The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen's d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.'s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity
Srull and Wyer (1979) demonstrated that exposing participants to more hostility-related stimuli caused them subsequently to interpret ambiguous behaviors as more hostile. In their Experiment 1, participants descrambled sets of words to form sentences. In one condition, 80% of the descrambled sentences described hostile behaviors, and in another condition, 20% described hostile behaviors. Following the descrambling task, all participants read a vignette about a man named Donald who behaved in an ambiguously hostile manner and then rated him on a set of personality traits. Next, participants rated the hostility of various ambiguously hostile behaviors (all ratings on scales from 0 to 10). Participants who descrambled mostly hostile sentences rated Donald and the ambiguous behaviors as approximately 3 scale points more hostile than did those who descrambled mostly neutral sentences. This Registered Replication Report describes the results of 26 independent replications (N = 7,373 in the total sample; k = 22 labs and N = 5,610 in the
This study focuses on the effects of victim/offender ethnic affiliation and cultural background of observers on attitudes toward offenders. To examine the effect of cultural background, we compared offender attribution among Christian Arabs ( n = 51), Muslim Arabs ( n = 249), and Jews ( n = 285). The participants were students from several Israeli universities and colleges. The age range was 18 to 33 years ( M = 20.23, SD = 2.67), and the majority were female (75.6%). The participants read a version of a vignette describing a case of a stabbing, and then rated the offender’s blame. In different versions of the crime scenario, we manipulated victim and offender ethnicity: two victim (Arab/Jewish) and three offender (African/Arab/Jewish) types. The results indicate that, in general, participants blamed African offenders more than Arab or Jewish offenders. Although the results show that differences in offender blaming between Arab and Jewish participants were not statistically significant, there is an interaction between participant cultural background and victim ethnicity in regard to offender blaming: Participants attributed more blame to offenders who stabbed a victim belonging to the same ethnic group as the participants. Overall, the results support defensive attribution theory, suggesting that observer attitudes toward offenders tend to be affected by similarity in ethnic affiliation. The discussion addresses the findings through the perspectives of cultural reciprocity, defensive attribution theory, and minority threat theory. It also acknowledges the limitations related to the specific cultural and geopolitical context of this research. Practical implications for practitioners and policymakers include training and increased ethnic diversity among professionals and experts working within the criminal justice system.
To explore the interrelationship between terrorist acts, terrorist ethnicity, and observer gender and cultural background in Israel, we recruited 211 participants aged 19–75 years. The majority were male (63%). As for the ethnic and religious cultural background, 40% were Jewish, 40% Druze, and 20% Muslim. The participants answered questions about their demographic characteristics, read three scenarios of terrorist acts, addressed attitudes toward terrorists, and suggested the length of imprisonment. We manipulated the type of act (shooting and killing/burning religious institutions/throwing stones at cars) and terrorist ethnicity (Arab/ Jewish). The results indicate significant main effects of the manipulated variables regarding attitudes toward terrorists. Also, Muslim Arab participants expressed more negative attitudes in cases of Jewish terrorists than Arab terrorists, whereas Jewish participants expressed more negative attitudes toward Arab terrorists than Jewish terrorists. Druze participants did not differentiate between Arab and Jewish terrorists. Furthermore, in cases of Arab perpetrators, Jewish participants suggested imprisonment terms 2.4 times longer than in cases of Jewish perpetrators. The discussion addresses the findings in the context of social identity theory and dual social identification. Regarding practical implications, the findings imply the need for education and training on ethnic bias among policymakers and practitioners.
Leal, Vrij, Deeb and Jupe (2018) found -with British participants-that a Model Statement elicited (1) more information and (2) a cue to deceit: After exposure to a Model Statement liars reported significantly more peripheral information than truth tellers. We sought to replicate these findings with Arabs living in Israel. Truth tellers and liars reported a stand-out event that they had (truth tellers) or pretended to have (liars) experienced in the last two
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.