Beliefs about humanity, not higher power, predict extraordinary altruism

Amormino, P., O'Connell, et al.

Journal of Research in Personality

Volume 101, December 2022, 104313

Abstract

Using a rare sample of altruistic kidney donors (n = 56, each of whom had donated a kidney to a stranger) and demographically similar controls (n = 75), we investigated how beliefs about human nature correspond to extraordinary altruism. Extraordinary altruists were less likely than controls to believe that humans can be truly evil. Results persisted after controlling for trait empathy and religiosity. Belief in pure good was not associated with extraordinary altruism. We found no differences in the religiosity and spirituality of extraordinary altruists compared to controls. Findings suggest that highly altruistic individuals believe that others deserve help regardless of their potential moral shortcomings. Results provide preliminary evidence that lower levels of cynicism motivate costly, non-normative altruism toward strangers.

Discussion

We found for the first time a significant negative relationship between real-world acts of altruism toward strangers and the belief that humans can be purely evil. Specifically, our results showed that adults who have engaged in costly altruism toward strangers are distinguished from typical adults by their reduced tendency to believe that humans can be purely evil. By contrast, altruists were no more likely than controls to believe that humans can be purely good. These patterns could not be accounted for by demographic differences, differences in self reported empathy, or differences in religious or spiritual beliefs.

This finding could be viewed as paradoxical, in that extraordinary altruists are themselves often viewed as the epitome of pure good—even described as “saints” in the scholarly literature (Henderson et al., 2003).

But our findings suggest that the willingness to provide costly aid for anonymous strangers may not require believing that others are purely \good (i.e., that morally infallible people exist), but rather believing that there is at least a little bit of good in everyone. Thus, extraordinary altruists are not overly optimistic about the moral goodness of other people but are willing to act altruistically towards morally imperfect people anyway. Although the concept of “pure evil” is conceptually linked to spiritual phenomena, we did not find any evidence directly linking altruists’ beliefs in evil to spirituality or religion.

 (cut)

Conclusions

Because altruistic kidney donations to anonymous strangers satisfy the most stringent definitions of costly altruism (Clavien & Chapuisat, 2013), the study of these altruists can provide valuable insight into the nature of altruism, much as studying other rare, ecologically valid populations has yielded insights into psychological phenomena such asmemory (LePort et al., 2012) and face processing (Russell, Duchaine, &

Nakayama, 2009). Results show that altruists report lower belief in pure evil, which extends previous literature showing that higher levels of generalized trust and lower levels of cynicism and are associated with everyday prosocial behavior (Turner & Valentine, 2001). Our findings provide preliminary evidence that beliefs about the morality of people in general, and the goodness (or rather, lack of badness) of other humans may help motivate real-world costly altruistic acts toward strangers.

The research is paywalled here.

Interaction between games give rise to the evolution of moral norms of cooperation

Salahshour M (2022)

PLoS Comput Biol 18(9): e1010429.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010429

Abstract

In many biological populations, such as human groups, individuals face a complex strategic setting, where they need to make strategic decisions over a diverse set of issues and their behavior in one strategic context can affect their decisions in another. This raises the question of how the interaction between different strategic contexts affects individuals’ strategic choices and social norms? To address this question, I introduce a framework where individuals play two games with different structures and decide upon their strategy in a second game based on their knowledge of their opponent’s strategy in the first game. I consider both multistage games, where the same opponents play the two games consecutively, and reputation-based model, where individuals play their two games with different opponents but receive information about their opponent’s strategy. By considering a case where the first game is a social dilemma, I show that when the second game is a coordination or anti-coordination game, the Nash equilibrium of the coupled game can be decomposed into two classes, a defective equilibrium which is composed of two simple equilibrium of the two games, and a cooperative equilibrium, in which coupling between the two games emerge and sustain cooperation in the social dilemma. For the existence of the cooperative equilibrium, the cost of cooperation should be smaller than a value determined by the structure of the second game. Investigation of the evolutionary dynamics shows that a cooperative fixed point exists when the second game belongs to coordination or anti-coordination class in a mixed population. However, the basin of attraction of the cooperative fixed point is much smaller for the coordination class, and this fixed point disappears in a structured population. When the second game belongs to the anti-coordination class, the system possesses a spontaneous symmetry-breaking phase transition above which the symmetry between cooperation and defection breaks. A set of cooperation supporting moral norms emerges according to which cooperation stands out as a valuable trait. Notably, the moral system also brings a more efficient allocation of resources in the second game. This observation suggests a moral system has two different roles: Promotion of cooperation, which is against individuals’ self-interest but beneficial for the population, and promotion of organization and order, which is at both the population’s and the individual’s self-interest. Interestingly, the latter acts like a Trojan horse: Once established out of individuals’ self-interest, it brings the former with itself. Importantly, the fact that the evolution of moral norms depends only on the cost of cooperation and is independent of the benefit of cooperation implies that moral norms can be harmful and incur a pure collective cost, yet they are just as effective in promoting order and organization. Finally, the model predicts that recognition noise can have a surprisingly positive effect on the evolution of moral norms and facilitates cooperation in the Snow Drift game in structured populations.

Author summary

How do moral norms spontaneously evolve in the presence of selfish incentives? An answer to this question is provided by the observation that moral systems have two distinct functions: Besides encouraging self-sacrificing cooperation, they also bring organization and order into the societies. In contrast to the former, which is costly for the individuals but beneficial for the group, the latter is beneficial for both the group and the individuals. A simple evolutionary model suggests this latter aspect is what makes a moral system evolve based on the individuals’ self-interest. However, a moral system behaves like a Trojan horse: Once established out of the individuals’ self-interest to promote order and organization, it also brings self-sacrificing cooperation.

The research is here.

How Bullying Manifests at Work — and How to Stop It

Ludmila N. Praslova, Ron Carucci, & Caroline Stokes

Harvard Business Review

Originally posted 4 NOV 22

While the organizational costs of incivility and toxicity are well documented, bullying at work is still a problem. An estimated 48.6 million Americans, or about 30% of the workforce, are bullied at work. In India, that percentage is reported to be as high as 46% or even 55%. In Germany, it’s a lower but non-negligible 17%. Yet bullying often receives little attention or effective action.

To maximize workplace health and well-being, it’s critical to create workplaces where all employees — regardless of their position — are safe. Systemic, organizational-level approaches can help prevent the harms associated with different types of bullying.

The term workplace bullying describes a wide range of behaviors, and this complexity makes addressing it difficult and often ineffective. Here, we’ll discuss the different types of bullying, the myths that prevent leaders from addressing it, and how organizations can effectively intervene and create a safer workplace.

The Different Types of Bullying

To develop more comprehensive systems of bullying prevention and support employees’ psychological well-being, leaders first need to be aware of the different types of bullying and how they show up. We’ve identified 15 different features of bullying, based on standard typologies of aggression, data from the Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI), and Ludmila’s 25+ years of research and practice focused on addressing workplace aggression, discrimination, and incivility to create healthy organizational cultures.

These 15 features can be mapped to some of the common archetypes of bullies. Take the “Screamer,” who is associated with yelling and fist-banging or the quieter but equally dangerous “Schemer” who uses Machiavellian plotting, gaslighting, and smear campaigns to strip others of resources or push them out. The Schemer doesn’t necessarily have a position of legitimate power and can present as a smiling and eager-to-help colleague or even an innocent-looking intern. While hostile motivation and overt tactics align with the Screamer bully archetype and instrumental, indirect, and covert bullying is typical of the Schemer, a bully can have multiple motives and use multiple tactics — consciously or unconsciously.

Caroline mediated a situation that illustrates both conscious and unconscious dynamics. At the reception to celebrate Ewa’s* national-level achievement award, Harper, her coworker, spent most of the time talking about her own accomplishments, then took the stage to congratulate herself on mentoring Ewa and letting her take “ownership” of their collective work. But there had been no mentorship or collective work. After overtly and directly putting Ewa down and (perhaps unconsciously) attempting to elevate herself, Harper didn’t stop. She “accidentally” removed Ewa from crucial information distribution lists — an act of indirect, covert sabotage.  

In another example, Ludmila encountered a mixed-motive, mixed-tactic situation. Charles, a manager with a strong xenophobic sentiment, regularly berated Noor, a work visa holder, behind closed doors — an act of hostile and direct bullying. Motivated by a desire to take over the high-stakes, high-visibility projects Noor had built, Charles also engaged in indirect, covert bullying by falsifying performance records to make a case for her dismissal.

The info is here.

Dozens of telehealth startups sent sensitive health information to big tech companies

Katie Palmer with

Todd Feathers & Simon Fondrie-Teitler 

STAT NEWS

Originally posted 13 DEC 22

Here is an excerpt:

Health privacy experts and former regulators said sharing such sensitive medical information with the world’s largest advertising platforms threatens patient privacy and trust and could run afoul of unfair business practices laws. They also emphasized that privacy regulations like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) were not built for telehealth. That leaves “ethical and moral gray areas” that allow for the legal sharing of health-related data, said Andrew Mahler, a former investigator at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights.

“I thought I was at this point hard to shock,” said Ari Friedman, an emergency medicine physician at the University of Pennsylvania who researches digital health privacy. “And I find this particularly shocking.”

In October and November, STAT and The Markup signed up for accounts and completed onboarding forms on 50 telehealth sites using a fictional identity with dummy email and social media accounts. To determine what data was being shared by the telehealth sites as users completed their forms, reporters examined the network traffic between trackers using Chrome DevTools, a tool built into Google’s Chrome browser.

On Workit’s site, for example, STAT and The Markup found that a piece of code Meta calls a pixel sent responses about self-harm, drug and alcohol use, and personal information — including first name, email address, and phone number — to Facebook.

The investigation found trackers collecting information on websites that sell everything from addiction treatments and antidepressants to pills for weight loss and migraines. Despite efforts to trace the data using the tech companies’ own transparency tools, STAT and The Markup couldn’t independently confirm how or whether Meta and the other tech companies used the data they collected.

After STAT and The Markup shared detailed findings with all 50 companies, Workit said it had changed its use of trackers. When reporters tested the website again on Dec. 7, they found no evidence of tech platform trackers during the company’s intake or checkout process.

“Workit Health takes the privacy of our members seriously,” Kali Lux, a spokesperson for the company, wrote in an email. “Out of an abundance of caution, we elected to adjust the usage of a number of pixels for now as we continue to evaluate the issue.”

The info is here.

The motivation of mission statements: How regulatory mode influences workplace discrimination

Kanze, D., Conley, M. A., & Higgins, E. T. (2021).

Organizational Behavior and Human 

Decision Processes, 166, 84–103.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.04.002

Abstract

Despite concerted efforts to enforce ethical standards, transgressions continue to plague US corporations. This paper investigates whether the way in which an organization pursues its goals can influence ethical violations, manifested as involvement in discrimination. We test this hypothesis among franchises, which employ a considerable amount of low-income workers adversely affected by discrimination. Drawing upon Regulatory Mode Theory, we perform a linguistic analysis of franchise mission statements to determine their degree of locomotion and assessment language. EEOC archival data for the past decade reveals that regulatory mode predicts franchise involvement in discrimination. Discriminatory behavior is associated with franchises whose mission statements motivate employees to embrace urgent action (locomotion mode) over thoughtful consideration (assessment mode). Two experiments demonstrate that participants exposed to high locomotion mission statements tend to disregard ethical standards due to their need for expediency, making significantly more discriminatory managerial decisions than those exposed to high assessment mission statements.

Highlights

• We examine the influence of motivational messaging on workplace discrimination.

• The regulatory mode of mission statements predicts discrimination activity.

• Discrimination is associated with motivational messaging high in locomotion mode.

• This risk can be counteracted with language that is high in assessment mode.

• Consideration of ethical standards mediates this effect due to need for expediency.

• We introduce a regulatory mode dictionary to help evaluate motivational language.

From the General Discussion

Regulatory mode and unethical behavior

These studies contribute to the literature that resides at the crossroads of regulatory mode and ethics, informing our understanding of the motivational forces behind discrimination by highlighting the role of locomotion and assessment concerns. We apply regulatory mode theory to investigate the organizational context in which individuals engage in an important, unambiguous, and generalizable facet of unethical behavior: violations of corporate ethical standards known as workplace nondiscrimination policies. Going on to examine the interplay between perceived expediency and attention, we extend scholarly research related to cognitive influences on the perpetrators (Dovidio et al., 2002, Lai and Babcock, 2013) and the companies in which they are employed (Cortina, 2008). Importantly, our work sheds light on the conditions under which employees attend to standards deemed key to ethical conduct (Lau, 2010).

By demonstrating the unintended consequences of leadership decisions embodied in corporate mission statements, our work complements predictive research on discrimination that has primarily been devoted to the effectiveness of intended policies and programs (Castilla, 2015, McKay et al., 2011; see Dipboye & Colella, 2005 and Green, 2003 for several exceptions). The presence of EEOC violations in the face of corporate nondiscrimination policies extends the rich tradition of bounded ethicality research on unintended choices beyond the individual to conceptualize behavior at the organizational level (Chugh et al., 2005). Likewise, we widen the breadth of regulatory mode theory’s applicability, establishing the mechanism by which locomotion and assessment concerns can produce significant organizational-level effects through individual decision making (Bélanger et al., 2015).

Exploring the trade-offs inherent in contrasting modes of goal pursuit, we also enrich the growing literature on the “dark side” of goals (Ordóñez et al., 2009, Welsh and Ordóñez, 2014). In doing so, this work likewise informs a more nuanced understanding of locomotion mode. Our theoretical prediction and empirical support for the pernicious effects of locomotion mode lie in stark contrast to the preponderance of regulatory mode literature. Past work has documented a variety of otherwise positive outcomes—involving transformational leadership, intrinsic task motivation, multi-tasking, time-management, and well-being—associated with locomotion (Amato et al., 2014, Benjamin and Flynn, 2006, Di Santo et al., 2018, Pierro et al., 2013, Pierro et al., 2006).

Our EEOC archival study presented empirical evidence linking regulatory mode to actual managerial transgressions taking place in corporations spanning a wide range of industries that operate throughout the entire United States. These real-world cases of discrimination then served as the decision-making tasks in controlled experiments that manipulated locomotion and assessment of mission statements. Employing a combination of archival and experimental methodologies, our work represents a marriage of external and internal validity that enhances both theory and practice in this domain.23 Ultimately, linguistic applications that modify corporate mission statements for goal pursuit language can answer a recent call “to move beyond a descriptive framework and focus on finding empirically testable strategies to mitigate unethical behavior” (Sezer et al., 2015, p. 78).

The research is here.

The Trajectory of Truth: A Longitudinal Study of the Illusory Truth Effect

Henderson, E. L., Simons, D. J., & Barr, D. J.

(2021). Journal of Cognition, 4(1), 29.

DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/joc.161

Abstract

Repeated statements are rated as subjectively truer than comparable new statements, even though repetition alone provides no new, probative information (the illusory truth effect). Contrary to some theoretical predictions, the illusory truth effect seems to be similar in magnitude for repetitions occurring after minutes or weeks. This Registered Report describes a longitudinal investigation of the illusory truth effect (n = 608, n = 567 analysed) in which we systematically manipulated intersession interval (immediately, one day, one week, and one month) in order to test whether the illusory truth effect is immune to time. Both our hypotheses were supported: We observed an illusory truth effect at all four intervals (overall effect: χ2(1) = 169.91; M(repeated) = 4.52, M(new) = 4.14; H1), with the effect diminishing as delay increased (H2). False information repeated over short timescales might have a greater effect on truth judgements than repetitions over longer timescales. Researchers should consider the implications of the choice of intersession interval when designing future illusory truth effect research.

Discussion

We used a repeated measures, longitudinal design to investigate the trajectory of the illusory truth effect over time: immediately, one day, one week, and one month. Both of our hypotheses were supported: We observed a main effect of the illusory truth effect when averaging across all four delay conditions (H1). The illusory truth effect was present at all four intervals, but the size of the effect diminished as the interval duration increased (H2). The repeated-minus-new difference was largest when tested immediately (0.67) and shrank after one day (0.39), one week (0.27), and one month (0.14). This reduction in the illusory truth effect over time is inconsistent with an earlier meta-analysis that found no relationship between the size of the effect and intersession interval across studies (Dechêne et al., 2010), but it is consistent with one between-subjects study showing a smaller effect after one week than after a few minutes (Silva et al., 2017, Experiment 1).

The reduced effect after a delay is consistent with the recognition, familiarity, and processing fluency explanations of the illusory truth effect. All three explanations predict larger effects for recently repeated items and smaller effects as feelings of recognition, familiarity or fluency fade with time.

A caveat to the processing fluency account occurs when the source of fluency is obvious (e.g., when participants recognise that statements have been recently repeated). In such cases, participants might not use processing fluency to make their judgments of truth, thereby eliminating the effect (Alter & Oppenheimer, 2009; Nadarevic & Erdfelder, 2014; Oppenheimer, 2004). Our results challenge this fluency discounting explanation because the size of the illusory truth effect was greatest when tested immediately, when participants should be most aware that some statements had been repeated. Similarly, the source disassociation hypothesis predicts that the illusory truth effect should increase with time as people forget that they saw the statements during the experiment, remembering only the semantic content and attributing it to a source outside the experiment. Here we find the opposite.

The research is here.

Wealth redistribution promotes happiness

R. J. Dwyer and E. W. Dunn

PNAS, 119 (46) e2211123119

November 7, 2022

Significance

We took advantage of a unique experiment, in which anonymous donors gave US$10,000 to each of 200 recipients in seven countries. By comparing cash recipients with a control group that did not receive money, this preregistered experiment provides causal evidence that cash transfers substantially increase happiness across a diverse global sample. These gains were greatest for recipients who had the least: Those in lower-income countries gained three times more happiness than those in higher-income countries. Our data provide the clearest evidence to date that private citizens can improve net global happiness through voluntary redistribution to those with less.

Abstract

How much happiness could be gained if the world’s wealth were distributed more equally? Despite decades of research investigating the relationship between money and happiness, no experimental work has quantified this effect for people across the global economic spectrum. We estimated the total gain in happiness generated when a pair of high-net-worth donors redistributed US$2 million of their wealth in $10,000 cash transfers to 200 people. Our preregistered analyses offer causal evidence that cash transfers substantially increase happiness among economically diverse individuals around the world. Recipients in lower-income countries exhibited happiness gains three times larger than those in higher-income countries. Still, the cash provided detectable benefits for people with household incomes up to $123,000.

From the Discussion section

This study provides causal evidence that cash transfers substantially increase happiness across a diverse sample spanning the global socioeconomic spectrum. By redistributing their wealth, two donors generated substantial happiness gains for others. These gains were greatest for recipients who had the least: Those in lower-income countries gained three times more happiness than those in higher-income countries, and those making $10k a year gained twice as much happiness as those making $100k. Still, the cash provided detectable benefits for people with household incomes up to $123k. Given that 99% of individuals earn less than this amount, these findings suggest that cash transfers could benefit the vast majority of the world’s population.

Of course, some caution is necessary in interpreting these findings, given that the study did not include nationally representative samples and focused on a limited time period. Although all participants were English-speaking Twitter users who were relatively liberal-leaning and well-educated, this sample was more economically diverse than any previous cash-transfer studies, enabling us to estimate the happiness benefits across a wide range of incomes. That said, our finding that cash transfers improved SWB—but less so for people with higher incomes—is consistent with the law of diminishing marginal utility in economics and with large-scale studies documenting the concave relationship between income and self-reported happiness.

The research is here.

Strategic Behavior with Tight, Loose, and Polarized Norms

Dimant, E., Gelfand, M. J., Hochleitner, A., 

& Sonderegger, S. (2022).

SSRN.com

Abstract

Descriptive norms – the behavior of other individuals in one’s reference group – play a key role in shaping individual decisions. When characterizing the behavior of others, a standard approach in the literature is to focus on average behavior. In this paper, we argue both theoretically and empirically that not only averages, but the shape of the whole distribution of behavior can play a crucial role in how people react to descriptive norms. Using a representative sample of the U.S. population, we experimentally investigate how individuals react to strategic environments that are characterized by different distributions of behavior, focusing on the distinction between tight (i.e., characterized by low behavioral variance), loose (i.e., characterized by high behavioral variance), and polarized (i.e., characterized by u-shaped behavior) environments. We find that individuals indeed strongly respond to differences in the variance and shape of the descriptive norm they are facing: loose norms generate greater behavioral variance and polarization generates polarized responses. In polarized environments, most individuals prefer extreme actions that expose them to considerable strategic risk to intermediate actions that would minimize such risk. Importantly, we also find that, in polarized and loose environments, personal traits and values play a larger role in determining actual behavior. This provides important insights into how individuals navigate environments that contain strategic uncertainty.

Conclusion

In this study, we investigate how individuals respond to differences in the observed distribution of others’ behavior. In particular, we test how different distributions of cooperative behavior affect an individual’s own willingness to cooperate. We first develop a theoretical framework that is based on the assumption that individuals are conditional cooperators and interpret differences in observed distribution as a shift in strategic uncertainty. We then test our framework empirically in the context of a PGG. To do so, we measure behavior in the PGG both before and after participants receive information about the distribution from which a co-players contribution is drawn. We thereby vary both the mean (high/low) and the variance/shape (high variance/ low variance/ u-shaped) of the observed distribution.

Our results confirm previous research showing that information about average behavior has an important effect on subsequent decisions. Individuals contribute significantly more in high mean conditions than in low mean conditions. However, the mean is not the only important feature of the distribution. In line with our theoretical framework, we find that looser environments generate a larger variance in individual responses compared to tighter environments.  In other words, “tight breeds tight” and “loose breeds loose”. Moreover, we find that, when confronted with a polarized (U-shaped) distribution, participants’ responses are polarized as well. A possible interpretation of these results is that people have heterogeneous reactions to situations characterized by high strategic uncertainty, while they react rather similarly when strategic uncertainty is low. Finally, we find that personal values have a higher predictive power for contribution decisions in loose and polarized compared to tight environments. This suggests that an individual’s reaction to strategic uncertainty may be mediated by their personal values.  This in turn has practical implications for behavioral change interventions. For example, when intervening in contexts with loose or polarized empirical norms, it may be more fruitful to focus on personal values, whereas when intervening in contexts with tight empirical norms, it may be more fruitful to focus on the behaviors of others.

Overall, we show that when studying empirical norms it is crucial to not only consider the average behavior, but the whole distribution. Doing so provides substantial analytical richness that can form the basis for a better understanding of the different behavioral patterns observed across societies.

The research is here.

From virility to virtue: the psychology of apology in honor cultures

Lin, Y., Caluori, N., Öztürk, E. B., & Gelfand, M. J. (2022).  PNAS of the United States of America, 119(41), e2210324119.

Abstract

In honor cultures, relatively minor disputes can escalate, making numerous forms of aggression widespread. We find evidence that honor cultures' focus on virility impedes a key conflict de-escalation strategy-apology-that can be successfully promoted through a shift in mindset. Across five studies using mixed methods (text analysis of congressional speeches, a cross-cultural comparison, surveys, and experiments), people from honor societies (e.g., Turkey and US honor states), people who endorse honor values, and people who imagine living in a society with strong honor norms are less willing to apologize for their transgressions (studies 1-4). This apology reluctance is driven by concerns about reputation in honor cultures. Notably, honor is achieved not only by upholding strength and reputation (virility) but also through moral integrity (virtue). The dual focus of honor suggests a potential mechanism for promoting apologies: shifting the focus of honor from reputation to moral integrity. Indeed, we find that such a shift led people in honor cultures to perceive apologizing more positively and apologize more (study 5). By identifying a barrier to apologizing in honor cultures and illustrating ways to overcome it, our research provides insights for deploying culturally intelligent conflict-management strategies in such contexts.

Significance

Conflict is widespread and can easily escalate in regions where honor is a central value. We find evidence that honor cultures’ focus on virility impedes a key conflict deescalation strategy—apology—that can be

successfully promoted through a shift in mindset. Building on the conceptualization of honor as both virility and virtue, we show that virility concerns of maintaining one’s reputation underlie the reluctance to

apologize. Conversely, shifting the focus of honor to virtue concerns promotes apologizing. Our findings suggest that honor is a double-edged sword with the potential to both escalate and de-escalate conflicts.

Discussion

In honor cultures, relatively minor disputes can escalate, making certain forms of aggression widespread. Yet, there is surprisingly little research on how to manage conflicts and disputes in these settings. In the present research, we examine the role of honor culture in apology, an act that is critical to conflict de-escalation and reconciliation. Across five studies, we show that the culture of honor impedes apology. People from honor societies (e.g., Turkey and US honor states) and people who endorse honor values are less willing to apologize for their transgressions. Our final experiment provides insight into ways to promote apologizing when honor is at stake.

When the focus of honor concerns is on moral integrity, people see apologizing more positively and apologize more. Our results suggest that people are unwilling to apologize in part because they are concerned that apologizing undermines a core focal concern in these cultures, namely reputation, which may lower their social standing. In addition, we found some evidence that people are less willing to apologize because they consider apologies to be less effective at resolving conflict and repairing relationships. The unwillingness to apologize and the inclination to retaliate after being wronged (36) may create a vicious cycle that further fuels conflicts in honor cultures.

The research is here.