2017-0060 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 23 (1) ◽

pp. 106-118 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Heleen van Mierlo ◽

Arnold B. Bakker

Keyword(s):

Current Knowledge ◽

Group Cohesion ◽

Well Being ◽

Psychological State ◽

Crossover Effect ◽

Explanatory Role ◽

Content Type ◽

Group Members ◽

Group Member ◽

Over Time

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to extend the current knowledge on psychological contagion and crossover by investigating the crossover of task-specific engagement (a positive, fulfilling state of mind) among group members. The paper also examines whether this crossover process is reinforced by strong group cohesion or by higher a priori levels of task engagement of the most engaged group member. Design/methodology/approach The authors operationalized crossover as within-group convergence on individual engagement over time. The authors studied this process in 43 newly formed groups performing a dynamic, interactive building task under controlled laboratory conditions, allowing the authors to observe the crossover process from a “zero” point, before any mutual influences had occurred. Findings Group member engagement scores indeed converged over time, supporting the proposed crossover effect of engagement, especially when the most engaged group member was highly engaged at the beginning of the group task. Unexpectedly, the explanatory role of group cohesion was not convincingly supported; the crossover of engagement was no stronger in groups with high cohesion. Practical implications These findings show that task-specific engagement is indeed transferred among group members, particularly when the most engaged group member is highly engaged. Originality/value Previous studies on psychological contagion and crossover were mainly focused on dyadic relationships and specific emotions or impaired well-being. The findings add to this literature by addressing the crossover of engagement – a more complex, beneficial psychological state – among group members and provide new input for developing and sustaining engagement in and of groups.

Download Full-text

“You’re such a pain!”: Investigating how psychological pain influences the ostracism of a burdensome group member

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations ◽

10.1177/1368430219844312 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 23 (4) ◽

pp. 519-545 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

James H. Wirth ◽

Angie S. LeRoy ◽

Michael J. Bernstein

Keyword(s):

Negative Affect ◽

Social Interactions ◽

Social Relationships ◽

Future Research ◽

Psychological Pain ◽

Group Members ◽

The Subject ◽

Group Success ◽

The Relationship ◽

Group Member

Maintaining social relationships with others is essential for survival, but not all relationships are beneficial. Individuals exclude nonbeneficial burdensome group members, those who encumber group success. We investigated whether feeling psychological pain is a mechanism that prompts assessment of social threats―potentially putting the “brakes” on burdensome (nonbeneficial) relationships. Specifically, we investigated if interacting with burdensome individuals caused others to experience psychological pain, negative affect, and to dislike the burdensome individual. Across 5 studies, using 3 different paradigms, we found those who interacted with a burdensome individual experienced psychological pain, which influenced ostracizing (excluding and ignoring) the burdensome group member. In Studies 4 and 5, we found psychological pain mediated the relationship between burdensomeness and ostracism even when we accounted for negative affect and dislike of the burdensome individual. Our results suggest psychological pain can guide social interactions and should be the subject of future research involving social threat.

Download Full-text

Are two heads better than one? The relationship between number of group leaders and group members, and group climate and group member benefit from therapy.

Group Dynamics Theory Research and Practice ◽

10.1037/a0026242 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

pp. 1-13 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Dennis M. Kivlighan ◽

Kevin London ◽

Joseph R. Miles

Keyword(s):

Group Leaders ◽

Group Climate ◽

Group Members ◽

The Relationship ◽

Group Member ◽

Better Than

Download Full-text

Relating the evolution of Music-Readiness and Language-Readiness within the context of comparative neuroprimatology

Interaction Studies ◽

10.1075/is.17035.sei ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 19 (1-2) ◽

pp. 86-101 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Uwe Seifert

Keyword(s):

Group Cohesion ◽

Complex Structures ◽

Musical Form ◽

Affective States ◽

Language And Music ◽

Group Members ◽

Evolution Of Music ◽

Relationship Of ◽

The Relationship ◽

Movement Synchronization

Abstract Language- and music-readiness are demonstrated as related within comparative neuroprimatology by elaborating three hypotheses concerning music-readiness (MR): The (musicological) rhythm-first hypothesis (MR-1), the combinatoriality hypothesis (MR-2), and the socio-affect-cohesion hypothesis (MR-3). MR-1 states that rhythm precedes evolutionarily melody and tonality. MR-2 states that complex imitation and fractionation within the expanding spiral of the mirror system/complex imitation hypothesis (MS/CIH) lead to the combinatorial capacities of rhythm necessary for building up a musical lexicon and complex structures; and rhythm, in connection with repetition and variation, scaffolds both musical form and content. MR-3 states that music’s main evolutionary function is to self-induce affective states in individuals to cope with distress; rhythm, in particular isochrony, provides a temporal framework to support movement synchronization, inducing shared affective states in group members, which in turn enhances group cohesion. This document reviews current behavioural and neurocognitive research relevant to the comparative neuroprimatology of music-readiness. It further proposes to extend MS/CIH through the evolution of the relationship of the language- and music-ready brain, by comparing “affective rhythm” and prosody – i.e. by comparatively approaching the language- and music-emotion link in neuroprimatology.

Download Full-text

The relationship between scientific psychology and common-sense psychology

Synthese ◽

10.1007/bf00413797 ◽

1991 ◽

Vol 89 (1) ◽

pp. 15-39 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Kathleen V. Wilkes

Keyword(s):

Common Sense ◽

Scientific Psychology ◽

The Relationship ◽

Common Sense Psychology

Download Full-text

“The Teacher Who had the Greatest Influence on My Thinking”

Social Psychology ◽

10.1027/1864-9335.39.3.141 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 39 (3) ◽

pp. 141-150 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Rainer Reisenzein ◽

Irina Mchitarjan

Keyword(s):

Social Psychology ◽

Common Sense ◽

Interpersonal Relations ◽

Responsibility Attribution ◽

Alexius Meinong ◽

Theory Of Value ◽

Psychological Inquiry ◽

Academic Teacher ◽

Common Sense Psychology

According to Heider, some of his ideas about common-sense psychology presented in The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations ( Heider, 1958 ) originally came from his academic teacher, Alexius Meinong. However, Heider makes no reference to Meinong in his book. To clarify Meinong’s influence on Heider, we compare Heider’s explication of common-sense psychology with Meinong’s writings, in particular those on ethics. Our results confirm that Heider’s common-sense psychology is informed by Meinong’s psychological analyses in several respects: Heider adopts aspects of Meinong’s theory of emotion, his theory of value, and his theory of responsibility attribution. In addition, Heider more or less continues Meinong’s method of psychological inquiry. Thus, even without Meinong’s name attached, many aspects of Meinong’s psychology found their way into today’s social psychology via Heider. Unknowingly, some of us have been Meinongians all along.

Download Full-text