Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Organization Sciences, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2024 Jul;247:104327. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104327. Epub 2024 May 27.
Negative gossip is a double-edged sword, which can harm group members but also protect them from harmful others. Current theory proposes that gossip receivers assess gossipers' selfish and prosocial intentions based on different social cues, to determine whether the negative gossip behavior is morally justifiable. However, assessing gossipers' moral intentions does not fully clarify when and how justifiability of negative gossip is assessed by receivers. Using goal framing theory, I propose a parsimonious way of understanding when gossip receivers will be interested in determining whether sharing the negative gossip was justifiable, and how they assess justifiability. In line with predictions, results of two scenario experiments showed that in a hedonic and gain goal frame gossip justifiability was similar to a baseline level, suggesting that receivers had no particular concerns regarding gossip justifiability. However, in a normative frame receivers assessed negative gossip to be less justifiable when social cues indicated that the gossiper was motivated to harm others for self-interest compared to when such cues were absent (Study 1). In Study 2, gossip was more justified when social cues indicated that that the target broke the salient social norm and signaled that the gossiper has low motivation to harm. Moreover, in a normative frame, participants were more interested in further establishing gossip truthfulness compared to participants in a gain, hedonic, or control condition in Study 1, and in a hedonic condition in Study 2. These results show that individuals' goal frame determine their interest in gossip justifiability and how they assess it. This may help solve the paradox of negative gossip by drawing from goal framing theory to understand individuals can be avid gossip consumers, while holding widely disapproving attitudes towards this behavior.
负面八卦是一把双刃剑,它既可以伤害群体成员,也可以保护他们免受他人的伤害。当前的理论提出,八卦接收者会根据不同的社交线索评估八卦者的自私和亲社会意图,以确定负面八卦行为是否在道德上是合理的。然而,评估八卦者的道德意图并没有完全阐明接收者何时以及如何评估负面八卦的合理性。本文运用目标框架理论,提出了一种简洁的理解方式,即八卦接收者何时会有兴趣确定分享负面八卦是否合理,以及他们如何评估合理性。与预测一致,两项情景实验的结果表明,在享乐和收益目标框架下,八卦的合理性与基线水平相似,这表明接收者对八卦的合理性没有特别的关注。然而,在规范框架下,当社交线索表明八卦者出于自身利益而有意伤害他人时,接收者会认为负面八卦的合理性较低,而当不存在这种线索时,接收者会认为负面八卦的合理性较高(研究 1)。在研究 2 中,当社交线索表明目标违反了明显的社会规范,并表明八卦者的伤害动机较低时,八卦会更合理。此外,在规范框架下,与研究 1 中的收益、享乐或控制条件下的参与者相比,以及与研究 2 中的享乐条件下的参与者相比,参与者更有兴趣进一步确定八卦的真实性。这些结果表明,个体的目标框架决定了他们对八卦合理性的兴趣以及他们如何评估合理性。这可能有助于通过借鉴目标框架理论来理解个体为什么既是热衷于八卦的消费者,同时又对这种行为持有广泛的反对态度,从而解决负面八卦的悖论。