Diversity Promotes Collective Intelligence in Large Groups but Harms Small Ones

Pescetelli, Niccolo, Alexis Rutherford, and Iyad Rahwan. 2020. “Diversity Promotes Collective Intelligence in Large Groups but Harms Small Ones.” PsyArXiv. January 2. doi:10.31234/osf.io/b8q2c

Abstract: Diverse groups are often said to be less susceptible to decision errors resulting from herding and polarization. Thus, the fact that many modern interactions happen in a digital world, where filter bubbles and homophily bring people together, is an alarming yet poorly understood phenomenon. But online interactions are also characterized by unprecedented scale, where thousands of individuals can exchange ideas simultaneously. Evidence in collective intelligence however suggests that small (rather than large) groups tend to do better in complex information environments. Here, we adopt the well-established framework of social learning theory (from the fields of ecology and cultural evolution) to explore the causal link between diversity and performance as a function of group size. In this pre-registered study, we experimentally manipulate both group diversity and group size, and measure individual and group performance in realistic geo-political judgements. We find that diversity hinders the performance of individuals in small groups, but improves it in large groups. Furthermore, aggregating opinions of modular crowds composed of small independent but homogeneous groups achieves better results than using non-modular diverse ones. The results are explained by greater conflict of opinion in diverse groups, which negatively impacts small (but not large) groups. The present work sheds light on the causal mechanisms underlying the success (or lack thereof) of diverse groups in digital environments, and suggests that diversity research can benefit from adopting a wider social learning perspective.


Full text downloadable at https://psyarxiv.com/b8q2c/download (PDF)

Women: Beliefs in one’s sexual power lead both to negative (via self‐objectification, eating less) and positive (via sexual subjectivity, more sexual desire and pleasure) consequences for mental health

Sex is power belief and women’s mental health: The mediating roles of self‐objectification and sexual subjectivity. Matthias De Wilde, Annalisa Casini, Robin Wollast, Stéphanie Demoulin. European Journal of Social Psychology, November 12 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2643

Abstract: Sex is power belief (SIPB) positively relates to self‐objectification. This research aims at expanding this finding. We propose that SIPB involves an instrumental view of one’s own body (i.e., self‐objectification) that leads women to experience the negative consequences classically associated with self‐objectification. We further suggest that SIPB positively relates to sexual subjectivity—multidimensional sexual self‐perceptions and positive sexual experiences—and that such relation counterbalances some of the negative effects of SIPB. We examine the effect of SIPB on women’s negative eating attitudes and sexual satisfaction, and test the mediating roles of self‐objectification and sexual subjectivity in three studies (N1 = 121, N2 = 296, N3 = 320). Results supported our predictions that beliefs in one’s sexual power lead both to negative (via self‐objectification) and positive (via sexual subjectivity) consequences for women’s mental health. The discussion focuses on the potential consequences of SIPB at both individual and collective levels.


 General Discussion

The overall aim of the present research was to provide a more complete and nuanced
picture of the relationship between SIPB and SO. More precisely, across three studies, we
aimed to examine the consequences of SIPB on women’s health (i.e., negative eating
attitudes and sexual satisfaction) and to assess two possible underlying mechanisms of these
relationships (i.e., SO and sexual subjectivity).
Results of studies 1, 2 and 3, indicated that SIPB was positively related to SO.
Women who perceive that their body is a source of power are more prone to focus on the
observable part of themselves and to consider it as important for their self-concept (i.e., selfobjectify).
These results are in line with the idea that some women consider that matching
beauty and thinness standards is a stairway to power over men (Erchull & Liss, 2013b, 2014).
Indeed, media in contemporary occidental society teach women from an early age that
sexualized behaviors are rewarded (Murnen & Smolak, 2012) and that they can – or even
should – feel empowered when expressing and displaying their sexuality (Erchull & Liss,
2013ab; Tolman, 2012). In this sense, these results replicated prior findings from Erchull and
Liss (2013a) which reported a positive correlation between SIPB and SO. In addition, our
results are in line with prior studies that reported a positive relationship between variables
conceptually close to SIPB (e.g., beauty as currency and enjoyment of sexualization) and SO
(Calogero, et al., 2017; Erchull & Liss, 2014).
Moreover, in line with the literature on SO (Moradi & Huang, 2008; Roberts et al.,
2018), results of studies 1, 2, and 3 showed that the positive relationship between SIPB and
SO is related to deleterious consequences for women’s health, such as increasing women’s
negative eating attitudes and decreasing women’s sexual satisfaction (considered as a health
indicator; Higgins, Mullinax, Trussell, Davidson, & Moore, 2011). This result legitimates the
concern of scholars about the illusory nature of feeling a sense of power using their body
(Calogero & Siegel, 2018; Gill, 2008, 2012; Liss et al., 2010; Anderson, 2014). Accordingly,
our results indicate that SIPB is related to women’s attempt to comply with men’s
expectations (e.g., negative eating attitudes). Further, some scholars claimed that women who
experience a sense of power through the use of their body have actually internalized
extremely deeply the objectifying perspective of society (e.g., Gill, 2012) and that this source
of power is implicitly reserved to women who best fit men’s expectations (Gill, 2008). Our
findings support scholars’ concerns with the fact that women’s desire, pleasure, and
subjectivity could be devalued by the message that their sense of power is, in fact, a “false
consciousness marketed to them by a sexualized advertising culture” (Lamb & Peterson,
2012, p. 705). Taken together, these results converge with the idea that, subjectively
empowering or not, SO remains deleterious for women’s health and sexual functioning.
In addition, on top of the deleterious consequences SIPB has via SO, results of
Studies 2 and 3 also indicated that SIPB positively relates to sexual satisfaction via an
increase in sexual subjectivity. Consistent with Peterson’s claim (2010), our results show that
beliefs in one’s sexual power increase women sense of empowerment, their subjective right
to feel attractive and sexually desirable (Horne & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2006), their perception
of efficacy and entitlement to sexual desire and pleasure (Tolman, 2002, 2012), and their
sexual self-reflection (Zimmer-Gembeck & French, 2016). Because increased sexual
subjectivity relates positively to one’s sexual satisfaction (Horne & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2006;
Zimmer-Gembeck & French, 2016), this translates into a positive relationship between SIPB
and sexual satisfaction and an overriding of the deleterious consequences SIPB has on sexual
satisfaction via an increase in SO. Interestingly, additional analyses reported in studies 2 and
3 seem to underline the important driving role of two sub-components of the sexual
subjectivity construct in the relationship between SIPB and sexual satisfaction, i.e., sexual
body esteem and perceived sexual efficacy. Future research should be conducted to further
replicate this unexpected results, and to provide a better understanding of these relationships.

Prosocials were more optimistic about the future of morally good (than bad) agents, while individualists were not; this was driven by prosocials’ failure to update beliefs from undesirable information about morally good agents

Zheng, Shuying, Xinyuan Yan, Jenifer Siegel, Vladimir Chituc, Shiyi Li, Molly Crockett, and Yina Ma. 2020. “Self-serving Karmic Beliefs: Prosociality Influences Vicarious Optimism.” PsyArXiv. January 2. doi:10.31234/osf.io/ecqgf

Abstract: Belief in karma is ubiquitous, appearing early in development and impacting prosocial behavior. Here, we tested the possibility that karmic beliefs are self-serving: are “good” people more likely to believe that good things happen to good people? Study 1 (n=170) showed stronger karmic beliefs in more prosocial individuals. Next, we tested whether self-serving karmic beliefs arose from a motivated deployment of vicarious optimism: prosocial individuals adopt karmic beliefs by prioritizing desirable (the fortunes of good people, the misfortunes of bad people) over undesirable information when predicting the future. Study 2 (n=107) showed that prosocials were more optimistic about the future of morally good (than bad) agents, while individualists were not. This was driven by prosocials’ failure to update beliefs from undesirable information about morally good agents. Together, we suggest that karmic beliefs are self-serving, and result from a failure to update beliefs from information that conflicts with a karmic worldview.

Discussion

Karma denotes the belief that good things will happen to people who have done good deeds, while misfortunes will befall bad people in the future. In the current studies, combining the moral character learning and vicarious belief update tasks, we are able to quantify the beliefs about the future of people who have done objectively good or bad deeds. We show that individuals hold optimistic beliefs about the future of good people and discount undesirable feedback when predicting their futures. In contrast, individuals similarly incorporate desirable and undesirable feedback into their beliefs about bad people’s futures. These results suggest that vicarious optimism is one possible cognitive mechanism that gives rise to karmic beliefs. Furthermore, we show that prosocial individuals (relative to individualists) hold stronger karmic beliefs and stronger vicarious optimism for good relative to bad people, suggesting that karmic beliefs are self-serving: good people more likely to believe that good things happen to good people.

We provide evidence for a correlation between prosociality and karmic beliefs. However, the causal direction of this relationship remains open to discussion, and is likely bidirectional. Previous studies showed that priming of karmic beliefs increased generosity and prosocial behavior (White, Kelly, Shariff, & Norenzayan, 2019), suggesting that karmic beliefs may be a precursor to prosocial behavior. However, studies developmental work suggests that prosocial behavior may emerge earlier than karmic beliefs; preverbal infants (6-10 months) show disapproval of antisocial behavior (Hamlin, Wynn, & Bloom, 2007) and infants between 12 and 24 months exhibit prosocial behaviors (Brownell, 2013), whereas karmic beliefs have only been demonstrated in 4-6-year-old children (Banerjee & Bloom, 2013, 2017). Thus, it may also be the case that prosociality promotes the development of karmic beliefs. Prosocial behavior is often costly (Crocker, Canevello, & Brown, 2017). Karmic beliefs that morally good behavior will be rewarded could provide one type of justification for these costs and serve as a psychological compensation (Bäckman & Dixon, 1992). In addition, helping others also brings positive “side effects” (Carlson & Zaki, 2018), such as positive feelings (Aknin, Van de Vondervoort, & Hamlin, 2018) and social praise (Eisenberg, Wolchik, Goldberg, & Engel, 1992). Thus over time, the beliefs that performing good deeds increases the chance of future desirable outcomes may be reinforced into a karmic worldview.

People hold karmic beliefs in both first-party and third-party contexts (Hafer & Olson, 1989). If prosocials and individualists hold karmic beliefs to a similar extent, we might expect strong optimistic belief updating for the self in prosocials, and pessimistic belief updating for the self in individualists. However, we observed that prosocials and individualists were similarly optimistic about their own futures. One potential explanation is that the wishful thinking for oneself outweighs karmic believes when there are any conflicts (Mata & Simão, 2019). Alternatively, individualists may not identify themselves as “bad people” given vast evidence that most people tend to view themselves in a positive light (Sanitioso & Wlodarski, 2004). Thus, it is possible that individualists believe in karma but view themselves as good people who deserve an optimistic future. Given that we found weaker karmic beliefs in individualists, the finding of similar optimistic beliefs for the self in individualists and prosocials would lend further support to our hypothesis that karmic beliefs are self-serving, so that strong karmic beliefs motivates prosocial individuals to believe in a bright future (possibly caused by the good deeds they did). Taken together, this suggests that the self-serving nature of karmic beliefs applies to both the self and other people.

In current study, individualists not only failed to show asymmetric vicarious optimism towards good and bad agents; they also did not show vicarious optimism at all. Consistent with previous findings that individualists maximize the differences between the self and others in allocating monetary reward (Haruno & Frith, 2010; Liu et al., 2019) or responding to painful stimuli (Singer et al., 2008), individualists also differentiate optimistic future beliefs toward the self and others (only showing optimism towards self, but not to others: t(50) = 2.35, p = 0.023, 95% CI = [0.58, 7.43], Cohen d’ = 0.33). Taken together, this suggests individualists prefer to maximize self-other differences not only in material outcomes (i.e., monetary allocation, physical pain) but also in immaterial beliefs about the future.

One limitation of our second study is that we only provide evidence for ‘half’ of the karmic worldview, i.e., that good things will happen to good people; we did not observe evidence for beliefs that bad things will happen to bad people. Even prosocials who showed stronger karmic beliefs did not express pessimistic beliefs about bad agents. This might be due to that, in prosocials’ karmic belief system, good things not happening is already a type of punishment for the bad people, given that prosocial generally care about others and prefer not to do harm to others (Penner., Dovidio., Piliavin., & Schroeder., 2005), thus prosocials do not predict bad consequence for morally bad people. Indeed, the current sample, we found evidence that prosocials showed stronger harm aversion in the moral decision task where they trade off profit for themselves against pain for another person (harm aversion: prosocials vs. individualists, t(101) = 4.39, p < 0.001, 95% CI = [0.11, 0.29], Cohen d’ = 0.43).

In conclusion, the current study provides a novel framework to decipher the cognitive processes that give rise to karmic beliefs, and further proposes that karmic beliefs may be subject to self-serving motivations. Our findings suggest that karmic beliefs – a feature of many religious traditions – may be a key component of a positive feedback loop between beliefs and behavior that together contribute to large-scale cooperation.

Sense of coherence is a health resource that moderates stress and helps limit the occurrence of overweightness and eating disorders

The Relationship between Sense of Coherence, Stress, Body Image Satisfaction and Eating Behavior in Japanese and Austrian Students. Yoshiko Kato et al. Psych 2019, 1(1), 504-514, November 14 2019. https://doi.org/10.3390/psych1010039

Abstract: Background: Restrained, emotional, and external eating are related to obesity and eating disorders. A salutogenic model has confirmed sense of coherence (SOC) as a health resource that moderates stress and helps limit the occurrence of overweightness and eating disorders. This study aimed to examine the relationship between SOC, social support, stress, body image satisfaction (BIS) and eating behaviors in different cultural environments. Methods: A total of 371 Austrian (161 men, 210 women) and 398 Japanese (226 men, 172 women) university students participated. The SOC-13 scale, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire, BMI-Based Silhouette Matching Test and an analogue single-stress item were used as measurements. Results: SOC negatively affected all three types of eating in Austrian students (men: β = −0.227 to −0.215; women: β = −0.262 to −0.214). In Japanese students, SOC negatively affected external eating in both sexes (men: β = −0.150; women: β = −0.198) and emotional eating (β = −0.187) in men. BIS indicated that the desire to become slim predicted restrained eating, women’s emotional eating, and men’s and Austrian women’s external eating. Stress was only predictive of emotional eating in Japanese men. Conclusions: This study found that SOC, BIS and stress might be valuable factors regulating eating behavior in a cultural context. However, the relationship between SOC, BIS, stress and eating behavior differs between cultures.

Keywords: sense of coherence; restrained eating; emotional eating; external eating; body image satisfaction; cross-culture

---
emotional eating (EME), external eating (EXE), restrained eating (RE)

4. Discussion

The main findings of this study indicate that SOC and BIS pertain negatively to RE, EME, and EXE with the appearance of culture and gender differences. In particular, SOC negatively predicts RE, EME, and EXE, particularly in Austrian students. For Japanese students, the relationship between SOC and eating behaviors seems to be less pronounced.

Japanese students had higher scores for RE and EXE but did not differ in EME. Not all eating behaviors reflect disordered eating, per se, but some eating behaviors seem to be associated with occasional overeating and moderate overweightness, such as restrained and emotional eating [31]. High RE values do not differentiate between successful and unsuccessful restrained eaters [7,32]. Considering the higher percentage of underweight Japanese students, RE seems to be a highly and successfully practiced eating behavior in Japan, independent of SOC and social support. Only BIS predicts RE in Japanese students, whereas SOC seems to be a source of eating regulation, in addition to BIS, in Austrian students. However, considering the higher rate of overweight students in Austria, this regulation is less successful for Austrian students than for Japanese students. SOC predicted EME in both male and female Austrian students and in Japanese male students, but not in Japanese female students. In the Japanese student sample, BIS was a significant predictor in women but not men, and stress was another predictor of EME. EXE was related to SOC in both countries, and BIS helped predict EXE in Austrian men and women and Japanese men but not in Japanese women. Stress correlated negatively and SOC correlated positively with social support among Japanese women; however, both variables disappeared as predictors of eating behavior in Japanese women, and seemed to be coping resources.

A previous study with Dutch subjects found that being female and having a strong SOC, a flexible RE, and self-efficacy promoted healthy eating practices [33]. The work of Speirs et al. suggested that a higher SOC is expected to prevent unhealthy eating practices and foster healthy eating behaviors in children [14]. This study found that SOC tended to prevent unhealthy eating behaviors.

In this investigation of two cultures, we examined the association between SOC and eating behaviors, based on a salutogenic model. SOC indicates the extent to which an individual has a pervasive and enduring, yet dynamic, feeling of confidence that the environment is predictable and that things will work out as well as can reasonably be expected. SOC contains aspects of optimism and control and represents the ability to cope with stressful events and find them meaningful [15]. A previous study reported that a strong SOC may confer some resilience against chronic diseases [34]. The results of the present study suggest that a high SOC might prevent RE, EME, and EXE in Austrian subjects. In contrast, SOC affected EXE in Japanese men and women and EME in Japanese men. SOC and stress were strongly associated in Japanese students and had a more indirect association with eating behaviors. In Austrian students, SOC, stress and social support were weakly correlated, while SOC was more strongly correlated with eating behaviors.

A higher SOC has been reported to relate to less perceived stress and a lower stress response [35]. Some studies have reported that obesity and eating disorders are caused by stressful situations [36]. Controlling stress is therefore necessary to maintain healthy eating behaviors. Because the degree of stress affected EME in Japanese men in the present study, we suggest that improving SOC might be effective in reducing EME via stress reduction. Social support, as an external health factor resource, was not directly related to the three eating behaviors but was correlated with SOC in this study. Social support seems to be associated with eating behaviors via SOC-mediated effects. This finding is in line with the results of our previous study, which showed that eating behavior was associated with interpersonal relationships [37].

Overall, as expected, the results supported the hypothesis that SOC affects eating behaviors and overweight-related eating behaviors more directly in Austrian students, whereas SOC relates to stress reduction in Japanese students and indirectly relates to eating habits.

It is important to note that cultural and gender-based differences were observed between variables in this study. The obesity rate was lower in women than in men, and the desire to become slim and RE were more prevalent in women than in men. Ideal body images are affected by cultural expectations, which often lead women to want to become thinner. Such a cultural context fosters restrained eating behaviors in women, and the degree to which women desire to become slimmer predicts RE. Conversely, the structure of the relationship between the desire to get slimmer and EME or EXE may differ by country and gender. In women, the desire to be slim was positively related to EME, while in Austrian and Japanese men, the desire to be slim was related to EXE. This result is in line with theories related to the DEBQ. Both EXE and EME are regarded as consequences of intense RE. Small positive differences between ideal and real body images were found among Japanese men, because young men are mainly concerned with gaining muscle rather than becoming slim [38]. Our results show that the highest rate of thinness was in Japanese women, and the desire to become slimmer might control EXE. These results support our previous findings [22].

A strength of this study is that it investigated a homogeneous group; all participants were university students. Additionally, all variables were investigated in their respective cultural groups using the same methodology in both Western and Asian countries [39].

However, this study had some limitations. First, we used one analogue scale to measure the degree of stress, to avoid a severe burden on the participants. A more sophisticated measure of stress should be used in future studies. A negative relationship was found between stress and resilience in Japanese students. In Austrian students, this negative relationship was weak and not significant. In Austria, the validity of the stress scale is insufficient. In the future, it is necessary to use a more validated stress scale and examine the relationship with eating behavior. Second, the national higher educational systems differ in these two cultures. For example, in Japan, approximately 50% of high school students enter a university after graduating high school, whereas Austria has a more flexible higher education system. This difference is reflected in the significant difference between the participants’ mean ages, but these small age differences did not influence our results. Third, some limitations might be a result of different effects and the importance of social support. The work of Kim et al. reported that Asians and Asian-Americans are more reluctant to ask for support from others, but are more likely to use and benefit from forms of support that do not involve explicit disclosure [40]. Japanese female students’ social support from family, friends and significant others was highly negatively correlated with stress, as with SOC, while in Austrians, this relationship was missing, although they endorsed receiving more social support. Another aspect contributing to the cultural differences might be response style differences between Japanese and Austrian students. The work of Harzing et al. showed that Asians preferred middle rather than extreme categories on rating scales, in comparison with Western respondents [41]. Using a coherent sample and harmonized measurements in both German and Japanese may have reduced this bias.

Despite these limitations, we conclude that SOC, BIS and stress are essential factors that regulate eating behavior in Japan and Austria, with a relationship to body weight. However, the relationships showed specific patterns. The relationships between SOC and eating practices in Austrian and Japanese populations must be further examined. Exploring these mechanisms will be relevant to fostering the development of programs to change eating behaviors, because culture is an important external resource for health promotion.