The accessibility of justice-related concepts can validate intentions to punish

Santos, David; Rivera, Reynaldo G.

doi:10.1080/15534510.2015.1031170

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, using SVT in the domain of stigmatized groups has proven to be a useful technique for reducing objectification (e.g., Briñol, Petty, & Belding, 2017), and for encouraging people to trust in their thoughts about hiring people from underrepresented groups such as those with mental challenges and physical disabilities (Requero et al, 2020). Furthermore, SVT studies have shown that the perceived validity of prejudice-relevant thoughts can be manipulated by providing participants with convergent (vs. divergent) evidence matching their thoughts (Clark et al, 2009, 2013), by highlighting the entitative nature of their groups (Clark & Thiem, 2015), and merely by priming the concept of justice (Santos & Rivera, 2015). In all of these SVT paradigms, thoughts were more likely to impact prejudiced attitudes under high (vs. low) validation conditions.…”

Section: Applications and New Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-validation theory: An integrative framework for understanding when thoughts become consequential.

Briñol¹,

Petty²

2022

Psychological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-validation theory (SVT) is introduced and presented as a series of six postulates. The core notion of SVT is that thoughts become more consequential for judgment and action as the perceived validity of the thoughts is increased. Instead of focusing on the objective accuracy of thoughts, self-validation research focuses on a subjective sense that one’s thoughts are valid or appropriate to use. People come to rely on any thought more when they perceive that thought is likely to be true (cognitive validation) or because they feel good about the thought (affective validation). Perceptions of thought validity are influenced by thought-relevant as well as incidental factors (e.g., one’s moods, sense of ease), and the impact of these factors can vary with their meaning. Individual and situational factors moderate when people rely on their assessments of validity and what thoughts are salient to validate. In short, SVT is a comprehensive and integrative framework from which to examine the use of thoughts across many seemingly diverse variables, outcomes, and domains in psychology. The theory is also relevant to understanding judgments in numerous applied contexts. By identifying moderators and mediators of thought validation processes and outcomes, SVT is capable of specifying when and why many different variables have an impact on judgments and actions.

show abstract

Section: Applications and New Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-validation theory: An integrative framework for understanding when thoughts become consequential.

Briñol¹,

Petty²

2022

Psychological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the perceived validity of these thoughts can be manipulated by other techniques such as having participants engage in confident (vs. doubtful) actions (e.g., Briñol, DeMarree, & Petty, ), or by empowerment (e.g., DeMarree, Briñol, & Petty, ; Gandarillas et al, ), or by activating confident emotions such as anger and disgust (Ashtom‐James & Tracy, ; Briñol, Petty, & Requero, ; Briñol et al, ; Hodson & Costello, ), or by providing them with convergent (vs. divergent) evidence matching their thoughts (Clark, Wegener, Briñol, & Petty, ; Clark et al, ), or by highlighting the entitativity nature of their groups (Clark & Thiem, ), or merely by priming the concept of justice (Santos & Rivera, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes toward hiring people with disabilities: A meta‐cognitive approach to persuasion

Requero¹,

Santos

Paredes

et al. 2020

J Applied Social Pyschol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attitudes toward hiring people with disabilities are becoming critical for promoting diversity and egalitarianism within organizations. The few interventions designed to promote positive attitudes toward people with disabilities have relied on changing either the direction and/or the amount of thoughts people generate with regard to this discriminated, understudied group. In the present research, we examine the impact of a different psychological process of attitude change based on meta‐cognition, or thinking about thinking. We used a meta‐cognitive approach to changing prejudiced attitudes because thoughtful processes are often overlooked or denied with regard to this particular group. Specifically, we explored the impact of thought confidence on attitude change across two studies designed to change attitudes toward the incorporation of people with disabilities in companies. In each study, participants first generated either positive or negative thoughts about the proposal (thought valence manipulation). Then, the confidence in those thoughts was measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Study 2). In concert with the self‐validation hypothesis, results showed that when thought confidence was relatively high (vs. low), thought valence had a greater impact on attitudes. Thus, thought valence was more predictive of attitudes when participants were confident in their thoughts. Specifically, confidence in thoughts enhanced persuasion for positive thoughts but reduced persuasion for negative thoughts. These findings provide insights into assessing effects of interventions aiming at improving attitudes toward the inclusion of minority groups in organizations.

show abstract

“…El tercer mecanismo posible, relacionado con el enfoque centrado en la auto-validación, podría ser que la injusticia reduzca la confianza de las personas en su propio criterio (Petty, Briñol, & Tormala, 2002; Santos & Rivera, 2015).…”

Section: ¿Provoca La Injusticia Una Disminución En El Rendimiento Cog...unclassified

“…A third possible mechanism, related to the self-validation approach, may be that injustice reduces people’s reliance on their judgements (Petty, Briñol, & Tormala, 2002; Santos & Rivera, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does injustice reduce cognitive performance? An experimental test / ¿Provoca la injusticia una disminución en el rendimiento cognitivo? Una prueba empírica

Correia

Lopes

Alcântara

et al. 2017

Revista de Psicología Social

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we report two experimental studies showing for the first time that injustice causes a reduction in cognitive performance in complex tasks. The two experiments (Study 1, N = 106, Study 2, N = 90) used two different paradigms. In Study 1 participants were exposed to injustice happening to other people. In Study 2 participants themselves were the targets of injustice. In both studies the dependent variable was cognitive performance in a complex task. Specifically, in Study 1 participants solved anagrams, and in Study 2 they solved several Raven matrices. The dependent measures were the number of anagrams and Raven matrices solved correctly. We found that cognitive performance was worse in the unjust condition compared to the just condition (i.e., fewer items solved correctly). These results imply that unfairness in everyday life may have a deleterious effect on individuals' capacity to think in a complex way. Possible mediators for this effect are proposed.

show abstract

The accessibility of justice-related concepts can validate intentions to punish

Cited by 10 publications

References 41 publications

Self-validation theory: An integrative framework for understanding when thoughts become consequential.

Self-validation theory: An integrative framework for understanding when thoughts become consequential.

Attitudes toward hiring people with disabilities: A meta‐cognitive approach to persuasion

Does injustice reduce cognitive performance? An experimental test / ¿Provoca la injusticia una disminución en el rendimiento cognitivo? Una prueba empírica

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About