The main advantage of experimental research lies in the possibility of systematically investigating the causal relation between the variables of interest. The well-known advantages result from (a) the possibility to manipulate the independent variable, (b) random assignment of participants to the experimental conditions, and (c) the experimenter's control over the operationalization of the variables and the general experimental setting. We argue that it is exactly these elements that constitute core advantages of experimental research but that are-at the same time-associated with side effects, which are often out of focus when researchers derive theoretical conclusions from their experimental findings. We discuss potential restrictions linked to these core elements of experimental research. Implications for both theory development and research design are discussed.

This research investigates the role of mood-based expectancies regarding a target's group membership for the impact of individuating information on target judgments. We argue that target judgments in both positive and negative mood may be more or less affected by individuating information depending on whether the target is an ingroup member or an outgroup member. Specifically, in a competitive intergroup setting it should be less congruent with mood-based expectancies when individuals in positive (negative) mood learn that an outgroup (ingroup) member rather than an ingroup (outgroup) member has succeeded. Hence, unexpected (i.e., mood-incongruent) category information should elicit more attention than expected (mood-congruent) category information. More importantly, subsequent individuating information (high vs. low target competence) should be processed more effortful and influence target judgments more strongly given mood-incongruent (vs. mood-congruent) category membership. Findings of an experiment support these predictions. Results are discussed in regard to implications for different research domains.

No abstract

Even though economic globalization and foreign trade are major topics in the political discourse of most societies and negative attitudes toward international trade are prevalent, there is a lack of research investigating the ideological roots of protectionist preferences from a psychological perspective. In the present research, we examined the implications of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) for trade attitudes. Using data from two nationally representative samples from the United States (Study 1) and Germany (Study 2), we found that RWA predicted protectionist attitudes above and beyond economic self‐interest. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between RWA and opposition to international trade was moderated by political involvement. The association of SDO with protectionist attitudes was inconsistent across the two studies and was not moderated by political involvement. Taken together, these results emphasize the importance of basic ideological orientations and the psychological dispositions they reflect in explaining public attitudes toward international trade.

Individuals consider abstract values and principles important aspects of their identities. Nonetheless, they often make judgments and decisions that contradict these values and principles for the sake of pragmatic benefits. Assuming that the process of weighting idealistic and pragmatic concerns is context sensitive, the present research argues that affect influences the relative weight of idealistic versus pragmatic concerns in decision situations owing to its influence on the level of abstraction at which individuals represent situations mentally. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate that more positive affect increases the prominent weighting of idealistic over pragmatic concerns while less positive affect leads to less differentiation between the relevance of idealistic and pragmatic concerns. Studies 3 and 4 test the assumption that affective influences on mental abstraction are crucial for affect-dependent shifts in the weighting of idealistic and pragmatic concerns. By bringing together theorizing on affect and cognition with recent theorizing on the role of mental abstraction for decision processes, this article highlights a mechanism through which decisions can be influenced by feelings that goes beyond the mechanisms that have typically been discussed in the affect and cognition literature so far.

Individuals can apply different processing strategies to deal with situations they encounter. One central question in social-cognition research refers to the factors that determine reliance on different processing strategies. Parting from a functional perspective, which holds that processing strategies need to be adjusted to the requirements of the situation, we argue that individuals’ mood carries information about the benign versus problematic nature of the situation and thus that mood can regulate cognitive processing. Focusing on mental abstraction, we propose that positive mood contributes to a processing style characterized by reliance on prior knowledge in the form of general knowledge structures, whereas negative mood elicits a processing style characterized by attention to details and consideration of new situation-specific information.

No abstract

Using data from the Austrian National Election Study (Study 1) and the American National Election Study (Study 2), this research investigated the role of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) in shaping attitudes toward governmental action related to the redistribution of wealth. We show that RWA is a relevant variable in explaining attitudes toward redistribution policies, and that the association between RWA and redistribution attitudes is moderated by political sophistication. RWA was associated with opposition to redistribution policies among individuals high in political sophistication, while among individuals low in political sophistication, RWA was either associated with support for redistribution policies (Study 1) or unrelated to redistribution attitudes (Study 2). Results suggest that exposure to the political discourse in a society affects how psychological needs and motives are related to preferences regarding the redistribution of wealth through the government.