Matching Items (16)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

152450-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Previous research on experiences of the endowment effect and buyer's remorse has often failed to compare the two seemingly related phenomena. The current study attempts to provide a framework in which the two can be compared and to offer a possible suggestion as to when it may be beneficial to

Previous research on experiences of the endowment effect and buyer's remorse has often failed to compare the two seemingly related phenomena. The current study attempts to provide a framework in which the two can be compared and to offer a possible suggestion as to when it may be beneficial to experience either the endowment effect or buyer's remorse, namely situations of resource scarcity versus abundance. The current study employed an online dating paradigm in which resource scarcity was operationalized as the sex ratio of users on the site. Two hundred and one participants were exposed to a favorable sex ratio, an unfavorable sex ratio, or a no information control condition and asked to bid on potential dates. Once matched with a potential date, participants were asked how willing they would be to give up their date and the minimum amount of points they would request to do so. These dependent variables served as indicators of experiences of the endowment effect or buyer's remorse. Results indicated that the sex ratio of the online dating site did not influence experiences of the endowment effect versus buyer's remorse. Potential mediators and moderators were also investigated although no significant effects were found. Possible reasons for the null results are discussed as well as future directions.
ContributorsMeyer, Kaitlin (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Kenrick, Douglas (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
153497-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
When consumers fail in their environmental, dieting, or budgeting goals, they may engage in a consumer confession about their goal-inconsistent behavior. This dissertation seeks to understand how confessions about consumer goal transgressions affect subsequent consumer motivation and behaviors. Results from a series of five experiments reveal that after reflecting about

When consumers fail in their environmental, dieting, or budgeting goals, they may engage in a consumer confession about their goal-inconsistent behavior. This dissertation seeks to understand how confessions about consumer goal transgressions affect subsequent consumer motivation and behaviors. Results from a series of five experiments reveal that after reflecting about a past transgression, Catholics who confess (vs. do not confess) about the focal transgression are more motivated to engage in subsequent goal-consistent consumer behaviors. However, results reveal no such effects for Non-Catholics; Non-Catholics are equally motivated to engage in goal-consistent consumer behaviors regardless of whether or not they confessed. Catholics and Non-Catholics differ on the extent to which they believe that acts of penance are required to make amends and achieve forgiveness after confession. For Catholics, confessing motivates restorative, penance-like behaviors even in the consumer domain. Thus, when Catholics achieve forgiveness through the act of confession itself (vs. a traditional confession requiring penance), they reduce their need to engage in restorative consumer behaviors. Importantly, results find that confession (vs. reflecting only) does not provide a general self-regulatory boost to all participants, but rather that confession is motivating only for Catholics due to their beliefs about penance. Together, results suggest that for consumers with strong penance beliefs, confession can be an effective strategy for getting back on track with their consumption goals.
ContributorsMathras, Daniele (Author) / Mandel, Naomi (Thesis advisor) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Morales, Andrea C (Committee member) / Samper, Adriana (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
150670-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Infectious diseases have been a major threat to survival throughout human history. Humans have developed a behavioral immune system to prevent infection by causing individuals to avoid people, food, and objects that could be contaminated. This current project investigates how ambient temperature affects the activation of this system. Because temperature

Infectious diseases have been a major threat to survival throughout human history. Humans have developed a behavioral immune system to prevent infection by causing individuals to avoid people, food, and objects that could be contaminated. This current project investigates how ambient temperature affects the activation of this system. Because temperature is positively correlated with the prevalence of many deadly diseases, I predict that temperature moderates the behavioral immune system, such that a disease prime will have a stronger effect in a hot environment compared to a neutral environment and one's avoidant behaviors will be more extreme. Participants were placed in a hot room (M = 85F) or a neutral room (M = 77F) and shown a disease prime slide show or a neutral slide show. Disgust sensitivity and perceived vulnerability surveys were used to measure an increased perceived risk to disease. A taste test between a disgusting food item (gummy bugs) and a neutral food item (gummy animals) measured food avoidance. There was no significant avoidance of the gummy and no significant difference in ratings of disgust sensitivity or perceived vulnerability as a function of temperature conditions. There were no significant interactions between temperature and disease. The conclusion is that this study did not provide evidence that temperature moderates the effect of disease cues on behavior.
ContributorsOsborne, Elizabeth (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Kwan, Sau (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
151038-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Men may engage in financially risky behaviors when seeking mates for several reasons: Risky behaviors can signal to potential mates one's genetic fitness, may facilitate success in status competition with other men, and may be a necessary strategy for gaining sufficient resources to offer potential mates. Once in a relationship,

Men may engage in financially risky behaviors when seeking mates for several reasons: Risky behaviors can signal to potential mates one's genetic fitness, may facilitate success in status competition with other men, and may be a necessary strategy for gaining sufficient resources to offer potential mates. Once in a relationship, however, the same financial riskiness may be problematic for males, potentially suggesting to partners an interest in (extra-curricular) mate-seeking and placing in jeopardy existing resources available to the partner and the relationship. In the current research, we employed guided visualization scenarios to activate either a mating motivation or no motivation in single and in attached men and women. Participants indicated their preference for either guaranteed sums of money or chances of getting significantly more money accompanied by chances of getting nothing. As predicted, mating motivation led single men to become more risky and attached men to become less risky. These findings replicated across different samples and measures. Interestingly, in all three studies, women exhibited the opposite pattern: Mating motivation led single women to become less financially risky and attached women to become more risky. Thus, two additional experiments were conducted to explore the potential causes of this effect. The results of these latter experiments support the "mate-switching" hypothesis of risk-taking in attached women. That is, women who are able (i.e. have high mate value) were more risky in order to exit an undesirable relationship and move into a better one.
ContributorsLi, Yexin Jessica (Author) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Thesis advisor) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Thesis advisor) / Cohen, Adam B. (Committee member) / Ledlow, Susan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
151083-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Beliefs about change reflect how we understand phenomena and what kind of predictions we make for the future. Cyclical beliefs about change state that events are in a constant flux, and change is inevitable. Linear beliefs about change state that events happen in a non-fluctuating pattern and change is not

Beliefs about change reflect how we understand phenomena and what kind of predictions we make for the future. Cyclical beliefs about change state that events are in a constant flux, and change is inevitable. Linear beliefs about change state that events happen in a non-fluctuating pattern and change is not commonplace. Cultural differences in beliefs about change have been documented across various domains, but research has yet to investigate how these differences may affect health status predictions. The present study addresses this gap by inducing different beliefs about change in a European-American college sample. Health status predictions were measured in terms of predicted likelihood of exposure to the flu virus, of contraction of the flu, and of receiving a flu vaccine. Most differences were observed among those who have a recent history of suffering from the flu. Among them, cyclical thinkers tended to rate their likelihood for exposure and contraction to be higher than linear thinkers. However, linear thinkers indicated that they were more likely to receive a flu vaccine. The different patterns suggest the possibility that cyclical beliefs may activate concepts related to cautionary behaviors or pessimistic biases, while linear beliefs may activate concepts related to taking action and exercising control over the environment. Future studies should examine the interplay between beliefs about change and the nature of the predicted outcome.
ContributorsKim, Summer Hyo Yeon (Author) / Kwan, Virginia S. Y. (Thesis advisor) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Committee member) / Cohen, Adam B. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
151046-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
People may conceptualize God as benevolent and as authoritarian. This research investigates the influence of these God-concepts on prosocial behavior; specifically whether such concepts differentially predict a set of beliefs about the self and the world, volunteer motivations, and intentions to volunteer for secular causes. Two studies, one correlation and

People may conceptualize God as benevolent and as authoritarian. This research investigates the influence of these God-concepts on prosocial behavior; specifically whether such concepts differentially predict a set of beliefs about the self and the world, volunteer motivations, and intentions to volunteer for secular causes. Two studies, one correlation and one experimental, were conducted among college students who were Christians and indicated they believe that God exists. A measurement model of the concepts of Benevolent and Authoritarian God was first tested, and a conceptual path model was then analyzed. I found that concepts of a benevolent God were associated with a benevolent self-identity, perceived moral and religious obligations to help, and a high sense of personal responsibility with a total positive indirect effect on intentions to volunteer - mainly via internal motivations. In contrast, concepts of an authoritarian God were associated with a perceived religious obligation, having a positive indirect effect on intentions to volunteer via external motivations; but also with a low benevolent self-identity and low personal responsibility associated with amotivation (the disinclination to volunteer). Thus, there was a null total indirect effect of belief in an authoritarian God on intentions to volunteer. Future directions including the use of religious primes are discussed.
ContributorsJohnson, Kathryn, Ph.D (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Okun, Morris A. (Thesis advisor) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Committee member) / Kwan, Sau V.S. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
156274-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Numerous published studies and a meta-analysis suggest that priming religion causes an increase in prosocial behaviors. However, mediating mechanisms of this purported causal relationship have not yet been formally tested. In line with cultural evolutionary theories and their supporting evidence, I test the proposition that public self-awareness mediates the effect

Numerous published studies and a meta-analysis suggest that priming religion causes an increase in prosocial behaviors. However, mediating mechanisms of this purported causal relationship have not yet been formally tested. In line with cultural evolutionary theories and their supporting evidence, I test the proposition that public self-awareness mediates the effect of priming religion on prosociality. However, other theories of religion suggest that persons may feel small when perceiving God, and these feelings have predicted prosociality in published research. In line with this, I also test whether a sense of small self and, relatedly, self-transcendent connection, are possible mediators of the religion priming effect on prosociality. In this study, I implicitly prime religion and test whether the above constructs mediate a potential effect on prosocial intentions. Although self-transcendent connection predicted prosocial intentions, the implicit prime affected neither the mediating variables nor prosocial intentions, nor were any significant indirect effects evident. Thus, no causal evidence of mediation was found. In addition, I examined whether God representations moderate the path from implicit religion priming to each proposed mediator. The results suggest that a benevolent God representation moderates the effect of religion priming on self-transcendent connection and that an ineffable God representation moderates the effect of religion priming on sense of small self. Lastly, I tested for mediation with a cross-sectional path model containing religiosity and belief in God as predictors. The results suggest that religiosity, controlling for belief in God, predicts prosociality through self-transcendent connection but belief in God, controlling for religiosity, does not predict prosociality. Implications for the religion priming literature and, more generally, the psychology of religion, are discussed.
ContributorsScott, Matthew J (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Shiota, Michelle N. (Committee member) / Johnson, Kathryn A. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
156853-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Anti-atheist prejudice is cross-culturally prevalent and marked by intuitive distrust. However, recent research suggests that, when social perceivers know additional relevant information about others (i.e., their reproductive strategies), this information overrides religious information and nonreligious targets are trusted as much as religious targets. That is, perceivers seem to use religious

Anti-atheist prejudice is cross-culturally prevalent and marked by intuitive distrust. However, recent research suggests that, when social perceivers know additional relevant information about others (i.e., their reproductive strategies), this information overrides religious information and nonreligious targets are trusted as much as religious targets. That is, perceivers seem to use religious information as a cue to a specific set of behavioral traits, but prioritize direct information about these traits when available. Here, I use this framework to explore the possibility that atheists are viewed positively in certain circumstances. First, atheists might be viewed positively for certain purposes because of their perceived reproductive strategies, even while being trusted less. Second, atheists who are family-oriented do not sacrifice trust, but may still be viewed positively for other traits (i.e., open-mindedness, scientific thinking). Third, given the constraints religion often imposes on behavior, atheists might be trusted more in situations where these constraints interfere with religious people’s inclination to cooperate. I tested these hypotheses using fictitious social media profiles to examine social perception. The study had a 3 (Target Religion: Religious, Nonreligious, or Atheist) × 3 (Target Reproductive Strategy: No Information, Committed, Uncommitted) experimental design (N = 550). Contrary to my predictions, participants did not rate atheists and nonreligious targets as “fast” compared to religious targets. Consistent with predictions, however, atheists and nonreligious individuals were rated significantly higher on perceived open-mindedness and scientific thinking. Finally, atheist and nonreligious targets were trusted more in two of the three trust domains: trust with scientific findings that contradict their worldview and trust with a secret about a friend’s abortion. Further analyses compared patterns of responding for religious and nonreligious individuals, finding evidence for ingroup bias in most perceptions, but not all. Results suggest that perceptions of atheists are complex, but that atheists may, at least sometimes, be viewed favorably. Finally, these results point to the importance of reproductive strategy as a dimension of social perception, as this variable had a clear effect, independent of target religion, on the hypothesized perceptions.
ContributorsMoon, Jordan W (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Committee member) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
157069-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Research and theory in social psychology and related fields indicates that people simultaneously hold many cultural identities. And it is well evidenced across relevant fields (e.g., sociology, marketing, economics) that salient identities are instrumental in a variety of cognitive and behavioral processes, including decision-making. It is not, however, well understood

Research and theory in social psychology and related fields indicates that people simultaneously hold many cultural identities. And it is well evidenced across relevant fields (e.g., sociology, marketing, economics) that salient identities are instrumental in a variety of cognitive and behavioral processes, including decision-making. It is not, however, well understood how the relative salience of various cultural identities factors into the process of making identity-relevant choices, particularly ones that require an actor to choose between conflicting sets of cultural values or beliefs. It is also unclear whether the source of that salience (e.g., chronic or situational) is meaningful in this regard. The current research makes novel predictions concerning the roles of cultural identity centrality and cultural identity situational salience in three distinct aspects of the decision-making process: Direction of decision, speed of decision, and emotion related to decision. In doing so, the research highlights two under-researched forms of culture (i.e., political and religious) and uses as the focal dependent variable a decision-making scenario that forces participants to choose between the values of their religious and political cultures and, to some degree, behave in an identity-inconsistent manner. Results indicate main effects of Christian identity centrality and democrat identity centrality on preference for traditional versus gender-neutral (i.e., non-traditional/progressive) restrooms after statistically controlling for covariates. Additionally, results show a significant main effect of democrat identity centrality and a significant interaction effect of Christian and democrat identity centrality on positive emotion linked to the decision. Post hoc analyses further reveal a significant quadratic relationship between Christian identity centrality and emotion related to the decision. There was no effect of situational strength of democrat identity salience on the decision. Neither centrality or situational strength had any effect on the speed with which participants made their decisions. This research theoretically and empirically advances the study of cultural psychology and carries important implications for identity research and judgment and decision-making across a variety of fields, including management, behavioral economics, and marketing.
ContributorsBarbour, Joseph Eugene (Author) / Cohen, Adam B. (Thesis advisor) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Committee member) / Mackinnon, David P (Committee member) / Mandel, Naomi (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
155269-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Existing work suggests that intergroup negativity is caused by dissimilarities of values between groups. In contrast, I propose that incompatible values--regardless of whether they are similar or dissimilar--cause intergroup negativities. Because values act as cues to tangible goals and interests, groups' values suggest desired outcomes that may conflict with our

Existing work suggests that intergroup negativity is caused by dissimilarities of values between groups. In contrast, I propose that incompatible values--regardless of whether they are similar or dissimilar--cause intergroup negativities. Because values act as cues to tangible goals and interests, groups' values suggest desired outcomes that may conflict with our own (i.e., incompatible values). The current study conceptually and empirically disentangles value-dissimilarity and value-incompatibility, which were confounded in previous research. Results indicated that intergroup negativities were strongly predicted by value-incompatibility, and only weakly and inconsistently predicted by value-dissimilarity. I further predicted that groups' values cue specific threats and opportunities to perceivers and that, in reaction to these inferred affordances, people will experience threat-relevant, specific emotional reactions (e.g., anger, disgust); however, results did not support this prediction. I also predicted that, because the inferred threats that groups pose to one another are not always symmetric, the negativities between groups may sometimes be asymmetric (i.e., Group A feels negatively toward Group B, but Group B feels neutral or positively toward Group A). This prediction received strong support. In sum, reframing our understanding of values as cues to conflicts-of-interest between groups provides principles for understanding intergroup prejudices in more nuanced ways.
ContributorsVarley Lee, Allison (Author) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Thesis advisor) / Siroky, David (Committee member) / Aktipis, C Athena (Committee member) / Cohen, Adam B. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017