Meat and interpersonal motives: the case of self-enhancement.

Meat eaters have a more hierarchical, less egalitarian view at the world than vegetarians. This can be manifested in social dominance orientation, at the intergroup level, but also at the interspecies level, yielding more empathy with nonhuman animals, and at the interpersonal level. We examined if interpersonal motives in human-human relationships and empathy with people are associated with frequency of meat eating, using a cross-sectional survey (N = 580). For the motives power and affiliation, no significant relationships emerged, but the self-enhancement motive was positively related to the number of days that participants ate meat. This predicted additional variance over and above variables at the intergroup and interspecies level, such as social dominance orientation and human-animal continuity. Empathy with people was negatively related to meat consumption, but this was explained by its correlation with empathy with animals. Discussion focuses on the importance of the self-enhancement motive in attachment to meat, the symbol of human superiority, as well as resistance to meat refusers.

A communicational approach to enhance open-mindedness towards meat-refusers.

Meat-refusers (vegetarians and vegans) are typically derogated by meat eaters because they threaten meat eaters' moral self-image. In two preregistered experiments (N = 323 and N = 243), we examined the effects of communication style on this 'do-gooder' derogation. For this purpose, we developed a paradigm to create moral threat in participants in an online study. Afterwards, participants read an essay of a meat-refuser that was either static, confident, and result-oriented; or dynamic, uncertain, and process-oriented. Dynamically communicating meat-refusers were found to elicit less moral threat and be evaluated as less arrogant than static targets. Regardless of communication, meat refusers with non-moral motives were also evaluated as less threatening and arrogant than ethical vegetarians and vegans. We propose that dynamic communication can improve relations between meat eaters and meat-refusers and, thereby, may eventually inspire meat eaters to decrease their meat consumption in the future.

Effects of a priori liking on the elicitation of mimicry.

Mimicry and prosocial feelings are generally thought to be positively related. However, the conditions under which mimicry and liking are related largely remain unspecified. We advance this specification by examining the relationship between mimicry and liking more thoroughly. In two experiments, we manipulated an individual's a priori liking for another and investigated whether it influenced mimicry of that person. Our experiments demonstrate that in the presence of a reason to like a target, automatic mimicry is increased. However, mimicry did not decrease when disliking a target. These studies provide further evidence of a link between mimicry and liking and extend previous research by showing that a certain level of mimicry even occurs when mimicry behavior is inconsistent with one's goals or motivations.

Mimicry in social interaction: benefits for mimickers, mimickees, and their interaction.

Mimicry has benefits for people in social interactions. However, evidence regarding the consequences of mimicry is incomplete. First, research on mimicry has particularly focused on effects of being mimicked. Secondly, on the side of the mimicker evidence is correlational or lacks real interaction data. The present study investigated effects for mimickers and mimickees in face-to-face interaction. Feelings towards the immediate interaction partner and the interaction in which mimicry takes place were measured after an interaction between two participants in which mimicry did or did not occur. Results revealed that mimickers and mimickees became more affectively attuned to each other due to bidirectional influences of mimicry. Additionally, both mimickers and mimickees reported more feelings of having bonded with each other and rated the interaction as smoother.

The source effect: person descriptions by self versus others have differential effects on impression formation.

Self-presentation via favorable self-descriptions may not lead to the desired impression, whereas positive descriptions by others may be more effective because they seem less susceptible to motivated bias. In four experiments, we investigated whether person descriptions have more impact on impressions when provided by third parties than by targets themselves. Results showed that target impressions were consistently more in line with the target description when positive sociability-related or positive competency-related information was given by a third party than by the target. This source effect always occurred for ratings of claimed traits. In addition, ratings of the target's sociability were also affected when the claim was about competency. Source effects were not obtained for negative self-descriptions. The results are discussed in terms of the presumed underlying process on the basis of mediation data.

Self-compassion versus global self-esteem: two different ways of relating to oneself.

This research examined self-compassion and self-esteem as they relate to various aspects of psychological functioning. Self-compassion entails treating oneself with kindness, recognizing one's shared humanity, and being mindful when considering negative aspects of oneself. Study 1 (N=2,187) compared self-compassion and global self-esteem as they relate to ego-focused reactivity. It was found that self-compassion predicted more stable feelings of self-worth than self-esteem and was less contingent on particular outcomes. Self-compassion also had a stronger negative association with social comparison, public self-consciousness, self-rumination, anger, and need for cognitive closure. Self-esteem (but not self-compassion) was positively associated with narcissism. Study 2 (N=165) compared global self-esteem and self-compassion with regard to positive mood states. It was found that the two constructs were statistically equivalent predictors of happiness, optimism, and positive affect. Results from these two studies suggest that self-compassion may be a useful alternative to global self-esteem when considering what constitutes a healthy self-stance.

Dispositional attribution: multiple inferences about motive-related traits.

This research views dispositional inference as a process whereby perceivers integrate multiple inferences about a target person's motives and traits. The findings suggest that although perceived motives may stimulate extra attributional processing (S. Fein, 1996), the content of the inferred motive is important as well. Perceivers learned about situational forces implying that a target person had free choice, no choice, or an ulterior motive for helpful behavior. Inferences about the target's helpfulness differed depending on whether the target's behavior was attributed to an obedience motive (no-choice condition) or to a selfish motive (ulterior-motive condition). In general, inferences about motives were more predictive of dispositional inferences than were global causal attributions (to situational vs. dispositional forces) or base rate assumptions.

Thinking about gender types: cognitive organization of female and male types.

We examined the content and dimensional structure of a large and representative sample of gender types. In Study 1, using an open-ended procedure, participants generated 306 different labels for female types (e.g. housewife, feminist, femme fatale, secretary, slob) and 310 for male types (e.g. workaholic, family man, sissy, womanizer, labourer). In Study 2A, a multidimensional configuration of 229 of these male and female types was derived from a free sorting task among a new set of participants. In Study 2B, a subset of types was judged on several dimensions of meaning, which were then fitted into the configuration of types. The most important dimensions in describing the structure of gender types were: young-old, masculine-feminine and traditional-modern. The masculine-feminine dimension showed that the male and female types were largely separated from each other; within each gender category, the types were ordered by their position on the masculine-feminine dimension. Several other aspects of current thinking about men and women are discussed.

Self-serving interpretations of flattery: why ingratiation works.

Persons who are flattered are more likely to assign credibility to and like the flatterer than observers, presumably because they are motivated by vanity. In existing studies, however, the difference between targets and observers has been confounded with other variables. The present experiments demonstrate that the target-observer difference in judgments of an ingratiator is not affected by these confounding variables, such as cognitive resources, the motive to like one's interaction partner, or to form an accurate impression, or mood. Results further suggest that, whereas cognitive responses to ingratiation are different among participants with high versus low self-esteem, affective responses and judgments of the ingratiator are not qualified by any personality variables.

Effects of stereotypes on attitude inference: outgroups are black and white, ingroups are shaded.

This study examines whether stereotypic expectancies about the attitudes of group members (teachers vs. students) affect the attitude inferred from a series of statements. Stereotypes can produce either assimilation, contrast or no effects. Because ingroups are seen as more variable than outgroups, it is possible that assimilation is easily accomplished in ingroup members because of high category width, whereas contrast is more likely for outgroups who are seen as homogenous. Alternatively, because people are motivated to allocate cognitive resources when processing information about ingroup members, it is also possible that contrast occurs more frequently for ingroups, or that no stereotype effects emerge because the members are not stereotyped. The results indicate that both contrast and assimilation effects are stronger for outgroup than for ingroup members. It is concluded that outgroup members are categorized as either typical or atypical of their group, whereas ingroup members can also occupy intermediate positions.