Using robots at work during the COVID-19 crisis evokes passion decay: Evidence from field and experimental studies.

The growing trend of introducing robots into employees' work lives has become increasingly salient during the global COVID-19 pandemic. In light of this pandemic, it is likely that organisational decision-makers are seeing value in coupling employees with robots for both efficiency- and health-related reasons. An unintended consequence of this coupling, however, may be an increased level of work routinisation and standardisation. We draw primarily from the model of passion decay from the relationship and clinical psychology literature to develop theory and test a model arguing that passion decays as employees increasingly interact with robots for their work activities. We demonstrate that this passion decay leads to an increase of withdrawal behaviour from both the domains of work and family. Drawing further from the model of passion decay, we reveal that employees higher in openness to experience are less likely to suffer from passion decay upon more frequent interactions with robots in the course of work. Across a multi-source, multi-wave field study conducted in Hong Kong (Study 1) and a simulation-based experiment conducted in the United States (Study 2), our hypotheses received support. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Coping with noise in social dilemmas: Group representatives fare worse than individuals because they lack trust in others' benign intentions.

Research on interindividual-intergroup discontinuity has illuminated distinct patterns of cognition, motivation, and behavior in interindividual versus intergroup contexts. However, it has examined these processes in laboratory environments with perfect transparency, whereas real-life interactions are often characterized by noise (i.e., misperceptions and unintended errors). This research compared interindividual and intergroup interactions in the presence or absence of noise. In a laboratory experiment, participants played 35 rounds of a dyadic give-some dilemma, in which they acted as individuals or group representatives. Noise was manipulated, such that players' intentions either were perfectly translated into behavior or could deviate from their intentions in certain rounds (resulting in less cooperative behavior). Noise was more detrimental to cooperation in intergroup contexts than in interindividual contexts, because (a) participants who formed benign impressions of the other player coped better with noise, and (b) participants were less likely to form such benign impressions in intergroup than interindividual interactions.

How AI tools can-and cannot-help organizations become more ethical.

In this paper, we argue that we cannot expect that AI systems-even given more data or better computational resources-will be more ethical than the humans who develop, deploy and use them. As such, we advocate that it is necessary to retain the responsibility for ethical decision-making in human hands. In reality, however, human decision-makers currently do not have the ethical maturity to meaningfully take on this responsibility. So, what to do? We develop the argument that to broaden and strengthen the ethical upskilling of our organizations and leaders, AI has a crucial role to play. Specifically, because AI is a mirror that reflects our biases and moral flaws back to us, decision-makers should look carefully into this mirror-taking advantage of the opportunities brought about by its scale, interpretability, and counterfactual modeling-to gain a deep understanding of the psychological underpinnings of our (un)ethical behaviors, and in turn, learn to consistently make ethical decisions. In discussing this proposal, we introduce a new collaborative paradigm between humans and AI that can help ethically upskill our organizations and leaders and thereby prepare them to responsibly navigate the impending digital future.

The reputational and ethical consequences of deceptive chatbot use.

The use of chatbots is becoming widespread as they offer significant economic opportunities. At the same time, however, customers seem to prefer interacting with human operators when making inquiries and as a result are not as cooperative with chatbots when their use is known. This specific situation creates an incentive for organizations to use chatbots without disclosing this to customers. Will this deceptive practice harm the reputation of the organization, and the employees who work for them? Across four experimental studies, we demonstrate that prospective customers, who interact with an organization using chatbots, perceive the organization to be less ethical if the organization does not disclose the information about the chatbot to their customers (Study 1). Moreover, employees that work for an organization which requires them to facilitate the deceptive use of a chatbot exhibit greater turnover intentions (Study 2) and receive worse job opportunities from recruiters in both a hypothetical experimental setting (Study 3) and from professional job recruiters in the field (Study 4). These results highlight that using chatbots deceptively has far reaching negative effects, which begin with the organization and ultimately impact their customers and the employees that work for them.

No person is an island: Unpacking the work and after-work consequences of interacting with artificial intelligence.

The artificial intelligence (AI) revolution has arrived, as AI systems are increasingly being integrated across organizational functions into the work lives of employees. This coupling of employees and machines fundamentally alters the work-related interactions to which employees are accustomed, as employees find themselves increasingly interacting with, and relying on, AI systems instead of human coworkers. This increased coupling of employees and AI portends a shift toward more of an "asocial system," wherein people may feel socially disconnected at work. Drawing upon the social affiliation model, we develop a model delineating both adaptive and maladaptive consequences of this situation. Specifically, we theorize that the more employees interact with AI in the pursuit of work goals, the more they experience a need for social affiliation (adaptive)-which may contribute to more helping behavior toward coworkers at work-as well as a feeling of loneliness (maladaptive), which then further impair employee well-being after work (i.e., more insomnia and alcohol consumption). In addition, we submit that these effects should be especially pronounced among employees with higher levels of attachment anxiety. Results across four studies (N = 794) with mixed methodologies (i.e., survey study, field experiment, and simulation study; Studies 1-4) with employees from four different regions (i.e., Taiwan, Indonesia, United States, and Malaysia) generally support our hypotheses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Is pride a prosocial emotion? Interpersonal effects of authentic and hubristic pride.

Pride is associated with both prosocial and antisocial behaviour. Do others also infer such behaviours when pride is expressed and does this affect their own prosocial behaviour? We expected that authentic pride (i.e., confidence, accomplishment) would signal and elicit more prosocial behaviour than hubristic pride (i.e., arrogance, conceit). In a first laboratory experiment, a target in a public-good dilemma was inferred to have acted less prosocially when displaying a nonverbal expression of pride versus no emotion. As predicted, inferences of hubristic pride-but not authentic pride-mediated this effect. Participants themselves also responded less prosocially. A second laboratory experiment where a target verbally expressed authentic pride, hubristic pride, or no emotion replicated the effects of hubristic pride and showed that authentically proud targets were assumed to have acted prosocially, but especially by perceivers with a dispositional tendency to take the perspective of others. We conclude that authentic pride is generally perceived as a more prosocial emotion than hubristic pride.

The road to a human-centred digital society: opportunities, challenges and responsibilities for humans in the age of machines.

The growing adoption of intelligent technologies has brought us to a crossroad. The creators of intelligent technologies are acquiring the power to influence a wide variety of outcomes that are important to human end-users. In doing so, those same intelligent technologies are being used to undermine and even actively harm the interests of those same end-users. In the absence of a recalibration, we are almost certainly headed down a path wherein intelligent technologies will primarily serve the interests of developers and owners of technology rather than humankind at large. In an attempt to push for such a recalibration, we present parallels between the 2008 financial crisis and the current state of affairs. Following which, we present a list of recommendations and implications to be used when in the pursuit of creating responsible and human-centred AI.

Two Sides of the Same Coin: Punishment and Forgiveness in Organizational Contexts.

Punishment and forgiveness are two very different responses to a moral transgression that both have been argued to restore perceptions of moral order within an organization. Unfortunately, it is currently unclear what motivates organizational actors to punish or forgive a norm transgressor. We build on social cognitive theory to argue that punishment and forgiveness of a transgressor are both rooted in self-regulatory processes. Specifically, we argue that organizational actors are more likely to respond to intentional transgressions with punishment, and to unintentional transgressions with forgiveness. However, these effects of transgressor intentionality should be found in particular among actors for whom moral identity is central (vs. peripheral). We find support for these predictions in a laboratory experiment and a field study among organizational leaders. By simultaneously studying punishment and forgiveness in organizational settings, we provide crucial insight in their shared motivational bases, as well as into important differences between the two.

The impact of leader depletion on leader performance: the mediating role of leaders' trust beliefs and employees' citizenship behaviors.

The leadership role can be demanding and depleting. Using self-regulation and social exchange theory as a framework, we developed a three-step sequential mediation model that explains how feelings of depletion can degrade leaders' own performance level, via the reciprocating behavior of their employees. Specifically, we hypothesized that leader depletion is negatively related to their trust beliefs. This lack of trust is expected to be reciprocated by employees in such a way that they display less citizenship behaviors towards their leader. These lowered citizenship behaviors are, in turn, predicted to negatively impact leader performance. Additionally, we hypothesized that these negative effects of feeling depleted are more pronounced for leaders who believe that their willpower is limited. Studies 1 and 2 illustrated that leader depletion indirectly influences their own performance level through leaders' trust beliefs and employees' leader-directed citizenship behaviors. Study 3 extended these findings from the inter-individual to the intra-individual level, and demonstrated the predicted moderating role of belief in limited willpower. Together, our studies provide new and useful insights in the broader, more distal implications of leader depletion, which have not yet been considered in existing self-regulation models.

How important is an apology to you? Forecasting errors in evaluating the value of apologies.

Apologies are commonly used to deal with transgressions in relationships. Results to date, however, indicate that the positive effects of apologies vary widely, and the match between people's judgments of apologies and the true value of apologies has not been studied. Building on the affective and behavioral forecasting literature, we predicted that people would overestimate how much they value apologies in reality. Across three experimental studies, our results showed that after having been betrayed by another party (or after imagining this to be the case), people (a) rated the value of an apology much more highly when they imagined receiving an apology than when they actually received an apology and (b) displayed greater trusting behavior when they imagined receiving an apology than when they actually received an apology. These results suggest that people are prone to forecasting errors regarding the effectiveness of an apology and that they tend to overvalue the impact of receiving one.

Robots at work: People prefer-and forgive-service robots with perceived feelings.

Organizations are increasingly relying on service robots to improve efficiency, but these robots often make mistakes, which can aggravate customers and negatively affect organizations. How can organizations mitigate the frontline impact of these robotic blunders? Drawing from theories of anthropomorphism and mind perception, we propose that people evaluate service robots more positively when they are anthropomorphized and seem more humanlike-capable of both agency (the ability to think) and experience (the ability to feel). We further propose that in the face of robot service failures, increased perceptions of experience should attenuate the negative effects of service failures, whereas increased perceptions of agency should amplify the negative effects of service failures on customer satisfaction. In a field study conducted in the world's first robot-staffed hotel (Study 1), we find that anthropomorphism generally leads to higher customer satisfaction and that perceived experience, but not agency, mediates this effect. Perceived experience (but not agency) also interacts with robot service failures to predict customer satisfaction such that high levels of perceived experience attenuate the negative impacts of service failures on customer satisfaction. We replicate these results in a lab experiment with a service robot (Study 2). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Tacit coordination in social dilemmas: the importance of having a common understanding.

Previous research has indicated that in social dilemmas, people tacitly coordinate their decisions by using the equal division rule. In 3 experimental studies, the authors investigated the extent to which a common understanding about task and behavioral requirements is essential for the tacit coordination process. The results show that people are less likely to coordinate on the equal division rule when collective feedback on past performance (Study 1), the distribution of information within the group (Study 2), or expected behavioral variance (Study 3) suggests that a common understanding in the group is lacking. Moreover, the results indicate that under these conditions, rather than adhering to the equal division rule, people base their decisions on their own social value orientations. The findings support the view that if situations provide insufficient cues for tacit coordination, people are more likely to decide on the basis of their personal characteristics.

When does self-sacrificial leadership motivate prosocial behavior? It depends on followers' prevention focus.

In the present set of studies, the authors examine the idea that self-sacrificial leadership motivates follower prosocial behavior, particularly among followers with a prevention focus. Drawing on the self-sacrificial leadership literature and regulatory focus theory, the authors provide results from 4 studies (1 laboratory and 3 field studies) that support the research hypothesis. Specifically, the relationship between self-sacrificial leadership and prosocial behavior (i.e., cooperation, organizational citizenship behavior) is stronger among followers who are high in prevention focus. Implications for the importance of taking a follower-centered approach to leadership are discussed.

Retaliation as a response to procedural unfairness: a self-regulatory approach.

When does procedural unfairness result in retaliation, and why do recipients of unfair treatment sometimes pursue and other times inhibit retaliation? Five studies addressed these questions. The authors proposed and found that regulatory focus moderates retaliation against an unfairness-enacting authority: Promotion-focus participants were more likely to retaliate than prevention-focus participants. Promotion focus was associated with, and also heightened the accessibility of, the individual self. In turn, individual-self accessibility influenced retaliation. In fact, prevention-focus participants were as retaliatory as promotion-focus participants under conditions of high individual-self accessibility. Implications for the procedural fairness and regulatory focus literatures are discussed, and suggestions for future research are offered.

To whom does voice in groups matter? Effects of voice on affect and procedural fairness judgments as a function of social dominance orientation.

The authors investigated the effects of voice--the opportunity to provide input in decision-making processes--on perceptions of procedural fairness. In particular, the authors studied the moderating role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in shaping this relation. SDO is an important individual differences variable that causes people to favor unequal relationships within and between social groups. Results revealed that voice was more strongly related to fairness judgments when participants had a high rather than low SDO. Moreover, positive affect mediated this moderation effect. The authors interpreted these results to indicate that high-SDO participants were especially sensitive to voice manipulations because such manipulations enhance perceptions of control over group resources and outcomes. The authors conclude by discussing alternative explanations based on other fairness theories.

Motivated reasoning during recruitment.

This research shows how job postings can lead job candidates to see themselves as particularly deserving of hiring and high salary. We propose that these entitlement beliefs entail both personal motivations to see oneself as deserving and the ability to justify those motivated judgments. Accordingly, we predict that people feel more deserving when qualifications for a job are vague and thus amenable to motivated reasoning, whereby people use information selectively to reach a desired conclusion. We tested this hypothesis with a 2-phase experiment (N = 892) using materials drawn from real online job postings. In the first phase of the experiment, participants believed themselves to be more deserving of hiring and deserving of higher pay after reading postings composed of vaguer types of qualifications. In the second phase, yoked observers believed that participants were less entitled overall, but did not selectively discount endorsement of vaguer qualifications, suggesting they were unaware of this effect. A follow-up preregistered experiment (N = 905) using postings with mixed qualification types replicated the effect of including more vague qualifications on participants' entitlement beliefs. Entitlement beliefs are widely seen as problematic for recruitment and retention, and these results suggest that reducing the inclusion of vague qualifications in job postings would dampen the emergence of these beliefs in applicants, albeit at the cost of decreasing application rates and lowering applicants' confidence. (PsycINFO Database Record

Ranking low, feeling high: How hierarchical position and experienced power promote prosocial behavior in response to procedural justice.

Research shows that power can lead to prosocial behavior by facilitating the behavioral expression of dispositional prosocial motivation. However, it is not clear how power may facilitate responses to contextual factors that promote prosocial motivation. Integrating fairness heuristic theory and the situated focus theory of power, we argue that in particular, organization members in lower (vs. higher) hierarchical positions who simultaneously experience a high (vs. low) sense of power respond with prosocial behavior to 1 important antecedent of prosocial motivation, that is, the enactment of procedural justice. The results from a multisource survey among employees and their leaders from various organizations (Study 1) and an experiment using a public goods dilemma (Study 2) support this prediction. Three subsequent experiments (Studies 3-5) show that this effect is mediated by perceptions of authority trustworthiness. Taken together, this research (a) helps resolve the debate regarding whether power promotes or undermines prosocial behavior, (b) demonstrates that hierarchical position and the sense of power can have very different effects on processes that are vital to the functioning of an organization, and (c) helps solve ambiguity regarding the roles of hierarchical position and power in fairness heuristic theory. (PsycINFO Database Record

So Gross and Yet so Far Away: Psychological Distance Moderates the Effect of Disgust on Moral Judgment.

People morally evaluate norm violations that occur at various distances from the self (e.g., a corrupt politician vs. a cheating spouse). Yet, distance is rarely studied as a moderator of moral judgment processes. We focus on the influence of disgust on moral judgments, as evidence here has remained inconclusive. Based on feelings as information theory and the notion that disgust evolved as a pathogen avoidance mechanism, we argue that disgust influences moral judgment of psychologically distant (vs. near) norm violations. Studies 1 and 3 show that trait disgust sensitivity (but not trait anger and fear) more strongly predicts moral judgment of distant than near violations. Studies 2 and 4 show that incidental disgust affects moral judgment of distant (vs. near) violations and that the moderating role of distance is mediated by involvement of others (vs. the self) in the evaluator's conceptualization of the violation.

The trickle-down effects of perceived trustworthiness on subordinate performance.

We study when and why perceptions of trustworthiness trickle down the organizational hierarchy to influence the performance of subordinates. Building on social learning theory, we argue that when supervisors perceive their managers as trustworthy, subordinates are more likely to also perceive their supervisor as trustworthy, which in turn enhances subordinate performance. We further argue that this trickle-down effect of trustworthiness perceptions emerges especially when the manager invites the supervisor to participate in decision-making. Finally, we propose that social learning processes that lead to supervisors exhibiting more trusting behavior toward their subordinates mediate this trickle-down effect. We find support for our predictions across one multisource field study (Study 1) and two experiments (Studies 2 and 3) that both use a yoked design. This research represents the first attempt to examine trickle-down effects related to trustworthiness, its impact on performance, and the mediating mechanisms by which those effects emerge. This research also provides the first empirical evidence about the role that social learning processes play in explaining trickle-down processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Understanding the positive effect of financial compensation on trust after norm violations: Evidence from fMRI in favor of forgiveness.

Norm violations are ubiquitous in organizations and often result in tangible harm and a loss of trust. One possible response to enhance trust involves the provision of financial compensation. Unfortunately, little is known about the processes that underlie the effect of such a tangible response to increase trust. We employed techniques in cognitive neuroscience (functional magnetic resonance imaging) to examine these processes. Participants placed in the scanner played the role of recipient in a series of dictator games with different allocators who (unknown to them) were preprogrammed. An unequal division of resources was used as a norm violation that resulted in a financial loss. Afterward the inflicted harm was restored through equal financial compensation. Our neuroimaging data indicate that financial compensation activates forgiveness-related brain areas and that this activation mediates the positive effect of financial compensation on trust. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of using tangible responses to increase trust in organizational settings. (PsycINFO Database Record