The present research examines whether individuation and categorization processes influence trust decisions about strangers at first and across repeated interactions. In a partial replication of the study reported by Cañadas et al. (2015), participants played an adaptation of the multi-round trust game paradigm and had to decide whether or not to cooperate with unknown partners. Gender (Study 1a) and ethnicity (Studies 1b, 2, and 3) served to create distinct social categories among the game partners, whose reciprocation rates were manipulated at (...) group and individual levels. At the group level, two social groups (i.e., ingroup vs. outgroup) were associated with opposite reciprocation rates (i.e., high vs. low reciprocation rate). At the individual level, consistency was manipulated by altering the reciprocation rate of one out of four members of each social group. That is, there was one inconsistent individual in each group showing a pattern of reciprocation opposite to the group reciprocation rate. Our data, contrary to Cañadas et al.’s (2015) findings, suggested that ingroup partners were individuated given that participants made their decisions to cooperate with the trustees according to their individual reciprocation rate and independently of the group reciprocation rate. In contrast, decisions about outgroup partners (i.e., men in Study 1a and Blacks in Studies 1b, 2, and 3) were affected by category-based thinking. At the same time, in comparison with ingroup, greater cooperation was observed with ethnic outgroups but not with gender outgroups. The consistency of our results with the previous literature on social categorization and across the three experiments seems to indicate they are reliable, supporting the hypothesis that categorization and individuation processes guide trust decision-making, promoting individuation mainly for ingroup and categorization among outgroup members. (shrink)

With the help of event-related potentials (ERPs), the present study used an oddball paradigm to investigate how both individual and target power modulate neural responses to angry expressions. Specifically, participants were assigned into a high-power or low-power condition. Then, they were asked to detect a deviant angry expression from a high-power or low-power target among a series of neutral expressions, while behavioral responses and electroencephalogram (EEG) were recorded. The behavioral results showed that high-power individuals responded faster to detect angry expressions (...) than low-power individuals. The ERP analysis showed that high-power individuals showed larger P3 amplitudes in response to angry expressions than low-power individuals did. Target power increased the amplitudes of the P1, VPP, N3, and P3 in response to angry expressions did, but decreased the amplitudes of the N1 and N170 in response to angry expressions. The present study extended previous studies by showing that having more power could enhance individuals’ neural responses to angry expressions in the late-stage processes, and individuals could show stronger neural responses to angry expressions from high-power persons in both the early‐ and late-stage processes. (shrink)

This research examines the trust and expectations people have for individuals with varying levels of status. Specifically, we predicted that people will have a greater amount of trust for individuals whom they perceive to have high (vs. low) status. Furthermore, we predicted that this positive effect of status on trust occurs because high-status individuals are viewed as less likely to engage in unethical behavior. We found evidence in two experimental laboratory studies and one survey study for some of our hypotheses. (...) An agenda for future research is suggested, including a discussion of the practical and theoretical implications of these findings. (shrink)