How the Lack of a Universal Definition of Childhood Neglect is Negatively Impacting U.S. Families

Social Judgment Theory can be a useful tool in understanding the ways in which judgment plays a role in how Child Protective Investigators determine if a child has been neglected. In most States, more children are removed by charges of ‘neglect only’ than for any other reason. A close examination of the States’ definitions of childhood neglect may offer insight as to how the writing of laws allows for discernment among case workers and further how their judgment is impacted by their own personal beliefs. In an effort to ensure child safety and prevent future traumas, the utilization of Social Judgment Theory should be considered in the social and psychological research of child welfare. Varying definitions of how neglect may propose a new variable in the differing outcomes of child removal between the states are discussed.

Stigmatization of Voluntarily Childfree Women and Men in the UK

People who choose not to have children may face negative social judgment. Using a UK sample, Study 1 ( N = 199) successfully replicated Ashburn-Nardo’s (2017) finding that childfree targets are perceived as less psychologically fulfilled than targets with children. The effect, however, appeared limited to expected decision regret rather than general fulfillment, which was later confirmed in Study 2 ( N = 329). In contrast to Ashburn-Nardo , our results did not indicate that moral outrage mediates the effect (Study 1), but exploratory findings suggested that perceivers who intend to have children of their own perceive the childfree as morally inferior and less likable (Study 2). Participants’ endorsement of conservative values was not consistently related to negative perceptions of childfree targets.

Interoceptive ability moderates the effect of physiological reactivity on social judgment

Social judgments—that others are kind or cruel, well-intentioned or conniving—can ease or disrupt social interactions. And yet a person’s internal state can color these judgments—a phenomenon known as affective realism. We examined the factors that contribute to, and mitigate, affective realism during a stressful interview. We hypothesized and found that individuals’ (N=161) ability to accurately perceive their own internal sensations influenced whether they attributed their own heightened stress reactions (i.e., sympathetic nervous system reactivity) to the behavior of two impassive interviewers. Participants who were poor heartbeat detectors perceived the interviewers as less helpful, polite, or professional, and more apathetic, judgmental, and aggressive when experiencing high levels of sympathetic nervous system reactivity during their interview. Being aware of one’s internal state may be one pathway to more accurate, adaptive social interactions.

How Disgust Affects Social Judgments

The emotion of disgust has been claimed to affect a diverse array of social judgments, including moral condemnation, inter-group prejudice, political ideology, and much more. We attempt to make sense of this large and varied literature by reviewing the theory and research on how and why disgust influences these judgments. We first describe two very different perspectives adopted by researchers on why disgust should affect social judgment. The first is the pathogen-avoidance account, which sees the relationship between disgust and judgment as resulting from disgust’s evolved function as a pathogen-avoidance mechanism. The second is the extended disgust account, which posits that disgust functions much more broadly to address a range of other threats and challenges. We then review the empirical evidence to assess how well it supports each of these perspectives, arguing that there is more support for the pathogen-avoidance account than the extended account. We conclude with some testable empirical predictions that can better distinguish between these two perspectives.

Susceptibility to Ingroup Influence in Adolescents With Intellectual Disability: A Minimal Group Experiment on Social Judgment Making

Adolescents with intellectual disability (ID) experience challenges and uncertainty when making judgments about other people’s intentions. In an attempt to achieve certainty, they might exhibit judgment tendencies that differ from those of typically developing adolescents. This study investigated social judgment making in adolescents with ID (n = 34, Mage = 14.89 years, SD = 1.41 years) compared with chronological age-matched adolescents without ID (n = 34, Mage = 14.68 years, SD = 1.15 years) and mental age (MA)-matched children (n = 34, Mage = 7.93 years, SD = 0.64 years). Participants used a computer-based task to judge the hostility of persons (fictitious characters). Adolescents with ID were found to make more polarizing judgments (i.e., either positive or negative, as opposed to moderate judgments) and were more likely to be guided by the opinions of a fictitious peer ingroup (minimal group) compared with adolescents without ID. No such differences were found between adolescents with ID and MA-matched children. The results are discussed in terms of scientific and practical implications.

Implicit attitudes matter for social judgments of others’ preference, but do not make those judgments more or less accurate

Drawing from a large dataset of responses to implicit and explicit attitude measures and social judgments of others’ preferences (N = 97,176) across 95 distinct attitude domains, this Registered Report utilized a componential analysis of judgment accuracy to examine whether implicit attitudes affected the accuracy of social judgment. I found evidence that judgments of the population’s preferences were associated with the population’s true implicit (but not explicit) attitudes, and that individuals projected their implicit attitudes in addition to the projection of explicit attitudes when judging the population’s true preferences. However, I found no evidence that stronger or weaker implicit attitudes were uniquely associated with greater or less accuracy in judging the population’s true preferences. These results provide generalizable evidence that implicit attitudes matter greatly for social judgment accuracy in distinct and nuanced ways.

Exposure-enhanced cognitive behavioral therapy for adolescents with binge eating: An initial case series

Binge eating (BE) often develops during adolescence and is associated with deleterious psychological and physical consequences. Current treatments for adolescents achieve suboptimal results, likely due to failure to adequately address fear of weight gain (FOWG) which maintains BE. Thus, exposure treatment (the most powerful intervention for fear) may be a promising approach. However, exposure treatment has only minimally tested in adults with BE and never tested in adolescents. Thus, the current study is the first to evaluate a 4-session exposure module within a 12-session standard cognitive behavioral therapy for adolescents with BE. We recruited adolescents with BE ( N = 5) and examined treatment feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects on FOWG and eating pathology. Overall, the 4-session exposure module was feasible and acceptable and showed preliminary evidence that it could reduce FOWG. However, several participants did not endorse significant fears of weight gain; rather, these participants reported that fears of deprivation or social judgment were more related to their BE. Future research should test higher doses of exposure and further examine the role of fear of deprivation/social judgment. Finally, future iterations of this treatment could include more parent involvement or test exposure in combination with treatments other than cognitive behavioral therapy, such as family-based treatment.

Cognitive and Affective Processes Associated with Social Biases

Background Decision-making and judgments in our social activities often erroneous and irrational, known as social biases. However, cognitive and affective processes that produce such biases remain largely unknown. In this study, we investigated associations between social schemas, such as social judgment and conformity, entailing social biases and psychological measurements relevant to cognitive and affective functions. Method Forty-two healthy adult subjects were recruited in this study. A psychological test and a questionnaire were administered to assess biased social judgements by superficial attributes and social conformity by adherence to social norms, respectively, along with additional questionnaires and psychological tests for cognitive and affective measurements, including negative affects, autistic traits, and Theory of Mind (ToM). Associations of social judgment and conformity with cognitive and affective functions were examined multiple regression analysis and structural equation modeling. Results Anxiety and the cognitive realm of ToM were mutually associated with both social judgments and conformity, although social judgements and conformity were still independent processes with each other. Social judgements were also associated with autistic traits and the affective realm of ToM, whereas social conformity was associated with negative affects other than anxiety and intuitive decision-making style. Conclusions These results suggest that ToM and negative affects may play important roles in social judgements and conformity, and social biases connoted in these social schemas.

Wealth, Power, Status

The main purpose of the present research was to examine the moderating effect of system-justifying beliefs on the relationship between a target’s hierarchical position in an organizational context and perceived competence. Through three experiments we manipulated an employee’s hierarchical position in various ways and examined the effects on social judgment. Participants’ system-justifying beliefs were assessed in an ostensibly unrelated study. In Studies 1 and 2, as predicted, only participants high in system justification rated the high-position target as more competent than the low-position target. A very different pattern of results emerged when experimentally disentangling hierarchy based on status, and hierarchy based on power (Study 3). Individuals who are respected and admired by others (high-status individuals) were systematically valued on competence, whereas individuals who have asymmetric control over valued resources (high-power individuals) were derogated on competence by participants low in system justification. The present studies provide greater insight into how social judgment can function to maintain the existing social hierarchy, and offer novel empirical support to the widely accepted idea that status and power refer to theoretically different constructs.

Will Life Extension Affect Our Social Judgments? Evidence That the Possibility of Indefinite Life Extension Increases Harshness Toward Social Transgressors

We tested the hypothesis that if indefinite life extension (ILE) through medical technologies were to become a reality, then people may become harsher in their judgment of social transgressors. In support of this hypothesis, we found that higher positive attitudes towards ILE technologies related to harshness in judgment of social transgressions (Study 1), and that making ILE plausible (compared to not plausible) led participants to endorse harsher punishments for social transgressors (Studies 2–3). We replicated this effect and found that it is not amplified by subliminal death primes, although the primes also increased harshness (Study 3). These results may have implications to understanding how social judgment may be affected by the prospect of ILE.