Robert Böhm

The Ontogeny of the Motivation That Underlies In-Group Bias

Humans demonstrate a clear bias toward members of their own group over members of other groups in a variety of ways. It has been argued that the motivation underlying this in-group bias in adults may be favoritism toward one’s own group (in-group love), derogation of the out-group (out-group hate), or both. Although some studies have demonstrated in-group bias among children and infants, nothing is known about the underlying motivations of this bias. Using a novel game, we found that in-group love is already present in children of preschool age and can motivate in-group-biased behavior across childhood. In contrast, out-group hate develops only after a child’s sixth birthday and is a sufficient motivation for in-group-biased behavior from school age onward. These results help to better identify the motivation that underlies in-group-biased behavior in children.

Using Behavioral Insights to Increase Vaccination Policy Effectiveness

Even though there are policies in place, and safe and effective vaccines available, almost every country struggles with vaccine hesitancy, that is, a delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccination. Consequently, it is important to understand the determinants of individual vaccination decisions to establish effective strategies to support the success of country-specific public health policies. Vaccine refusal can result from complacency, inconvenience, a lack of confidence, and a rational calculation of pros and cons. Interventions should, therefore, be carefully targeted to focus on the reason for non-vaccination. We suggest that there are several interventions that may be effective for complacent, convenient, and calculating individuals whereas interventions that might be effective for those who lack confidence are scarce. Thus, efforts should be concentrated on motivating the complacent, removing barriers for those for whom vaccination is inconvenient, and adding incentives and additional utility for the calculating. These strategies might be more promising, economic, and effective than convincing those who lack confidence in vaccination.

The Inter-Group Comparison – Intra-Group Cooperation Hypothesis: Comparisons between Groups Increase Efficiency in Public Goods Provision

Identifying methods to increase cooperation and efficiency in public goods provision is of vital interest for human societies. The methods that have been proposed often incur costs that (more than) destroy the efficiency gains through increased cooperation. It has for example been shown that inter-group conflict increases intra-group cooperation, however at the cost of collective efficiency. We propose a new method that makes use of the positive effects associated with inter-group competition but avoids the detrimental (cost) effects of a structural conflict. We show that the mere comparison to another structurally independent group increases both the level of intra-group cooperation and overall efficiency. The advantage of this new method is that it directly transfers the benefits from increased cooperation into increased efficiency. In repeated public goods provision we experimentally manipulated the participants’ level of contribution feedback (intra-group only vs. both intra- and inter-group) as well as the provision environment (smaller groups with higher individual benefits from cooperation vs. larger groups with lower individual benefits from cooperation). Irrespective of the provision environment groups with an inter-group comparison opportunity exhibited a significantly stronger cooperation than groups without this opportunity. Participants conditionally cooperated within their group and additionally acted to advance their group to not fall behind the other group. The individual efforts to advance the own group cushion the downward trend in the above average contributors and thus render contributions on a higher level. We discuss areas of practical application.

Ein Vorname sagt mehr als 1000 Worte : Zur sozialen Wahrnehmung von Vornamen

Zusammenfassung. Die vorliegende Studie prasentiert Wortnormen fur 30 mannliche und 30 weibliche deutsche Vornamen (modern, altmodisch und zeitlos) hinsichtlich der Wahrnehmung von Alter, Attraktivitat und Intelligenz des Namenstragers/der Namenstragerin. Es wurden 104 jungere (unter 30 Jahre) und 42 altere (uber 50 Jahre) Personen befragt. Wir untersuchen hierbei (1) Stereotype, welche die Wahrnehmung von Vornamenstragern und -tragerinnen beeinflussen, (2) die Grundlagen fur die Entstehung “zeitloser Vornamen” und (3) die Grunde fur die Vornamenswahl bei eigenen Kindern. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass (1) die Vornamenwahrnehmung vom (zugeschriebenen) Alter der Namenstrager und -tragerinnen und dem Alter der Befragten abhangt. (2) Es finden sich zwei, in der Alterswahrnehmung unterschiedliche Ordnungen zeitloser Vornamen. (3) Die Praferenzen bei der Benennung eigener Kinder unterliegen grosen zeitlichen Schwankungen.

Who Does (Not) Participate in Intergroup Conflict

Prior research on the participation in intergroup conflict suggests that prosocial individuals are parochial cooperators who escalate intergroup conflict. However, evidence on this conjecture is currently inconclusive. We provide a critical empirical test of the link between individuals’ prosocial tendencies (operationalized via Social Value Orientation [SVO] and trait Honesty-Humility) and cooperative behavior in different intergroup conflict games (i.e., variants of the Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma). Contradicting the view that prosocial individuals fuel intergroup conflict, both trait dimensions were positively associated with cooperative behavior toward others in general, irrespective of others’ group membership. That is, individuals with a prosocial SVO or high levels of Honesty-Humility, respectively, refrained from harming out-group members and, if possible, even benefited them. Overall, the results imply that the cooperativeness of prosocial individuals is universal in nature, thus exceeding the in-group boundary. Prosocial individuals are hence willing to foster intergroup cooperation rather than fueling intergroup conflict.

Detrimental effects of introducing partial compulsory vaccination: experimental evidence

BACKGROUND During outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, compulsory vaccination is sometimes discussed as a last resort to counter vaccine refusal. Besides ethical arguments, however, empirical evidence on the consequences of making selected vaccinations compulsory is lacking. Such evidence is needed to make informed public health decisions. This study therefore assesses the effect of partial compulsory vaccination on the uptake of other voluntary vaccines. METHOD A total of 297 (N) participants took part in an online experiment that simulated two sequential vaccination decisions using an incentivized behavioural vaccination game. The game framework bases on epidemiological, psychological and game-theoretical models of vaccination. Participants were randomized to the compulsory vaccination intervention (n = 144) or voluntary vaccination control group (n = 153), which determined the decision architecture of the first of two decisions. The critical second decision was voluntary for all participants. We also assessed the level of anger, vaccination attitude and perceived severity of the two diseases. RESULTS Compulsory vaccination increased the level of anger among individuals with a rather negative vaccination attitude, whereas voluntary vaccination did not. This led to a decrease in vaccination uptake by 39% in the second voluntary vaccination (reactance). CONCLUSION Making only selected vaccinations compulsory can have detrimental effects on the vaccination programme by decreasing the uptake of voluntary vaccinations. As this effect occurred especially for vaccine hesitant participants, the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy within a society will influence the damage of partial compulsory vaccination.

On the benefits of explaining herd immunity in vaccine advocacy

Most vaccines protect both the vaccinated individual and the community at large by building up herd immunity. Even though reaching disease-specific herd immunity thresholds is crucial for eliminating or eradicating certain diseases1,2, explanation of this concept remains rare in vaccine advocacy3. An awareness of this social benefit makes vaccination not only an individual but also a social decision. Although knowledge of herd immunity can induce prosocial vaccination in order to protect others, it can also invite free-riding, in which individuals profit from the protection provided by a well-vaccinated society without contributing to herd immunity themselves. This cross-cultural experiment assesses whether people will be more or less likely to be vaccinated when they know more about herd immunity. Results show that in cultures that focus on collective benefits, vaccination willingness is generally higher. Communicating the concept of herd immunity improved willingness to vaccinate, especially in cultures lacking this prosocial cultural background. Prosocial nudges can thus help to close these immunity gaps.

Improving Medical Decision Making and Health Promotion through Culture-Sensitive Health Communication An Agenda for Science and Practice

This review introduces the concept of culture-sensitive health communication. The basic premise is that congruency between the recipient’s cultural characteristics and the respective message will increase the communication’s effectiveness. Culture-sensitive health communication is therefore defined as the deliberate and evidence-informed adaptation of health communication to the recipients’ cultural background in order to increase knowledge and improve decision preparedness in medical decision making, and to enhance the persuasiveness of messages in health promotion. To achieve effective health communication in varying cultural contexts, an empirically and theoretically based understanding of culture will be indispensable. We therefore define culture, discuss which evolutionary and structural factors contribute to the development of cultural diversity, and how differences are conceptualized as scientific constructs in current models of cultural differences. Additionally, we will explicate the implications of cultural differences for psychological theorizing, because common constructs of health behavior theories and decision making, such as attitudes or risk perception, are subject to cultural variation. In terms of communication we will review both communication strategies as well as channels that are used to disseminate health messages, and discuss the implications of cultural differences for their effectiveness. Finally, we propose both an agenda for science as well as for practice to advance and apply the evidence base for culture-sensitive health communication. This calls for more interdisciplinary research: between science and practice, but also between scientific disciplines and between basic and applied research.This review introduces the concept of culture-sensitive health communication. The basic premise is that congruency between the recipient’s cultural characteristics and the respective message will increase the communication’s effectiveness. Culture-sensitive health communication is therefore defined as the deliberate and evidence-informed adaptation of health communication to the recipients’ cultural background in order to increase knowledge and improve preparation for medical decision making and to enhance the persuasiveness of messages in health promotion. To achieve effective health communication in varying cultural contexts, an empirically and theoretically based understanding of culture will be indispensable. We therefore define culture, discuss which evolutionary and structural factors contribute to the development of cultural diversity, and examine how differences are conceptualized as scientific constructs in current models of cultural differences. In addition, we will explicate the implications of cultural differences for psychological theorizing, because common constructs of health behavior theories and decision making, such as attitudes or risk perception, are subject to cultural variation. In terms of communication, we will review both communication strategies and channels that are used to disseminate health messages, and we will discuss the implications of cultural differences for their effectiveness. Finally, we propose an agenda both for science and for practice to advance and apply the evidence base for culture-sensitive health communication. This calls for more interdisciplinary research between science and practice but also between scientific disciplines and between basic and applied research.

Different Games for Different Motives: Comment on Haesevoets, Folmer, and Van Hiel (2015)

Recently, Haesevoets, Folmer, and Van Hiel (2015) strongly questioned the comparability and equivalence of different mixed–motive situations as modelled in economic games. Particularly, the authors found that different game correlated only weakly on average and loaded on two separate factors. In turn, personality traits failed to consistently account for behavioural tendencies across games. Contrary to the conclusions of Haesevoets et al., these findings are actually perfectly in line with the game–theoretic understanding of the different economic games. If one considers the variety of specific motives underlying decisions in different games, Haesevoets et al.s findings actually support the validity of different games rather than questioning it. This, in turn, emphasizes the necessity for the plethora of different games that have been developed over decades in economics and psychology. Copyright

Honesty-humility under threat:: Self-uncertainty destroys trust among the nice guys.

Recent research on humans’ prosociality has highlighted the crucial role of Honesty-Humility, a basic trait in the HEXACO personality model. There is overwhelming evidence that Honesty-Humility predicts prosocial behavior across a vast variety of situations. In the present contribution, we cloud this rosy picture, examining a condition under which individuals high in Honesty-Humility reduce prosocial behavior. Specifically, we propose that under self-uncertainty, it is particularly those individuals high in Honesty-Humility who reduce trust in unknown others and become less prosocial. In 5 studies, we assessed Honesty-Humility, manipulated self-uncertainty, and measured interpersonal trust or trust in social institutions using behavioral or questionnaire measures. In Study 1, individuals high (vs. low) in Honesty-Humility showed higher levels of trust. This relation was mediated by their positive social expectations about the trustworthiness of others. Inducing self-uncertainty decreased trust, particularly in individuals high in Honesty-Humility (Studies 2–5). Making use of measuring the mediator (Studies 2 and 3) and applying a causal chain design (Studies 4a and 4b), it is shown that individuals high in Honesty-Humility reduced trust because self-uncertainty decreased positive social expectations about others. We end with an applied perspective, showing that Honesty-Humility is predictive of trust in social institutions (e.g., trust in the police; Study 5a), and that self-uncertainty undermined trust in the police especially for individuals high in Honesty-Humility (Study 5b). By these means, the present research shows that individuals high in Honesty-Humility are not unconditionally prosocial. Further implications for Honesty-Humility as well as for research on self-uncertainty and trust are discussed.