The way one frames a question has been noted to have effects on the decision of the participant. The framing effect occurs when people react to choices differently depending on how the choice is presented to them. When the choice is presented as a loss, people tend not to react to such questions positively, but when they are presented as a gain, people will react positively. Therefore, it can be concluded that the framing effect is a perfect example of the cognitive bias process. Research shows that, in a positive frame, people will tend to avoid risk.
The overuse of self-cleansing can be detrimental to one’s morale. As stated by (Kogut & Beyth-Marom, 2008), those who make decisions are not widely biased when helping another individual but they are more influenced by what they perceive the other individuals intentions are. When studying self-worth and willingness to help this must be taken into account otherwise the conclusion may be flawed. We hypothesize that both participants in the high and low self-worth conditions would be willing to help, but those in the low self-worth condition would be more likely to help a stranger rather than those with high self-worth.
However, many cross-cultural researchers find that autonomy and self-direction are perceived not as important in Eastern culture compared with Western culture. Logically, it may turn out to be a source of pre-decisional procrastination that results from reluctance to self-decision making (Mann et al., 1998). Moreover, a present-fatalistic time orientation was shown to give rise to avoidance procrastination, as it is a sense that the future is predetermined by fate (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). Sirois (2014) find that low positive affect and high level of stress partially serves as mediators of the relationship between future time perspective and procrastination behavior. Ferrari (2001) proposes that chronic procrastination behavior is proved to be associated with lower future orientation; one possible explanation can be that it eases the present tension or short-term pleasure is more tempting (since they procrastinate by switching to do other things).
Results of studies that focussed on internal versus external control suggests that strategies associated with positive psychosocial adaptation to change are connected to feelings of being in control of the threat or stressor, while feeling that external factors control the individual provoke coping responses for example blaming shifting. Other coping styles to acknowledge are optimism versus pessimism, where optimism is positively related to coping strategies that enhances adaptation to changed circumstances and overall psychological well-being. Studies showed that the psychosocial adjustment of optimistic individuals are higher (Miller, Manne, Taylor, Keates and Dougherty, 1996). Individual who resort to repression uses avoidance as a coping strategy in an effort to not have to deal with the threat (Krohne, 1996). When an individual exercise self-restraint or cognitive restraint as a coping mechanism, they and place themselves in control of the threat.
Contrariwise, downward counterfactual recognizes how a consequence may possibly be unpleasant and adverse than the actual outcome. It is where individuals identifies and are satisfied with what they have, knowing that it could have been otherwise (McCrea, 2008). This gives rise to emotions shifting from happiness to being at ease (Galinsky & Moskowitz,
They also tend to believe that they are less prone to contracting diseases. This disadvantage is titled risk perception and risk behavior. (Macfarlane, Yanes, & Imar, 1995) Unrealistic optimism can be compared to the planning fallacy. (Buehrer & Griffin, 2003) This meaning underestimating something or being too confident in decision making and things do not go as planned. While being too optimistic in terms of the planning fallacy, deadlines are still a form of motivation.
One’s national culture impacts the original relationship because it helps shape one’s personality, which helps shape their susceptibility to group think. Therefore one’s national culture acts as a partial mediating variable, because it influences both personality type and one’s susceptibility to groupthink. My hypothesis is that those with high UAI scores are more likely to succumb to groupthink and those with low UAI scores are less likely to succumb to groupthink.
7 Effects on Behavior Shame and guilt are not considered to be equally „moral“ emotions. While guilt seems to be more adaptive and beneficial for all parties involved, shame can lead to further complications (Tangney, Stuewig et al. 2007). Thus, shame and guilt result in different (moral) behaviors. The following paragraphs will contrast different consequential behaviors following the experience or anticipation of either shame or guilt, identified by Tangney, Stuewig et at (2007).
Participants also completed a measure of impulsivity to determine the relationship between specific personality traits and conflict resolution behaviors in friendships. Considering the research on the facets of impulsivity and interpersonal dysfunction, I formed multiple hypotheses. First, I hypothesized that higher levels of all four facets would predict an increased incidence of the destructive behaviors of exit and neglect. Secondly, sensation seeking would negatively relate to loyalty and voice behaviors. Third, higher levels of each of the impulsivity facets would predict lower levels of commitment.
There are two kinds of people in the world; the ones that believe that the consequences of an action outweigh the importance of intention, and those that feel that intentions are all that matter. Consequences are measurable outcomes that are a direct result of our actions. Intentions are the thoughts behind a person’s actions. They are the reason that a person chooses to do something. Consequences and intentions both correlate with action.