ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Group members often reason egocentrically, both when allocating responsibility for collective endeavors and when assessing the fairness of group outcomes. These self-centered judgments are reduced when participants consider their other group members individually or actively adopt their perspectives. However, reducing an egocentric focus through perspective taking may also invoke cynical theories about how others will behave, particularly in competitive contexts. Expecting more selfish behavior from other group members may result in more self-interested behavior from the perspective takers themselves. This suggests that one common approach to conflict resolution between and within groups can have unfortunate consequences on actual behavior.
... 19 In competitive contexts, perspective-taking can cause people to behave selfishly because people think (sometimes accurately) that their competitor will also behave selfishly. 24 In addition, healthcare providers compete over time with the patient. 15 For example, an occupational therapist who wants to get through their patients quickly before the end of a long day might take the nurse's perspective and understand that the nurse wants to administer treatment. ...
... Perspective-taking outcomes tend to be more positive when collaboration is emphasized. 24 Therefore, emphasizing collaboration instead of competition might be helpful. 24 To elaborate, when healthcare professionals engage in communication training, they gain the confidence to respectfully disagree with other team members, supervisors, and people considered more powerful in the team. ...
... 24 Therefore, emphasizing collaboration instead of competition might be helpful. 24 To elaborate, when healthcare professionals engage in communication training, they gain the confidence to respectfully disagree with other team members, supervisors, and people considered more powerful in the team. 34 The few studies that have incorporated perspective-taking skills for multiprofessional collaboration have found a positive impact on trust-building, active listening, authenticity, and shared plans of care. ...
Article
Background: Engaging in perspective-taking often has positive outcomes for both healthcare providers and patients. Perspective-taking by healthcare providers has been linked to increased patient satisfaction and compliance, patients' positive perceptions of healthcare providers' interpersonal skills, and a reduction in judgmental attitudes toward individuals who engage in health-risk behaviors. The positive outcomes that are associated with perspective-taking are often highlighted in the literature. However, less discussed are the negative outcomes. Aim: This paper discusses the positive and negative outcomes associated with perspective-taking and presents potential methods for mitigating negative outcomes. Conclusion: When designing and implementing perspective-taking interventions, educators and researchers should consider potential negative intervention outcomes and strategies to attenuate these outcomes.
... 19 In competitive contexts, perspective-taking can cause people to behave selfishly because people think (sometimes accurately) that their competitor will also behave selfishly. 24 In addition, healthcare providers compete over time with the patient. 15 For example, an occupational therapist who wants to get through their patients quickly before the end of a long day might take the nurse's perspective and understand that the nurse wants to administer treatment. ...
... Perspective-taking outcomes tend to be more positive when collaboration is emphasized. 24 Therefore, emphasizing collaboration instead of competition might be helpful. 24 To elaborate, when healthcare professionals engage in communication training, they gain the confidence to respectfully disagree with other team members, supervisors, and people considered more powerful in the team. ...
... 24 Therefore, emphasizing collaboration instead of competition might be helpful. 24 To elaborate, when healthcare professionals engage in communication training, they gain the confidence to respectfully disagree with other team members, supervisors, and people considered more powerful in the team. 34 The few studies that have incorporated perspective-taking skills for multiprofessional collaboration have found a positive impact on trust-building, active listening, authenticity, and shared plans of care. ...
Article
This paper discusses the positive and negative outcomes associated with perspective‐taking and presents potential methods for mitigating negative outcomes
... Previous research suggests that social manipulation requires the ability to understand another person's perspective and interpret the available emotional and social cues (e.g., Batanova and Loukas 2011). If PT is associated with aggressive behaviour as well as prosocial behaviour, there is reason to ask whether or not the purely cognitive component (PT) should be seen more as a neutral component that may be used for different purposes instead of as part of the concept of empathy (Caruso, Epley, and Bazerman 2006;Staub 1987). ...
... Driven by the theory that PT is a neutral tool that people may use for positive as well as negative social behaviour (e.g., Caruso, Epley, and Bazerman 2006;Staub 1987), this study hypothesised that PT is positively associated with both RA and RI. On the basis of previous research showing that empathic concern predicts helping behaviour (e.g., Eisenberg, Eggum, and Di Giunta 2010;Eisenberg and Miller 1987), empathic concern for victims of RA (ECV) is assumed to be negatively associated with RA and positively associated with RI. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study examined the role of a) empathic concern for victims of relational aggression (ECV) and b) perspective taking (PT) in explaining self- and peer-reported relational aggression (RA) and relational inclusion (RI) in a sample of 345 adolescents. The direct association among ECV, PT and self- and peer-reported RA and RI was investigated. The moderating effect of ECV on the association between PT and RA and RI was also explored. Structural equation modelling was used, and the results showed that ECV may be important in preventing RA but less important in explaining RI among adolescents. The results further revealed that PT was positively associated with self-reported RA but not with peer-reported RA. The possibility that the two methods provide supplementary information is discussed. The main findings emphasise the importance of developing initiatives that increase adolescents’ empathic concern towards RA victims.
... When individuals perceived the psychological activities of competitors as having low benevolence, they responded with low benevolence performance. 25 However, this reactive egoism was attenuated under cooperative contexts, 15 resulting in increased prosocial behavior. 16 In the present study, we hypothesized that the relationship between social perspective-taking and interpersonal trust would be mediated by benevolence (H3). ...
... 19 When participants perceived the other person had low benevolence, they showed more self-interested behavior. 25 Under the cooperative context, the individual with a cooperative motivational orientation would expect the other person to also have a benevolent intention toward him. 19 The prosocial behavior of individuals increased significantly after social perspective-taking. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose: Several studies have demonstrated that perspective-taking can foster interpersonal trust. However, few studies have explored the effect of social perspective-taking on interpersonal trust under a specific social context and its internal mechanism. The present study explored the effect of social perspective-taking on interpersonal trust and further examined this interaction under two different social contexts: a cooperative vs a competitive context. We also explored why social perspective-taking fostered interpersonal trust. Methods: Study 1 (N = 45) was conducted using a within-subjects design in which participants were asked to read the dilemmas of two partners under two conditions (social perspective-taking vs objective focus) and complete the trust game after each reading. In Study 2 (N = 135), we manipulated the social context by a word memorization task to explore the effect of social perspective-taking on interpersonal trust under different contexts (competitive vs cooperative). In Study 3, we examined benevolence as a mediator in the relationship between social perspective-taking and interpersonal trust. Results: Study 1 showed that interpersonal trust under the social perspective-taking condition was significantly higher than interpersonal trust under the objective focus condition. Study 2 showed that under the cooperative context, participants under the social perspective-taking condition invested more money to another partner than those under the objective focus condition. However, under the competitive context, the results were the opposite. Study 3 demonstrated that benevolence mediated the relationship between social perspective-taking and interpersonal trust in both cooperative and competitive contexts. Conclusion: Social perspective-taking could improve interpersonal trust under a cooperative context, while the degree of interpersonal trust decreases under a competitive context. Moreover, social perspective-taking could influence the perception of benevolence and thereby enhance or diminish interpersonal trust.
... Perspective taking is the process of imagining the world from another's perspective and seeing things from this other person's point of view (Davis, 1983). Perspective taking is an inherently cognitive process whereby a person actively thinks about the cognitions, motivations, or emotions of another (Caruso, Epley, & Bazerman, 2006). Perspective taking differs from empathy, as the latter refers to an other-focused affective response that allows someone to emotionally connect with another person (Galinsky, Maddux, Gilin, & White, 2008;Ku, Wang, & Galinsky, 2015;Wang, Tai, Ku, & Galinsky, 2014). ...
... As Knight and Eisenkraft's metaanalysis demonstrated, negative affect in groups is only helpful when it is attributed to factors external to the team and when the situation causing it can be quickly resolved. Teams composed of members high in perspective taking, however, will process group members' affect as if it were their own (Caruso et al., 2006;Galinsky et al., 2005). Rather than focus their effort and energy on the task at hand, they devote their energy to processing their team members' negative affective states, thereby causing the exact adverse effects that negative affect in groups can have on performance if team members' cognitive resources are needed elsewhere (Barry & Friedman, 1998;Bechtoldt, De Dreu, Nijstad, & Zapf, 2010;Lyubomirsky & Nolen-Hoeksema, 1995). ...
Article
Full-text available
Whereas the positive relationship between positive affect in teams and team performance is well established, the relationship between team negative affect and team performance seems to be subject to moderating effects. We focus on the effects of perspective taking as one of these moderators, and posit that perspective taking impedes team performance when team state affect is negative because team members become preoccupied with others’ negative emotions. Results from 49 teams involved in a computerized interactive decision-making task support our hypothesis: Negative state affect was negatively related to performance for teams high in perspective taking, but not for teams low in perspective taking. This leads to the conclusion that when teams experience high negative affect, they benefit from low perspective taking.
... However, this perspective taking invokes cynicism and egoistic behaviora phenomenon called reactive egoism (Babcock & Loewenstein, 1997;Caruso, Epley & Bazerman, 2005a;Paese & Yonker, 2001). Perspective taking also reduces the interest in future collaborations among those who belief that they contributed more than others (Caruso, Epley & Bazerman, 2005b). Reactive egoism gets more accentuated in competitive contexts. ...
... However, this perspective taking invokes cynicism and egoistic behaviora phenomenon called reactive egoism (Babcock & Loewenstein, 1997;Caruso, Epley & Bazerman, 2005a;Paese & Yonker, 2001). Perspective taking also reduces the interest in future collaborations among those who belief that they contributed more than others (Caruso, Epley & Bazerman, 2005b). Reactive egoism gets more accentuated in competitive contexts. ...
... First, perspective taking might be anchored in a delegitimizing narrative or a negative view of the other, which in turn would make salient and reproduce the pre-existing negative narratives, resulting in negative intergroup outcomes (e.g., Skorinko & Sinclair, 2013). In addition, asking individuals to imagine themselves as the adversary can backfire, because the adversary's perspectives might be perceived as threatening to one's moral values and identity, thereby eliciting negative attitudes toward the outgroup (Bruneau & Saxe, 2012;Caruso et al., 2006). If the perspectives taken are anchored on negative and delegitimizing views of the other, then perspective taking is unlikely to result in positive intergroup outcomes. ...
Article
Full-text available
Can perspective taking improve intergroup attitudes in conflict contexts? How does a context of conflict shape people's responses to perspective‐taking tasks and their ultimate effectiveness? The present study addressed these questions by examining the effect of perspective taking (compared with a perspective giving and a control condition) on intergroup attitudes between Trump and Clinton supporters (N = 537) one month after the 2016 presidential election. Perspective taking had positive effects on some intergroup attitudes: It increased warmth toward the outgroup (thermometer ratings), outgroup tolerance, perceived similarities between groups, and marginally increased positive outgroup evaluation. This study also sheds light on the mechanisms that might reduce the effectiveness of perspective taking in conflict settings by assessing the content and the effects of the induced perspectives in response to perspective‐taking task. About half of the induced perspective‐taking narratives involved negative views of the other, which were associated with worse intergroup outcomes. In addition, higher perceived intensity of the conflict between Trump and Clinton supporters and more negative emotions about the election outcome predicted more induced negative perspectives as a response to the perspective‐taking task. In turn, negative perspectives were associated with more negative intergroup attitudes. To sum up, while perspective taking had an overall positive impact on intergroup attitudes in this conflict setting, its impact seems to be contingent upon the content of induced perspective‐taking narratives.
Article
Human resource (HR) managers play a critical role in supporting workers during organizational crisis recovery, but this support is hampered when employee energy is drained during difficult times. We develop relational theory and practical suggestions to address how employees can generate energy from interpersonal interactions in a post‐crisis context. Drawing from interviews, field observations, and archival data of interpersonal interactions in the surf and boardsport industry in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis, we investigated individual energetic contributions and the process which generated relational energy, defined as psychological resourcefulness generated from interpersonal interactions that enhances work capacity. Our analysis revealed that in the aftermath of a crisis, employees generated relational energy by engaging in processes of perspective taking and interpersonal adjustment while engaging in crisis‐recovery work. This was particularly true when their personal contributions to the interactions were negative or neutral in valence and of low intensity. This is in contrast to assumptions in the literature and industry cultural norms, but was essential to fueling interdependent work efforts during crisis recovery. These findings extend and refine theory on energy at work to help inform HR practice by developing understanding of how the energy generated from other people can be an important resource to help sustain crisis recovery, and how HR managers can support these processes.
Chapter
Full-text available
Since the end of the 1970s, a wide range of psychological, economic, and sociological laboratory and field experiments proved human beings deviating from rational choices. Standard neoclassical profit maximization axioms were outlined to fail to explain how humans actually behave. Human beings were rather found to use heuristics in day-to-day decision-making. These mental shortcuts enable us to cope with information overload in a complex world. Behavioral economists proposed to nudge and wink citizens to make better choices with many different applications in very many different domains. This book will (1) start with a review of the contemporary literature on human decision-making failures in Europe and North America presenting the wide range of nudges and winks developed to curb harmful consequences of humane decision-making fallibility; then (2) propose how to use mental heuristics, biases, and nudges in the finance domain to profit from economic markets providing clear communication strategies; and then (3) finish with clear leadership and followership directives on nudging in the digital age.
Article
Four studies investigated whether people feel inhibited from engaging in social action incongruent with their apparent self-interest. Participants in Study I predicted that they would be evaluated negatively were they to take action on behalf of a cause in which they had no stake or in which they had a stake but held stake-incongruent attitudes. Participants in Study 2 reported both surprise and anger when a target person took action on behalf of a cause in which he or she had no stake or in which he or she held stake-incongruent attitudes. In Study 3, individuals felt more comfortable engaging in social action and expected others to respond more favorably toward their actions if the issue was described as more relevant to their own sex than to the opposite sex. In Study 4, the authors found that providing nonvested individuals with psychological standing rendered them as likely as vested individuals to undertake social action. The authors discuss the implications of these results for the relationship between vested interest, social action, and attitude-behavior consistency.
Article
The chameleon effect refers to nonconscious mimicry of the postures, mannerisms, facial expressions, and other behaviors of one's interaction partners, such that one's behavior passively rind unintentionally changes to match that of others in one's current social environment. The authors suggest that the mechanism involved is the perception-behavior link, the recently documented finding (e.g., J. A. Bargh, M. Chen, & L. Burrows, 1996) that the mere perception of another' s behavior automatically increases the likelihood of engaging in that behavior oneself Experiment 1 showed that the motor behavior of participants unintentionally matched that of strangers with whom they worked on a task. Experiment 2 had confederates mimic the posture and movements of participants and showed that mimicry facilitates the smoothness of interactions and increases liking between interaction partners. Experiment 3 showed that dispositionally empathic individuals exhibit the chameleon effect to a greater extent than do other people.
Article
Three investigations are reported that examined the relation between self-appraisals and appraisals of others. In Experiment 1, subjects rated a series of valenced trait adjectives according to how well the traits described the self and others. Individuals displayed a pronounced “self-other bias,” such that positive attributes were rated as more descriptive of self than of others, whereas negative attributes were rated as less descriptive of self than of others. Furthermore, in contrast to C. R. Rogers's (1951) assertion that high self-esteem is associated with a comparable regard for others, the tendency for individuals to evaluate the self in more favorable terms than they evaluated people in general was particularly pronounced among those with high self-esteem. These findings were replicated and extended in Experiment 2, where it also was found that self-evaluations were more favorable than were evaluations of a friend and that individuals with high self-esteem were most likely to appraise their friend...
Article
Reactions to other's claims of resposibility were investigated by assessing group members' evaluations of a fellow group member who took high, moderate, or low personal responsibility for a positive or negative outcome. As predicted, individuals whose attribution were self-serving (blaming others for failure or claiming credit for success) were liked less than (1) group members who allocated responsibility equally, and (2) members whose "other-serving" attributions indicated they took the blame for failure or credited others for success. These results suggest that attributions-when exchanged among group members-significantly influence social perceptions and group relations.
Article
The attributional egotism of individuals may be particularly important when they serve as members of cooperative groups. Within a group one's fellow members may be granted or denied credit for a group performance in order to manipulate one's own perceived responsibility for the outcome. In this study, group members privately or publicly reported their assessments of their own and others' responsibility for group successes and failures. Subjects privately claimed more responsibility for success than for failure but did not do so (in public) when the other members were expected to see their reports. Moreover, under public conditions, subjects claimed less responsibility for a group success than they gave to the other members, an effect which disappeared in private. Subjects were clearly sensitive to the interpersonal implications of their attributions, displaying less egotism under public conditions.
Article
Studies of reasoning by majority and minority members show that group members in the majority think more about the trade-offs associated with alternative decision outcomes than do group members in the minority, who are more single-minded in support of their own position. However, prior work has not examined whether this holds when decision makers change the status quo. The authors compared the integrative complexity of U.S. Supreme Court justices writing on behalf of either a majority or a minority in decisions to either uphold or overturn legal precedent. As predicted, justices writing on behalf of decisions to uphold precedent exhibited greater integrative complexity than did justices writing on behalf of decisions to overturn precedent, but this effect was stronger for the authors of majority than minority opinions.