Steven J. Sherman’s research while affiliated with Indiana University Bloomington and other places

In four studies, we test the hypothesis that people, asked to envisage interactions between an ingroup and an outgroup, tend to spatially represent the ingroup where writing starts (e.g., left in Italian) and as acting along script direction. Using soccer as a highly competitive intergroup setting, in Study 1 (N = 100) Italian soccer fans were found to envisage their team on the left side of a horizontal soccer field, hence playing rightward. Studies 2a and 2b (N = 219 Italian and N = 200 English speakers) replicate this finding, regardless of whether the own team was stronger or weaker than the rival team. Study 3 (N = 67 Italian and N = 67 Arabic speakers) illustrates the cultural underpinnings of the Spatial Intergroup Bias, showing a rightward ingroup bias for Italian speakers and a leftward ingroup bias for Arabic speakers. Findings are discussed in relation to how space is deployed to symbolically express ingroup favoritism (Spatial Ingroup Bias) versus shared stereotypes (Spatial Agency Bias).

People's intuitive predictions under uncertainty may rely on the representativeness or on the availability heuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). However, the distinction between these two heuristics has never been clear, and both have been proposed to underlie the same judgment tasks. For instance, when judging what outcome is likely to be next in a coin flip after a streak, representativeness leads to predicting an alternation in the outcome, ending the streak (gambler's fallacy), whereas availability leads to predicting the streak's continuation. We propose that availability (direct use of accessibility) is computed earlier than representativeness (comparing to an abstract representation of the expected outcome). In five studies, we pit one heuristic against the other in binary prediction tasks, both in coin flip and athlete's performance contexts. We find that, although the streak outcome is cognitively more available, judgments are usually based on representativeness, leading more often to a prediction of an alternation after a streak. However, under time-pressure conditions, representativeness processes are constrained and participants are more prone to base their predictions on the most salient and cognitively available outcomes.

Humanness is something generally associated with the in-group and denied to out-groups. However, not all out-groups are equally deprived of their humanness. Correlational studies suggest that numerical minorities (from the perceiver’s perspective) are more likely to be judged as less than human. In the present research, we interpreted this phenomenon in terms of the cognitive processes involved in illusory correlation and identified and tested the conditions (i.e., humanness as a frequent and shared characteristic, and relative small group size) that would contribute to minority dehumanization. In two studies in which participants learned about members of two new groups differing in size, we found support for this account. The findings of the present research broaden the current knowledge of out-group dehumanization, showing the contribution of cognitive processes in the denial of humanness to minority groups. Implications for the understanding of the determinants of group dehumanization and illusory correlation are discussed.

The present paper explores the role of motivation to observe a certain outcome in people's predictions, causal attributions, and beliefs about a streak of binary outcomes (basketball scoring shots). In two studies we found that positive streaks (points scored by the participants' favourite team) lead participants to predict the streak's continuation (belief in the hot hand), but negative streaks lead to predictions of its end (gambler's fallacy). More importantly, these wishful predictions are supported by strategic attributions and beliefs about how and why a streak might unfold. Results suggest that the effect of motivation on predictions is mediated by a serial path via causal attributions to the teams at play and belief in the hot hand.

Previous research with the ratio-bias task found larger response latencies for conflict trials where the heuristic- and analytic-based responses are assumed to be in opposition (e.g., choosing between 1/10 and 9/100 ratios of success) when compared to no-conflict trials where both processes converge on the same response (e.g., choosing between 1/10 and 11/100). This pattern is consistent with parallel dual-process models, which assume that there is effective, rather than lax, monitoring of the output of heuristic processing. It is, however, unclear why conflict resolution sometimes fails. Ratio-biased choices may increase because of a decline in analytical reasoning (leaving heuristic-based responses unopposed) or to a rise in heuristic processing (making it more difficult for analytic processes to override the heuristic preferences). Using the process-dissociation procedure, we found that instructions to respond logically and response speed affected analytic (controlled) processing (C), leaving heuristic processing (H) unchanged, whereas the intuitive preference for large nominators (as assessed by responses to equal ratio trials) affected H but not C. These findings create new challenges to the debate between dual-process and single-process accounts, which are discussed.

This research shows that the same people who appear to have low numerical competence when analyzing personally irrelevant health-related numerical information are able to overcome their reasoning shortcomings and make better judgments when they are shown equivalent information that is personally relevant, and when only a sophisticated kind of reasoning enables them to interpret this information in a favorable way. The fact that people can engage in poorer or more sophisticated numerical reasoning depending on whether that reasoning produces favorable or unfavorable conclusions has implications both for the concept of numeracy as an individual-difference variable and for health communication.

Encouraging sustainable water use is a critical endeavor in addressing issues associated with short- and long-term droughts. Toilets account for up to 26.7% of indoor household water use. Therefore substantial opportunity exists to conserve water via reduced flushing after urination at home. Here, we use an online survey (N = 1008) to identify barriers to reduced flushing. The majority of participants reported they always flush (63%) and believed that others should always flush. Social norms surrounding cleanliness are the most prevalent reasons for flushing. Results suggest four main barriers to reducing flushing: disgust sensitivity, habitual nature of flushing, norms regarding cleanliness, and lack of pro-environmental motivations. Participants who always flush are less likely to sacrifice for the environment than occasional flushers. Participants tended to underestimate average American water use and their own water use. Targeted interventions to decrease urine-related disgust and increase pro-environmental motivations may help achieve water conservation goals.

Encouraging sustainable water use is a critical endeavor in addressing issues associated with short- and long-term droughts. Toilets account for up to 26.7% of indoor household water use. Therefore substantial opportunity exists to conserve water via reduced flushing after urination at home. Here, we use an online survey (N = 1008) to identify barriers to reduced flushing. The majority of participants reported they always flush (63%) and believed that others should always flush. Social norms surrounding cleanliness are the most prevalent reasons for flushing. Results suggest four main barriers to reducing flushing: disgust sensitivity, habitual nature of flushing, norms regarding cleanliness, and lack of pro-environmental motivations. Participants who always flush are less likely to sacrifice for the environment than occasional flushers. Participants tended to underestimate average American water use and their own water use. Targeted interventions to decrease urine-related disgust and increase pro-environmental motivations may help achieve water conservation goals.