Development of prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and preliminary evidence.

Lange, Paul A. M. Van; Bruin, Ellen M. N. De; Otten, W.; Joireman, Jeff

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.733

Cited by 946 publications

(1,114 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,010

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Commitment is defined as the intent to persist in a relationship, including long-term orientation to the involvement and feelings of psychological attachment to the partner (Agnew, Van Lange, Rusbult, & Langston, 1998;Rusbult, Martz, & Agnew, 1998). As demonstrated in several studies, commitment is predictive of various cognitions and behaviors, including not only accommodation but also willingness to sacrifice, unrealistically positive beliefs about the relationship, and a shift in thinking from "I, me, and mine" to "we, us, and ours" (e.g., Agnew et al, 1998;Rusbult, Van Lange, Wildschut, Yovetich, & Verette, 2000;Van Lange, Otten, De Bruin, & Joireman, 1997;Van Lange, Rusbult, et al, 1997;Wieselquist, Rusbult, Foster, & Agnew, 1999).…”

Section: An Interdependence Framework Of Forgivingmentioning

confidence: 99%

When forgiving enhances psychological well-being: The role of interpersonal commitment.

Karremans¹,

Lange²,

Ouwerkerk³

et al. 2003

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

288

278

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research addresses the question of when and why forgiving might enhance psychological well-being. The authors predict that forgiving is associated with enhanced well-being but that this association should be more pronounced in relationships of strong rather than weak commitment. This hypothesis received good support in Studies 1-3. Studies 2 and 3 addressed the issue of why forgiving might be associated with psychological well-being, revealing that this association was reduced after controlling for psychological tension (i.e., a psychological state of discomfort due to conflicting cognitions and feelings). Study 4 revealed that in the context of marital relationships, tendencies toward forgiving one's spouse exhibited a more pronounced association with psychological well-being than did tendencies to forgive others in general.

show abstract

Section: An Interdependence Framework Of Forgivingmentioning

confidence: 99%

When forgiving enhances psychological well-being: The role of interpersonal commitment.

Karremans¹,

Lange²,

Ouwerkerk³

et al. 2003

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

288

278

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Option A represents the competitive choice because it yields a larger difference between one's own and the other's outcomes ( The decomposed game measurement technique has been demonstrated to have good internal consistency (e.g., Liebrand & Van Run, 1985) and test-retest reliability over substantial periods of time (i.e., 19 months; Van Lange & Schuyt, 1997; see also Dehue, McClintock, & Liebrand, 1993;Kuhlman, Camac, & Cunha, 1986). Also, social value orientations, as measured by the current nine-item decomposed game measure, are not related to tendencies toward favorable self-presentation or to measures of mood (e.g., Platow, 1992;Van Lange, Otten, De Bruin, & Joireman, 1997). Finally, there is increasing evidence that social value orientations are predictive of cognition and behavior in many settings of interdependence, supporting the ecological validity of social value orientation (e.g., negotiation, De Dreu & Van Lange, 1995;helping behavior, McClintock & Allison, 1989; environmental decision making, Van Vugt, Van Lange, & Meertens, 1996).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From game theory to real life: How social value orientation affects willingness to sacrifice in ongoing close relationships.

Lange¹,

Agnew²,

Harinck³

et al. 1997

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

216

201

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research adopted an interdependence analysis of sacrifice, examining the link between commitment (i.e., the subjective experience of dependence and long-term orientation) and willingness to sacrifice in ongoing close relationships, and determining whether this link is moderated by preexisting individual differences in social value orientation (i.e., prosocial, individualistic, or competitive orientation). Consistent with hypotheses, results of 2 studies revealed both that willingness to sacrifice was associated with greater commitment and that this link was more pronounced among individualists than among prosocials. Results also revealed an association between one's own willingness to sacrifice and beliefs regarding the partner's willingness to sacrifice (this link was somewhat more pronounced among prosocials than among individualists) and one's own willingness to sacrifice and actual partner's willingness to sacrifice.

show abstract

“…Research by Van Lange and his colleagues (Van Lange, Agnew, Harinck, & Steemers, 1997;Van Lange & Liebrand, 1991;Van Lange, Otten, De Bruin, & Joireman, 1997;Van Lange & Semin-Goossens, 1998; see also Kuhlman, Camac, & Cunha, 1986) has compared the responses of three classes of individuals: prosocials (those who are predisposed to distribute outcomes so as to maximize joint gains or minimize reciprocal losses), individualists (those who are predisposed to maximize own gains in an absolute sense), and competitors (those who are predisposed to maximize own outcomes relative to others' outcomes). In comparison to individualists and competitors, prosocials are more likely to respond cooperatively, regardless of their partner's response.…”

Section: Concluding Rem Arksmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Self in Relationships: Whether, How, and When Close Others Put the Self “in Its Place”

Sedikides¹,

Campbell²,

Reeder³

et al. 2001

European Review of Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

favorable impression of the partner; and (b) expecting attributional generosity from the partner. In fact, when the partner violates this exp ectancy (i.e., when he/she displays the SSB), members of close dyads respond by manifesting the SSB in turn. We discuss these and several other contingencies that are likely to keep an individual's self-enhancement tendencies in check.Individuals enhance the self in diverse and remarkable ways. They consider themselves more moral, trustworthy, kind, and physically attractive than others. They rate themselves as above-average teachers, managers, and leaders. They also believe that they are happier than others, that they are likely to be healthier and live longer than others, and that they are more likely than others to experience positive life events but less likely than others to experience negative life events. They even believe they are better drivers! Such overblown self-evaluations are well documented (Sedikides & Strube, 1997). These beliefs are maintained through several mechanisms. One mechanism is biased memorial processes, such as better memory for positive than negative self-attributes (Skowronski, Betz, Thompson, & Shannon, 1991) and for feedback pertaining to one's strengths rather than one's weak@sses (Sedikides & Green, 2000). Another mechanism is the selective reconstruction, generation, and evaluation of confirming causal theories (Kunda, 1990;Ross, 1989). A third mechanism is the idiosyncratic (i.e., favorable to the self) definition of traits and abilities (Dunning, 1993). Other mechanisms include denial (Janoff-Bulman & Timko, 1987), psychological distancing from others (Schimel, Pyszczynski, Greenberg, O 'Mahen, & Arndt, 2000), affirmation of a self-domain that is unrelated to the selfdomain under threat (Steele, 1988), downward social comparison (Wills, 1981, favorable self-presentation (Schlenker & Pontari, 2000), and selffavoring causal attributions for success and failure -an attributional pattern known as the self-serving bias (SSB).The SSB is the individual's propensity to make internal attributions for success, but external attributions for failure. Stated otherwise, the SSB refers to the individual's taking responsibility for successful task outcomes, but denying responsibility, or blaming other persons or circumstances, for failed task outcomes. For example, students will take credit for passing a difficult examination, but will attribute failing the same examination to its difficulty or the instructor's tough grading policy; business partners working on an account will claim disproportionate credit if the account is gained, but will avoid personal responsibility if the account is lost; and group members will overemphasize their individual contribution on a group project, but will blame other members for the group's inferior output. The SSB is pervasive, and is one of the most robust and easily replicable phenomena in social and personality psychology (for both narrative and quantitative reviews, see Arkin, Cooper,

show abstract

Development of prosocial, individualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and preliminary evidence.

Cited by 946 publications

References 49 publications

When forgiving enhances psychological well-being: The role of interpersonal commitment.

When forgiving enhances psychological well-being: The role of interpersonal commitment.

From game theory to real life: How social value orientation affects willingness to sacrifice in ongoing close relationships.

The Self in Relationships: Whether, How, and When Close Others Put the Self “in Its Place”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About