Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T19:18:57.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are mental states assessed relative to what most people “should” or “would” think? Prescriptive and descriptive components of expected attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2010

Tamar A. Kreps  and
Benoît Monin
Tamar A. Kreps
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. Kreps_Tamar@gsb.stanford.edumonin@stanford.eduhttp://www.stanford.edu/people/monin
Benoît Monin
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. Kreps_Tamar@gsb.stanford.edumonin@stanford.eduhttp://www.stanford.edu/people/monin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For Knobe, observers evaluate mental states by comparing agents' statements with “defaults,” the attitudes they are expected to hold. In our analysis, Knobe's model relies primarily on what agents should think, and little on expectancies of what they would think. We show the importance and complexity of including descriptive and prescriptive norms if one is to take expectancies seriously.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , August 2010 , pp. 341 - 343
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Asch, S. E. (1956) Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs 70(9):1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biernat, M. (2005) Standards and expectancies: Contrast and assimilation in judgments of self and others. Psychology Press/Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W. & Chaiken, S. (1978) Causal inference about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36:424–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, H. H. (1971) Attribution in social interaction. General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Pettit, D. & Knobe, J. (2009) The pervasive impact of moral judgment. Mind and Language 24:586–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prentice, D. A. & Miller, D. T. (1996) Pluralistic ignorance and the perpetuation of social norms by unwitting actors. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 28:161–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, L. & Ward, A. (1996) Naive realism in everyday life: Implications for social conflict and misunderstanding. In: Values and knowledge, ed. Reed, E., Turiel, E. & Brown, T., pp. 103–35. Erlbaum.Google Scholar