Microworkers who are paid less tend to exaggerate the importance of their participation; express greater enjoyment and experience lower tension; expend lower effort and are more likely to drop out

Microworkers as Research Participants: Does Underpaying Turkers lead to Cognitive Dissonance? Bingjie Liu, S.Shyam Sundar. Computers in Human Behavior, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.06.017

Highlights
•    Turkers who are paid less tend to exaggerate the importance of their participation.
•    Turkers who are paid less express greater enjoyment and experience lower tension.
•    Turkers paid less expend lower effort and are more likely to drop out.
•    Underpaying microworkers undermines ethical practice of scientific research.

Abstract: Social science researchers increasingly rely on microworkers to serve as study participants, paying them very little compared to participants recruited from other venues. This has raised ethical concerns and questioned the validity of research based on microworkers. Informed by cognitive dissonance theory, we conducted two between-subjects experiments to examine the effects of underpaying Amazon Mechanical Turk workers (Turkers) on their perceptions and their actual performance on criteria crucial to online social science research. Data show that underpaid Turkers experienced ‘cognitive dissonance’ such that those paid as low as $0.25 said that their participation was more important (than subjects who were paid higher), which was positively associated with other positive perceptions and demand characteristics. Nevertheless, underpaying Turkers increased dropout rate, reduced their level of effort in answering open-ended questions and undermined perceived agency. We discuss the ethical and practical implications of underpaying microworkers.

Keywords: Amazon’s Mechanical Turk; underpayment; cognitive dissonance; enjoyment; effort

Speculations on the Evolutionary Origins of System Justification (justifying system's harsh or unfair results)

Speculations on the Evolutionary Origins of System Justification. John T. Jost, Robert M. Sapolsky, H. Hannah Nam. Evolutionary Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704918765342

Abstract: For centuries, philosophers and social theorists have wondered why people submit voluntarily to tyrannical leaders and oppressive regimes. In this article, we speculate on the evolutionary origins of system justification, that is, the ways in which people are motivated (often nonconsciously) to defend and justify existing social, economic, and political systems. After briefly recounting the logic of system justification theory and some of the most pertinent empirical evidence, we consider parallels between the social behaviors of humans and other animals concerning the acceptance versus rejection of hierarchy and dominance. Next, we summarize research in human neuroscience suggesting that specific brain regions, such as the amygdala and the anterior cingulate cortex, may be linked to individual differences in ideological preferences concerning (in)equality and social stability as well as the successful navigation of complex, hierarchical social systems. Finally, we consider some of the implications of a system justification perspective for the study of evolutionary psychology, political behavior, and social change.

Keywords: system justification, ideology, political neuroscience, amygdala, hierarchy, evolutionary psychology

Sexual disgust sensitivity was associated with increased odds of voting for Donald Trump vs each other major presidential candidate, as well as with increased odds of affiliating with the Republican vs the Democratic or Libertarian parties

Sexual Disgust Trumps Pathogen Disgust in Predicting Voter Behavior During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Joseph Billingsley, Debra Lieberman, Joshua M. Tybur. Evolutionary Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474704918764170

Abstract: Why is disgust sensitivity associated with socially conservative political views? Is it because socially conservative ideologies mitigate the risks of infectious disease, whether by promoting out-group avoidance or by reinforcing norms that sustain antipathogenic practices? Or might it be because socially conservative ideologies promote moral standards that advance a long-term, as opposed to a short-term, sexual strategy? Recent attempts to test these two explanations have yielded differing results and conflicting interpretations. Here, we contribute to the literature by examining the relationship between disgust sensitivity and political orientation, political party affiliation, and an often overlooked outcome—actual voter behavior. We focus on voter behavior and affiliation for the 2016 U.S. presidential election to determine whether pathogen or sexual disgust better predicts socially conservative ideology. Although many prominent aspects of Donald Trump’s campaign—particularly his anti-foreign message—align with the pathogen-avoidance model of conservatism, we found that pathogen-related disgust sensitivity exerted no influence on political ideology, political party affiliation, or voter behavior, after controlling for sexual disgust sensitivity. In contrast, sexual disgust sensitivity was associated with increased odds of voting for Donald Trump versus each other major presidential candidate, as well as with increased odds of affiliating with the Republican versus the Democratic or Libertarian parties. In fact, for every unit increase in sexual disgust sensitivity, the odds of a participant voting for Trump versus Clinton increased by approximately 30%. It seems, then, that sexual disgust trumps pathogen disgust in predicting socially conservative voting behavior.

Keywords: disgust sensitivity, social conservatism, voter behavior, pathogen avoidance, sexual strategies

Unconventional Consumption Methods and Enjoying Things Consumed: Recapturing the “First-Time” Experience

Unconventional Consumption Methods and Enjoying Things Consumed: Recapturing the “First-Time” Experience. Ed O’Brien, Robert W. Smith. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218779823

Abstract: People commonly lament the inability to re-experience familiar things as they were first experienced. Four experiments suggest that consuming familiar things in new ways can disrupt adaptation and revitalize enjoyment. Participants better enjoyed the same familiar food (Experiment 1), drink (Experiment 2), and video (Experiments 3a-3b) simply when re-experiencing the entity via unusual means (e.g., eating popcorn using chopsticks vs. hands). This occurs because unconventional methods invite an immersive “first-time” perspective on the consumption object: boosts in enjoyment were mediated by revitalized immersion into the consumption experience and were moderated by time such that they were strongest when using unconventional methods for the first time (Experiments 1-2); likewise, unconventional methods that actively disrupted immersion did not elicit the boost, despite being novel (Experiments 3a-3b). Before abandoning once-enjoyable entities, knowing to consume old things in new ways (vs. attaining new things altogether) might temporarily restore enjoyment and postpone wasteful replacement.

The Real Reason Liberals Drink Lattes

The Real Reason Liberals Drink Lattes. Diana C. Mutz and Jahnavi S. Rao. Political Science & Politics, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096518000574

Abstract: Are liberals truly more likely to drink lattes than conservatives? In this study, we first use a representative national survey to address this unanswered question. On confirmation, we examine three hypotheses about why this relationship exists. Our results led to a fundamental reinterpretation of what it means to be a “latte liberal.”