↓ Skip to main content

The Dynamic Reactance Interaction – How Vested Interests Affect People’s Experience, Behavior, and Cognition in Social Interactions

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Dynamic Reactance Interaction – How Vested Interests Affect People’s Experience, Behavior, and Cognition in Social Interactions
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01752
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina Steindl, Eva Jonas

Abstract

In social interactions, individuals may sometimes pursue their own interests at the expense of their interaction partner. Such self-interested behaviors impose a threat to the interaction partner's freedom to act. The current article investigates this threat in the context of interdependence and reactance theory. We explore how vested interests influence reactance process stages of an advisor-client interaction. We aim to explore the interactional process that evolves. In two studies, participants took the perspective of a doctor (advisor) or a patient (client). In both studies we incorporated a vested interest. In Study 1 (N = 82) we found that in response to a vested interest of their interaction partner, patients indicated a stronger experience of reactance, more aggressive behavioral intentions, and more biased cognitions than doctors. A serial multiple mediation revealed that a vested interest engendered mistrust toward the interaction partner and this mistrust led to an emerging reactance process. Study 2 (N = 207) further demonstrated that doctors expressed their reactance in a subtle way: they revealed a classic confirmation bias when searching for additional information on their preliminary decision preference, indicating stronger defense motivation. We discuss how these findings can help us to understand how social interactions develop dynamically.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 45%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 18%
Social Sciences 4 11%
Computer Science 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2015.
All research outputs
#18,431,664
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,184
of 29,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,524
of 387,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#372
of 464 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,824 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 387,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 464 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.