What does it take to succeed? This question has fueled a long-running debate. Some have argued that humans are fundamentally competitive, and that pursuing self-interest is the best way to get ahead. Others claim that humans are born to cooperate and that we are most successful when we collaborate with others.
Philosophers and psychologists have long been interested in identifying factors that influence moral judgment. The current analysis compares the literatures on moral psychology and decision-making under uncertainty to propose that utilitarian choices are driven by the same forces that lead to risky choices.
The current research examined whether cross-national variation in egalitarianism predicts talent levels and organizational performance. We propose that national variation in egalitarianism predicts country-level talent because egalitarianism influences policymaking at the institutional level and everyday social interactions at the psychological level. We compared the relative impact of institutional and psychological measures of equality using the context of international performance in the most popular worldwide sport: football (soccer).
The current research integrates perspectives on gendered race and person-position fit to introduce the concept of a <em>gender profile</em>. We propose that both the "gender" of a person's biological sex and the "gender" of a person's race (Asians are perceived as feminine and Blacks as masculine) help comprise an individual's gender profile — the overall femininity or masculinity associated with their demographic characteristics. We also propose that occupational positions have gender profiles.
This paper investigates whether individual venture capitalists have repeatable investment skill and the extent to which their skill is impacted by the venture capital (VC) firm where they work. We examine a unique data set that tracks the performance of individual venture capitalists' investments over time and as they move between firms.
Eight studies explored the antecedents and consequences of whether people locate their sense of self in the brain or the heart. In Studies 1a–f, participants' self-construals consistently influenced the location of the self: The general preference for locating the self in the brain rather than the heart was enhanced among men, Americans, and participants primed with an independent self-construal, but diminished among women, Indians, and participants primed with an interdependent self-construal.
The current research examines how power affects performance in pressure-filled contexts. We present low-power-threat and high-power-lift effects, whereby performance in high-stakes situations suffers or is enhanced depending on one's power; that is, the power inherent to a situational role can produce effects similar to stereotype threat and lift. Three negotiations experiments demonstrate that role-based power affects outcomes but only when the negotiation is diagnostic of ability and, therefore, pressure-filled.
People frequently feel anxious. Although prior research has extensively studied how feeling anxious shapes intrapsychic aspects of cognition, much less is known about how anxiety affects interpersonal aspects of cognition. Here, we examine the influence of incidental experiences of anxiety on perceptual and conceptual forms of perspective taking.
Are the rich more unethical than the poor? To answer this question, the current research introduces a key conceptual distinction between selfish and unethical behavior. Based on this distinction, the current article offers 2 novel findings that illuminate the relationship between social class and unethical behavior. First, the effects of social class on unethical behavior are not invariant; rather, the effects of social class are moderated by whether unethical behavior benefits the self or others.