Perspective Taking and Self-Persuasion: Why "Putting Yourself in Their Shoes" Reduces Openness to Attitude Change

Measurement Invariance Testing Works

Psychometricians have argued that measurement invariance (MI) testing is needed to know if the same psychological constructs are measured in different groups. Data from five experiments allowed that position to be tested. In the first, participants answered questionnaires on belief in free will and either the meaning of life or the meaning of a nonsense concept called "gavagai." Since the meaning of life and the meaning of gavagai conceptually differ, MI should have been violated when groups were treated like their measurements were identical. MI was severely violated, indicating the questionnaires were interpreted differently. In the second and third experiments, participants were randomized to watch treatment videos explaining figural matrices rules or task-irrelevant control videos. Participants then took intelligence and figural matrices tests. The intervention worked and the experimental group had an additional influence on figural matrix performance in the form of knowing matrix rules, so their performance on the matrices tests violated MI and was anomalously high for their intelligence levels. In both experiments, MI was severely violated. In the fourth and fifth experiments, individuals were exposed to growth mindset interventions that a twin study revealed changed the amount of genetic variance in the target mindset measure without affecting other variables. When comparing treatment and control groups, MI was attainable before but not after treatment. Moreover, the control group showed longitudinal invariance, but the same was untrue for the treatment group. MI testing is likely able to show if the same things are measured in different groups.

Perceiving a Stable Self-Concept Enables the Experience of Meaning in Life

We test the hypothesis that the perception of stability in one's self-concept (i.e., future self-continuity) enables the experience of meaning in life because perceiving a stable sense of self confers a sense of certainty to the self-concept. Study 1 provided initial evidence of the influence of future self-continuity on feelings of meaning in life (MIL) in a nationally representative sample. In Studies 2a and 2b, we manipulated future self-continuity by varying the expectedness of one's future self, demonstrating the causal influence of future self-continuity on self-certainty and feelings of MIL. Study 3 again manipulated future self-continuity, finding an indirect effect on feelings of meaning in life via self-certainty. Our findings thus suggest the experience of meaning in life arises from the perception of a stable sense of self. We discuss the implications for the antecedents and conceptualization of MIL as well as the nature of the self-concept.

Attitudes in an interpersonal context: Psychological safety as a route to attitude change

Interpersonal contexts can be complex because they can involve two or more people who are interdependent, each of whom is pursuing both individual and shared goals. Interactions consist of individual and joint behaviors that evolve dynamically over time. Interactions are likely to affect people’s attitudes because the interpersonal context gives conversation partners a great deal of opportunity to intentionally or unintentionally influence each other. However, despite the importance of attitudes and attitude change in interpersonal interactions, this topic remains understudied. To shed light on the importance of this topic. We briefly review the features of interpersonal contexts and build a case that understanding people’s sense of psychological safety is key to understanding interpersonal influences on people’s attitudes. Specifically, feeling psychologically safe can make individuals more open-minded, increase reflective introspection, and decrease defensive processing. Psychological safety impacts how individuals think, make sense of their social world, and process attitude-relevant information. These processes can result in attitude change, even without any attempt at persuasion. We review the literature on interpersonal threats, receiving psychological safety, providing psychological safety, and interpersonal dynamics. We then detail the shortcomings of current approaches, highlight unanswered questions, and suggest avenues for future research that can contribute in developing this field.

Weighing the costs: the epistemic dilemma of no-platforming

'No-platforming'-the practice of denying someone the opportunity to express their opinion at certain venues because of the perceived abhorrent or misguided nature of their view(s)-is a hot topic. Several philosophers have advanced epistemic reasons for using the policy in certain cases. Here we introduce epistemic considerations against no-platforming that are relevant for the reflection on the cases at issue. We then contend that three recent epistemic arguments in favor of no-platforming fail to factor these considerations in and, as a result, offer neither a conclusive justification nor strong epistemic support for no-platforming in any of the relevant cases. Moreover, we argue that, taken together, our epistemic considerations against no-platforming and the three arguments for the policy suggest that no-platforming poses an epistemic dilemma (i.e., a difficult choice situation involving two equally undesirable options). While advocates and opponents of no-platforming alike have so far overlooked this dilemma, it should be addressed not only to prevent that actual no-platforming decisions create more epistemic harm than good, but also to put us into a better position to justify the policy when it is indeed warranted.

The influence of culture and close others on the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion

Although self-persuasion was shown to be more effective than direct persuasion in changing attitudes and intentions, its effectiveness in different cultures remains unclear. Furthermore, research suggests that Eastern individuals tend to incorporate close others in the self to a larger extent than Western individuals. Combining both lines of research, the current studies examined whether thinking of a close other would influence the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion across cultures. Two parallel studies were conducted. U.S. participants (n_study 1 = 195; n_study 2 = 292) and Chinese participants (n_study 1 = 187; n_study 2 = 313) reported their initial attitudes and intentions toward five target behaviors prior to either think of a specific close other or not. Subsequently, they were randomly assigned to receive either a self-persuasion or a direct persuasion task. Specifically, the self-persuasion task led participants to generate own arguments or arguments that they think the close other would give; the direct persuasion task led participants to read given arguments or imagine that the arguments were from the close other. In the end, all participants reported their attitudes and intentions again after doing the persuasion tasks. The moderation effect of culture was only found in Study 1, such that direct persuasion worked more effectively in Chinese participants than self-persuasion, whereas the effectiveness of the two persuasive techniques did not differ in U.S. participants. In both studies, thinking of a close other was not found to influence the effectiveness of (self-)persuasion across cultures. Possible explanations and future research directions were discussed.

Depolarizing American voters: Democrats and Republicans are equally susceptible to false attitude feedback

American politics is becoming increasingly polarized, which biases decision-making and reduces open-minded debate. In two experiments, we demonstrate that despite this polarization, a simple manipulation can make people express and endorse less polarized views about competing political candidates. In Study 1, we approached 136 participants at the first 2016 presidential debate and on the streets of New York City. Participants completed a survey evaluating Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on various personality traits; 72% gave responses favoring a single candidate. We then covertly manipulated their surveys so that the majority of their responses became moderate instead. Participants only noticed and corrected a few of these manipulations. When asked to explain their responses, 94% accepted the manipulated responses as their own and rationalized this neutral position accordingly, even though they reported more polarized views moments earlier. In Study 2, we replicated the experiment online with a more politically diverse sample of 498 participants. Both Clinton and Trump supporters showed nearly identical rates of acceptance and rationalization of their manipulated-to-neutral positions. These studies demonstrate how false feedback can powerfully shape the expression of political views. More generally, our findings reveal the potential for open-minded discussion even in a fundamentally divided political climate.

Gender in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: Issues, Causes, Solutions

The landscape of gender in education and the workforce has shifted over the past decades: women have made gains in representation, equitable pay, and recognition through awards, grants, and publications. Despite overall change, differences persist in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). This Viewpoints article on gender disparities in STEM offers an overarching perspective by addressing what the issues are, why the issues may emerge, and how the issues may be solved. In Part 1, recent data on gaps in representation, compensation, and recognition (awards, grants, publications) are reviewed, highlighting differences across subfields (e.g., computer science vs biology) and across career trajectories (e.g., bachelor's degrees vs senior faculty). In Part 2, evidence on leading explanations for these gaps, including explanations centered on abilities, preferences, and explicit and implicit bias, is presented. Particular attention is paid to implicit bias: mental processes that exist largely outside of conscious awareness and control in both male and female perceivers and female targets themselves. Given its prevalence and persistence, implicit bias warrants a central focus for research and application. Finally, in Part 3, the current knowledge is presented on interventions to change individuals' beliefs and behaviors, as well as organizational culture and practices. The moral issues surrounding equal access aside, understanding and addressing the complex issues surrounding gender in STEM are important because of the possible benefits to STEM and society that will be realized only when full participation of all capable and qualified individuals is guaranteed.