Jerkies, tacos, and burgers: Subjective socioeconomic status and meat preference. Eugene Y. Chan, Natalina Zlatevska. Appetite, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.08.027
Abstract: In mankind's evolutionary past, those who consumed meat were strong and powerful and thus man saw meat as indicative of social status. This symbolic connection between meat and status persists today. Thus, based upon psychological theories of compensation, individuals low on subjective socioeconomic status (SES) should have a greater preference for meat, as meat may be substitutable for the status that they lack. Three experiments tested this premise. Participants who felt low on subjective SES preferred meat-based foods compared to participants who felt high on it (Experiment 1). The effect is driven by a desire for status (Experiments 2–3) and not by felt hunger or power (Experiments 1–2) and not generalizable to plant foods (Experiment 3). The results suggest a symbolic link between meat and status, which has intriguingly not yet been empirically shown, and we also demonstrate a consequence of the link for food preference. The results may be of use for doctors who advise eating less meat to improve physical health and for environmental advocates who argue that meat consumption exacerbates global warming. We will also discuss the contributions of and further avenues based on our work.
Thursday, August 30, 2018
Participants stated their opinions about salient political issues, & we covertly altered some of their responses to indicate an opposite position; we asked to verify the manipulated responses, & only half of the manipulations were corrected by the participants
False beliefs and confabulation can lead to lasting changes in political attitudes. Strandberg T, Sivén D, Hall L, Johansson P, Pärnamets P. Journal of experimental psychology. General 147:9 2018 Sep pg 1382-1399. http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-42340-004
Abstract: In times of increasing polarization and political acrimony, fueled by distrust of government and media disinformation, it is ever more important to understand the cognitive mechanisms behind political attitude change. In two experiments, we present evidence that false beliefs about one's own prior attitudes and confabulatory reasoning can lead to lasting changes in political attitudes. In Experiment 1 (N = 140), participants stated their opinions about salient political issues, and using the Choice Blindness Paradigm we covertly altered some of their responses to indicate an opposite position. In the first condition, we asked the participants to immediately verify the manipulated responses, and in the second, we also asked them to provide underlying arguments behind their attitudes. Only half of the manipulations were corrected by the participants. To measure lasting attitude change, we asked the participants to rate the same issues again later in the experiment, as well as one week after the first session. Participants in both conditions exhibited lasting shifts in attitudes, but the effect was considerably larger in the group that confabulated supporting arguments. We fully replicated these findings in Experiment 2 (N = 232). In addition, we found that participants' analytical skill correlated with their correction of the manipulation, whereas political involvement did not. This study contributes to the understanding of how confabulatory reasoning and self-perceptive processes can interact in lasting attitude change. It also highlights how political expressions can be both stable in the context of everyday life, yet flexible when argumentative processes are engaged.
Abstract: In times of increasing polarization and political acrimony, fueled by distrust of government and media disinformation, it is ever more important to understand the cognitive mechanisms behind political attitude change. In two experiments, we present evidence that false beliefs about one's own prior attitudes and confabulatory reasoning can lead to lasting changes in political attitudes. In Experiment 1 (N = 140), participants stated their opinions about salient political issues, and using the Choice Blindness Paradigm we covertly altered some of their responses to indicate an opposite position. In the first condition, we asked the participants to immediately verify the manipulated responses, and in the second, we also asked them to provide underlying arguments behind their attitudes. Only half of the manipulations were corrected by the participants. To measure lasting attitude change, we asked the participants to rate the same issues again later in the experiment, as well as one week after the first session. Participants in both conditions exhibited lasting shifts in attitudes, but the effect was considerably larger in the group that confabulated supporting arguments. We fully replicated these findings in Experiment 2 (N = 232). In addition, we found that participants' analytical skill correlated with their correction of the manipulation, whereas political involvement did not. This study contributes to the understanding of how confabulatory reasoning and self-perceptive processes can interact in lasting attitude change. It also highlights how political expressions can be both stable in the context of everyday life, yet flexible when argumentative processes are engaged.
The increased use of financial contracts to manage household risk is associated with a decline in religious adherence & smaller church congregations, a cost-benefit analysis leads households to replace their participation in social networks with lower-cost financial contracts
Cronqvist, Henrik and Warachka, Mitch and Yu, Frank, Does Finance Make Us Less Social? (July 2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3229344
Abstract: Formal financial contracts and informal risk-sharing agreements within social networks both enable households to manage risk. Using an exogenous reduction in the cost of financial contracting, we find that the increased use of financial contracts to manage household risk is associated with a decline in religious adherence and smaller church congregations. These results indicate that a cost-benefit analysis leads households to replace their participation in social networks with lower-cost financial contracts. Our study contributes toward understanding the implications of emerging technologies known collectively as FinTech that lower the cost of financial contracting.
Keywords: Household Risk Management, Social Networks, FinTech
JEL Classification: G02, G28
Abstract: Formal financial contracts and informal risk-sharing agreements within social networks both enable households to manage risk. Using an exogenous reduction in the cost of financial contracting, we find that the increased use of financial contracts to manage household risk is associated with a decline in religious adherence and smaller church congregations. These results indicate that a cost-benefit analysis leads households to replace their participation in social networks with lower-cost financial contracts. Our study contributes toward understanding the implications of emerging technologies known collectively as FinTech that lower the cost of financial contracting.
Keywords: Household Risk Management, Social Networks, FinTech
JEL Classification: G02, G28
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
