Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Volume 63)

Front Cover
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
Copyright
Contents
Contributors
Chapter One: Social evaluation: Comparing models across interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup, several-group, and many-gr ...
	1. Social evaluation is context-dependent and complex: An illustration
	2. Joining forces to better understand how people navigate their social environment
	3. A systematic comparison of five models of social evaluation
		3.1. Interpersonal evaluation: Dual perspective model (DPM)
			3.1.1. Theoretical roots
			3.1.2. Focal domains
			3.1.3. Premises and evidence
				3.1.3.1. Priority of communion
				3.1.3.2. Perspective determines dimension relevance
				3.1.3.3. Power and interdependence moderate the importance of others agency
				3.1.3.4. Distinguishing facets of agency and communion helps to refine the predictions
		3.2. Intragroup evaluation: The behavior regulation model (BRM)
			3.2.1. Theoretical roots
			3.2.2. Focal domains
			3.2.3. Main premises
				3.2.3.1. Sociability differs from morality
				3.2.3.2. Morality is primary for group pride and identification
				3.2.3.3. People are more motivated to do what is moral vs competent or sociable
				3.2.3.4. Behavioral adaptation to moral ingroup norms communicates loyalty and earns respect
		3.3. Intergroup evaluation: Dimensional compensation model (DCM)
			3.3.1. Theoretical roots
			3.3.2. Focal domains, premises, and evidence
				3.3.2.1. People rate pairs of groups using the two fundamental dimensions in a compensatory manner
				3.3.2.2. Compensation is unique to the two dimensions
				3.3.2.3. Group characterizations are context-based but the two fundamental dimensions are not equally malleable
				3.3.2.4. Boundary conditions: Conflict and absence of status differences preclude compensation
				3.3.2.5. Underlying mechanisms: Different viewpoints entail different motives
		3.4. Several-group evaluation: Stereotype content model (SCM)
			3.4.1. Theoretical roots
			3.4.2. Focal domains
			3.4.3. Premises and evidence
				3.4.3.1. Primary dimensions are warmth and competence
				3.4.3.2. Stereotypes are not only unidimensional but also mixed
				3.4.3.3. Perceived interdependence predicts warmth; perceived status predicts competence
				3.4.3.4. Distinct emotions and behaviors follow from distinct warmth-competence combinations
				3.4.3.5. SCM dimensions apply to interpersonal interactions beyond societal judgments
		3.5. Many-group evaluation: Agency-beliefs-communion (ABC) model
			3.5.1. Theoretical roots
			3.5.2. Focal domains
			3.5.3. Premises and evidence
				3.5.3.1. People spontaneously perceive societal groups on agency, beliefs, and communion
				3.5.3.2. People perceive groups beliefs as opportunities for exploitation vs exploration
				3.5.3.3. Perceived self-group similarity on agency and beliefs independently predict perceived communion of groups, and p ...
				3.5.3.4. Groups communion is less consensual than groups agency and beliefs
	4. Intertwining our social evaluation models to generate new insights
		4.1. Combining interpersonal and intragroup evaluation
		4.2. Combining interpersonal and intergroup evaluation
		4.3. Combining several-group and many-group evaluation
		4.4. Combining intergroup and many-group evaluation
		4.5. Combining many-group, intergroup, and several-group evaluation
	5. From adversarial positions to model comparison, combination, and integration
	References
Chapter Two: Whole traits: Revealing the social-cognitive mechanisms constituting personality´s central variable
	1. Adequate accounts of behavior must now include traits
	2. Whole Trait Theory
		2.1. Three primary principles
		2.2. Nine secondary principles
	3. TraitDES (what one actually does)
		3.1. Surprisingly high within-person variability in trait manifestations
		3.2. Surprisingly high consistency of between-person differences in personality manifestation
		3.3. Density distributions of states as unifiers
		3.4. Trait scores on self-report questionnaires partially reflect density distributions
		3.5. Three reasonable objections
			3.5.1. Are situations the reason for consistency of individual differences in distributions?
			3.5.2. Are deviations from mean levels experienced as inauthentic submissions to the situation?
			3.5.3. Do independent observers verify the actors´ opinions of their states?
	4. TraitEXP (what one potentially does)
		4.1. Explaining traits=explaining distributions of states
		4.2. State variation has affective consequences
		4.3. People change the traits they enact based on the situation
		4.4. Personality state variation is largely explained by goal variation
	5. Extension to other trait domains
		5.1. Whole Trait Theory works for the virtues
		5.2. The core contingency model as core process in psychopathology
	6. Whole Trait Theory and personality development
	7. Conclusion
	Acknowledgments
	References
Chapter Three: Paradoxical thinking as a paradigm of attitude change in the context of intractable conflict
	1. Introduction
	2. The context of intractable conflict
	3. Attitude change
	4. Limitations of traditional approaches in the context of intractable conflict
	5. Paradoxical thinking
		5.1. Indications of paradoxical thinking in psychological literature
		5.2. Establishing the paradoxical thinking phenomenon
		5.3. Extending the scope of the paradigm
		5.4. Paradoxical thinking mechanisms
			5.4.1. Initial empirical evidence in support of the hypothesized mechanis
			5.4.2. Ramifications of the paradigm
	6. Conclusions
	Acknowledgment
	References
Chapter Four: The structure and perceptual basis of social judgments from faces
	1. The robust beauty of the structure of judgments from faces
		1.1. The structure of social judgments from faces
		1.2. The universality of the structure of social judgments from faces
		1.3. Misunderstandings of structure models and cross-cultural differences
		1.4. Limitations of dimensional structure models
	2. Revealing the perceptual basis of social judgments from faces
		2.1. Tools to model social judgments from faces
		2.2. Data-driven computational models of social judgments
		2.3. Advantages of computational models of judgments
		2.4. An alternative approach to mapping social judgments to physical face space
		2.5. Limitations of data-driven models
	3. Future directions
	4. Conclusions
	Acknowledgments
	References
Chapter Five: On the utility of the self in social perception: An Egocentric Tactician Model
	1. An overview of the Egocentric Tactician Model
	2. The self: A precise
	3. General premises of the Egocentric Tactician Model
		3.1. Premise 1: An actor´s behaviors often have many possible meanings
		3.2. Premise 2: Self-knowledge is one source that influences the perceived meaning of an actor´s behavior
		3.3. Premise 3: Self-knowledge is mostly positive
		3.4. Premise 4: The motives that drive the maintenance or rise of self-positivity will often determine the influence of t ...
	4. On the utility of the ETM: More examples of how it fits existing data
		4.1. Hypothesis 1: Central self-knowledge influences actor judgments made from low-constraint information
		4.2. Hypothesis 2: With high-constraint actor behaviors, the impact of central self-knowledge on social perception is mod ...
	5. The ETM versus the self-as-distinct model
		5.1. Comparing the ETM and the S-A-D model
		5.2. On the utility of the ETM: How it can account for findings that also fit the S-A-D model
		5.3. On the utility of the ETM: Results that are troubling for the S-A-D model but are accounted for by the ETM
	6. New research ideas derived from the ETM
	7. Coda
	References
Back Cover