08:30 - 10:00
Mon-A7-Talk I-
Mon-Talk I-
Room: A7
Chair/s:
Maren Mayer
When making decisions, individuals often receive advice from others and incorporate this advice into their own judgments and decisions-under certain conditions leading to increases in decision quality and confidence. Beyond the typical paradigm examining advice-based decisions, several research avenues emerged in recent years that rely on advice taking and extend the typical paradigm to various different tasks and contexts. In this symposium, we thus introduce several novel directions for advice taking and related research. The first contribution provides an overview of typical paradigms and findings of empirical studies on advice-based decisions conducted over the last 15 years in behavioral and organizational research. The second contribution describes a newly developed (largely) culture-fair estimation task that solely requires secondary school level as a basis for conducting between-culture comparisons of advice taking in Chinese and German students. The third talk will present an application of the advice taking paradigm to investigate social influence in moral judgments at the example of the asymmetric moral conformity effect. The fourth contribution addresses sequential collaboration, a process relying on consecutively improving contributions made by others in which previous contributions can be viewed as advice for later contributors. Some of the previous findings will be reassessed to complement the presentation of a novel statistical modeling approach for process-consistent analysis of judgment formation in part five. The final contribution addresses how people update their beliefs about the validity of effects when being confronted with various scientific evidence, which can be viewed as a form of advice.
WITHDRAWN Applying an Advice Taking Approach to Moral Cognition Research - The Case of Asymmetric Moral Conformity WITHDRAWN
Mon-A7-Talk I-03
Presented by: Max Hennig
Max Hennig 1, 2, Tobias R. Rebholz 2
1 Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, 2 Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
Though models of moral cognition recognize the importance of social influences, experimental investigations of conformity effects in moral judgment are surprisingly rare. A notable exception, Bostijn and Roets (2017a) demonstrated greater conformity to “deontological” than to “consequentialist” majorities when judging moral dilemmas. Although the authors interpreted this “asymmetric moral conformity effect” in terms of a strategic shifting of responses away from consequentialist towards deontological judgments, this could not actually be investigated, as only post-manipulation judgments were measured. We reinvestigated this finding by conducting a direct replication (dataset 1), as well as an extension, in which initial judgments were assessed prior to final judgments, which enables a direct test of the shift hypothesis (dataset 2). Dataset 1 (N = 242) replicates the original asymmetric conformity effect, showing that deontological majorities reduced consequentialist judgments, whereas consequentialist majorities exerted no influence, both compared to a no-majority control condition. Dataset 2 (N = 483) manifests a marginal interaction between majority condition and initial judgments such that, when initial judgments were consequentialist, deontological majorities reduced the likelihood for final judgments being consequentialist, whereas consequentialist majorities exerted no influence, which provides weak support for the shift hypothesis. Moreover, and unexpectedly, when initial judgments were added, deontological and consequentialist majorities both influenced final judgments, resulting in a symmetrical moral conformity effect. This finding suggests limitations to the asymmetric conformity effect and illustrates how the advice taking paradigm could provide a useful tool for investigating moral cognition.
Keywords: advice taking, moral judgment, conformity, social influence