2718 research outputs found
Sort by
Inaugural editorial
Get PDFThe commencement of a new editorial tenure within the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cognition (JPSP: ASC) provides an opportunity for reflection regarding the journal's core mission. The editors recognize that social psychology is at a crossroads due to competing demands that may have led to reduced submissions and posed challenges for previous editors in filling the journal's pages. Now, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cognition (JPSP: ASC) has been allotted more pages to allow for growth during this editorial term. Although this is desirable for the field, it adds to the pressure of identifying articles for publication given the difficulties filling the pages during previous editorial terms. As the premier outlet of social psychology since 1965, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cognition (JPSP: ASC) will retain its centrality if we increase submissions and publish more articles, while continuing to strive to communicate methodologically trustworthy, intellectually stimulating, and socially relevant research, in a responsible fashion
What drives disagreement about moral hypocrisy? Perceived comparability and how people exploit it to criticize enemies and defend allies
Get PDFCharges of hypocrisy are usually thought to be to be damning. Yet when a hypocrisy charge is made, there often remains disagreement about whether or not its target really is a hypocrite. Why? Three pre-registered experiments (N = 2,599) conceptualize and test the role of perceived comparability in evaluating hypocrisy. Calling someone a hypocrite typically entails invoking a comparison—one meant to highlight internal contradiction and cast moral character into question. Yet there is ambiguity about which sorts of comparisons are valid in the first place. We argue that disagreements about moral hypocrisy often boil down to disagreements about comparability. Although the comparability of two situations should not depend on whose behavior is being scrutinized, observers shift comparability judgments in line with social motives to criticize or defend. In short, we identify a cognitive factor that can help to explain why, for similar patterns of behavior, people see hypocrisy in their enemies but consistency in themselves and their allies
Choice-Learn: Large-scale choice modeling for operational contexts through the lens of machine learning
Get PDFDiscrete choice models aim at predicting choice decisions made by individuals from a menu of alternatives, called an assortment. Well-known use cases include predicting a commuter’s choice of transportation mode or a customer’s purchases. Choice models are able to handle assortment variations, when some alternatives become unavailable or when their features change in different contexts. This adaptability to different scenarios allows these models to be used as inputs for optimization problems, including assortment planning or pricing
Platform governance in the presence of within-complementor interdependencies: evidence from the rideshare industry
Get PDFExisting studies suggest that platform access restrictions may cause restricted complementors to switch to competing platforms, which will increase complement quantity on competing platforms. We re-examine this prediction by accounting for the impact of economies of scope on complementor responses to platform access restriction. We argue that restricting a complementor’s access on a platform may prevent it from achieving economies of scope from multi-homing, thereby incentivizing it to abandon both the restricted and (unrestricted) competing platforms. Using rideshare data in New York City, we compare the numbers of trips made by Lyft and Uber drivers, respectively, before and after Lyft restricted drivers’ access on its platform. We find that Lyft’s access restriction reduced trip numbers not only on the Lyft platform but also on the Uber platform. In addition, both Lyft’s and Uber’s trip numbers decreased not only during the restricted low-demand periods (e.g., non-rush hours) but also during the unrestricted high-demand periods (e.g., rush hours). In contrast, after a substantial number of multi-homing drivers left both platforms following Lyft’s access restriction, a subsequent access restriction by Uber led to an increase in trip numbers on the Lyft platform. These results highlight the importance of accounting for interdependencies across complementor activities when designing platform governance policies
Minkowski Centers via Robust Optimization: Computation and Applications
Get PDFCenters of convex sets are geometric objects that have received extensive attention in the mathematical and optimization literature, both from a theoretical and practical standpoint. For instance, they serve as initialization points for many algorithms such as interior-point, hit-and-run, or cutting-planes methods. First, we observe that computing a Minkowski center of a convex set can be formulated as the solution of a robust optimization problem. As such, we can derive tractable formulations for computing Minkowski centers of polyhedra and convex hulls. Computationally, we illustrate that using Minkowski centers, instead of analytic or Chebyshev centers, improves the convergence of hit-and-run and cutting-plane algorithms. We also provide efficient numerical strategies for computing centers of the projection of polyhedra and of the intersection of two ellipsoids
Better together: member proactivity is better for team performance when aligned with conscientiousness
Get PDFProactivity, the tendency to create change in the work environment, typically improves team performance. This relationship is far from perfect, however. We explore inconsistencies in the team proactivity literature to shed light on an important question – when is member proactivity beneficial or dysfunctional for teams? First, we consider the composition of member proactivity at the team level and whether a simple ‘more is better’ heuristic neglects a more complex relationship linking member proactivity to team coordination and performance. Second, we explore whether proactivity is better when aligned with another individual difference focused on the propensity to plan and coordinate with others (i.e., conscientiousness). In two studies, we compare traditional additive and configurational compositional approaches to these two attributes with a new attribute alignment approach, allowing us to examine the co-occurrence of proactivity and conscientiousness within some team members relative to others. First, we find that team member proactivity-conscientiousness alignment (P-C alignment) predicts the performance of MBA consulting teams better than the other team composition models we considered. Then, we replicate this finding in a laboratory simulation, finding that it occurs because P-C alignment improves team coordination. Our results demonstrate that member proactivity is most effective for the team when it aligns with conscientiousness
When it pays to be clear: the appeal of concrete communication under uncertainty
Get PDFThis research demonstrates that the persuasiveness of concrete versus abstract communication in advertisers’ promotional messages depends on how (un)certain people feel. Three lab experiments and one study conducted in a natural setting provide converging evidence that uncertainty (versus certainty) increases the appeal of products advertised concretely (i.e., more specific, tangible, less open to interpretation) rather than abstractly, while keeping content similar. We demonstrate the effect across different types of uncertainty, product ads and slogans, three different languages, and a range of products, increasing the external validity of the findings. The results indicate that the effectiveness of concrete communication is critically determined by the level of (un)certainty people experience, which provides important insights for advertisers and communication officers
Too Little, Too Late? How Policymakers and Regulators Respond to the Business Model Innovations of Digital Firms
Get PDFDigitally enabled firms such as Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta achieved rapid growth in part through business model innovations that challenged the existing norms and regulations of the markets they entered. Research has explored aspects of their norm-breaking behavior—for example, getting users to behave differently, or offering free services to forestall competitors. I focus on their tactics for getting through or around regulatory infrastructure designed to protect consumers and other stakeholders. Specifically, I examine the relationship between large digital firms and three sets of institutional structures—competition policy, employment law, and individual property rights. I identify three tactics firms have used to overcome potential resistance: some have finessed regulations by identifying gaps and inconsistencies they could take advantage of, some have sidestepped regulations by arguing that those regulations do not apply to their situation, and others have nullified those rules by denying their existence altogether. I discuss regulatory responses to these tactics, from providing a free pass on one extreme, to doubling down on existing rules on the other extreme, and negotiating a new set of rules in the middle. I conclude with thoughts on the role of institutional innovation in fostering economic development in the context of digital innovation
Developing theoretical insights in entrepreneurship research
No full textAs the study of entrepreneurship advances, our appreciation for the role of theory in the development of the field has grown. In this paper, we build on our collective experiences to offer a peek into the inner workings of entrepreneurship theorizing, using specific examples to highlight ways of developing theoretical insights for advancing entrepreneurship research. Our journeys suggest an iterative process centered on asking an important and interesting question, challenging prevailing assumptions, understanding context and phenomenon, and developing conceptual models and analyses. We focus on the uniqueness of entrepreneurial phenomena, contexts, and actors as well as the interdisciplinary nature of the fiel
Diversity Ideologies, Beliefs, and Climates: A Review, Integration, and Set of Recommendations
No full textInitiatives aimed at fostering diversity in organizations have become an increasingly common means for combatting inequality among demographic groups. There is growing recognition that the success of diversity initiatives is a function of not only the relatively concrete policies they include but also less visible factors, such as the diversity cognitions held by organizational members. Diversity cognitions—and particularly beliefs regarding how to approach diversity and its effects—have received significant scholarly attention and a variety of literatures conclude they are invisible, yet powerful, drivers of diversity, inclusion, and other desirable workplace outcomes. Nevertheless, different diversity cognitions are often studied in isolation of one another, which prevents a full understanding of their nature and outcomes. We review and integrate research on different cognitions regarding how to approach diversity and its effects, with the goal of identifying synergistic opportunities for guiding future research. To this end, we focus on three diversity cognitions: diversity ideologies, diversity beliefs, and diversity climates. We review similarities and differences in how these constructs are conceptualized and studied, as well as in their nomological networks of outcomes and antecedents. We then use our review to identify gaps in current understanding and generate recommendations for guiding future work. Our recommendations focus on enhanced construct clarity, nuance with regard to dimensionality, and understanding of outcomes and antecedents. Deeper understanding of beliefs regarding how to approach diversity and its effects is likely to provide new insight into strategies for fostering workplace diversity and inclusion and thereby help combat inequality