This volume examines the phenomenon of fake news by bringing together leading experts from different fields within psychology and related areas, and explores what has become a prominent feature of ...public discourse since the first Brexit referendum and the 2016 US election campaign.
Dealing with misinformation is important in many areas of daily life, including politics, the marketplace, health communication, journalism, education, and science. In a general climate where facts and misinformation blur, and are intentionally blurred, this book asks what determines whether people accept and share (mis)information, and what can be done to counter misinformation? All three of these aspects need to be understood in the context of online social networks, which have fundamentally changed the way information is produced, consumed, and transmitted. The contributions within this volume summarize the most up-to-date empirical findings, theories, and applications and discuss cutting-edge ideas and future directions of interventions to counter fake news.
Also providing guidance on how to handle misinformation in an age of “alternative facts”, this is a fascinating and vital reading for students and academics in psychology, communication, and political science and for professionals including policy makers and journalists.
When individuals are undecided between options, they may flip a coin or use other aids that produce random outcomes to support decision-making. Such aids lead to clear suggestions, which, ...interestingly, individuals do not necessarily follow. Instead when looking at the outcome, individuals sometimes appear to like or dislike the suggestion, and then decide according to this feeling. In this manuscript we argue that such a decision aid can function as a catalyst. As it points to one option over the other, individuals focus on obtaining this option and engage in a more vivid representation of the same. By imagining obtaining the option, feelings related to the option become stronger, which then drive feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the outcome of the decision aid. We provide support for this phenomenon throughout two studies. Study 1 indicates that using a catalyst leads to stronger feelings. Study 2 replicates this finding using a different catalyst, and rules out alternative explanations. Here, participants report that after having used a catalyst, they experienced a stronger feeling of suddenly knowing what they want compared to the control group that did not use a catalyst. Implications of these results for research and practice are discussed.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
When facing a difficult decision, individuals may rely on a coin flip to help them come to a conclusion. In some cases, however, individuals might not adhere to the coin’s outcome, but instead report ...liking or disliking the coin flip’s outcome, and may use this affective reaction to form their decision. In this manuscript we investigate the affective reaction towards the outcome of a coin flip and determine whether this affective reaction provides valid feedback in regards to individuals’ underlying preferences (Hypothesis 1). We further test whether flipping a coin results in a higher alignment between previous preferences and subsequent decisions (Hypothesis 2). We conducted three studies in the lab and with online samples. Throughout all studies we found support for the notion that the affective reactions regarding the coin flip’s outcome validly reflect previously indicated preferences or attractiveness ratings. Contrary to wide-spread expectations, however, we did not find reliable support for the notion that flipping a coin, compared to a control group, leads to decisions that are more in line with the previously stated preferences.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Having secrets is incredibly common. However, secrecy has only recently started to receive more attention in research. What has largely been neglected so far are the consequences of secret-sharing ...for the relationship between sharer and receiver. In this project, we aim to fill this gap. Previous research has shown that closeness can make secret-sharing more likely. Building on research from the self-disclosure and relationship literature, we experimentally investigate whether secret-sharing might in turn increase perceptions of closeness. In addition, we test the valence of the secrets shared as potential driver of the hypothesized effect, as negative secrets might signal a high level of trust, but might also present a burden to the receiver. To provide a holistic picture, we build on a variety of methods to investigate three perspectives: Study 1 focuses on the receiver and tests whether another person sharing secrets (vs. nonconfidential information) decreases distance in the eyes of the receiver. Study 2 investigates lay theories and tests how an observer perceives the relationship between two people who share secrets (vs. nonconfidential information). Study 3 tests whether these lay theories about sharing secrets are predictive of behavior, and how a sharer might choose secrets of negative or positive valence to decrease perceived distance on the receiver's side. Our results will contribute to the understanding of how sharing secrets affects the way individuals think about each other, how close they feel to each other, and how they interact with each other.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Having secrets is incredibly common. However, secrecy has only recently started to receive more attention in research. What has largely been neglected are the consequences of secret-sharing for the ...relationship between sharer and receiver; a gap we aim to fill in this project. Previous research has shown that closeness can make secret-sharing more likely. Building on research from the self-disclosure and relationship literature, we experimentally investigate in three studies (N = 705) whether confiding a secret to somebody might in turn increase perceptions of closeness. In addition, we test whether the valence of the secrets moderates the hypothesized effect. While confiding negative secrets might signal a high level of trust and lead to a similar closeness as confiding positive secrets, they might also present a burden to the receiver and lead to a different pattern of closeness. To provide a holistic picture, we build on a variety of methods and investigate three perspectives: Study 1 focused on the receiver and showed that another person sharing secrets (vs. nonconfidential information) decreased the distance in the eyes of the receiver. Study 2 tested how an observer perceives the relationship between two people. Distance was judged to decrease when secrets (vs. nonconfidential information) were shared, however, this difference was not significant. Study 3 tested whether lay theories about sharing secrets predict behavior, and how sharing information may be used to change perceived distance on the receiver's side. Participants preferred to share neutral compared to secret information and positive compared to negative secrets irrespective of the distance condition. Our results contribute to the understanding of how sharing secrets affects the way individuals think about each other, how close they feel to each other, and how they interact with each other.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Social categorization is a crucial information processing strategy that adults deliberately adjust depending on goals and situational requirements. This study investigated whether flexibility in ...categorization is similarly present among preschool children. More specifically, we tested whether spontaneous gender categorizations are more pronounced for children with a situationally induced abstract compared to concrete construal level mindset. Sixty-one children first participated in a construal mindset induction task before completing a visual variant of the “who said what” memory task. Systematic memory confusions indicated that all children engaged in gender-based social categorization but that this tendency was accentuated in the abstract compared to concrete mindset condition. These results suggest an ability of children to modulate social categorizations. Implications for the development of intergroup biases are discussed.
•Social categorization is a fundamental information processing strategy.•Adults adjust social categorization depending on their construal level.•This study tests whether preschool children have the same capability.•Results show gender based social categorizations among preschool children.•Categorizations were further accentuated when construing abstractly vs. concretely.
When individuals face difficult decisions, they may turn to random decision‐making aids, such as coin flips, for support. Here, we show that flipping a coin before making a decision impacts the ...number of reasons that individuals consider when making consumer choices (Study 1), policy decisions (Study 2), personal decisions (Study 3) and breakup decisions (Studies 4a, 4b, 4c). In Studies 1 to 3, flipping a coin resulted in fewer reasons or a reduced increase in the number of reasons that were deemed important. In contrast, when looking at qualitatively different decisions such as breakup decisions (4a to 4c), where using a coin flip may be perceived as unacceptable, flipping a coin resulted in more reasons being taken into account. Across studies, we show that flipping a coin impacts decision‐making processes. Taking breakup decisions aside, a coin flip may ease decision‐making by decreasing the number of reasons taken into account.
Values, beliefs, and traits differ across individuals, and these concepts might impact whether individuals choose to engage in (dis)honest behavior. This project focuses on interindividual ...differences in Machiavellianism, which is defined as a tendency toward cynicism and manipulativeness, and the belief that the ends justify the means. We hypothesized that trait Machiavellianism would predict dishonest behavior. Furthermore, we speculated that some situations are more conducive than others for Machiavellianism to translate into behavior. In particular, Construal Level Theory holds that individuals construe social situations on a concrete level, or an abstract level, and that an abstract construal level triggers values and value-related traits to be more influential on behavior. Against this background, we hypothesized that differences in Machiavellianism produce differences in dishonest monetary behavior when situations are construed abstractly. Four studies tested these considerations by asking participants to toss a coin and self-report the toss' outcome. Inconsistent with our theorizing, we did not find that higher Machiavellianism is consistently associated with a higher self-reported probability of receiving an individual bonus. We also did not find consistent support that higher Machiavellianism is associated with cheating under abstract compared to concrete construal.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Abstract
When people find it difficult to make a decision, they may opt to let chance decide. Flipping a coin, rolling a die, or using a counting-out rhyme are well-known decision aids. When ...individuals directly follow the aid’s suggestion, the decision aid acts as a
decider
. But when the decision aid elicits a felt response, such as liking or disliking the aid’s suggestion, and individuals act upon this response, the decision aid serves as a
catalyst
. This manuscript investigates whether and how many individuals apply these two strategies. In four studies (total
N
= 1135), we focus on coin flips as one of the most common decision aids and place an emphasis on the catalyst strategy. We examine (1) the frequency of previous experiences and future willingness to use a coin flip to make decisions, (2) which affective reactions accompany the coin flip when using it as catalyst, and (3) the circumstances under which individuals are more versus less likely to accept the use of a random decision-making aid to come to a decision. These results illustrate the catalyst phenomenon but also highlight the boundary conditions of individuals’ willingness to use randomness as an aid for decision making. We discuss directions for future research as well as potential applications.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
CEKLJ, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
When deciding between two options, settling can be difficult if one option is superior on one dimension but inferior on another. To arrive at a conclusion, people may gather further information, ...thereby running the risk of prolonging or blocking the decision-making process or even making suboptimal decisions. Here, we suggest that random decision aids may prove fruitful by reducing the need for further information. Five experiments (total N = 997) examined how information need is influenced after making a preliminary decision between two options and then receiving a suggestion from a random decision aid (a coin flip). Across studies, coin participants are less likely to request additional information (Study 1 and two follow-up studies, combined p = .021) and indicate a lower need for additional information (Study 2, p = .023, and Study 3, p = .001) compared to a control condition without a coin flip. Interestingly, participants do not necessarily adhere to the coin but stick to their preliminary decision as much as or even more than the control group, suggesting that the decision aid does not determine the decision outcome. This is true for hypothetical decisions between changing versus maintaining the status quo without an objectively correct solution (Studies 1, 1b, and 1c), for a decision between two options with an objectively correct solution (Study 2), and for a real monetary decision without an objectively correct solution (Study 3). Random decision aids may thus help to avoid decision blocks or the collection of too much information.
•Receiving a random suggestion reduces information need.•The decision aid does not change a preliminarily made decision.•We show this across five studies using different decisions and samples.•Our results suggest that random devices may help to overcome decision blocks.
PDF
