Objective: The results of numerous empirical studies have showed the occurrence of so-called unrealistic optimism. Thus, we aimed to investigate whether in the situation of an imminent coronavirus pandemic, people would still perceive themselves as being less exposed to the disease than others. Methods: Survey studies were conducted to examine the level of unrealistic optimism. Participants (n = 171, 67.3% of women) in a subjective way judged the risk of their coronavirus infection and the likelihood that this would happen to an average student of the same sex from their class. The survey was conducted in three waves: prior to the announcement of the first case of coronavirus (2-3 March), immediately after that announcement (5-6 March), and a few days later (9-10 March). Results: We showed that women estimated the chances of being infected as significantly higher (M = 4.52, SD = 2.079; t = 2.387; p = 0.018; Cohen's d = 0.393) than men (M = 3.71, SD = 2.042). The phenomenon of unrealistic optimism was observed especially in men (as compared to other male participants) as it appeared in all three measures (M (you) = 3.95 vs. M (other male student) = 4.63; M = 3.71 vs. M = 4.68, and M = 4.46 vs. M = 5.38 in phase one, two, and three, respectively; p ≤ 0.006 for all comparison), but also in women in the last two measures (M (you) = 4.55 vs. M (other female student) = 4.95, and M = 4.99 vs. M = 5.38 in phase 2 and 3, respectively; p ≤ 0.012 for both comparisons). Conclusions: The study revealed a fairly general occurrence of unrealistic optimism, which was mainly observed in men as it appeared in all three measures, but also in women in the last two measures. This result is important for health experts who are responsible for making people comply with regulations concerning social distancing, putting masks on to stop infection, and staying at home. It is possible that unrealistically optimistic people will behave much less in line with the aforementioned recommendations, causing coronavirus to spread widely.

This research addressed three questions concerning facial mimicry: (a) Does the relationship between mimicry and liking characterize all facial expressions, or is it limited to specific expressions? (b) Is the relationship between facial mimicry and liking symmetrical for the mimicker and the mimickee? (c) Does conscious mimicry have consequences for emotion recognition? A paradigm is introduced in which participants interact over a computer setup with a confederate whose prerecorded facial displays of emotion are synchronized with participants’ behavior to create the illusion of social interaction. In Experiment 1, the confederate did or did not mimic participants’ facial displays of various subsets of basic emotions. Mimicry promoted greater liking for the confederate regardless of which emotions were mimicked. Experiment 2 reversed these roles: participants were instructed to mimic or not to mimic the confederate’s facial displays. Mimicry did not affect liking for the confederate but it did impair emotion recognition.

No abstract

The present research explored the effects of nonverbal mimicry behavior and mimicker attractiveness in a natural retail context. A 3 (nonverbal mimicry, nonmimicking, antimimicry) × 2 (attractive salesperson, attractiveness control) design was used to study the effects of different combinations of these variables on female customers’ (N = 150) purchases, customer service ratings, and plans to return to the store. Results showed that customers spent the most and had the highest customer service ratings when they interacted with a salesperson who was both attractive and mimicking them. When the salesperson, however, was less attractive and engaged in the opposite gestures as the customer, it corresponded with substantially lower customer service ratings and a tendency to not wish to return to the store. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings for mimicry and attractiveness in a retail environment are discussed.

Research on the chameleon effect has demonstrated that social benefits, such as liking, safety, rapport, affiliation, and cohesion can be evoked through nonverbal imitation (e.g., body language and mannerisms). Herein, we introduce the echo effect, a less researched phenomenon of verbal mimicry, in a real-world setting. Study participants, 330 currency exchange office customers, were assigned into one of three experimental and two control conditions. Careful attention to research design produced results that address issues raised in the mimicry literature and more clearly define the boundaries of verbal mimicry. The results demonstrate that while repetition of words is important in increasing an individual’s tendency to perform prosocial behaviors, the order in which they are repeated back is not; verbal mimicry is more powerful mechanism than dialogue; and, for nonmimicry control conditions, no response produces the same result as a brief response.

IntroductionOptimism is boosted by leaders hoping for job creation, increased business spending, and a high consumption rate. In this research, we assessed the hazardous side effect for global health policies stemming from this optimism: unrealistic optimism (being unrealistically optimistic about future negative events), which may be responsible for new infections and may prevent the eradication of COVID-19. The goal of the research was not only to assess whether this effect exists and to find out whether such an effect is global but also to evaluate whether there are groups resistant to this effect (presenting a potential toolkit for reducing this effect).Material and methodsIn May and April of 2020, online surveys were administered among students in Iran, Kazakhstan, and Poland respectively to assess the unrealistic optimism/pessimism. In study 1/objective 1, the survey was conducted twice (in a period of about 3 weeks) to assess the potential change (due to the anonymous codes delivered by the participants, we were able to make follow-ups between the same participants) in time in the 3 countries. In the first wave, 1611 participants took the survey. In the second wave, there were 1426 respondents. In study 2, the survey was conducted among 207 Polish healthcare workers of the frontline hospital.ResultsIn study 1 across the 3 cultures (the first wave for unmatched data by the code of the specific participant F(1, 1608) = 419.2; p < 0.001, and for matched data F(1, 372) = 167.195; p < 0.001; ηp² = 0.31; ηp² = 0.21; the second wave for unmatched data F(1, 1423) = 359.61; p < 0.001; ηp² = 0.2, and for matched F(1, 372) = 166.84; p < 0.001; ηp² = 0.31), unrealistic optimism is present, and importantly it is constant in time. In study 2, unrealistic optimism was not found among healthcare professionals, who we hypothesized due to the medical knowledge are not inclined to be unrealistically optimistic t(206) = 1.06; p = 0.290, d = 0.07.ConclusionsMedical education of COVID-19 severity might reduce unrealistic optimism, which may be the reason why pandemic restrictions are not being respected.

Abstract. Clinical psychologists have frequently reported that similarity in movements can be greatly beneficial. It increases rapport and favors a better understanding of clients’ emotions. Social psychologists have shown that mimicking instills greater trust in the mimicker and that mimickees disclose more intimate information. Therefore, mimicry seems to be an ideal tool to implement during therapeutic interventions. However, the current study reveals a potentially perilous outcome stemming from mimicry: mimicked (verbally – Study 1, N = 49; nonverbally – Study 2, N = 40) participants were more eager to cheat the mimicker. This means that incorporating mimicry into the therapeutic process may lead to clients misinforming therapists. The discussion section describes some caveats associated with the experiments and suggests directions for future research.

No abstract