Removing the Egocentric Bias: The Relevance of Distress Cues to Evaluation of Fairness

This investigation examines the hypothesis that the egocentric bias may be removed if the psychological distress of the coworker is made salient. The design was a 2 X 2 X 2 completely randomized factorial with the amount of reward (overreward versus underreward), type of relationship (friends versus...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Personality & social psychology bulletin 1984-06, Vol.10 (2), p.235-242
Hauptverfasser: O'Malley, Michael N., Becker, Lee A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 242
container_issue 2
container_start_page 235
container_title Personality & social psychology bulletin
container_volume 10
creator O'Malley, Michael N.
Becker, Lee A.
description This investigation examines the hypothesis that the egocentric bias may be removed if the psychological distress of the coworker is made salient. The design was a 2 X 2 X 2 completely randomized factorial with the amount of reward (overreward versus underreward), type of relationship (friends versus strangers),and salience of a coworker's distress (no distress message versus distress message) as the three independent variables. The results indicated that the egocentric bias (significant differences between underrewarded and overrewarded subjects' evaluations of fairness) was found when the coworker's distress was not made evident. The bias was eliminated, however, when the distress of the coworker was made known through a message. An explanation of how the equity formulation can account for these findings is provided.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0146167284102009
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1307163993</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0146167284102009</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1307163993</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c192t-250cba89c7333fb2711144f3f291fecced114571152ff9dbc11bf6ec704c366e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1LxDAQxYMoWFfvHjwUPEdnkjTZHHVZP2BBED2HdjapXdx2TbqC_70t9SCCp2Hm_d4beIydI1whGnMNqDRqI-YKQQDYA5ZhUQhulJSHLBtlPurH7CSlDQAorUTGLp79tvts2jrv33y-rDvybR8bym-bMp2yo1C-J3_2M2fs9W75snjgq6f7x8XNihNa0XNRAFXl3JKRUoZKGERUKsggLAZP5NfDXgzXQoRg1xUhVkF7MqBIau3ljF1OubvYfex96t2m28d2eOlQgkEtrZUDBRNFsUsp-uB2sdmW8cshuLED97eDwcInSypr_yv0P_4bUwNYlw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1307163993</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Removing the Egocentric Bias: The Relevance of Distress Cues to Evaluation of Fairness</title><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>O'Malley, Michael N. ; Becker, Lee A.</creator><creatorcontrib>O'Malley, Michael N. ; Becker, Lee A.</creatorcontrib><description>This investigation examines the hypothesis that the egocentric bias may be removed if the psychological distress of the coworker is made salient. The design was a 2 X 2 X 2 completely randomized factorial with the amount of reward (overreward versus underreward), type of relationship (friends versus strangers),and salience of a coworker's distress (no distress message versus distress message) as the three independent variables. The results indicated that the egocentric bias (significant differences between underrewarded and overrewarded subjects' evaluations of fairness) was found when the coworker's distress was not made evident. The bias was eliminated, however, when the distress of the coworker was made known through a message. An explanation of how the equity formulation can account for these findings is provided.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0146-1672</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7433</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0146167284102009</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin, 1984-06, Vol.10 (2), p.235-242</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c192t-250cba89c7333fb2711144f3f291fecced114571152ff9dbc11bf6ec704c366e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167284102009$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167284102009$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21818,27868,27923,27924,43620,43621</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>O'Malley, Michael N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becker, Lee A.</creatorcontrib><title>Removing the Egocentric Bias: The Relevance of Distress Cues to Evaluation of Fairness</title><title>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin</title><description>This investigation examines the hypothesis that the egocentric bias may be removed if the psychological distress of the coworker is made salient. The design was a 2 X 2 X 2 completely randomized factorial with the amount of reward (overreward versus underreward), type of relationship (friends versus strangers),and salience of a coworker's distress (no distress message versus distress message) as the three independent variables. The results indicated that the egocentric bias (significant differences between underrewarded and overrewarded subjects' evaluations of fairness) was found when the coworker's distress was not made evident. The bias was eliminated, however, when the distress of the coworker was made known through a message. An explanation of how the equity formulation can account for these findings is provided.</description><issn>0146-1672</issn><issn>1552-7433</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1984</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1LxDAQxYMoWFfvHjwUPEdnkjTZHHVZP2BBED2HdjapXdx2TbqC_70t9SCCp2Hm_d4beIydI1whGnMNqDRqI-YKQQDYA5ZhUQhulJSHLBtlPurH7CSlDQAorUTGLp79tvts2jrv33y-rDvybR8bym-bMp2yo1C-J3_2M2fs9W75snjgq6f7x8XNihNa0XNRAFXl3JKRUoZKGERUKsggLAZP5NfDXgzXQoRg1xUhVkF7MqBIau3ljF1OubvYfex96t2m28d2eOlQgkEtrZUDBRNFsUsp-uB2sdmW8cshuLED97eDwcInSypr_yv0P_4bUwNYlw</recordid><startdate>198406</startdate><enddate>198406</enddate><creator>O'Malley, Michael N.</creator><creator>Becker, Lee A.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>HOKLE</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198406</creationdate><title>Removing the Egocentric Bias</title><author>O'Malley, Michael N. ; Becker, Lee A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c192t-250cba89c7333fb2711144f3f291fecced114571152ff9dbc11bf6ec704c366e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1984</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>O'Malley, Michael N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Becker, Lee A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 22</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><jtitle>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>O'Malley, Michael N.</au><au>Becker, Lee A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Removing the Egocentric Bias: The Relevance of Distress Cues to Evaluation of Fairness</atitle><jtitle>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin</jtitle><date>1984-06</date><risdate>1984</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>235</spage><epage>242</epage><pages>235-242</pages><issn>0146-1672</issn><eissn>1552-7433</eissn><abstract>This investigation examines the hypothesis that the egocentric bias may be removed if the psychological distress of the coworker is made salient. The design was a 2 X 2 X 2 completely randomized factorial with the amount of reward (overreward versus underreward), type of relationship (friends versus strangers),and salience of a coworker's distress (no distress message versus distress message) as the three independent variables. The results indicated that the egocentric bias (significant differences between underrewarded and overrewarded subjects' evaluations of fairness) was found when the coworker's distress was not made evident. The bias was eliminated, however, when the distress of the coworker was made known through a message. An explanation of how the equity formulation can account for these findings is provided.</abstract><cop>Thousand Oaks, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0146167284102009</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0146-1672
ispartof Personality & social psychology bulletin, 1984-06, Vol.10 (2), p.235-242
issn 0146-1672
1552-7433
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1307163993
source Periodicals Index Online; SAGE Complete A-Z List
title Removing the Egocentric Bias: The Relevance of Distress Cues to Evaluation of Fairness
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T15%3A14%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Removing%20the%20Egocentric%20Bias:%20The%20Relevance%20of%20Distress%20Cues%20to%20Evaluation%20of%20Fairness&rft.jtitle=Personality%20&%20social%20psychology%20bulletin&rft.au=O'Malley,%20Michael%20N.&rft.date=1984-06&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=235&rft.epage=242&rft.pages=235-242&rft.issn=0146-1672&rft.eissn=1552-7433&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0146167284102009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1307163993%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1307163993&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0146167284102009&rfr_iscdi=true