Psychologyhttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/98922024-03-29T12:38:39Z2024-03-29T12:38:39ZThe Uncertainty Model of Boredom and Self-Control Failure: How Ambient Uncertainty Influences Affect and Behaviour during Unrelated Goal PursuitBritton, Emilyhttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/202072024-01-05T03:30:54Z2024-01-04T00:00:00ZThe Uncertainty Model of Boredom and Self-Control Failure: How Ambient Uncertainty Influences Affect and Behaviour during Unrelated Goal Pursuit
Britton, Emily
Integrating basic theories of motivation, boredom and self-regulation, in this dissertation, I present the Uncertainty Model of Boredom and Self-Control Failure (UM-B-SCF). The UM-B-SCF proposes that motivational states elicited in one context can influence affect and behaviour during subsequent unrelated goal pursuit. Motivational theory guiding my work suggests that under conditions of goal conflict and uncertainty, the behavioural inhibition system (BIS) is activated causing generalized shifts in cognition, affect and behaviour, which persist until the conflict can be resolved (Corr & McNaughton, 2008; Gray & McNaughton, 2000). According to the UM-B-SCF, the resulting motivational state is conducive to feelings of boredom and self-control failure. Importantly, if uncertainties persist unresolved, the ambient motivational state can carry forward to cause boredom and low self-control in other goals unrelated to the initial conflict. Across seven studies (N = 1,972), I found consistent support for the proposed model. People who experienced greater uncertainty, whether due to awareness of death (Studies 2 and 3), the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic (Studies 4 and 5), an uncertain personal relationship (Study 7), or general life circumstances (Studies 1 and 6) perceived unrelated tasks and projects as more boring and difficult to complete. Felt uncertainty about an initial conflict predicted both experiencing (Studies 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6) and anticipating (Studies 2, 3, 5, and 7) more boredom and less self-control in general (Study 1), during a data entry task (Studies 2 and 3), working on daily tasks (Study 4), completing an online survey (Studies 4 and 7), imagining pursuing general (Study 5) and academic or career-related personal projects (Studies 2 and 3), and working toward general (Study 4) and specific academic goals (Study 6) over the course of a month. In Study 6, I assessed between- and within-person variability in uncertainty and found that experiencing more uncertainty on average and feeling more uncertain than usual were both associated with boredom and difficulties exercising self-control. In all seven studies, the results were consistent with an indirect pathway such that uncertainty predicted greater boredom, and boredom in turn predicted less self-control. Collectively, the results of the present research suggest that ambient uncertainty may be an inconspicuous but influential barrier to effective goal pursuit. Findings are discussed with respect to their implications for understanding the proposed theoretical process, including possible alternative conceptualizations of the model. Possible applications of the findings for alleviating boredom and disengagement are also discussed.
2024-01-04T00:00:00ZCorrelates and Consequences of Misjudging Romantic Partners’ Work and Family PrioritiesCyr, Emilyhttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/201362023-12-06T03:31:08Z2023-12-05T00:00:00ZCorrelates and Consequences of Misjudging Romantic Partners’ Work and Family Priorities
Cyr, Emily
Women still complete the preponderance of unpaid domestic labour, even when employed full-time. Conversely, despite lessening pressures on men to provide financially, men have not seen a commensurate uptick in domestic work. I propose that inaccurate interpersonal perceptions between men and women are a key mechanism driving these uneven changes to gender roles. I mega-analytically analyzed the work and family goals of 435 mixed-gender romantic couples in Canada, then calculated women’s and men’s inaccuracies when appraising their partners’ goals. On average, women wanted more egalitarian romantic relationships than men, a gap compounded by men underestimating their partners' desire for egalitarianism. Further, men (especially those who saw their partners as highly feminine) simultaneously overestimated their partners' orientation toward family goals (over career goals) and their career intensity. Women also misperceived their partners, but here expectations were fairly low: Women underestimated their partners' family goals and career intensity. Turning to long-term outcomes, modest evidence emerged that people with inaccurate partners experienced lower relationship well-being within the next two years. Perceiving partners as being generally poor at perspective-taking (distinct from their actual inaccuracy) was the most powerful predictor of both relationship dissolution and worsened relationship well-being. These findings clarify common misperceptions between romantic partners and illuminate the consequences of having—or perceiving you have—a partner who does not understand your work and family goals.
2023-12-05T00:00:00ZDazzled and Confused: Bullshitting as a Strategic BehaviourTurpin, Martin Harryhttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/201352023-12-06T03:31:02Z2023-12-05T00:00:00ZDazzled and Confused: Bullshitting as a Strategic Behaviour
Turpin, Martin Harry
While much work has focused on receptivity to bullshit as a form of irrational belief which may predict the endorsement of other irrational beliefs, much less has been done examining how bullshit may be used strategically. For a highly social species such as humans, much can be gained by deploying cognitive and linguistic tricks to impress, confuse, and entice others toward favourable actions for the bullshitter. In the current research, I examine the persuasive power of bullshit in 9 studies. First, I demonstrate how the use of bullshit affects people’s judgments of things unrelated to the content of the bullshit itself, including enhancing the perceived profoundness of abstract art through the inclusion of bullshit titles (Chapter 2) or increasing reported willingness-to-pay for questionable products which are described using bullshit (Chapter 3). Further, I demonstrate that effective bullshitting may confer benefits in terms of how others perceive the bullshitter, including that good bullshitters are judged to be more intelligent. I also demonstrate that this judgement may not be completely unfounded insofar as cognitive ability predicts the ability to bullshit well (Chapter 4). I then propose a potential mechanism for why bullshit carries persuasive power, that is, through a unique combination of aesthetic appeal and confusing construction which leaves the target of bullshit baffled, but open to be impressed by the odd beauty of flowery nonsense. I ultimately find that the strongest predictor of receptivity to bullshit is how beautiful it is judged to be (Chapter 5). I discuss these results as they contribute to an understanding of bullshitting as a strategic behaviour which affords good bullshitters the opportunity to gain advantages through confusion, superficial impressiveness, and a flexible commitment to truth telling.
2023-12-05T00:00:00ZExtremely Partisan Samples Impact Perceptions of Political Group Beliefsvan der Valk, Alexandrahttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/201312023-12-06T03:31:06Z2023-12-05T00:00:00ZExtremely Partisan Samples Impact Perceptions of Political Group Beliefs
van der Valk, Alexandra
Accurately inferring the beliefs of a partisan group (e.g. Democrats, Republicans) can be challenging when exposed to extremely partisan beliefs from that group. Across two studies (total N = 566), we tested whether people correct these inferences for sample bias when it was explicitly disclosed. Study 2 further assessed how much of this correction is deliberate. Participants read 12 statements that most members of a political party (Democrats or Republicans) generally agree with. They were shown how strongly five party members agreed with each statement. In the biased sample conditions, these five party members were selected from the top 10% most partisan members; this bias was either disclosed or undisclosed. In the unbiased sample condition, the five members were representatively sampled from the entire party. Then, participants estimated on average how much the entire party agreed with each statement, and the likelihood that party members of the same or opposing parties agreed with each other. Participants’ mean estimates from the biased sample conditions were higher than the unbiased sample condition but lower than the samples viewed, indicating an (insufficient) attempt to correct for sample bias. Corrections were largest when sample bias was disclosed. Overall accuracy was highest when participants viewed unbiased samples, though across conditions there appeared a general tendency to overestimate strength of partisan beliefs. Parties were perceived as more homogeneous when participants viewed biased samples, regardless of whether bias was disclosed or not. While awareness of hyperpartisan bias helps correct judgments, it may not eliminate overestimation, overconfidence, or inflated perceptions of party homogeneity.
2023-12-05T00:00:00Z