What is the final thought of the researchers at the end of this article?

The researchers conclude that their experiments are consistent with a growing number of studies that demonstrate the positive effects of prosociality. Prosociality benefits not only another, but also ourselves. The world is getting busier. Ignoring the benefits of social involvement can have very negative consequences. The researchers conclude with the conclusion that both the hedonist who seeks happiness and the idealist who seeks civilization must choose the same path.

Looking for loneliness?

Why do we ignore strangers when connecting with others increases our success?

There are two reasons for this. First of all, loneliness is perhaps a more positive experience than contact with other people. A second reason is that people misunderstand the consequences of social connections.

Where did the researchers conduct their research?

The researchers opted for public transport. They instructed travelers on trains and buses to make contact with a stranger in their area, to avoid contact with a stranger in their area or to behave exactly as they would when traveling by bus train.

What conclusion did the researchers draw from their research?

Their research showed that the participants who made contact with strangers had experienced it as more positive and no less productive than when they did not. This is remarkable because all participants from the contexts, individually, had predicted the opposite. This incorrect assessment may be due to the fact that the interest of others to commit is underestimated. The result of this underestimation is that people who do not learn the real consequences of social interaction.

Can the pleasure in connection be contagious?

Yes, that's possible. This is apparent from a study in a laboratory where people had to talk to each other in a waiting room. Both those who did this spontaneously and those who did it because it was the assignment both experienced a positive experience. This is also proof that people are social animals. A lack of social interaction is bad for human well-being.

What are the most important keywords in this article?

The most important keywords in this article are social cognition, social connection, mind perception, affective prognosis and well-being.

Why do social connections have to be regulated?

It is important that social connections are regulated because modern life offers many opportunities for social involvement. As well as choosing food that we expect will satisfy our hunger, we like to make contact with people from whom we expect social support.

Which people do we often evaluate as poor sources of social support?

We often evaluate distant strangers and outgroup members as relatively poor sources when it comes to social support. Sometimes this is wise. Consider, for example, the confrontation with an unsatisfactory stranger as a potential discussion partner. Then it is often better to avoid a conversation than to try to connect with this person. Research has also shown this. We easily connect with people we know, such as friends, but we ignore strangers easily.

What is the core of the researchers' research?

In this article, the researchers wonder whether connecting with a stranger is less favorable than staying completely isolated. Although connecting with a stranger does not have the same long-term benefits as connecting with friends. Perhaps people misunderstand the consequences of distant social interactions. As a result, they may expect that staying isolated is more pleasant than talking to a stranger. However, the opposite is true. This is apparent from various studies.

Which studies show this?

For example, studies in which extroverted people expect to have a more positive conversation with another extroverted person. However, the investigation revealed that they had an equally pleasant experience with both an extrovert and an introvert person. Another experiment revealed that there were no differences in mood between people who interacted with a stranger like those who interacted with a dating partner. These studies show that we wrongly prefer isolation to interaction with a stranger.

What two different patterns can this misunderstanding assume about the actual consequences of social connection?

First of all, the relatively mild misunderstanding that people expect that connecting with a stranger in a conversation will be more negative than staying isolated. In reality, talking to a stranger cannot be worse (or perhaps a little bit worse) than staying isolated. The other pattern can be a reflection of a more extreme misunderstanding. Namely not just an error in the size or duration of an effect, but an error in the actual valence of an effect. This pattern mainly occurs when people are told to act extroverted instead of introverted.

What joint conclusion can be drawn from these studies?

All studies show the profound misunderstanding that people expect that connecting with a stranger will be more negative than staying isolated. In fact, the opposite pattern is true.

What was the goal of the researcher to perform nine experiments?

The aim was to explain at least partly an apparent social paradox both in the field and in the laboratory. Namely, why people prefer isolation between strangers rather than connection with strangers. This is remarkable because people benefit greatly from social connection.

In which two contexts did the researchers start their research?

On commuter trains and in public buses. The researchers chose these contexts because they are places where strangers come very close together but almost never connect.

What did the researchers ask the participants in their studies?

In each context, they first asked in one experiment to talk to a stranger, not to talk to a stranger, or to do whatever they normally do. They did this to be able to measure the actual consequences of distant involvement versus isolation.

In another experiment, the researchers asked participants in every context to predict their experiences in the same circumstances. In these field experiments, the researchers wanted to clarify whether a wrong expectation was the cause of human behavior. People may prefer isolation to social contact because they have wrong expectations of social contact.

In their fifth and final experiment, the researchers investigated whether the effects of the social connection are contagious. In general, the studies focused on whether people are sufficiently social in their daily lives or if they are not social enough for their own well-being.

Why, according to the researchers, do people expect that connecting to a stranger is less pleasant when sitting alone?

People may not have learned directly or indirectly about reality. A false belief can be created by any barrier that prevents a person from learning from reality. A possible barrier may be a common shared belief that other people are not interested in connecting. The belief can come directly from existing standards of conduct. The studies show that people can improve their well-being of the moment by being more social towards others.

How did the participants in the experiment start their obligatory conversation?

A large part of the participants could no longer clearly remember the start of their conversation. Of the people who could still remember, 29% asked about current events, 39% asked a personal question and 16% opted for a different start. For example, by talking about themselves. None of the participants in the study reported that they were participating in a study. What the participants had in common was that they all tried to say something that was worth responding to.

The researchers encouraged extraverted behavior among the participants in their research. But why wouldn't extrovert (as well as introverts) think that being isolated on the train would be unpleasant?

The researchers have several possible explanations for this question. First of all, it could be that the experiments had too little power to detect stable moderators of personalities. The experiments could at least detect theoretically modest effects. In addition, the researchers used only a measure of 10 items from the Big Five in their prediction experiments. This instead of a more specific measure of extraversion.

According to the researchers, what is probably the reason that there are specific social functions and habits?

According to the researcher these are there to relieve our fear. We are afraid of the negative consequences that could result from attempted interactions. According to the researchers, the most effective way to interact with strangers is to remove the barrier to start a conversation. This would work better than enhancing one's own property of extraversion.

What do the researchers mention in this article about the qualifications of their research?

The researchers emphasize that entering into interactions with foreigners does not always have to be pleasant. In addition, they suspect that there are some important preconditions for pleasant interactions with strangers that the researchers could not test with their experiments. For example, the interactions usually lasted only a few minutes and there were no repeated interactions or particularly long interactions. The studies indicate that other studies show that the pleasure of interacting with a stranger diminishes over time. This is because more is learned about the other person.

What is the final thought of the researchers at the end of this article?

The researchers conclude that their experiments are consistent with a growing number of studies that demonstrate the positive effects of prosociality. Prosociality benefits not only another, but also ourselves. The world is getting busier. Ignoring the benefits of social involvement can have very negative consequences. The researchers conclude with the conclusion that both the hedonist who seeks happiness and the idealist who seeks civilization must choose the same path.

What is facial attractiveness and which qualities do we find attractive?

Facial attraction is about the signals that people send about their biological quality, in particular about their health. Properties that have been implicated as signals of biological quality and that we find attractive are related to sexual dimorphism, symmetry, averageness, adiposity and carotenoid-based skin color.

What was the purpose of this study?

The researchers want to be able to use the results of this study to assess whether there are predictive values of attractiveness, perceived health and actual health. They intended to investigate this in three steps. First of all, by investigating whether one of the facial features, including sexual dimorphism, meanness, symmetry, adiposity and skin color, gives a positive result for the attractiveness of the face. The researchers then planned to investigate whether one of the facial features positively predicted perceived health. And finally, as a third step, the researchers planned to study whether one of the features predicts one of the actual health measures. Think of immune function, oxidative stress and the quality of the sperm.

What to tell about predictors of facial attraction and human health?

What is facial attractiveness and which qualities do we find attractive?

Facial attraction is about the signals that people send about their biological quality, in particular about their health. Properties that have been implicated as signals of biological quality and that we find attractive are related to sexual dimorphism, symmetry, averageness, adiposity and carotenoid-based skin color.

What was positively predicted as attractiveness in men and women?

For men, attractiveness is about masculinity, symmetry, averageness and in a negative sense, just as for women, because of adiposity. For women, attractiveness was positively predicted by femininity. The skin color predicted no attraction in either sex. So color probably only plays a limited role when it comes to attractiveness.

Does the appearance predict the actual health of men and women?

The results of the researchers show that there are only weak connections between attractive features and health. The researchers investigated this with the help of measures that were theoretically linked to sexual selection. This included immune function, oxidative stress and sperm quality. Only in men was some evidence found for the phenotype-linked fertility hypothesis.

What was the purpose of this study?

The researchers want to be able to use the results of this study to assess whether there are predictive values of attractiveness, perceived health and actual health. They intended to investigate this in three steps. First of all, by investigating whether one of the facial features, including sexual dimorphism, meanness, symmetry, adiposity and skin color, gives a positive result for the attractiveness of the face. The researchers then planned to investigate whether one of the facial features positively predicted perceived health. And finally, as a third step, the researchers planned to study whether one of the features predicts one of the actual health measures. Think of immune function, oxidative stress and the quality of the sperm.

Is there evidence that female attractiveness means health?

The researchers of this study found no evidence that there is a link between female attractiveness and health. There may be a relationship between female attractiveness and fertility. Increased estrogen levels are positively associated with the likelihood of conception in women. It is possible that men can pick up estrogen-related fertility cues from women via femininity.

Who were the participants in this study?

The researchers conducted their research in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration. A total of one hundred and nine Caucasian men and eighty Caucasian women participated in this study. The age of the participants was between 17 and 35 years. All participants said they were heterosexual. To participate in this study, they received credits or a travel allowance. Forty-four women used different forms of hormonal contraception compared to thirty-six women who did not use hormonal contraception.

Which procedure did the researchers choose?

All participants in this study first attended a one-hour laboratory session. A distinction was made between women who did and women who did not use hormonal contraception. Subsequently, samples were taken from the participants, both urine samples and oxidative stress assays. During the rest period, the researchers took photos of the faces of the participants and asked them to complete a lifestyle questionnaire. It contained questions about the diet and exercise habits of the participants, as well as their perceived stress levels, recent or long-term medical conditions and exposure to various toxins. The purpose of the questionnaires was to identify potential disruptive lifestyle factors that could influence health measures. For the photo, the men were shaved and the women wore no makeup or artificial tanning. They looked straight into the camera and assumed a neutral expression and kept their mouths shut.

How were the photos prepared that were shown to the participants during the research?

With the help of the Psychomorph61 program, all photos were calibrated in color to be able to change subtle random variations in color due to exposure and photographic conditions. The alignment was also adjusted so that all eyes were at the same height on a horizontal surface. The hair, ears and neck were covered with a black oval mask.

In this article the writers mainly focused on research on women. According to them, should there also be research into the role of men in partner psychology?

The same predictions aimed at women would also apply to men. This includes predictions such as differences in measurement value, exposure to new potential partners with a higher value than the current partner, but also the revealed relationship tax. However, the writers also expect differences. More often than in women's affairs, men's affairs are motivated by the desire for sexual variation. Direct sexual access to fertile women has a key function in the psychology of many men. Men use this to a lesser extent as partner tactics.

What to say about the mate-switch hypothesis?

What circumstances can cause a mat switching?

These can be different circumstances. For example, unexpected costs caused by someone's partner (relationship tax), discrepancies arising from changes in the degree-value of both partners or due to the arrival of a new and interested potential partner. This potential partner must have sufficient incremental value to compensate for the costs of a fracture.

What does the mate-switching hypothesis suggest?

This hypothesis about mate-link suggests the circumstances (see previous question) created adjustment problems throughout human evolution. By this they mean circumstances that came up with falsified adjustments to anticitates and possibilities for partner switch. But also implementing exit strategies and managing challenges during the aftermath of the entire process.

Which studies of the link hypothesis are covered in this article?

The following investigations are covered in this article:
• cultivating "back-up partners";
• the assessment of partner infected costs that include relationship tax;
• the measurement of self-neglecting welfare shift ratios in a partner;
• the measurement of degree of value discrepancies and anticipation of sexual, emotional and economic disturbances.

What does the mate-link hypothesis say about the "good genes" hypothesis?

For the "good genes" hypothesis, the mate-switching hypothesis offers so much a complementary as a competing explanation. Moreover, he explains in a similar way a large number of other mating phenomena that remain inexplicable for alternative accounts.

Why do people need adjustments?

The writers mention six arguments as to why people need adjustments. These are:
1. to monitor their current partnerships for received and expected benefits and to monitor accrued and expected costs;
2. to evaluate alternative potential partners while they are already paired;
3. to bypass the partner monitoring tactics of the partner;
4. as a tactic for assessing and looking up alternative, desired and interested partners;
5. to use exit strategies for splitting up a current partner in a way that minimizes costs;
6. to switch to a new partner when the cost / benefit accounts make the circumstances favorable for a switch.

Why do people need adjustments?

The writers mention six arguments as to why people need adjustments. These are:
1. to monitor their current partnerships for received and expected benefits and to monitor accrued and expected costs;
2. to evaluate alternative potential partners while they are already paired;
3. to bypass the partner monitoring tactics of the partner;
4. as a tactic for assessing and looking up alternative, desired and interested partners;
5. to use exit strategies for splitting up a current partner in a way that minimizes costs;
6. to switch to a new partner when the cost / benefit accounts make the circumstances favorable for a switch.

What conclusions do the writers draw at the end of this article?

The authors draw from this article that the degree-switching hypothesis explains a large number of existing specifications and generates new predictions that still have to be tested. For example, it provides a framework for predictions about the specific circumstances that should trigger a partner-psychology. Consider deviating value differences. But also interest in potential alternatives and an increased relationship burden.

Is more research needed and what should it focus on?

Yes, more research is needed. Especially to investigate the hypothetical design characteristics of the degree-switch adjustment. Including the inputs and outputs. In addition, it should focus on internal regulatory variables. Consider relationship satisfaction and prosperity-trade-off relationships.

In this article the writers mainly focused on research on women. According to them, should there also be research into the role of men in partner psychology?

The same predictions aimed at women would also apply to men. This includes predictions such as differences in measurement value, exposure to new potential partners with a higher value than the current partner, but also the revealed relationship tax. However, the writers also expect differences. More often than in women's affairs, men's affairs are motivated by the desire for sexual variation. Direct sexual access to fertile women has a key function in the psychology of many men. Men use this to a lesser extent as partner tactics.

Many people have thought for decades that low self-esteem causes aggression. There are many authors who have cited this belief or who have used it as an implicit assumption to explain their findings regarding other variables. It is difficult to establish the origins of this idea. Many have searched the literature without finding any original theoretical statement of that view and there is no real investigation that can provide strong empirical evidence that low self-esteem causes aggression. It seems that the theory entered into conventional wisdom without ever being empirically establish.

However, many studies show that the view of low self-esteem does not easily reconcile with the theory that low self-esteem causes aggression. Many study findings show that people with low self-esteem are uncertain and confused about themselves and that they are oriented toward avoiding loss and risk and they are modest, shy, lacking confidence in themselves and submitting readily to other people’s influence. It is not very likely that these patterns increase aggression and some even seem likely to discourage it. People with low self-esteem want to avoid risk and loss and attacking someone is eminently risky. The people with low self-esteem lack confidence of success, but aggression is usually undertaken in the expectation of defeating the other person. People with low self-esteem usually submit to influence, but aggression is often engaged to reject and resist external influence. People with low self-esteem are confused about who they are, but aggression is likely to be an attempt to defend and assert a strongly held opinion about oneself.

Violent men

If you look at violent individuals, than you’ll probably not find them to have low self-esteem. Most studies have focused on violent men, but it seems reasonable to assume that violent women conform to similar patterns. Violent people have a strong sense of personal superiority and their violence often stems from a sense of wounded pride. When someone questions their view of self, they lash out in response. One review showed that favourable self-regard is linked to violence in one sphere after another. Rapist, wife beaters, gang members and murderers are all marked by strongly held views of their own superiority. When you have two groups and these two differ in self-esteem, the group with the higher self-esteem will be more violent than the other. People with manic depression tend to be more aggressive and violent during their manic stage (favourable views of self) than during the depression phase (self-esteem low). Alcohol intoxication also boosts self-esteem temporarily and it also boosts aggressive tendencies. There are many more examples that show that aggressive, violent people hold highly favourable opinions of themselves. When the favourable opinions are disputed or questioned by other people, aggressions seems to show. It therefore seems plausible that aggression results from threatened egotism.

Aggression and self-regard

The low self-esteem theory is not plausible. What if scientists go to the opposite conclusion, namely that high self-esteem causes violence? The writers think that they shouldn’t hold the opposite view without knowing whether many non-violent individuals also have high self-esteem. What seems surprising is that controlled studies linking self-esteem to aggression are almost non-existent. It seems unlikely that no one has ever bothered to study the question. It seems more plausible that such investigations have been done, but that they have not been published because they failed to find any clear link. There are a few studies that looked at the link between self-esteem and hostile tendencies and they found that people with high self-esteem tended to cluster at both the hostile and non-hostile extremes.

The difference between these two was the stability in self-esteem. The researchers assessed this by measuring self-esteem on different occasions and computing how much variability each individual showed over time. People whose self-esteem was high and stable (people whose favourable view of self was impervious) were the least prone to hostility. People with high and unstable self-esteem scored highest on hostility. It seems that violent individuals are one subset of people with high self-esteem. High self-esteem contains several different kinds of people. One of those kinds is non-aggressive and the other is aggressive. More researchers are agreeing that individuals with high self-esteem form a heterogeneous category. More researchers have begun to focus on self-esteem. Other scientists are beginning to use related constructs, like narcissism. Narcissism is holding a grandiose view of personal superiority, an inflated sense of entitlement, fantasies of personal greatness, low empathy. Its quit plausible that these traits are linked to aggression and violence. This is especially the case when somebody disputes their assessment of self. Research has also found that narcissism is linked to high and unstable self-esteem. Narcissism seems a promising candidate to study.

The writers of this text have done laboratory tests of links among self-esteem, aggression and narcissism. In some studies, participants were insulted by a confederate posing as another participant and they were later given the opportunity to aggress against that person (or another person) by means of sounding an aversive blast of loud noise. In both studies, the highest levels of aggression were exhibited by people who had scored high on narcissism and had been insulted. Self-esteem had no effect on aggression by itself, and high or low self-esteem didn’t either in combination with receiving the insult. These results confirm the link between threatened egotism and aggression. It also contradicts the theory that low self-esteem causes violence. It is not fair to depict narcissists as generally aggressive. In the writers’ research, narcissists’ aggression did not differ from that of other people as long as there was no insulting provocation.

Narcissism is not directly a cause of aggression and can be better understood as a risk factor that can contribute to increasing a violent response to provocations. When the narcissists were insulted, they were no more aggressive than anyone else toward an innocent third person. Narcissists are heavily invested in their high opinion of themselves and they also want others to share and confirm this opinion. When someone questions their self-portrait, the narcissists turn aggressive in response to those people. The aggression of narcissists is a means of defending the grandiose self-view.

But can laboratory studies really capture what happens out in the real world, where violence takes a more serious and sometimes even deadly form? To answer this question, the writers conducted another study in which they obtained self-esteem and narcissism scores from incarcerated violent felons. The researchers thought that being held in prison and the failure experience of having been arrested, convicted and sentences would push the scores toward low self-esteem and low narcissism. But, the prisoners’ scores pointed toward high narcissism as the major cause of aggression. The self-esteem scores were comparable to the scores of published samples. The narcissism scores were significantly higher than the published norms from all other studies. The prisoner group outscored other groups on superiority and entitlement. These findings show that the dangerous aspects of narcissism are the inflated sense of being superior to others and being entitled to special privileges.

Deep down inside

Many researchers have raised the question whether the egotism of aggressive people is a superficial form of bluster that is put on to conceal deep-rooted insecurities and self-doubts. This question suggests that aggressive people do have low self-esteem but simply act as if they do not. Maybe wife beaters really perceive themselves as inferior beings, and their aggressive assertion of superiority is just a cover-up. Researchers have sought to find this inner core of self-doubt and they reported that they could not do so. Basically, all studies that have studied the links between narcissism and self-esteem have found a positive correlation, so indicating that narcissists have high self-esteem. Even if such evidence could be found, the view that low self-esteem causes aggression would still be wrong. By now it should be clear that overt low self-esteem does not cause aggression. Hidden low self-esteem can’t cause aggression if non-hidden low self-esteem has no such effect. But when you focus the theory on the hidden quality of low self-esteem requires one to consider what it is that is hiding it. This brings the analysis back to egotism. It would be the sense of superiority that is responsible for aggression. This is even the case if one could show that the sense of superiority is only on the surface and conceals an underlying low self-esteem. No one has shown that.

According to the writers, it is time to abandon the quest for simple links between self-esteem and aggression. Low self-esteem doesn’t cause violence and the opposite seems to be true, but too simple. High self-esteem is a characteristic of highly aggressive individuals and non-aggressive ones, so direct prediction tends to be inconclusive. Researchers have looked at other patterns and patterns of narcissism and instability of self-esteem have proven successful in recent investigations. Of course, more research is needed. The evidence best fits the view that aggression is most likely when people with a narcissistically inflated view of their personal superiority encounter someone who disputes that opinion. Aggression is then a means of defending a favourable view of self against someone who seeks to deflate it. It seems that threatened egotism and not low self-esteem is the most explosive recipe for violence. Research should also look into what aggressive people hope to accomplish by responding violently to an insult. There should also be looked into emotion processes involved in egotistical violence. Does aggression really make the aggressor feel better?

Self-control developed in the interpersonal sphere before the intrapersonal sphere. Societal expectations are the distal pressures that prompt people to control their behaviours. The need to belong was a strong force shaping humanity and it was therefore crucial to adhere to relational norms in order to be included and stay included. Research on self-control has taken a different tack, it emphasizes the personal sphere rather than the social sphere. The field of psychology has focused mainly on the inner self’s role in self-regulation. This is also with good reason: it makes sense to study the self-as-agent through its actions, emotions and decisions. Baumeister outlined three major features of selfhood: one involved reflexive self-awareness, the second interpersonal relations and the third the executive function. This article will focus on the influence of self-regulation on interpersonal relations, that is the interface between two roots of the self.

The limited-resource model of self-control

The limited resource model of self-regulation posits that any form of self-control behaviour that involves deliberate, conscious and controlled responses by the self draws on a limited resource, akin to strength or energy. The model holds that one act of active volition will have a detrimental impact on any subsequent act that draws from the same resource. The resource can be replenished, but at a slower rate than it is consumed. As a consequence, a series of self-regulatory acts will deplete the available resource to the point of self-regulatory failure. The self will then function less effective and this will result in reliance on habit, routine and automatic processes. Research has pointed out that not only prototypical instances of the exertion of self-control drain this resource, but also a variety of other executive functions, like generation and regulation of thought and feelings. Research using the self-regulatory resource model typically uses a paradigm involving two resource-consuming tasks. In the first phase, participants were asked to perform a task that is thought to consume self-regulatory resources or they perform a less taxing version of the experimental task. The type of task participants are requested to complete constitutes the key independent variable. Performance on a second and unrelated resource-consuming task is measured and this serves as the dependent measure. If performance on the second task is impaired as a function of having completed the first demanding task, a state of self-regulatory resource depletion is inferred. The completion of the first task requires the consumption of large quantities of the self-regulatory resource. This will reduce the person’s capabilities to successfully regulate behaviour during an ensuing period in which the second task is presented. This situations is likened to a hangover-effect. Many studies have used this paradigm and the results support the basic tenets of the limited resource model of self-control. Much of this research has focused on intra-psychic phenomena that are affected by or will affect the resources available for self-control

Another study by Baumeister in which he examined something he called ego depletion, showed that people who exerted conscious self-control on one activity subsequently performed poorer on a second unrelated task. In one study he showed that participants who were requested to eat unpalatable food (radishes) persisted less on a subsequent frustrating, unsolvable puzzle task than did participants requested to eat enjoyable food or no food. People had to overcome the resistance to eat the less-than-tasty radishes and this consumed self-control resources and the resulting depletion carried over to detrimentally impact participants’ stamina at the frustrating puzzle. The research of Baumeister also shows that resource depletion effects could also be brought about by actively suppressing emotions or performing a cognitively demanding task involving syllogistic reasoning. Another study demonstrated that depleting consumers of their self-regulatory resources by mental or emotional self-control tasks resulted in increases on several indexes of impulsivity in the marketplace. Another study showed that when food was freely presented to dieters and non-dieters, dieters became more depleted than non-dieters. This was because the dieters needed considerable amounts of regulatory resources to resists. The researchers found that depletion effects for dieters were not only restricted to eating-related behaviours, but extended to non-food related self-regulatory behaviours as well. Once depleted, people will exhibit reduced performance at any subsequent act of self-control. Self-regulatory resources are also involved in logical reasoning and higher-order reflective processes.

Self-control and public social behaviours

Many studies have found support for the notion of finite resources of self-control in the personal sphere, but it does not mean that public, interpersonal functioning is left unaffected by it. Self-control is influential in the realm of interpersonal behaviour. Interpersonal interactions can be inefficient and involve active self-regulation, which can lead to later self-control failure. Only recently has the limited resource model begun to be applied to interpersonal phenomena, but several issues have received attention. For instance, research has shown that active self-representation requires self-regulatory resources. Studies have also found that counter-normative modes of self-presentation can be quite resource-demanding and they deplete self-regulatory resources to a larger extent than normative modes of self-presentation. In one study, researchers states that conventional gender roles implicate men as having to highlight their personal accomplishments and women their interpersonal skills. Going against this typical style will result in reduced self-regulatory resources and worse self-control. So when men had to presentment themselves by focusing on their interpersonal skills and women who presented themselves in terms of their personal accomplishments showed poorer performance in subsequent tasks than participants who presented themselves in accordance with gender roles. Other studies show that impression formation processes may also leave people prone to self-regulatory failure.

Weakened self-regulation

Conscious self-regulation may be especially relevant in dyadic settings where the stakes are high, like when people are confronted with fundraisers, politicians or other influence agents that want something from them. These are often situations in which the target’s limited resources are easily drained and the person will become particularly susceptible to an influence attempt. Almost all compliance-gaining procedures that influence professionals use, share one key feature: the presence of multiple decision moments or sequential requests. You’ve probably already heard of the foot-in-the-door technique. This starts with a small request and it is followed by a larger target request. Consciously attending and responding to these initial requests drains self-regulatory resources. The resulting state of regulatory resource depletion then increases the chances of compliance through the use of decisional heuristics that are embedded in the influence context.

Interpersonal benefits of good self-control

When you view personal relationships, you can think about the importance of self-control for overriding selfish and self-interested impulses, focusing attention on one’s partner and not attractive alternatives and being emotionally restrained. Failing to adhere to the standards of one’s relationship partners can lead to social rejection and it is therefore beneficial to exert self-control in interpersonal relations. One study indicated that suppressing emotions was more demanding and required more self-regulatory resources than not engaging in emotional suppression. These people exhibited less loyalty to their partners and showed more constructive behaviour than people not suppressing emotions. Self-control has a beneficial impact on relationships through diminishing the self-serving bias. This bias occurs when people give themselves credit for good outcomes but blame outside factors for bad outcomes. This bias is problematic in intimate relationships and has been linked to relationship dissolution. One study showed that people who had to suppress their emotions and thus had their self-regulatory resources depleted gave less credit to their partner when they received positive feedback for building a structure with blocks. They also said that the partner had a larger role when the outcome of the building was bad. Overriding the desire to attribute good events to oneself and bad events to others requires self-regulatory resources and when there are not many resources available, relationship damaging behaviour can occur.

Some researchers claim that social life comes with an implicit contract. This contract involves an exchange between the individual and society. The society will obviously benefit from harmonious relations among people and the individual will benefit through gaining social inclusion. People must suppress selfish impulses and conform to social norms and they in return expect to be rewarded with social acceptance. This means that being good at self-control ought to yield social benefits. This bargain will not always go through. Individuals can fail to regulate selfish tendencies or society can fail to reward a person for self-control. What happens then? At the individual level, when a person fails to regulate selfish urges, the result can be rejection, unemployment or imprisonment. When society fails to adhere to its part of the bargain, the person may respond by failing to self-regulate. Studies also support this. Studies showed that participants who were socially rejected demonstrated less self-control than those who were socially accepted. According to the implicit bargain theory, failure to self-regulate would occur because the person perceives self-control effects as futile. However, there are also studies that show that social rejection does not necessarily decrease executive performance. Social acceptance does also not always enhance executive performance.

Gains from losing self-control

Most research on self-control focuses on the positive benefits of self-control. Resisting impulses to eat too much, gamble or show aggression have been linked to positive outcomes, like healthier lifestyles and interpersonal relationships. Self-regulation improves the chances of attaining goals in these domains. But, even good self-control can lead to negative outcomes. Researchers suggest that people sometimes engage in personally-harmful behaviours as a route to social acceptance. Despite not wanting to perform an adverse behaviour, people sometimes can do just that because they perceive it will enhance social acceptance. Engaging in behaviour that the person finds aversive requires self-control insofar as the person must override the initial impulses to avoid the behaviour. There is physical discomfort that comes from binge eating and most people find this aversive enough that they stop eating long before their stomach becomes painfully full. Most people will find binge eating aversive. However, binge eating has been linked with being popular in some social circles. This is also the case for alcohol. Initially, the taste of alcohol is aversive to the senses by many adolescents drink as a means of social acceptance from peers. This is also the case for drugs. Delinquent behaviour like graffiti and property damage can also be boosted by pressure from peers. When somebody sees his friend engage in delinquent behaviour, he or she may be more willing to show this behaviour as well. People want social approval from friends. A silent signal of approval can elicit delinquent behaviours among adolescents because it is paired with interpersonal inclusion.

What is this article about?

Research shows that the most common perpetrators of evil are caused by friends. However, little further research has been done into this. That is why the writers in this article discuss the special features of friendships that differentiate hurt or injury in relationships between friends from such experiences in other personal relationships that we find important.

The writers present three lines of evidence which, according to them, show that there is an urgent need for more systematic investigation into forgiveness and revenge in friendships. Which three?

The writers then mention the following three guidelines:

1. Friendships are one of the most common contexts in which people are confronted with offenses, provocations, betrayal and other aversive experiences;
2. More than in other forms of relationships, wrongdoing can be more difficult to forgive and generate a greater desire for revenge when they occur between friends;
3. Friendships are unique, they differ from other important interpersonal relationships in that they are, for example, relatively free from obligatory ties, duties and other relationships.

Themes in friendship: violation, forgiveness and revenge

What is this article about?

Research shows that the most common perpetrators of evil are caused by friends. However, little further research has been done into this. That is why the writers in this article discuss the special features of friendships that differentiate hurt or injury in relationships between friends from such experiences in other personal relationships that we find important.

Why do writers find friendship an important theme?

Usually friendships are deeply intimate and therefore they are often subject to specific and often strict rules of conduct. In this article the writers zoom in deeper into the characteristics of the victim, the friendship and the violations that are likely to promote or not allow forgiveness and / or revenge. In particular, the writers in this article also consider the role of gender, such as homosexual and cross-sex friendships.

The writers present three lines of evidence which, according to them, show that there is an urgent need for more systematic investigation into forgiveness and revenge in friendships. Which three?

The writers then mention the following three guidelines:

1. Friendships are one of the most common contexts in which people are confronted with offenses, provocations, betrayal and other aversive experiences;
2. More than in other forms of relationships, wrongdoing can be more difficult to forgive and generate a greater desire for revenge when they occur between friends;
3. Friendships are unique, they differ from other important interpersonal relationships in that they are, for example, relatively free from obligatory ties, duties and other relationships.

Which characteristics of a victim do writers discuss?

The writers explain that victims can have different characteristics. Reliable predictors of forgiveness at the level of broad personality dimensions are a variation in acceptability, emotional stability and honesty and humility. The opposite often predicts the level of revenge.

Is narcissism a potentially valuable predictor of forgiveness and revenge?

The writers think so. Narcissists are less forgiving and are more opposed to their own forgiveness. They are more concerned about her personal costs and less convinced of her moral accuracy. In addition, they are often much more demanding of those who have harmed them.

What is the verb between dedication and forgiveness, according to the writers?

Allocation can be associated with forgiveness in various theoretical and practical ways. In this way dedication promotes forgiveness. The higher the dedication, the more inclined we are to forgive someone for his offenses. Dedication also moderates on the impact of forgiveness on psychological well-being. Finally, forgiveness can also help maintain engagement with the partner, with the exception of serious violations.

What gender differences in friendship rules do writers discuss?

The writers suggest that when it comes to violations that violate fundamental friendship, this has more effect on girls than on boys. Moreover, girls have higher expectations of loyalty and commitment than boys. This is especially important in their childhood and adolescence.

What differences and similarities do writers discuss when it comes to same-sex friendships?

Women have higher standards for their friendships compared to men. Women also have more criticism of violations of norms in friendships compared to men. This especially comes to the fore when the subject of transgression was related to trust and intimacy. Women also attach more importance to intimacy and closeness in friendships in comparison with men. A possible explanation for these differences between men and women is that women have less power in society than men. This may make them more dependent on their skills, for example for support. According to evolutionary psychology, this can also be caused by carrying and raising children. In times of need, they need more close ties with other women.

What differences and similarities do writers discuss when it comes to cross-sex friendships?

Cross-sex friendships both intimacy, companionship and social and emotional support, just like same-sex friendships. Yet there are also differences. They are free from a number of competitive tendencies inherent in same-sex characteristics and naturally offer a view of the world of the opposite sex. They can contain an undercurrent of romantic and / or sexual tension. This can jeopardize friendship. Men in particular indicate that they feel more attractive to the girlfriend compared to women. However, when people are not involved in a romantic relationship, they have higher expectations of their same-sex friends.

The writers cite three considerations that they believe should serve as a guide for investigating responses to acts of wrongdoing by friends. Which three?

The writers mention these three considerations:

1. In their studies of forgiveness and revenge, investigations should in particular embrace the considerable diversity that characterizes friendships;
2. Investigations should focus more on the offender / revenge taker who does harm to the victim than to the victims (most investigations focus on this);
3. Investigations should focus more on the comparison of forgiveness and revenge between different types of relationships, such as friendships and romantic relationships. This with the aim of getting clear which variables and processes are important within the context of a relationship and in other relationship situations.

What conclusion do the writers draw at the end of this article?

The writers draw the conclusion that in today's Western society, friendships can have a greater meaning in people's lives than ever before. This is caused by demographic changes, such as falling marriage rates and the resulting increase in the number of single people. But the conclusion is that there may be more causes behind it. Such as shifts in gender relationships and patterns of family structure.

According to the writers, is it important that even more research is done into friendships?

The writers of this article claim it is. The attractiveness to study friendships can increase because friendships are becoming increasingly important in people's lives than in the past. Potential damage that violations, betrayal and the like can cause in friendships increases the urgency to investigate friendships. From this we can learn how people deal with acts of injury and offenses committed by their friends, or by themselves committed against their friends.

According to the writers, what findings prove that gratitude is important for the successful maintenance of intimate bonds?

The writers name three studies. They indicate that several studies show that people who feel more valued by their romantic partners also have more appreciation for their partners. Then they also respond better to the needs of their partners. This is apparent from the first investigation. The second study shows that when partners are more committed, these relationships last longer. The results of the third study show that more appreciative partners, outside of their relationship, are also perceived by others as more responsive and committed.

What are the most important concepts in this article?

The most important concepts in this article are gratitude, appreciation, romantic relationships, risk regulation and relationship management.

About gratitude and intimate bonds

What is the reason for this article?

The writers use a combination of literature about gratitude and risk regulation to test a new process model of gratitude and relationship management. For this they use cross-sectional, daily experience and observational and longitudinal methods.

According to the writers, what findings prove that gratitude is important for the successful maintenance of intimate bonds?

The writers name three studies. They indicate that several studies show that people who feel more valued by their romantic partners also have more appreciation for their partners. Then they also respond better to the needs of their partners. This is apparent from the first investigation. The second study shows that when partners are more committed, these relationships last longer. The results of the third study show that more appreciative partners, outside of their relationship, are also perceived by others as more responsive and committed.

What are the most important concepts in this article?

The most important concepts in this article are gratitude, appreciation, romantic relationships, risk regulation and relationship management.

The writers claim that valuation influences the maintenance of relationships through a multi-step process. Which paths are named?

The first three paths in the model are about predictions regarding valuation and relationship maintenance as an intrapersonal process. Path A shows that the feeling that is appreciated by the partner leads to someone feeling more appreciation for his or her partner. Path B shows that an increased appreciation increases the desire to maintain the relationship. This is an important mechanism that leads to more relationship management. This is reflected in path C. The other two paths, path D and path E, contain the representation of interpersonal transfer of appreciation in dyadic relationships. For example, path D shows that people who feel more valued by their partner when they engage in relationship preservation behavior. In the last path, path E, it emerges that maintenance behaviors are a critical mechanism by which we notice feelings of appreciation between the different partners.

What is the risk regulation system for?

This system helps people investigate through conflicts between possible rejections and improve intimacy. It helps identify when self-protection is needed and when a relationship must be defended. The basic principle of the risk regulation system is the idea that when a feeling is assessed positively by a partner, we are more likely to take a risk. Appreciative feelings, on the other hand, are a reminder of the inherent value and value of a partner. These two assessment aspects together is what influences people to maintain a relationship.

Why did the writers use a dual structure?

Because there is a strong correlation between the two subscales of the AIR scale, they claimed that a model with two factors was better than a valuation model with only one factor. Therefore, they performed a series of confirmatory factor analyzes, using AMOS 18. The result was that a model with two factors had a significantly better fit, than a model with only one factor, and moreover yielded a more generally acceptable fit.

What conclusions do writers draw from the results of their first study?

In the first study, the authors examined three components of their proposed model, or paths A to C. They did this by assessing the relationship between appreciation and responsiveness. For this they used a combined cross-sectional and a 14-day daily experience study of individuals in a romantic relationship. They investigated associations between appreciation and responsiveness in two different ways. For the first method they used the AIR scale and for the second method they used lagging analyzes. The daily part was crucial because they were able to assess the temporal order of their model. They were able to do this by examining changes in valuation and relationship management per day. According to the writers, the first study provides evidence for both transversal and daily experience data for the first three paths of their proposed model. The value of the partner increases the desire to maintain the relationship. This can even go so far that people tailor the needs of their partner to their own priorities. Appreciative people are more satisfied, which makes them more willing to maintain valued relationships.

What conclusions do the authors draw from the results of their second study?

In their second study, the writers focused on the relationship between valuation and relationship management. They test whether the appreciative feelings could predict the stability of relationships over time. They again found evidence that appreciation was an important component for maintaining the relationship. For example, people who appreciated their partner more were more committed to maintaining their relationship. This study also provided evidence that appreciation not only influences how we think and act in a relationship, but also whether we are willing to stay in the relationship over the longer term.

Emoties spelen een belangrijke rol binnen het groepsleven. Veel gebeurtenissen die binnen of buiten groepen plaatsvinden kunnen bepaalde emoties oproepen bij groepsleden doordat ze individuele of groepsgebaseerde belangen betreffen. Emoties die in een groepscontext worden opgeroepen blijven vaak niet privé. Meestal komen ze, bewust of onbewust, tot uitdrukking in gezichtsuitdrukkingen, lichaamshouding, stemtoon, etc.. Wanneer een groepslid dus bepaalde emoties opwekt bij andere groepsleden, kan die expressie van emotie hem iets vertellen over hoe de anderen zich voelen met betrekking tot de situatie. Op deze manier beïnvloeden de groepsleden elkaar continu. Helaas heeft de wetenschap nog niet goed gekeken naar hoe het gedrag van een individu wordt beïnvloed door de emotionele expressies van andere groepsleden. In dit onderzoek wil men kijken wat het effect is van de emotionele expressie van de meerderheid op de neiging van de individu om door te gaan met het deviante gedrag of om zich te conformeren aan de meerderheid. Hierbij focust men op twee emoties, te weten blijdschap en boosheid.

Wat is het sociaal-functioneel perspectief?

Volgens het sociaal-functioneel perspectief hebben emoties bepaalde functies in groepen, en ook tussen groepen. Geuite emoties beïnvloeden het gedrag van andere individuen of groepen via affectieve (bijvoorbeeld emotionele besmetting) of inferentiële processen. Aan de hand van inferentiële processen kunnen individuen uit de emotionele expressies van anderen informatie verkrijgen over de motieven en intenties van die anderen.

Wat is de verhouding tussen deviantie en groepsdoelen?

Deviantie wordt gedefinieerd als elk gedrag of expressie van een idee of mening die bewust of onbewust afwijkt van de gedragingen en meningen van de meerderheid. Er zijn een aantal interessante tegenstellingen met betrekking tot deviantie en groepen:

• Deviantie gebeurt soms bewust, soms onbewust. Onbewuste deviantie vindt al gauw plaats, omdat de voorkeuren van een individu niet altijd te hoeven overeenkomen met die van de groep. Daarbij vinden sommige individuen het prettig om anders te zijn dan de rest en zijn ze bewust deviant zonder de groep volledig te verlaten.

• Deviantie wordt soms geaccepteerd, soms afgewezen. Deviantie wordt zeer vaak door de groep afgewezen, wat kan leiden tot bijvoorbeeld pesten en fysieke uitsluiting. Soms probeert men om de deviante individu te hersocialiseren.

• Deviantie is soms nadelig voor het bereiken van de groepsdoelen, en soms juist vereist. In sommige situaties is deviantie zelfs nodig (denk aan groepsdoelen die creativiteit vereisen), terwijl het in andere situaties het bereiken van de groepsdoelen in de weg staat (denk aan het verlangzamen van de besluitvorming).

Om effectief om te kunnen gaan met deviantie moet de groep in staat zijn om deviantie te reguleren. Het idee hier is dat de uitingen van blijdschap of boosheid van de groep een sociale functie kunnen vervullen, doordat blijdschap de deviantie kan aanmoedigen terwijl boosheid mogelijk kan leiden tot de conformiteit van het deviante individu.

Wat is de relatie tussen blijdschap en boosheid?

De verwachting is dat deviante individuen de emotionele expressie van de meerderheid over het gedrag van het individu gebruiken om informatie af te leiden over hun positie in de groep, welke het individu vervolgens kan aanmoedigen om zijn gedrag te veranderen. Zo kan bijvoorbeeld boosheid en blijdschap aan een deviant groepslid worden geuit, en deze kan daaruit informatie afleiden over zijn inclusionary status. Met betrekking tot de expressies van boosheid en blijheid van de meerderheid aan het deviant groepslid worden twee verwachtingen geuit:

• Wanneer de meerderheid met blijdschap reageert op het deviante gedrag van het individu, zal de individu zich aangemoedigd voelen en het gevoel hebben een veilige positie te hebben binnen de groep. Dit is gebaseerd op verschillende onderzoeksresultaten. Zo wordt blijdschap vaak geassocieerd met doelcongruentie, veiligheid en goede sociale relaties.

• Wanneer de meerderheid met boosheid reageert op het deviante gedrag van het individu, zal de individu zich afgewezen voelen door de groep. Dit is gebaseerd op onderzoek dat laat zien dat boosheid vaak gerelateerd is aan pogingen om iemands gedrag te veranderen, sociale afstand, onveiligheid en een onzekere positie in de groep.

Wat is de rol van conformiteit?

De reactie van de meerderheid kan de individu aanmoedigen om ofwel deviant te blijven, of om te conformeren. Door te conformeren kan de individu weer het gevoel krijgen bij de groep te horen. Conformiteit wordt gedefinieerd als de handeling van het veranderen van het deviante gedrag op zo’n manier dat het meer in overeenstemming komt met de groepsnorm. Conformiteit betreft een beweging in de richting van de groepsnorm. Het geeft de individu een kans om te laten zien dat hij betrokken is bij de identiteit van de groep, en de groepsleden zullen niet langer een bedreiging voor die identiteit ervaren. Conformiteit kan op die manier worden gezien als een gedragsstrategie om acceptatie van de groep te verwerven. Uit onderzoek kan worden afgeleid dat conformiteit plaatsvindt wanneer een individu zich afgewezen voelt, gemotiveerd is om acceptatie te zoeken in een bepaalde groep, en wanneer conformiteit tot acceptatie zal leiden omdat het zowel gezien als gewaardeerd wordt door de groep.

Wat voor theorie is hierover ontstaan?

Het theoretische model in dit onderzoek begint met de eerder genoemde hypothese (zie blijdschap en boosheid). Vervolgens beïnvloedt deze subjectieve interpretatie van de emotionele expressie van de groep het gedrag van het individu. Wanneer de groep met blijdschap reageert zal dit de individu niet aanmoedigen om zijn gedrag te veranderen of voor meer deviant gedrag zorgen. Wanneer de groep met boosheid reageert kan dat de individu motiveren om zijn sense of belonging te herstellen en zich te conformeren. Of een deviant individu zich conformeert of niet hangt af van de mate waarin a) de deviante persoon is gemotiveerd om zijn acceptatie terug te winnen, en b) conformiteit dat kan bewerkstelligen of niet. Dit is in vijf studies onderzocht.

Studie 1

In de eerste studie werd de relatie tussen de emoties van de meerderheid en de gevoelende acceptatie of afwijzing van het deviante individu onderzocht. Uit de resultaten blijkt dat het deviante individu zich minder geaccepteerd (meer afgewezen) voelt wanneer de groepsmeerderheid boosheid uit. Ook voelt het deviante individu zich meer geaccepteerd (minder afgewezen) wanneer de groepsmeerderheid blijheid uit. Niet alle negatieve emotionele reacties leiden tot gevoelens van afwijzing, want er blijkt ook dat wanneer de groepsmeerderheid teleurgesteld in plaats van boos reageert, het deviante individu zich niet meer afgewezen voelt.

Studie 2

In de tweede studie werd bekeken of de emoties die door de groepsmeerderheid worden geuit de keuze tussen conformeren en het verlaten van de groep beïnvloeden. De hypothese is dat deze keuze afhankelijk is van de beschikbaarheid van alternatieve groepen om zich bij aan te sluiten. Als er alternatieven beschikbaar zijn, is de kans op het verlaten van de groep hoger voor de individuen die een boze reactie hebben gekregen (en zich meer afgewezen voelen) dan voor de individuen die een blijde reactie hebben gekregen (en zich meer geaccepteerd voelen). Als er geen alternatieve groepen beschikbaar zijn, zullen de individuen bij de groep blijven, ongeacht of zij zich afgewezen voelen of niet. De hypothesen worden in dit onderzoek bevestigd. Opvallend is dat na een blijde reactie, de deviante individuen zich vaak alsnog gingen conformeren. Dit zou kunnen betekenen dat de blijde reactie van de groepsmeerderheid leidt tot een verhoogd verlangen om in de groep te blijven, in plaats van een verlangen om acceptatie terug te winnen.

Studie 3

In de derde studie is bekeken in welke situaties de emotionele expressies van de meerderheid er toe leiden dat deviante individuen zich conformeren als gevolg van subjectieve gevoelens van acceptatie of afwijzing. In coöperatieve settings is gecoördineerde actie nodig om de groepsdoelen te bereiken, en deviantie kan het bereiken van dat doel in de weg staan. Dus met name in coöperatieve settings kan een individu bewijzen dat hij een goed groepslid is door zich te conformeren. De hypothese is dat gevoelens van afwijking leiden tot conformering wanneer het individu de situatie als coöperatief beschouwd, maar niet wanneer deze de situatie als competitief beschouwd. Deze hypothese wordt bevestigd. In situaties die als meer coöperatief worden beschouwd, wordt meer druk ervaren om te conformeren wanneer men meer boosheid en minder blijdschap ervaart. Deze relatie wordt gemedieerd door gevoelens van afwijking en wordt niet gevonden in competitieve situaties.

Studie 4

In de vierde studie werd onderzocht of boosheid, wanneer geuit in een coöperatieve setting, kan leiden tot conformiteit door het opwekken van gevoelens van afwijzing. Er werd een experiment uitgevoerd waarin een groep van drie participanten een probleem moesten oplossen. Twee van de leden kregen instructies om met blijheid of boosheid te reageren op een idee van de derde participant. Er werd ook gebruik gemaakt van een non-emotionele conditie, waarbij de participanten de instructies kregen om geen emotie uit te drukken. Conformiteit werd geoperationaliseerd als de relatieve invloed van de derde participant (wanneer geconfronteerd met een blijde of boze meerderheid) op de uitkomst van de groepstaak. De hypothese is dat wanneer het individu wordt geconfronteerd met een boze meerderheid hij zich afgewezen zal voelen, en zich zal conformeren. De invloed van de twee boze groepsleden zou dan relatief hoog moeten zijn vergeleken met de relatieve invloed van het individu. De deviante individuen die te maken hebben met een boze meerderheid hebben dus relatief minder invloed in hun groep dan de deviante individuen die te maken hebben met een blijde meerderheid of de deviante individuen in de non-emotionele conditie.

Deze verwachting werd door het onderzoek bevestigd. Er moet vermeld worden dat wanneer de meerderheid met blijdschap reageerde, de resultaten gemengd waren. Dit zou kunnen komen doordat ze in de non-emotionele setting niet in staat waren hun blijdschap te verbergen, waardoor de deviante individuen alsnog blijdschap ervoeren. Dit wijst op de moeilijkheid van het hebben van een non-emotionele categorie in een naturalistische setting. Met betrekking tot de relatieve invloed wordt de conformiteitinterpretatie bevestigd. Hier kan echter over worden opgemerkt dat de deviante individuen mogelijk gebruik hebben gemaakt van een passieve strategie. Omdat de deviante individuen zich niet fysiek konden terugtrekken uit de situatie hebben zij zich geconformeerd. Dit wordt conformiteit door omissie genoemd.

Studie 5

In de laatste studie werd een experiment uitgevoerd waarin maximale experimentele controle mogelijk was en waarin conformiteit direct kon worden gemeten. Ook werd gecontroleerd voor de invloed van de prototypischheid van het individu. Prototypischheid verwijst naar de mate waarin een lid kenmerken van groepslidmaatschap heeft. Prototypische groepsleden hebben vaak een centrale positie in de groep en zijn zekerder van hun positie. Niet-prototypische groepsleden bevinden zich meer aan de buitenkant van de groep en zijn drukker met het beheren van de groepsgrenzen en het behouden van hun positie. De verwachting is dat periferische groepsleden zich meer conformeren bij een boze meerderheidsreactie (als er geen alternatieve groepen beschikbaar zijn), omdat zij zich meer bezig houden met het verkrijgen van acceptatie van de groep. Prototypische leden worden minder beïnvloedt door de mening van de meerderheid, omdat ze al een stabiele positie hebben. Deze verwachtingen worden in het onderzoek bevestigd. Ook bleek dat de conformiteit stabiel was over tijd, en dat na een aantal weken de individuen zich nog altijd conformeren aan de groepsnorm.

Wat voor algemene discussie is hierover ontstaan?

De theorie over de eerder genoemde sociale functies van emoties wordt in dit onderzoek bevestigd. In de literatuur wordt onderscheid gemaakt tussen drie sociale functies van emoties op het groepsniveau:

• Collectief gedeelde emoties helpen individuen bij het identificeren van de groepsgrenzen en groepsleden.

• Emoties helpen de individuen bij het definiëren van en onderhandelen over de groepsrollen en groepsstatussen.

• Collectief emotioneel gedrag helpt groepen bij het oplossen van problemen.

Uit het onderzoek blijkt dat emotionele expressies van de meerderheid gevolgen hebben voor de gepercipieerde status van het deviante individu, wat weer invloed heeft op de groepsgrenzen. Ook wordt bevestigd dat de emoties functioneel werken bij het reguleren van het gedrag van de groepsleden om groepsdoelen te kunnen bereiken. De effectiviteit van boosheid om verandering teweeg te brengen bij deviante groepsleden is afhankelijk van een aantal situationele factoren, waaronder de gepercipieerde competitiviteit van de situatie en de mate waarin een deviant groepslid prototypisch is.