可信度困境:当承认(被认为)缺乏可信度时,夸夸其谈会更可信

IF 3.4 2区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Kristina A. Wald , Shereen J. Chaudhry , Jane L. Risen
{"title":"可信度困境:当承认(被认为)缺乏可信度时,夸夸其谈会更可信","authors":"Kristina A. Wald ,&nbsp;Shereen J. Chaudhry ,&nbsp;Jane L. Risen","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>People who are judged negatively by others (e.g., as low in competence) often face a dilemma: They may want to self-promote (to improve others’ impressions of them), but worry their claims may not seem <em>believable</em>. We term this type of situation the “credibility dilemma,” and investigate how people can self-promote most effectively in such cases. In particular, we examine the impact of explicitly acknowledging one’s perceived lack of credibility while self-promoting (e.g., “I’m not that smart, but…” or “I know this may seem hard to believe, but…”). Across ten studies, we find that credibility disclaimers <em>improve</em> perceptions of the self-promoter (compared to self-promoting without them) by increasing perceptions of the speaker’s self-awareness and sincerity. In contrast, credibility disclaimers are ineffective (and sometimes backfire) when the speaker is <em>already</em> perceived as credible. Our findings suggest that common advice to avoid drawing attention to one’s flaws may sometimes be unwarranted.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"183 ","pages":"Article 104351"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The credibility dilemma: When acknowledging a (perceived) lack of credibility can make a boast more believable\",\"authors\":\"Kristina A. Wald ,&nbsp;Shereen J. Chaudhry ,&nbsp;Jane L. Risen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104351\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>People who are judged negatively by others (e.g., as low in competence) often face a dilemma: They may want to self-promote (to improve others’ impressions of them), but worry their claims may not seem <em>believable</em>. We term this type of situation the “credibility dilemma,” and investigate how people can self-promote most effectively in such cases. In particular, we examine the impact of explicitly acknowledging one’s perceived lack of credibility while self-promoting (e.g., “I’m not that smart, but…” or “I know this may seem hard to believe, but…”). Across ten studies, we find that credibility disclaimers <em>improve</em> perceptions of the self-promoter (compared to self-promoting without them) by increasing perceptions of the speaker’s self-awareness and sincerity. In contrast, credibility disclaimers are ineffective (and sometimes backfire) when the speaker is <em>already</em> perceived as credible. Our findings suggest that common advice to avoid drawing attention to one’s flaws may sometimes be unwarranted.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":\"183 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104351\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597824000438\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597824000438","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

受到他人负面评价(如能力低下)的人常常面临两难境地:他们可能想自我推销(以改善他人对自己的印象),但又担心自己的说法看起来不靠谱。我们将这种情况称为 "可信度困境",并研究在这种情况下人们如何才能最有效地进行自我推销。我们特别研究了在自我推销时明确承认自己缺乏可信度的影响(例如,"我没那么聪明,但是...... "或 "我知道这看起来很难相信,但是......")。在十项研究中,我们发现可信度免责声明(与不使用可信度免责声明的自我推销相比)会提高人们对说话者自我意识和诚意的看法,从而提高人们对自我推销者的看法。与此相反,当人们认为发言者可信时,可信度免责声明则无效(有时还会适得其反)。我们的研究结果表明,避免让人注意到自己缺点的常见建议有时可能是没有道理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The credibility dilemma: When acknowledging a (perceived) lack of credibility can make a boast more believable

People who are judged negatively by others (e.g., as low in competence) often face a dilemma: They may want to self-promote (to improve others’ impressions of them), but worry their claims may not seem believable. We term this type of situation the “credibility dilemma,” and investigate how people can self-promote most effectively in such cases. In particular, we examine the impact of explicitly acknowledging one’s perceived lack of credibility while self-promoting (e.g., “I’m not that smart, but…” or “I know this may seem hard to believe, but…”). Across ten studies, we find that credibility disclaimers improve perceptions of the self-promoter (compared to self-promoting without them) by increasing perceptions of the speaker’s self-awareness and sincerity. In contrast, credibility disclaimers are ineffective (and sometimes backfire) when the speaker is already perceived as credible. Our findings suggest that common advice to avoid drawing attention to one’s flaws may sometimes be unwarranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信