Search results

Personalised statements from CEOs can be used as a tool to protect reputation in corporate crises. However, it needs to be considered that CEOs have different personalities. The present chapter, therefore, examines the effects of social distance of a CEO in combination with crisis communication strategies in corporate crises. This is illustrated by means of an experimental study with a 2 × 2 between-subjects design (factor 1: close vs. far social distance of the CEO; factor 2: deny vs. rebuild crisis communication strategy). The results indicate that in preventable crises, a close social distance of the CEO is beneficial for the CEO’s image as well as the image of the organisation because it promotes empathy and motivated assessment. Empathy towards the CEO remains unaffected by the communication strategy. The effect of the social distance on the motivated assessment occurs, however, only with a deny strategy. If an apology is pronounced, there is no difference whether an approachable or a distant CEO is speaking. The study discussed in this chapter is among the first to take empathy and motivated reasoning into account when analysing the effects of privatisation on CEO image and organisational image.

This paper aims to investigate a condition under which identity salience effects are weakened. By examining how identity salience influences individuals’ product judgment in a domain of trade-offs, the current research demonstrates that the utilitarian value of a product is an important determinant of the effectiveness of identity salience on product judgment.

This research consists of two experiments. In Experiment 1, the authors examined whether identity salience effects were mitigated when the level of the perceived utilitarian value of an identity-incongruent product was greater than that of an identity-congruent product. In Experiment 2, the authors examined the effectiveness of internal attribution as a moderator that strengthens identity salience effects when the perceived utilitarian value of an identity-incongruent (vs. identity-congruent) product is higher.

In Experiment 1, the authors show that when the utilitarian value of a product with an attribute congruent (vs. incongruent) with one’s salient identity is lower, individuals do not show a greater preference for the identity-congruent (vs. identity-incongruent) product, mitigating the identity salience effects. Experiment 2 demonstrates that when individuals with a salient identity attribute a decision outcome to the self, they display a greater preference for the identity-congruent product even when its utilitarian value is lower compared to that of the identity-incongruent product.

The research contributes to previous research examining conditions under which identity salience effects are weakened [e.g. social influence by others (Bolton and Reed, 2004); self-affirmation (Cohen et al., 2007)] by exploring the role of the utilitarian value of a product, which has not been examined yet in prior research. Also, by doing so, the current research adds to the literature on identity salience in a domain of trade-offs (Benjamin et al., 2010; Shaddy et al., 2020, 2021). Finally, this research reveals that when a decision outcome is attributed to the self, identity salience effects become greater. By finding a novel determinant of identity salience effects (i.e. internal attribution), the present research contributes to the literature that has examined factors that amplify identity salience effects [e.g. cultural relevance (Chattaraman et al., 2009); social distinctiveness (Forehand et al., 2002); different types of groups (White and Dahl, 2007)].

The findings provide managerial insights on identity-based marketing by showing a condition under which identity-based marketing does not work [i.e. when the utilitarian value of an identity-congruent (vs. identity-incongruent) product is lower] and how to enhance the effectiveness of identity-based marketing by using internal attribution.

By exploring the role of utilitarian value, not yet examined in prior research, the present research adds to the knowledge of the conditions under which identity salience effects are weakened. Furthermore, by finding a novel determinant of identity salience effects (i.e. internal attribution), the research contributes to the literature on factors that amplify identity salience effects.

The object of this research is the reconstruction of the existing legal response by European Union states to the phenomenon of immigration. It seeks to analyse the process of conferral of protection.

One main dimension is selected and discussed: the case law of the national courts. The study focuses on the legal status of immigrants resulting from the intervention of these national courts.

The research shows that although the courts have conferred an increasing protection on immigrants, this has not challenged the fundamental principle of the sovereignty of the states to decide, according to their discretionary prerogatives, which immigrants are allowed to enter and stay in their territories. Notwithstanding the differences in the general constitutional and legal structures, the research also shows that the courts of the three countries considered – France, Germany and Spain – have progressively moved towards converging solutions in protecting immigrants.

The research contributes to a better understanding of the different legal orders analysed.

Organizations may fail to innovate because receivers exhibit bias against adopting creative ideas. This paper explores many motivational, cognitive, and affective factors that can cause receivers to hinder the creativity–innovation process. In particular, receivers may engage in motivated reasoning and skepticism against creative ideas, face barriers to recognizing creative value, and experience negative affect when receiving creative ideas. Each creative adoption decision point during the creativity–innovation process is an opportunity for bias to derail progress. This helps explain why innovation can be so difficult. Understanding the biases that hinder the creativity–innovation process allows individuals and organizations to take action to mitigate them.

Organizations are investing their resources to identify effective leaders; however, the most commonly utilized assessments of leadership potential do not cover the social cognitions of individuals. Trait assessments, which are explicit in nature, also have other problems, including faking and socially desirable responding. In this chapter, we highlight the importance of leaders' implicit reasoning processes, with a particular focus on cognitive biases, in an attempt to understand how destructive leaders frame the world, situations and people and how they justify their choice of behaviours and decisions. Empirical evidence in the literature supports the valid use of implicit reasoning measurements in organizational contexts. Thus, we first summarize and list the cognitive biases of destructive leaders as identified in the literature. We then turn our focus on Machiavellian leaders as they have been associated with destructive leadership. We present the most common six cognitive biases and justification mechanisms of Machiavellian leaders based on our qualitative analysis of interview responses from 72 employees. We aim to encourage researchers and practitioners to make use of the literature on implicit reasoning and to further contribute to developing measures assessing such implicit reasoning processes.

Complex social interactions such as argumentation and persuasion are increasingly common in online communications. To better understand these interactions and their impacts on people and on the society, it is important for the authors to understand how people reason online such as when they need to justify themselves or convince others with their perspectives. Reasoning in online discussions is expectedly to be different from doing so offline, as one often communicates with others anonymously and asynchronously in such contexts (e.g. Reddit discussions). The purpose of this paper is to investigate people's reasoning behavior in online environments focusing on how they justify their perspectives.

In this study, the authors examined how a subreddit Change My View (CMV) users offer their opinions and justify them through the lens of argumentation and reasoning. The authors annotated, 330 Reddit discussion original posts (OPs) to identify claims, rationales and supports for reasoning, i.e. personal experiences, definitions, domain expertise and external sources. The authors investigated the correlations among the occurrences of these supporting statements and whether they are related to the topics of the posts.

The findings suggest that if people mention their domain expertise, they tend to provide related personal experiences as well. Additionally, if the participants talk about the topic of domestic politics, they tend to utilize their personal experiences.

Further research may be conducted to help system designers. System designers (e.g. online debate systems, collective decision-making systems, etc.) may benefit from the findings to design systems by considering commonly used supporting statements, which may enhance people's reasoning and argumentation processes. The sample size is a small sample. The authors acknowledge that the small sample size of the study may limit the generalizability of the findings; however, it is still acceptable compared to the existing literature. One future study could be annotating a larger dataset to further probe the use of supporting statements in online reasoning.

The authors' findings might be useful to understand how Reddit users are justifying their opinions as the reflection of their reasoning processes. In order to contribute further research in argumentation and reasoning in online platforms, the authors make the annotated dataset publicly available.

To best of the authors' knowledge, this study was one of a few studies whose purpose is to understand Reddit CMV users' reasoning processes. To understand how online users offer their reasons while providing their ideas is important to have effective communication processes and to improve online discussion experiences which are very common in today's digital era.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0330

The purpose of this paper is to comprehensively review a large and heterogeneous body of academic literature on investors' feedback trading, one of the most popular trading patterns observed historically in financial markets. Specifically, the authors aim to synthesize the diverse theoretical approaches to feedback trading in order to provide a detailed discussion of its various determinants, and to systematically review the empirical literature across various asset classes to gauge whether their feedback trading entails discernible patterns and the determinants that motivate them.

Given the high degree of heterogeneity of both theoretical and empirical approaches, the authors adopt a semi-systematic type of approach to review the feedback trading literature, inspired by the RAMESES protocol for meta-narrative reviews. The final sample consists of 243 papers covering diverse asset classes, investor types and geographies.

The authors find feedback trading to be very widely observed over time and across markets internationally. Institutional investors engage in feedback trading in a herd-like manner, and most noticeably in small domestic stocks and emerging markets. Regulatory changes and financial crises affect the intensity of their feedback trades. Retail investors are mostly contrarian and underperform their institutional counterparts, while the latter's trades can be often motivated by market sentiment.

The authors provide a detailed overview of various possible theoretical determinants, both behavioural and non-behavioural, of feedback trading, as well as a comprehensive overview and synthesis of the empirical literature. The authors also propose a series of possible directions for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate recent changes made by Australian consumers in their consumption of beef, chicken, pork and lamb, as well as the factors motivating both decreased and increased consumption of each type of meat. Reasons for meat-avoidance are also examined.

An online questionnaire was completed in July 2016 by two Australian samples comprising: adults from the general population; and vegetarians. Data were analysed for 287 meat consumers and 82 meat avoiders. Descriptive statistics and results of multinomial logistic regression models are presented.

Meat consumers most commonly reported reducing consumption of beef in the last 12 months (30 per cent); followed by lamb (22 per cent), pork (14 per cent) and chicken (8 per cent). The following factors were associated with reductions in meat consumption: concerns regarding price and personal health; age and household income; and food choice motivations related to personal benefits, social factors and food production and origin. Main reasons motivating meat-avoidance were concerns regarding animal welfare, health and environmental protection.

This is the first Australian study providing national-level insight on how and why meat consumption patterns are changing. Reasons for changes are examined through an anti-consumption lens, investigating rationale for avoiding, reducing and increasing consumption. This provides a more comprehensive understanding of meat consumption and anti-consumption decisions, which are becoming increasingly complex. Insights on the psychologically distinct motivations underpinning avoidance, reductions and increases in meat consumption can inform the development of strategies aimed at promoting a societal-shift towards consumption of more sustainable dietary protein sources.

Purpose – Acknowledging that the field of neuroscience is expanding rapidly and the implication of recent neuroscientific advances on the study of politics is equally vast, this chapter will focus primarily on three key areas of convergence that have influenced the direction of neuropolitics: first, decision-making (emotions, preferences, and voting behavior); second, research on in-group/out-group relations, such as coalitional groupings and discrimination and prejudice; and, third, the rise of neuroeconomics.

Approach – This chapter is concerned with the intersection of political science and neuroscience and discusses how recent technological and theoretical developments in the latter are greatly contributing to the field of neuropolitics.

Findings – The insights generated by neuroscience permit the study of politics to be anchored on a scientific foundation for the first time. In turn, this opens the door to a renaissance in the political psychology subfield of political science, as the scientific origins of political behavior are revealed.

Research implications – The ongoing revolution in neuroscience is producing insights into international political behavior that is largely unacknowledged by political scientists.

Value – The implications for domestic and international policy are major. Fundamentally, this is because neuroscience allows us to comprehend better the origins of human political behavior.

The purpose of this research is to describe a model of nurses' work motivation relevant to the human caring stance of professional nursing work.

The model was derived from selected theories of behavioral motivation and work motivation. Evidence‐based theory addressing nurses' work motivation and nurses' motivational states and traits in relation to characteristics of organizational culture and patient health outcomes is suggested in an effort to make a distinct contribution to health services research. An integrated review of selected theories of motivation is presented, including conceptual analyses, theory‐building techniques, and the evidence supporting the theoretical propositions and linkages among variables intrinsic to nurses' work motivation.

The model of the Motivation to Care for Professional Nursing Work is a framework intended for empirical testing and theory building. The model proposes specific leadership and management strategies to support a culture of motivational caring and competence in health care organizations.

Attention to motivation theory and research provides insights and suggests relationships among nurses' motivation to care, motivational states and traits, individual differences that influence nurses' work motivation, and the special effects of nurses' work motivation on patient care outcomes. Suggestions for nursing administrative direction and research are proposed.