Navigating the social world: Shared horizontal and vertical evaluative dimensions

Abele-Brehm, Andrea; Ellemers, Naomi; S, Fiske; Koch, Amy; Yzerbyt, Vincent

doi:10.31234/osf.io/b5nq6

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Altogether, a number of resulting insights illuminated the processes of social evaluation (catalysts, antecedents, consequences) as well as the functions (e.g., social comparison, judgment accuracy, self and ingroup esteem, and guiding interaction). The integrative alignments-and remaining disagreements-are generating research as well as having practical significance (59).…”

Section: Box 1 Controversies and Alignment Of Five Competing Models mentioning

confidence: 99%

Adversarial alignment enables competing models to engage in cooperative theory building toward cumulative science

Ellemers

Abele²,

Koch

et al. 2020

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crises in science concern not only methods, statistics, and results but also, theory development. Beyond the indispensable refinement of tools and procedures, resolving crises would also benefit from a deeper understanding of the concepts and processes guiding research. Usually, theories compete, and some lose, incentivizing destruction of seemingly opposing views. This does not necessarily contribute to accumulating insights, and it may incur collateral damage (e.g., impairing cognitive processes and collegial relations). To develop a more constructive model, we built on adversarial collaboration, which integrates incompatible results into agreed-on new empirical research to test competing hypotheses [D. Kahneman,Am. Psychol.58, 723–730 (2003)]. Applying theory and evidence from the behavioral sciences, we address the group dynamic complexities of adversarial interactions between scientists. We illustrate the added value of considering these in an “adversarial alignment” that addressed competing conceptual frameworks from five different theories of social evaluation. Negotiating a joint framework required two preconditions and several guidelines. First, we reframed our interactions from competitive rivalry to cooperative pursuit of a joint goal, and second, we assumed scientific competence and good intentions, enabling cooperation toward that goal. Then, we applied five rules for successful multiparty negotiations: 1) leveling the playing field, 2) capitalizing on curiosity, 3) producing measurable progress, 4) working toward mutual gain, and 5) being aware of the downside alternative. Together, these guidelines can encourage others to create conditions that allow for theoretical alignments and develop cumulative science.

show abstract

Section: Box 1 Controversies and Alignment Of Five Competing Models mentioning

confidence: 99%

Adversarial alignment enables competing models to engage in cooperative theory building toward cumulative science

Ellemers

Abele²,

Koch

et al. 2020

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Framework for the Emotional Psychology of Group Membership

Davis

Kelly

2021

Rev.Phil.Psych.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The vast literature on negative treatment of outgroups and favoritism toward ingroups provides many local insights but is largely fragmented, lacking an overarching framework that might provide a unified overview and guide conceptual integration. As a result, it remains unclear where different local perspectives conflict, how they may reinforce one another, and where they leave gaps in our knowledge of the phenomena. Our aim is to start constructing a framework to help remedy this situation. We first identify a few key ideas for creating a theoretical roadmap for this complex territory, namely the principles of etiological functionalism and the dual inheritance theory of human evolution. We show how a "molecular" approach to emotions fits into this picture, and use it to illuminate emotions that shape intergroup relations. Finally, we weave the pieces together into the beginnings of a systematic taxonomy of the emotions involved in social interactions, both hostile and friendly. While it is but a start, we have developed the argument in a way that illustrates how the foundational principles of our proposed framework can be extended to accommodate further cases.

show abstract

Q-SpAM: How to Efficiently Measure Similarity in Online Research

Koch

Speckmann

Unkelbach

2020

Sociological Methods & Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring the similarity of stimuli is of great interest to a variety of social scientists. Spatial arrangement by dragging and dropping “more similar” targets closer together on the computer screen is a precise and efficient method to measure stimulus similarity. We present Qualtrics-spatial arrangement method (Q-SpAM), a feature-rich and user-friendly online version of spatial arrangement. Combined with crowdsourcing platforms, Q-SpAM provides fast and affordable access to similarity data even for large stimulus sets. Participants may spatially arrange up to 100 words or images, randomly selected targets, self-selected targets, self-generated targets, and targets self-marked in different colors. These and other Q-SpAM features can be combined. We exemplify how to collect, process, and visualize similarity data with Q-SpAM and provide R and Excel scripts to do so. We then illustrate Q-SpAM’s versatility for social science, concluding that Q-SpAM is a reliable and valid method to measure the similarity of lots of stimuli with little effort.

show abstract

Navigating the social world: Shared horizontal and vertical evaluative dimensions

Cited by 3 publications

References 121 publications

Adversarial alignment enables competing models to engage in cooperative theory building toward cumulative science

Adversarial alignment enables competing models to engage in cooperative theory building toward cumulative science

A Framework for the Emotional Psychology of Group Membership

Q-SpAM: How to Efficiently Measure Similarity in Online Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About