Individuals often underutilize the advice they receive from others, a phenomenon known as egocentric advice discounting. Recent research suggests that this tendency may be even stronger in groups (Minson & Mueller, 2012; Schultze, Mojzisch, & Schulz-Hardt, 2019). Using a quantity estimation task, we tested five hypotheses about advice taking by groups and individuals. Chief among these is that groups will discount advice more than individuals do when they have reached consensus on the quantity in question prior to receiving that advice, but will discount it less than individuals do when, in addition to being prevented from reaching consensus beforehand, their members initially have rather different opinions about that quantity. We also tested the hypothesis that advice received from groups will be discounted less than advice received from individuals. Individuals and two-person teams received advice on 15 general knowledge questions that each called for a percentage response. Half of the teams were required to reach an initial consensus judgment before receiving that advice, while the rest were prevented from doing so. Study results support most of our hypotheses, and are discussed in terms of the motivated cognitive closure likely induced by pre-advice consensus seeking in groups.
PurposeThe support of host country nationals (HCNs) is critical for expatriate adjustment and performance. Drawing from social identity theory and self-categorization theory, this study investigates the antecedents of HCNs' support toward expatriates in Central/South America, focusing on cultural similarities and expatriate race.Design/methodology/approachWe conducted a quasi-experimental study to understand the antecedents that promote the willingness of HCNs to offer required support to expatriates. Data were gathered from 117 Latin American participants, who were asked to respond to questions about their perceptions of expatriates from the USA and their willingness to offer support to those expatriates.FindingsOverall, our findings suggest that HCNs are likely to provide support to expatriates when they perceive the expatriates as similar in terms of culture and race. Specifically, African Americans received more positive attitudes and support than White Americans in South/Central America. The effect of cultural similarity on HCN willingness to support expatriates was mediated by perceived trustworthiness.Originality/valueThe present study extends the research on HCN support to expatriates, to Central/South America, an important region that has been under-studied in the expatriate–HCN context. Another novel feature of our study is that we investigate the role of expatriate race and cultural similarity and illuminate the underlying mechanism of the relationship between expatriate race and HCN support.
In an experiment involving 3-person laboratory groups (N = 56), we examined the combined effect of group members’ value orientation and their general mindset on group creativity. We induced a collectivistic (vs. individualistic) value orientation via a group-based (vs. individual-based) incentives. We also induced an independent (vs. interdependent) mindset by activating a focus on uniqueness and differentiation (vs. similarity and assimilation). Consistent with a synergy model of individualism-collectivism (Choi, Cho, Seo, & Bechtoldt, 2018), we found that groups generated more original ideas when members combined a collectivistic value orientation with an independent mindset than with an interdependent mindset. By contrast, no significant effects emerged when an individualistic value orientation was induced. We also found that this effect was mediated by the thinking process conducive to creativity (i.e., low fixation), thereby illuminating the underlying cognitive mechanism of the synergy effect. Implications of these findings for research on culture and group creativity are discussed.
Positive and negative affect are often thought to influence the quality of group decision-making by prompting different cognitive processing styles: a less effortful heuristic style in the case of positive affect, and a more detail-oriented systematic style in the case of negative affect, with the latter yielding better group decisions than the former. By contrast, we argue that rather than prompting a specific cognitive processing style, positive affect encourages the maintenance of whatever style is currently in use, while negative affect encourages a change in style. Consequently, both positive and negative affect can result in either better or worse group decisions, depending on which cognitive processing style was at play just prior to the affect’s arousal. To test this idea, we conducted three experiments, and found that when heuristic processing was initially primed, subsequently inducing a sad mood resulted in better decisions by both individuals and groups than did subsequently inducing a happy mood. The reverse occurred when systematic processing was initially primed. In groups, these effects were mediated by the relative focus, during group discussion, on critical decision-relevant information. Implications of these findings and future directions for research are discussed.
PurposeThe support of host country nationals (HCNs) is a key determinant of expatriate adjustment and performance. The purpose of this paper is to explore underlying motivations for their support to expatriates. Previous research has shown that HCNs with pro-social motivation are more likely to help expatriates. Drawing upon motivated information processing in groups (MIP-G) theory, the authors test whether epistemic motivation moderates the observed relationship between pro-social motivation and HCNs’ support toward expatriates.Design/methodology/approachThe authors ran two correlational studies (N = 267) in the USA (Study 1) and South Korea (Study 2). Across two studies, epistemic motivation and social motivation were measured using their multiple proxies validated in previous research. The authors also measured HCNs’ willingness to offer role information and social support to a hypothetical expatriate worker.FindingsResults lend support to our hypotheses that pro-social HCNs are more willing than pro-self HCNs to provide role information and social support to the expatriates, but this occurs only when they have high rather than low epistemic motivation.Originality/valueThe current paper contributes the literature on HCNs helping expatriates by qualifying the prior results that a pro-social motivation (e.g. agreeableness and collectivism) increases the willingness of HCNs to help expatriates. As hypothesized, this study found that that case is only true when HCNs have high, rather than low, epistemic motivation. Also, previous research on MIP-G theory has mainly focused on the performance of small groups (e.g. negotiation, creativity and decision-making). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first attempt to test MIP-G theory in the context of HCNs helping expatriates.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.