Sandra Carpenter

Differential processing of in-group and out-group information.

People have a more differentiated cognitive representation of in-groups than of out-groups. This has led to the prediction that memory should be better for in-group information than for out-group information. However, past research has provided equivocal support for that prediction. This article advances a differential processing hypothesis that offers a solution to this paradox. The hypothesis suggests that whereas in-group information is organized by person categories, outgroup information is organized through attribute categories. In-group membership alters the categorical basis of memory for person information, but these categories are not necessarily superior to the attribute categories that are used to organize out-group information

Effects of Cultural Tightness and Collectivism on Self-Concept and Causal Attributions

Previous research investigating the influence of cultural variables on the psychological constructs of self-concept and causal attributions has employed responses of individuals within cultures. In the present research, ethnographies of 16 cultures were examined using the CD-ROM version of the Human Relations Area Files (HRAF). As predicted, self-concept was related to both cultural tightness and collectivism. Specifically, interdependent self-concepts were more likely to occur in tight and collective cultures, whereas independent self-concepts occurred in individualistic and loose cultures. Causal attributions for failure were found to be more external for more collective cultures, but no relation between failure attributions and cultural tightness was obtained. Causal attributions for success were not systematically related to either cultural tightness or collectivism. Additional variables that are speculated to influence attributions, in conjunction with culture, are proposed for future research. The usefulness of the CD-ROM version of the HRAF for addressing psychological questions is discussed.

The Relation between Allocentrism and Perceptions of Ingroups

The authors examine how allocentrism, or the importance placed on ingroups, relates to the perceived homogeneity and entitativity (groupness)of relational (interpersonal) and collective (categorical) ingroups. In two studies (Ns = 198, 90), allocentrism is shown to be positively related to perceptions of ingroup entitativity and homogeneity. This pattern was obtained, however, only for perceptions of collective ingroups. Ethnic differences between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White participants’ perceptions of ingroups were mediated by allocentrism (Study 1). Participants in Study 2 were members of a laboratory task group and their levels of allocentrism predicted their perceptions of the group’s homogeneity and entitativity regardless of the actual homogeneity of the group. The effects of allocentrism on perceptions of ingroups are discussed in terms of self-esteem, group identification, and responses to ingroup members’ deviations from norms.

Cultural pluralism and prejudice reduction.

Predictions derived from models of cultural pluralism and cultural assimilation were tested. Previous research has shown that highlighting differences between ethnic groups, in conjunction with self-focus, can reduce prejudice. The presented research tested the following questions: (a) does highlighting differences function to reduce prejudice between groups that are dissimilar to each other as well as between those that are highly similar, (b) is prejudice reduction due to distinctiveness a function of the lessened ingroup positivity or lessened outgroup negativity, (c) does making distinctiveness salient reduce prejudice toward only the distinctive outgroups or to outgroups more generically, and (d) does the manipulation equally impact African American, Mexican American, Mexican National, and White American participants? Results demonstrated that highlighting differences while simultaneously focusing on the self reduces prejudice, although similarity mediates the relationship with those who are perceived as more different. Distinctiveness also reduced outgroup negativity and generalized to other outgroups. Finally, the manipulation reduced prejudice only for White Americans, Mexican Americans, and Mexican Nationals.

Women Derive Collective Self‐Esteem from Their Feminist Identity

Womens self-esteem is more strongly related to social acceptance and inclusion than to accomplishments. We investigated the extent to which women derive self-esteem from being women, that is, from their membership in a collective gender group. We hypothesized and found that womens collective self-esteem (i.e., self-esteem derived from their gender group) would systematically vary for women showing differing degrees of feminist development. Thus, womens self-esteem derived from womanhood seems to depend on the “meaning” of womanhood to the individual woman.

Mothers’ Reports of Events Causing Anger Differ Across Family Relationships

Mother’s reports of anger causes within the family were analyzed in terms of the family relationships of the persons experiencing and eliciting anger and three independent components of the anger-eliciting event—Type of Cause, Focus of Anger, and Temporal Specificity. Mothers’ reports suggest substantial differences (a) in anger causes across relationships, (b) depending on whether parents or children were experiencing or eliciting anger events, and (c) for the three independent components of the anger events. For example, for type of cause, mothers’ reports indicated more expectancy violations for parents’ than children’s anger, but more goal blockages for children’s than parents’ anger. Also, elicitormattered; mothers’ reports indicated more goal blockages elicited by parents than by children, but more expectancy violations elicited by children than by parents. These patterns are interpreted in terms of differential power and status within the family.

Importance and Descriptiveness of Self-Aspects: A Cross-Cultural Comparison

This study investigated self-concept similarities and differences among Turkish and American (Mexican American and White) university students. The descriptiveness of self-attributes was measured in three domains (independent self, relational self, and other-focused or traditional self). In addition, the importance of personal, social, and collective selves was identified for each culture group. In terms of importance of self, the cultural groups showed more similarities than differences, emphasizing personal identity the most, followed by social and collective identity orientations. The results also suggested similarities across the cultural groups in descriptiveness of self-aspects, whereby relational attributes were rated as more self-descriptive than independent and other-focused or traditional aspects. Despite these similarities, our results suggested that importance and descriptiveness ratings do not show the same pattern. The results are discussed in terms of self-schemas and the association between aspects of the self that are important and descriptive of the self.

Studying team shared mental models

As technology is used to support team-based activities, one important factor affecting the performance of teams is the kind of mental model shared between team members. This paper describes a novel conceptual graph based methodology to study these mental models to better understand how shared mental models affect performance and other factors of a teams behavior.

Contexts and sharing/not sharing private information

No matter how discreet people are they tend to share private information with the people they trust. They also expose information when sharing the information is relevant to the situation or to the requestor. Our study deals with finding out in what contexts people share or do not share certain kind of private information elements. The analyses of our study showed that the context really matters when an individual decides to share information. Based on different contexts and private information, we analyzed what contexts prove effective in getting certain private information elements. It turns out that people trust other people who are close to them and would share private information elements in cases when it is appropriate to expose the information such as helping the trusted person or when they themselves would benefit from the exposure. We conclude that the combination of a trusted person and relevant context is enough to gather sufficient private information about a person, which may be against the owner of the information.

Expert Sources in Warnings May Reduce the Extent of Identity Disclosure in Cyber Contexts

ABSTRACT Identity theft is an increasing threat to individuals, institutions, and the economy. People are often not adequately cautious with the disclosure of their personal information in digital contexts and may make poor decisions to reveal private information. Warnings reduce unnecessary information exposure, but the effectiveness may depend on source credibility and expertise on influencing risk perceptions and attitudes. The warnings must be designed for users acting in a digital context. The current research was conducted to determine whether adding a trustworthy and expert source to a message that warned individuals not to disclose their personal information would impact decisions to disclose. First, a survey (pilot study) was conducted to identify the source considered the most trustworthy (among Google, FBI Cyber Division, and Department of Justice) and competent with respect to online security. Google received the highest ratings. In a later experiment, warnings with sources did reduce the extent of disclosure, with the FBI Cyber Division (not Google) being the most effective source. The results indicate that warnings need to be tested with respect to the actual target behavior (in this case, disclosure), rather than relying on individuals’ perceptions of trust, risk, or influence of a warning message when designing effective warnings.