Advertisement

Social Influence as Socially Distributed Information Processing

  • Andrzej Nowak
  • Robin Vallacher
  • Agnieszka Rychwalska
  • Magdalena Roszczyńska-Kurasińska
  • Karolina Ziembowicz
  • Mikołaj Biesaga
  • Marta Kacprzyk-Murawska
Chapter
  • 26 Downloads
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Complexity book series (BRIEFSCOMPLEXITY)

Abstract

Social influence is arguably the most fundament and pervasive social process. The majority of research on this topic adopts the perspective of the source of influence, investigating how the he or she can overcome the resistance or passivity of the target of influence. In this view, social influence is tantamount to control and often involves strategies and tactics of manipulation. This chapter presents Regulatory Theory of Social Influence (RTSI), which examines social influence from the perspective of the target. RTSI holds that rather than always resisting social influence, the target often plays an active role in controlling the influence process. In particular, the target optimizes decision-making and judgment by delegating information processing to potential sources, thereby conserving his or her cognitive resources and improving the quality of his or her decisions and judgments. The interaction of four factors—trust, coherence, issue importance, and own expertise—determine the target’s choice of sources and the level of abstraction in the information sought from these sources. The chapter briefly discusses each factor and their interactive effects on the choice of sources and the level of information that is sought from them. Beyond maximizing the cognitive efficiency of the target and the quality of his or her outcomes, the processes specified by RTSI enhance the functioning of the social group in which the target embedded. The model also has practical applications in various domains, including the design of rules for interaction among AI agents in techno-social groups.

Keywords

Attractiveness of the source Attractor Asymmetry between trust and distrust Bi-directional influence Coherence Complex systems Decisions Delegation of information processing Distributed information processing Feedback loops High-level information Importance Judgments Low-level information Opinion dynamics Own expertise Regulatory theory of social influence Source of influence Target of influence Transactive memory Trust 

References

  1. Adorno, T.W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D.J., Sanford, R.N., Aron, B.R., Levinson, M.H., Morrow, W.R.: The authoritarian personality. Norton, New York (1950)Google Scholar
  2. Allport, G.W.: Handbook of social psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA (1954)Google Scholar
  3. Apsler, R., Sears, D.O.: Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 9(2p1), 162 (1968)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Arrow, K.J.: The limits of organization. Norton, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  5. Arrow, H., McGrath, J.E., Berdahl, J.L.: Small groups as complex systems: formation, coordination, development, and adaptation. Sage, London (2000)Google Scholar
  6. Asch, S.E.: Social psychology. Prentice-Hall, New York (1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Asch, S.E.: Opinions and social pressure. Sci. Am. 193(5), 31–35 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Asch, S.E.: Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychol. Monogr. Gen. Appl. 70(9), 1 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barabási, A.L., Albert, R.: Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science. 286(5439), 509–512 (1999)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barber, B.: The logic and limits of trust. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick (1983)Google Scholar
  11. Baron, R.S., Vandello, J.A., Brunsman, B.: The forgotten variable in conformity research: impact of task importance on social influence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71(5), 915–927 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R.: The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 117(3), 497 (1995)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Bentley, R.A., Ormerod, P., Batty, M.: Evolving social influence in large populations. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 65(3), 537–546 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., McCabe, K.: Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games Econom. Behav. 10(1), 122–142 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bonabeau, E.: Agent-based modeling: methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99(Suppl 3), 7280–7287 (2002)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Bourdieu, P.: The forms of capital. In: Halsey, A.H., Lauder, H., Brown, P., et al. (eds.) Education: culture, economy, society, pp. 46–58. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1997)Google Scholar
  17. Brady, J.V.: Ulcers in “executive” monkeys. Sci. Am. 199(4), 95–103 (1958)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Brehm, J.W.: A theory of psychological reactance. Academic, New York (1966)Google Scholar
  19. Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E.: The need for cognition. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 42(1), 116 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chiles, T.H., McMackin, J.F.: Integrating variable risk preferences, trust, and transaction cost economics. Acad. Manag. Rev. 21(1), 73–99 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cialdini, R.B.: Influence: the Psychology of Persuasion. Morrow, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  22. Coleman, J.S.: Foundations of social theory. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA (2000)Google Scholar
  23. Cook, K.S., Hardin, R., Levi, M.: Cooperation without trust? Russell Sage Foundation Publ, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  24. Craik, F.I., Lockhart, R.S.: Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 11(6), 671–684 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cuddy, A.J., Fiske, S.T., Glick, P.: Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: the stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40, 61–149 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. Currall, S.C., Epstein, M.J.: The fragility of organizational trust: lessons from the rise and fall of Enron. Organ. Dyn. 32(2), 193–206 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Currall, S.C., Inkpen, A.C.: On the complexity of organizational trust: a multi-level co-evolutionary perspective and guidelines for future research. In: Bachmann, R., Zaheer, A. (eds.) Handbook of trust research, pp. 235–246. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (2006)Google Scholar
  28. DeBruine, L.M.: Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 269(1498), 1307–1312 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Deluga, R.J.: The relation between trust in the supervisor and subordinate organizational citizenship behavior. Mil. Psychol. 7(1), 1–16 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Deutsch, M.: Trust and suspicion. J. Confl. Resolut. 2(4), 265–279 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Deutsch, M.: Cooperation and trust: some theoretical notes. Nebraska symposium on motivation, pp. 275–320. Nebraska University Press, Lincoln (1962)Google Scholar
  32. Dimoka, A.: What does the brain tell us about trust and distrust? Evidence from a functional neuroimaging study. MIS Q. 34(2), 373–396 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dodgson, M.: Learning, trust, and technological collaboration. Hum. Relat. 46(1), 77–95 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Earle, T.C.: Trust in risk management: a model-based review of empirical research. Risk Anal. 30(4), 541–574 (2010)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Ekeh, P.P.: Social exchange theory: the two traditions. Haward University Press, Cambridge, MA (1974)Google Scholar
  36. Festinger, L.: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, vol. 2. Stanford University Press (1962)Google Scholar
  37. Fine, B.J.: Conclusion-drawing, communicator credibility, and anxiety as factors in opinion change. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 54, 369–374 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Fiske, S.T., Taylor, S.E.: Social cognition. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  39. Fiske, S.T., Cuddy, A.J., Glick, P.: Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11(2), 77–83 (2007)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. French, J.R., Raven, B., Cartwright, D.: The bases of social power. Classics Organ. Theory. 7, 311–320 (1959)Google Scholar
  41. Fukuyama, F.: Trust: the social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Free Press Paperbacks, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  42. Gambetta, D.: Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Basil Blackwell, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  43. Giardini, F., Quattrociocchi, W., Conte, R.: Understanding opinions. A cognitive and formal account. Advances in Complex Systems (2011)Google Scholar
  44. Glöckner, A., Engel, C.: Can we trust intuitive jurors? Standards of proof and the probative value of evidence in coherence-based reasoning. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 10(2), 230–252 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gorn, G.J.: The effects of personal involvement, communication discrepancy, and source prestige on reactions to communications on separatism. Can. J. Behav. Sci. 7, 369–386 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gouldner, A.W.: The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Am. Sociol. Rev. 161–178 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Grzelak, J.Ł., Nowak, A.: Wpływ społeczny. In: Strelau, J. (ed.) Psychologia Podręcznik Akademicki, vol. 3, pp. 187–205 (2000)Google Scholar
  48. Guastello, S.J., Koopmans, M., Pincus, D. (eds.): Chaos and complexity in psychology: the theory of nonlinear dynamical systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
  49. Hayashi, Y., Kryssanov, V.: An empirical investigation of similarity-driven trust dynamics in social networks. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 79, 27–37 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Heesacker, M., Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T.: Field dependence and attitude change: source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking. J. Pers. 51(4), 653–666 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Horne, B.D., Adali, S..: This just in: fake news packs a lot in title, uses simpler, repetitive content in text body, more similar to satire than real news. In Eleventh International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (2017)Google Scholar
  52. Janis, I.L.: Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, p. 349. Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1982)Google Scholar
  53. Johnson, S.: Emergence: the connected lives of ants, brains, cities and software. Simon and Schuster, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  54. Johnson, N.: Simply complexity: a clear guide to complexity theory. Oneworld Publications, Oxford (2009)Google Scholar
  55. Johnson-George, C., Swap, W.C.: Measurement of specific interpersonal trust: construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 43(6), 1306 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Johnston, W.A., Dark, V.J., Jacoby, L.L.: Perceptual fluency and recognition judgments. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 11(1), 3 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Konovsky, M.A., Pugh, S.D.: Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Acad. Manag. J. 37(3), 656–669 (1994)Google Scholar
  58. Kramer, R.M., Tyler, T.R.: Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1996)Google Scholar
  59. Krosnick, J.A.: Attitude importance and attitude change. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 24, 240–255 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kruglanski, A.W.: Motivated social cognition: principles of the interface. (1996)Google Scholar
  61. Kruglanski, A.W., Freund, T.: The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 19(5), 448–468 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kruglanski, A.W., Thompson, E.P.: Persuasion by a single route: a view from the unimodel. Psychol. Inq. 10(2), 83–109 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Kruglanski, A.W., Webster, D.M.: Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychol. Rev. 103(2), 263 (1996)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. Kunda, Z., Thagard, P.: Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: a parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychol. Rev. 103(2), 284 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Landrum, A.R., Mills, C.M., Johnston, A.M.: When do children trust the expert? Benevolence information influences children’s trust more than expertise. Dev. Sci. 16(4), 622–638 (2013)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. Latané, B., Nowak, A.: Attitudes as catastrophes: from dimensions to categories with increasing involvement. In: Dynamical systems in social psychology, pp. 219–249. Academic, San Diego (1994)Google Scholar
  67. Lewicka, M., Czapiński, J., Peeters, G.: Positive-negative asymmetry or ‘When the heart needs a reason’. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 22(5), 425–434 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lewicki, R.J., Bunker, B.B.: Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. In: Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research, pp. 114–139. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Lewicki, R., McAllister, D.J., Bies, R.: Trust and distrust: new relationships and realities. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23(3), 438–458 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Li, P.P.: Towards an interdisciplinary conceptualization of trust: a typological approach. Manag. Organ. Rev. 3(3), 421–445 (2007)Google Scholar
  71. Liberman, N., Trope, Y.: The psychology of transcending the here and now. Science. 322(5905), 1201–1205 (2008)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Liberman, N., Trope, Y., Stephan, E.: Psychological distance. In: Social psychology: handbook of basic principles, 2, pp. 353-383 (2007)Google Scholar
  73. Maddux, J.E., Rogers, R.W.: Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness, and supporting arguments on persuasion: a case of brains over beauty. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39(2), 235 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Mason, M., Hood, B., Macrae, C.N.: Look into my eyes: gaze direction and person memory. Memory. 12(5), 637–643 (2004)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20(3), 709–734 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. McEvily, B., Tortoriello, M.: Measuring trust in organisational research: review and recommendations. J. Trust Res. 1(1), 23–63 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. McGuire, W.J.: Attitudes and attitude change. In: The handbook of social psychology, pp. 233–346. Random House, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  78. McKnight, D.H., Cummings, L.L., Chervany, N.L.: Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23(3), 473–490 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. McKnight, D.H., Chervany, N.: While trust is cool and collected, distrust is fiery and frenzied: a model of distrust concepts. In AMCIS Proceedings, pp.883–888. (2001)Google Scholar
  80. McKnight, D.H., Kacmar, C.J., Choudhury, V.: Dispositional trust and distrust distinctions in predicting high and low-risk internet expert advice site perceptions. e-Service J. 3(2), 35–58 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Milgram, S.: Obedience to authority. Harper & Row, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  82. Misztal, B.: Trust in modern societies: the search for the bases of social order. Polity Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  83. Mitchell, R., Nicholas, S.: Knowledge creation in groups: the value of cognitive diversity, transactive memory and open-mindedness norms. Electron. J. Knowl. Manag. 4(1), 67–74 (2006)Google Scholar
  84. Myers, D.G., Lamm, H.: The group polarization phenomenon. Psychol. Bull. 83(4), 602 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Nowak, A.: Dynamical minimalism: why less is more in psychology. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 8(2), 183–192 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R.R.: Dynamical social psychology, vol. 647. Guilford Press, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  87. Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., Latané, B.: From private attitude to public opinion: a dynamic theory of social impact. Psychol. Rev. 97(3), 362 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R.R., Tesser, A., Borkowski, W.: Society of self: the emergence of collective properties in self-structure. Psychol. Rev. 17, 39–61 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R.R., Miller, M.E.: Social influence and group dynamics. Handb. Psychol. 383–417 (2003)Google Scholar
  90. Nowak, A., Winkowska-Nowak, K., Brée, D. (eds.): Complex human dynamics: from mind to societies. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  91. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R.R., Zochowski, M., Rychwalska, A.: Functional synchronization: the emergence of coordinated activity in human systems. Front. Psychol. 8, 945 (2017)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R., Rychwalska, A., Zochowski, M.: In Sync: the emergence of function in minds, groups, and societies. Springer (in press)Google Scholar
  93. Nowak, A., Vallacher, R., Rychwalska, A., Zochowski, M.: In Sync: the emergence of function in minds, groups, and societies. Springer (2020)Google Scholar
  94. Ormerod, P.: The economics of radical uncertainty (No. 2015-40). Economics Discussion Papers (2015)Google Scholar
  95. Parks, C.D., Henager, R.F., Scamahorn, S.D.: Trust and reactions to messages of intent in social dilemmas. J. Confl. Resolut. 40(1), 134–151 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Peeters, G., Czapiński, J.: Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: the distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 1(1), 33–60 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Pennington, N., Hastie, R.: Explaining the evidence: tests of the story model for juror decision making. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 62(2), 189 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Pennycook, G., Rand, D.G.: Lazy, not biased: susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition. 188, 39–50 (2019)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  99. Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T.: The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: Communication and persuasion, pp. 1–24. Springer, New York (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Putnam, R.D.: The prosperous community. Am. Prospect. 4(13), 35–42 (1993)Google Scholar
  101. PytlikZillig, L.M., Hamm, J.A., Shockley, E., Herian, M.N., Neal, T.M., Kimbrough, C.D., Tomkins, A.J., Bornstein, B.H.: The dimensionality of trust-relevant constructs in four institutional domains: results from confirmatory factor analyses. J. Trust Res. 6(2), 111–150 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Reber, R., Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N.: Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychol. Sci. 9(1), 45–48 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Reeder, G.D., Brewer, M.B.: A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychol. Rev. 86(1), 61 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Riegelsberger, J., Sasse, M.A., McCarthy, J.D.: Do people trust their eyes more than their ears? Media bias while seeking expert advice. In Proceedings of CHI’05 extended abstracts on Human factors in Computing System. pp. 1745–1748 (2005)Google Scholar
  105. Rokeach, M.: Political and religious dogmatism: an alternative to the authoritarian personality. Psychol. Monogr. Gen. Appl. 70(18), 1 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Ross, L., Lepper, M.R., Hubbard, M.: Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 32(5), 880 (1975)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. Roszczyńska-Kurasińska, M., Kacprzyk-Murawska, M.: The dynamics of trust from the perspective of a trust game. In: Nowak, A., Winkowska-Nowak, K., Bree, D. (eds.) Complex human dynamics, pp. 191–207. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Rotter, J.B.: Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. Am. Psychol. 26(5), 443 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., Camerer, C.: Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23(3), 393–404 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Schoorman, F.D., Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H.: An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present, and future. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32(2), 344–354 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Schuman, H., Presser, S.: Questions and answers: experiments on question form, wording, and context in attitude surveys. Academic, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  112. Sherif, C.W., Sherif, M., Nebergall, R.E.: Attitude and attitude change: the social judgement-involvement process. Saunders, Philadelphia/London (1965)Google Scholar
  113. Simon, H.A.: Bounded rationality in social science: today and tomorrow. Mind & Society. 1(1), 25–39 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Simon, D., Holyoak, K.J.: Structural dynamics of cognition: from consistency theories to constraint satisfaction. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 6(4), 283–294 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Sitkin, S.B., Roth, N.L.: Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organ. Sci. 4(3), 367–392 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Stephan, E., Liberman, N., Trope, Y.: Politeness and psychological distance: a construal level perspective. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 98(2), 268–280 (2010)PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Tang, L.R., Jang, S.S., Chiang, L.L.: Website processing fluency: its impacts on information trust, satisfaction, and destination attitude. Tour. Anal. 19(1), 111–116 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Thagard, P.: Explanatory coherence. Behav. Brain Sci. 12(03), 435–467 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Thagard, P.: Coherence in thought and action. MIT press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  120. Thibaut, J.W., Kelley, H.H.: The social psychology of groups. Routledge, London (2017/1959)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Thom, R.: Structural stability and morphogenesis. Benjamin, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  122. Tyler, T.R.: Trust within organisations. Pers. Rev. 32(5), 556–568 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Uviller, H.R.: Credence, character, and the rules of evidence: seeing through the liar’s tale. Duke Law J. 42, 776–832 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Vallacher, R.R., Nowak, A. (eds.): Dynamical systems in social psychology. Academic, San Diego (1994)Google Scholar
  125. Vallacher, R.R., Nowak, A.: The dynamics of self-regulation. In: Advances in social cognition, vol. 12, pp. 3–52. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1999)Google Scholar
  126. Vallacher, R.R., Nowak, A.: Dynamical social psychology: finding order in the flow of human experience. In: Social psychology: handbook of basic principles, vol. 2, pp. 734–758. Guilford Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  127. Vallacher, R.R., Wegner, D.M.: A theory of action identification. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1985)Google Scholar
  128. Vallacher, R.R., Wegner, D.M.: What do people think they’re doing? Action identification and human behavior. Psychol. Rev. 94(1), 3 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Vallacher, R.R., Read, S.J., Nowak, A.: The dynamical perspective in personality and social psychology. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 6(4), 264–273 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Vallacher, R.R., Read, S.J., Nowak, A. (eds.): Computational Social Psychology. Routledge, New York (2017)Google Scholar
  131. Voci, A.: The link between identification and in-group favouritism: effects of threat to social identity and trust-related emotions. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 45(2), 265–284 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1348/014466605X52245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., Aral, S.: The spread of true and false news online. Science. 359(6380), 1146–1151 (2018)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  133. Wegner, D.M.: Transactive memory: a contemporary analysis of the group mind. In: Mullen, B., Goethals, G.R. (eds.) Theories of group behavior, pp. 185–208, New York. Springer (1987)Google Scholar
  134. Wegner, D.M., Vallacher, R.R.: Implicit psychology: an introduction to social cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1977)Google Scholar
  135. Winkielman, P., Olszanowski, M., Gola, M.: Faces in-between: evaluations reflect the interplay of facial features and task-dependent fluency. Emotion. 15(2), 232 (2015)PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  136. Wojciszke, B.: Postawy i ich zmiana. Psychologia. 3, 79–105 (2000)Google Scholar
  137. Wojciszke, B.: Morality and competence in person-and self-perception. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 16(1), 155–188 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Wojciszke, B., Baryła, W.: Perspektywa sprawcy i biorcy w spostrzeganiu siebie i innych. Psychol. Społeczna. 1(1), 9–32 (2006)Google Scholar
  139. Wojciszke, B., Bazińska, R., Jaworski, M.: On the dominance of moral categories in impression formation. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24(12), 1251–1263 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Worchel, P.: Trust and distrust. In: Austin, W.G., Worchel, S. (eds.) The social psychology of intergroup relations. Wadsworth, Belmont (1979)Google Scholar
  141. Yoo, Y., Kanawattanachai, P.: Developments of transactive memory systems and collective mind in virtual teams. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 9(2), 187–208 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Zabłocka, A., Praszkier, R., Petrushak, E., Kacprzyk-Murawska, M.: Measuring the propensity for building social capital depending on ties-strength. J. Posit. Manag. 7(4), 19–39 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Ziegler, C.N.: On recommender systems. In social web artifacts for boosting recommenders, pp. 11–20. Springer, Cham (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Zucker, L.G., Darby, M.R., Brewer, M.B., Peng, Y.: Collaboration structure and information dilemmas in biotechnology: organizational boundaries and trust production. In: Kramer, R.M., Tyler, T.R. (eds.) Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research, pp. 90–113. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrzej Nowak
    • 1
  • Robin Vallacher
    • 2
  • Agnieszka Rychwalska
    • 3
  • Magdalena Roszczyńska-Kurasińska
    • 3
  • Karolina Ziembowicz
    • 4
  • Mikołaj Biesaga
    • 3
  • Marta Kacprzyk-Murawska
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Psychology Institute for Social StudiesUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyFlorida Atlantic UniversityBoca RatonUSA
  3. 3.The Robert Zajonc Institute for Social StudiesUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland
  4. 4.The Maria Grzegorzewska UniversityWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations