Victim sensitivity (VS)—a personality trait reflecting the anxious expectation of being exploited—reliably predicts egoistic behavior in interpersonal situations. Here, we look at intragroup situations and investigate whether even one highly victim‐sensitive individual can have a detrimental effect of solidarity and cooperativeness on the entire group. Two studies—one field study with community residents from Philippine villages who played a solidarity game (N ≈ 800 individuals, 30 villages) and one lab study with participants in a small‐group setting (N = 144 individuals, 48 groups) who played a public goods game—show that the highest VS score in a group negatively predicts solidarity and cooperation in the group, especially when external stressors (e.g., a natural disaster and a climate of distrust) are present and group‐level resilience factors (e.g., in‐group identification and task enjoyment) are absent. These results are relevant for research on the intragroup processes both from a basic as well as from an applied perspective.

The research Ethics committee of the Faculty of Pedagogy and Psychology (ELTE) granted a central permission (permission nr: 2019/47). Many other labs obtained IRB approval too, which approvals can be found here: https://osf.io/j6kte/ . Participants had to give informed consent before starting the experiment. Only participants recruited through Mturk or Prolific received monetary compensation.Note that full information on the approval of the study protocol must also be provided in the manuscript.

The present research investigates the psychological dynamics underlying displaced revenge. We examine (1) the effect of entitativity on displaced revenge tendencies, including potential mediators of this effect, and (2) the conditions under which taking displaced revenge is satisfying for avengers. In three studies, we show that (a) perpetrator group entitativity predicts the tendency to take displaced revenge via perceptions that the vengeful action is effective in delivering a message to the original perpetrator, (b) that displaced revenge is satisfying when the group continues to exist in its original form, but not when the perpetrator has left the group or when the group has dissolved, and (c) that displaced revenge is most satisfying when both the original perpetrator and the target of revenge understand why revenge has been taken. These findings imply that sending a message to the original perpetrator is an important aspect of the psychological dynamics underlying displaced revenge.

No abstract

Much research on moral judgment is centered on moral dilemmas in which deontological perspectives (i.e., emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with utilitarian judgements (i.e., following the greater good defined through consequences). A central finding of this field Greene et al. showed that psychological and situational factors (e.g., the intent of the agent, or physical contact between the agent and the victim) play an important role in people’s use of deontological versus utilitarian considerations when making moral decisions. As their study was conducted with US samples, our knowledge is limited concerning the universality of this effect, in general, and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors of moral judgments, in particular. Here, we empirically test the universality of deontological and utilitarian judgments by replicating Greene et al.’s experiments on a large (N = X,XXX) and diverse (WEIRD and non-WEIRD) sample across the world to explore the influence of culture on moral judgment. The relevance of this exploration to a broad range of policy-making problems is discussed.