No abstract

Anecdotes of past social movements suggest that Internet-enabled technologies, especially social media platforms, can facilitate collective actions. Recently, however, it has been argued that the participatory Internet encourages low-cost and low-risk activism-slacktivism-which may have detrimental consequences for groups that aim to achieve a collective purpose. More precisely, low-threshold digital practices such as signing online petitions or "liking" the Facebook page of a group are thought to derail subsequent engagement offline. We assessed this postulation in three experiments (N = 76, N = 59, and N = 48) and showed that so-called slacktivist actions indeed reduce the willingness to join a panel discussion and demonstration as well as the likelihood to sign a petition. This demobilizing effect was mediated by the satisfaction of group-enhancing motives; members considered low-threshold online collective actions as a substantial contribution to the group's success. The findings highlight that behavior that is belittled as slacktivism addresses needs that pertain to individuals' sense of group membership. Rather than hedonistic motives or personal interests, concerns for the ingroup's welfare and viability influenced the decision to join future collective actions offline.

Past research has shown that the experience of taste can be influenced by a range of external cues, especially when they concern food's quality. The present research examined whether food's ethicality - a cue typically unrelated to quality - can also influence taste. We hypothesised that moral satisfaction with the consumption of ethical food would positively influence taste expectations, which in turn will enhance the actual taste experience. This enhanced taste experience was further hypothesised to act as a possible reward mechanism reinforcing the purchase of ethical food. The resulting ethical food → moral satisfaction  → enhanced taste expectations and experience → stronger intentions to buy/willingness to pay model was validated across four studies: one large scale international survey (Study 1) and three experimental studies involving actual food consumption of different type of ethical origin - organic (Study 2), fair trade (Study 3a) and locally produced (Study 3b). Furthermore, endorsement of values relevant to the food's ethical origin moderated the effect of food's origin on moral satisfaction, suggesting that the model is primarily supported for people who endorse these values.

A wide range of studies investigating the nature and determinants of radicalisation, and terrorist-related behaviour exist. These, in turn, have influenced theory, policy and practice in areas concerned with violent extremism prevention, disruption and management. As such interventions become more common, debates rage within mental health professions about the role mental health practitioners should play in countering violent extremism. This systematic review assesses the impact of mental health problems upon attitudes, intentions and behaviours in the context of radicalisation and terrorism. We identified 25 studies that measured rates of mental health problems across 28 samples. The prevalence rates are heterogenous and range from 0% to 57%. If we pool the results of those samples (n=19) purely focused upon confirmed diagnoses where sample sizes are known (n=1705 subjects), the results suggest a rate of 14.4% with a confirmed diagnosis. Where studies relied upon wholly, or in some form, upon privileged access to police or judicial data, diagnoses occurred 16.96% of the time (n=283 subjects). Where studies were purely focused upon open sources (n=1089 subjects), diagnoses were present 9.82% of the time. We then explore (a) the types and rates of mental health disorders identified (b) comparison/control group studies (c) studies that explore causal roles of mental health problems and (d) other complex needs.

Improvements have been made in identifying the prevalence of risk factors/indicators for violent extremism. A consistent problem is the lack of base rates. How to develop base rates is of equal concern. This study has two aims: (i) compare two methods for developing base rates; the Unmatched Count Technique (UCT) and direct questioning, (ii) generate base rates in a general population sample and compare these to a sample of lone-actor terrorists (n = 125). We surveyed 2108 subjects from the general population. Participants were recruited from an online access panel and randomly assigned to one of three conditions; direct survey, control, or UCT. Survey items were based on a loneactor terrorist codebook developed from the wider literature. Direct questioning was more suitable under our study conditions where UCT resulted in deflation effects. Comparing the base rates identified a number of significant differences: (i) lone-actor terrorists demonstrated propensity indicators related to a cognitive susceptibility, and a crime-and/or violence-supportive morality more often; the general sample demonstrated protective factors more often, (ii) lone-actor terrorists demonstrated situational indicators related to a crime-and/or violence-supportive morality more often, whereas the general sample experienced situational stressors more often, (iii) lone-actor terrorists demonstrated indicators related to exposure to extremism more often. Results suggest there are measurable differences in the prevalence of risk factors between lone-actor terrorists and the general population. However, no single factor "predicts" violent extremism. This bears implications for our understanding of the interrelation of risk and protective factors, and for the risk assessment of violent extremism.

This study explores how researchers’ analytical choices affect the reliability of scientific findings. Most discussions of reliability problems in science focus on systematic biases. We broaden the lens to emphasize the idiosyncrasy of conscious and unconscious decisions that researchers make during data analysis. We coordinated 161 researchers in 73 research teams and observed their research decisions as they used the same data to independently test the same prominent social science hypothesis: that greater immigration reduces support for social policies among the public. In this typical case of social science research, research teams reported both widely diverging numerical findings and substantive conclusions despite identical start conditions. Researchers’ expertise, prior beliefs, and expectations barely predict the wide variation in research outcomes. More than 95% of the total variance in numerical results remains unexplained even after qualitative coding of all identifiable decisions in each team’s workflow. This reveals a universe of uncertainty that remains hidden when considering a single study in isolation. The idiosyncratic nature of how researchers’ results and conclusions varied is a previously underappreciated explanation for why many scientific hypotheses remain contested. These results call for greater epistemic humility and clarity in reporting scientific findings.

Computer-mediated intergroup contact (CMIC) is a valuable strategy to reduce negative sentiments towards members of different social groups. We examined whether characteristics of communication media that facilitate intergroup encounters shape its effect on out-group attitudes. Specifically, we propose that concealing individuating cues about out-group members during CMIC increases prejudice, as interaction partners are perceived as less socially present. To assess these hypotheses, we conducted two mixed-factorial experiments.Participants engaged in synchronous text-chat with out-group members (Study 1) and a confederate (Study 2) who either shared or concealed their name and photo. Overall, CMIC reduced negative out-group sentiments. Study 2 showed, however, that out-group members' anonymity decreased perceived social presence, which was associated with less positive evaluations of the CMIC and higher prejudice. In conclusion, CMIC can contribute to conflict resolution interventions, preparing individuals for direct intergroup contact, if its affordances or conversation topics enhance interaction partners' social presence.Keywords: intergroup contact, prejudice, anonymity, social presence, computer- (Postmes, Spears, & Lea, 1998, 2002. At the Center for Multiculturalism and Technology in Israel, for instance, computer-mediated communication (CMC) services facilitated exchanges between secular Jewish, Orthodox Jewish, and Arab-Islamic teachers (Hoter, Shonfeld, & Ganayim, 2009). After initial text-chats teachers used audio and then video conferencing to engage with out-group members. Following the online intergroup interactions, teachers expressed less prejudice towards the most unfavorable out-group.Negative attitudes of religious Jews towards Muslims were reduced, as were Muslims' negative attitudes towards religious and secular Jews (Walther, Hoter, Ganayem, & Shonfeld, 2015).Intergroup contact certainly is a powerful strategy to overcome conflict and engender harmonious relations between social groups (Allport, 1954;Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). In addition to a substantial literature attesting to the impact of direct, face-to-face intergroup encounters, empirical evidence (Alvídrez, Piñeiro-Naval, Marcos-Ramos, & Rojas-Solís, 2015;Schwab & Greitemeyer, 2015;Tynes, Giang, & Thompson, 2008;Walther et al., 2015;White, & Abu-Rayya, 2012;White, Abu-Rayya, & Weitzel, 2014;White, Abu-Rayya, Bliuc, & Faulkner, 2015) as well as evaluations of internet-based conflict reconciliation programs (Abbott, Austin, Mulkeen, & Metcalfe, 2004;Hoter et al., 2009;Stock et al., 2009) suggest that computer-mediated intergroup contact (CMIC) can as well promote positive out-group attitudes. Running head: ANONYMITY IN COMPUTER-MEDIATED INTERGROUP CONTACT 3The present research extends this work and highlights conditions that moderate the effect of CMIC on prejudice. Specifically, we sought to assess whether characteristics of communication media, such as social media platforms, chat tools, or email services, that enable compute...

No abstract