Personal Misconduct Elicits Harsher Professional Consequences for Artists (vs. Scientists): A Moral-Decoupling Process.

Recent years have brought increased accountability for personal misconduct, yet often, unequal consequences have resulted from similar offenses. Findings from a unique archival data set (N = 619; all university faculty) and three preregistered experiments (N = 2,594) show that the perceived artistic-versus-scientific nature of the offender's professional contributions influences the professional punishment received. In Study 1, analysis of four decades of university sexual-misconduct cases reveals that faculty in artistic (vs. scientific) fields have on average received more severe professional consequences. Study 2 demonstrates this experimentally, offering mediational evidence that greater difficulty morally decoupling art (vs. science) contributes to the phenomenon. Study 3 provides further evidence for this mechanism through experimental moderation. Finally, Study 4 shows that merely framing an individual's work as artistic versus scientific results in replication of these effects. Several potential alternative mechanisms to moral decoupling are tested but not supported. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Attitude Strength: What's New?

Attitude strength (what makes attitudes durable and impactful) has become an important topic in the domain of social influence. We review three areas in which the traditional view of attitude strength has been modified or updated since the publication of Petty and Krosnick's 1995 edited book on the topic. First, although it was widely assumed that there were different categories of strength variables (i.e., operative versus meta-cognitive), it may now be better to recognize that each strength property can be measured both structurally and subjectively and that each measure is useful. Second, although scholars assumed that virtually all persuasion techniques would work better on weaker than stronger attitudes, recent research suggests that some techniques might actually work better on stronger than weaker attitudes. Third, although stronger attitudes often guide behavior better than weaker ones, when strength is challenged or weak attitudes are threatening, people can be motivated to act to demonstrate or restore certainty. This can result in weaker attitudes leading to more extreme behavior.

Attitude Strength: What’s New?

Attitude strength (what makes attitudes durable and impactful) has become an important topic in the domain of social influence. We review three areas in which the traditional view of attitude strength has been modified or updated since the publication of Petty and Krosnick’s 1995 edited book on the topic. First, although it was widely assumed that there were different categories of strength variables (i.e., operative versus meta-cognitive), it may now be better to recognize that each strength property can be measured both structurally and subjectively and that each measure is useful. Second, although scholars assumed that virtually all persuasion techniques would work better on weaker than stronger attitudes, recent research suggests that some techniques might actually work better on stronger than weaker attitudes. Third, although stronger attitudes often guide behavior better than weaker ones, when strength is challenged or weak attitudes are threatening, people can be motivated to act to demonstrate or restore certainty. This can result in weaker attitudes leading to more extreme behavior. (AU)

Dampening affect via expectations: The case of ambivalence.

People often form attitudes based on a mixture of positive and negative information. This can result in mixed evaluative reactions that are associated with feeling conflicted and undecided (i.e., felt ambivalence). In the present research, we examined whether expectations of receiving mixed information could dampen felt ambivalence compared to situations where the mixed information was instead unexpected. In six experiments, expectancies of receiving mixed information-either explicitly provided or implied via patterns of behavior-led people to feel less ambivalent about a target person who had engaged in mixed social behaviors. Expectations of mixed information reduced felt ambivalence to receipt of such information in comparison to having no explicit expectancies (Studies 1-3, 5-6), negative expectancies (Study 2), positive expectancies (Study 3), and compared with expectancies formed merely on the basis of behavioral patterns (Study 4). The extent to which people felt that their expectancies of mixed information regarding the target were confirmed (vs. disconfirmed) significantly accounted for the reductions in felt ambivalence. Finally, lower felt ambivalence via manipulated expectations accounted for reduced decision time in a workplace simulation about recommending promotion or termination of an employee (Study 6). Overall, these findings bridge the extensive literatures in attitudes, social judgment, and expectations, showing that expecting mixed information can lead to reductions in felt ambivalence that have consequences for behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).