Suchergebnisse

Groups often make decisions by consensus and choose the option(s) preferred by the majority. Most research has therefore treated group consensus as a singular construct, contrasting consensus and dissensus, or the majority and minority. The current research, however, found that varying degrees of consensus among the majority impacted outside observers' perceptions of the voting group's internal power structure and evaluations of its decision-making process. Specifically, partial consent (not all members agree), versus unanimous consent (all members agree), led observers to (i) infer that the group had a more decentralized, egalitarian (vs centralized, hierarchical) power structure and, consequently (ii) evaluated the group's ostensible decision-making process more (vs less) favorably. In sum, this research demonstrated how a lack of unanimity can bolster group perceptions, identified one context where that effect was attenuated by making unanimity favorable, discusses the role of procedural fairness in group judgments, and reveals potential implications for public affairs.

Abstract
The most consequential consideration of brands arises during preferential decision-making. This article proposes that as a consequence of the repeated pairing of brands and preferential decisions, exposure to brands initiates a cognitive state of readiness for preferential decisions (which we term decision readiness) that subsequently makes preferential decisions easier. Using both real and fictitious brands across a variety of choice contexts, seven experiments demonstrate that consumers find preferential decision-making easier when it occurs in the presence (vs. absence) of brands. Consistent with the details of our framework, this effect: (i) is explained by the activation of decision readiness, (ii) leads to outcomes such as increased outcome satisfaction and decreased decision delegation, and (iii) is attenuated when exposure is to only one brand. Collectively, these findings demonstrate the importance of exposure to brands for decision-making which, in turn, offers novel insight into existing literatures on brand exposure, decision difficulty, and brand roles.

Surprisingly little is known about the self-control consequences of individuals' political ideologies, given the centrality of political ideology to people's self-identity and the vitality of self-control to human functioning. This research addresses this unexplored gap by offering insight into the processes (freewill beliefs) and factors (the value of freewill for effective self-control) that lead both conservatives and liberals to demonstrate greater self-control. In doing so, these findings provide a platform by which to broaden our understanding of the underlying mechanisms impacting self-control as well as an alternative perspective for interpreting previously documented differences between conservatives and liberals (e.g., intelligence, academic success).