The Unintentional Nonconformist: Habits Promote Resistance to Social influence
Abstract
This research tests a novel source of resistance to social influence—the automatic repetition of habit. In three experiments,
participants with strong habits failed to align their behavior with others. Specifically, participants with strong habits to drink
water in a dining hall or snack while working did not mimic others’ drinking or eating, whereas those with weak habits
conformed. Similarly, participants with strong habits did not shift expectations that they would act in line with descriptive
norms, whereas those with weak habits reported more normative behavioral expectations. This habit resistance was not
due to a failure to perceive influence: Both strong and weak habit participants’ recalled others’ behavior accurately, and it
was readily accessible. Furthermore, strong habit participants shifted their normative beliefs but not behavior in line with
descriptive norms. Thus, habits create behavioral resistance despite people’s recognition and acceptance of social influence.
An updated meta-analysis of the primed goal-organizational behaviour relationship
Gary P. Latham, Xiao Chen, Ronald F. Piccolo and Guy Itzchakov
Goal Setting
Environmental cues (e.g. achievement-related words and pictures) can prime/activate, in the absence of awareness, a mental representation of importance stored in memory. Chen et al.'s 2021 Applied Psychology: An International Review70, 216–253. (doi:10.1111/apps.12239) meta-analysis revealed a moderate, significant overall effect for the goal priming-organizational behaviour relationship, with three moderators identified: context-specific versus a general prime, prime modality (i.e. visual versus linguistic) and experimental setting (field versus laboratory). An independent researcher found that their finding was negligibly affected by a publication bias. Shanks & Vadillo (2021), Royal Society Open Science8, 210544. (doi:10.1098/rsos.210544) (field: k = 13, N = 683, d = 0.64), questioned Chen et al.'s conclusion regarding the effect size found in field studies (field: k = 8, N = 357, d = 0.68). In this paper, we discussed Shanks & Vadillo's selection of additional field experiments that led to their conclusion of a publication bias. We updated Chen et al.'s meta-analysis to include relevant studies conducted since that study's publication. The present meta-analysis reproduced the original findings in Chen et al. (field: k = 11, N = 534, d = 0.67). The updated findings are consistent with: (i) laboratory findings, (ii) the findings obtained in field experiments on consciously set goals and (iii) goal setting theory (Latham & Locke, 2018 In Handbook of industrial, work & organizational Psychology, vol. 1 (eds D Ones, N Anderson, C Viswesvaran, H Sinangil), pp. 103–124).
Keep reading
An Examination of the Moderating Effect of Core Self-Evaluations and the Mediating Effect of Self-Set Goals on the Primed Goal-Task Performance Relationship
Guy Itzchakov, Gary P. Latham
Goal Setting
An understudied issue in the goal priming literature is why the same prime can provoke different responses in different people. The current research sheds light on this issue by investigating whether an individual difference variable, core self-evaluations (CSE), accounts for different responses from the same prime. Based on the findings of experiments showing that individuals with high CSE have higher performance after consciously setting a task-related goal than individuals with lower CSE, two hypotheses were tested: (1) Individuals who score high on CSE perform better following a subconsciously primed goal for achievement than do individuals who score low on CSE, and (2) this effect is mediated by a self-set goal. Two laboratory experiments (n = 207, 191) and one field experiment (n = 62) provided support for the hypotheses. These findings suggest that personality variables such as the CSE can provide an explanation for the “many effects of the one prime problem”.
Keep reading