Katrina Jongman-Sereno - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Katrina Jongman-Sereno
Oxford Handbooks Online, 2016
Social Anxiety, 2014
Abstract 1. One important theory of social anxiety that emphasizes the role of the self is the se... more Abstract 1. One important theory of social anxiety that emphasizes the role of the self is the self-presentation theory of social anxiety (eg, Leary and RM Kowalski, 1995). In principle, this theory states that people experience social anxiety when they want to make a desired ...
The Journal of social psychology, Jan 2, 2015
People sometimes display strong emotional reactions to events that appear disproportionate to the... more People sometimes display strong emotional reactions to events that appear disproportionate to the tangible magnitude of the event. Although previous work has addressed the role that perceived disrespect and unfairness have on such reactions, this study examined the role of perceived social exchange rule violations more broadly. Participants (n = 179) rated the effects of another person's behavior on important personal outcomes, the degree to which the other person had violated fundamental rules of social exchange, and their reactions to the event. Results showed that perceptions of social exchange rule violations accounted for more variance in participants' reactions than the tangible consequences of the event. The findings support the hypothesis that responses that appear disproportionate to the seriousness of the eliciting event are often fueled by perceived rule violations that may not be obvious to others.
Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2015
Many psychological phenomena have been explained primarily in terms of intrapsychic motives to ma... more Many psychological phenomena have been explained primarily in terms of intrapsychic motives to maintain particular cognitive or affective states-such as motives for consistency, self-esteem, and authenticity-whereas other phenomena have been explained in terms of interpersonal motives to obtain tangible resources, reactions, or outcomes from other people. In this article, we describe and contrast intrapsychic and interpersonal motives, and we review evidence showing that these two distinct sets of motives are sometimes conflated and confused in ways that undermine the viability of motivational theories. Explanations that invoke motives to maintain certain intrapsychic states offer a dramatically different view of the psychological foundations of human behavior than those that posit motives to obtain desired interpersonal outcomes. Several phenomena are examined as exemplars of instances in which interpersonal and intrapsychic motives have been inadequately distinguished, if not dire...
Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs, 2015
The Psychology of Social Status, 2014
Psychological Science, 2013
Accusations of entrenched political partisanship have been launched against both conservatives an... more Accusations of entrenched political partisanship have been launched against both conservatives and liberals. But is feeling superior about one's beliefs a partisan issue? Two competing hypotheses exist: the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis (i.e., conservatives are dogmatic) and the ideological-extremism hypothesis (i.e., extreme views on both sides predict dogmatism). We measured 527 Americans' attitudes about nine contentious political issues, the degree to which they thought their beliefs were superior to other people's, and their level of dogmatism. Dogmatism was higher for people endorsing conservative views than for people endorsing liberal views, which replicates the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis. However, curvilinear effects of ideological attitude on belief superiority (i.e., belief that one's position is more correct than another's) supported the ideological-extremism hypothesis. Furthermore, responses reflecting the greatest belief superiority were obtained on conservative attitudes for three issues and liberal attitudes for another three issues. These findings capture nuances in the relationship between political beliefs and attitude entrenchment that have not been revealed previously.
Abstract: Four studies examined intellectual humility—the degree to which people recognize that t... more Abstract: Four studies examined intellectual humility—the degree to which people recognize that their beliefs might be wrong. Using a new Intellectual Humility Scale, Study 1 showed that intellectual humility was associated with variables related to openness, curiosity, tolerance of ambiguity, and low dogmatism. Study 2 revealed that participants high in intellectual humility were less certain that their beliefs about religion were correct and judged people less on the basis of their religious opinions. In Study 3, participants high in intellectual humility were less inclined to think that politicians who changed their attitudes were “flip-flopping,” and Study 4 showed that people high in intellectual humility were more attuned to the strength of persuasive arguments than those who were low. In addition to extending our understanding of intellectual humility, this research demonstrates that the Intellectual Humility Scale is a valid measure of the degree to which people recognize that their beliefs are fallible.
Oxford Handbooks Online, 2016
Social Anxiety, 2014
Abstract 1. One important theory of social anxiety that emphasizes the role of the self is the se... more Abstract 1. One important theory of social anxiety that emphasizes the role of the self is the self-presentation theory of social anxiety (eg, Leary and RM Kowalski, 1995). In principle, this theory states that people experience social anxiety when they want to make a desired ...
The Journal of social psychology, Jan 2, 2015
People sometimes display strong emotional reactions to events that appear disproportionate to the... more People sometimes display strong emotional reactions to events that appear disproportionate to the tangible magnitude of the event. Although previous work has addressed the role that perceived disrespect and unfairness have on such reactions, this study examined the role of perceived social exchange rule violations more broadly. Participants (n = 179) rated the effects of another person's behavior on important personal outcomes, the degree to which the other person had violated fundamental rules of social exchange, and their reactions to the event. Results showed that perceptions of social exchange rule violations accounted for more variance in participants' reactions than the tangible consequences of the event. The findings support the hypothesis that responses that appear disproportionate to the seriousness of the eliciting event are often fueled by perceived rule violations that may not be obvious to others.
Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2015
Many psychological phenomena have been explained primarily in terms of intrapsychic motives to ma... more Many psychological phenomena have been explained primarily in terms of intrapsychic motives to maintain particular cognitive or affective states-such as motives for consistency, self-esteem, and authenticity-whereas other phenomena have been explained in terms of interpersonal motives to obtain tangible resources, reactions, or outcomes from other people. In this article, we describe and contrast intrapsychic and interpersonal motives, and we review evidence showing that these two distinct sets of motives are sometimes conflated and confused in ways that undermine the viability of motivational theories. Explanations that invoke motives to maintain certain intrapsychic states offer a dramatically different view of the psychological foundations of human behavior than those that posit motives to obtain desired interpersonal outcomes. Several phenomena are examined as exemplars of instances in which interpersonal and intrapsychic motives have been inadequately distinguished, if not dire...
Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs, 2015
The Psychology of Social Status, 2014
Psychological Science, 2013
Accusations of entrenched political partisanship have been launched against both conservatives an... more Accusations of entrenched political partisanship have been launched against both conservatives and liberals. But is feeling superior about one's beliefs a partisan issue? Two competing hypotheses exist: the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis (i.e., conservatives are dogmatic) and the ideological-extremism hypothesis (i.e., extreme views on both sides predict dogmatism). We measured 527 Americans' attitudes about nine contentious political issues, the degree to which they thought their beliefs were superior to other people's, and their level of dogmatism. Dogmatism was higher for people endorsing conservative views than for people endorsing liberal views, which replicates the rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis. However, curvilinear effects of ideological attitude on belief superiority (i.e., belief that one's position is more correct than another's) supported the ideological-extremism hypothesis. Furthermore, responses reflecting the greatest belief superiority were obtained on conservative attitudes for three issues and liberal attitudes for another three issues. These findings capture nuances in the relationship between political beliefs and attitude entrenchment that have not been revealed previously.
Abstract: Four studies examined intellectual humility—the degree to which people recognize that t... more Abstract: Four studies examined intellectual humility—the degree to which people recognize that their beliefs might be wrong. Using a new Intellectual Humility Scale, Study 1 showed that intellectual humility was associated with variables related to openness, curiosity, tolerance of ambiguity, and low dogmatism. Study 2 revealed that participants high in intellectual humility were less certain that their beliefs about religion were correct and judged people less on the basis of their religious opinions. In Study 3, participants high in intellectual humility were less inclined to think that politicians who changed their attitudes were “flip-flopping,” and Study 4 showed that people high in intellectual humility were more attuned to the strength of persuasive arguments than those who were low. In addition to extending our understanding of intellectual humility, this research demonstrates that the Intellectual Humility Scale is a valid measure of the degree to which people recognize that their beliefs are fallible.