<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Dreu, C.K.W. de</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/289/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Oxytocin Motivates Non-Cooperation in Intergroup Conflict to Protect Vulnerable In-Group Members (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/37906/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-11-07T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Intergroup conflict is often driven by an individual's motivation to protect oneself and fellow group members against the threat of out-group aggression, including the tendency to pre-empt out-group threat through a competitive approach. Here we link such defense-motivated competition to oxytocin, a hypothalamic neuropeptide involved in reproduction and social bonding. An intergroup conflict game was developed to disentangle whether oxytocin motivates competitive approach to protect (i) immediate self-interest, (ii) vulnerable in-group members, or (iii) both. Males self-administered oxytocin or placebo (double-blind placebo-controlled) and made decisions with financial consequences to themselves, their fellow in-group members, and a competing out-group. Game payoffs were manipulated between-subjects so that non-cooperation by the out-group had high vs. low impact on personal payoff (personal vulnerability), and high vs. low impact on payoff to fellow in-group members (in-group vulnerability). When personal vulnerability was high, non-cooperation was unaffected by treatment and in-group vulnerability. When personal vulnerability was low, however, in-group vulnerability motivated non-cooperation but only when males received oxytocin. Oxytocin fuels a defense-motivated competitive approach to protect vulnerable group members, even when personal fate is not at stake. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The Herding Hormone: Oxytocin Stimulates In-Group Conformity (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/38052/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-11-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>People often conform to others with whom they associate. Surprisingly, however, little is known about the possible hormonal mechanisms that may underlie in-group conformity. Here, we examined whether conformity toward one's in-group is altered by oxytocin, a neuropeptide often implicated in social behavior. After administration of either oxytocin or a placebo, participants were asked to provide attractiveness ratings of unfamiliar visual stimuli. While viewing each stimulus, participants were shown ratings of that stimulus provided by both in-group and out-group members. Results demonstrated that on trials in which the ratings of the in-group and out-group were incongruent, the ratings of participants given oxytocin conformed to the ratings of their in-group but not of their out-group. Participants given a placebo did not show this in-group bias. These findings indicate that administration of oxytocin can influence subjective preferences, and they support the view that oxytocin's effects on social behavior are context dependent. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Conflict in medical teams: Opportunity or danger? (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/37905/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Objectives Intragroup conflicts often occur when people are called upon to collaborate in the accomplishment of a task. For example, when surgeons and nurses work together during an operation, conflicts may emerge because of differences in functional understanding. Whether these conflicts are beneficial or detrimental to team outcomes has been the source of much debate. From one perspective, a conflict that stems from differences in members' functional understanding may enhance team members' understanding and performance of the task at hand. By contrast, such a conflict may cause hostility, emotionality and distraction from actual task accomplishment. Methods This study reviews findings on the relationships between intragroup conflict and team outcomes, discusses potential conflict resolution strategies for intragroup conflicts and explores how these link to the field of medical education. Results Three primary types of conflict have been distinguished, involving, respectively, task-, process- and relationship-associated conflict. Both process conflict, or conflict about the logistics of task accomplishment, and relationship conflict, or conflict about interpersonal incompatibilities, have been shown to detract from effective team functioning. Task conflict, or conflict about the content of the task itself, is also generally negative for team functioning, but under certain conditions its negative effects may be minimised. For example, when teams can clearly separate task issues from relationship issues, task conflicts are less destructive for team outcomes. However, achieving such a separation in practice, and thereby realising the benefits of task conflict, is quite difficult to achieve. Conclusions Intragroup conflicts pose a challenge to effective team functioning. In the education of medical professionals, effective training in conflict management skills and their application to specific team conflict dynamics, such as with reference to how to resolve task as opposed to relationship conflict, is critical. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Oxytocin modulates selection of allies in intergroup conflict (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/37901/</link>
      <pubDate>2012-03-22T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>In intergroup competition and conflict, humans benefit from coalitions with strong partners who help them to protect their in-group and prevail over competing out-groups. Here, we link oxytocin, a neuropeptide produced in the hypothalamus, to ally selection in intergroup competition. In a double-blind placebocontrolled experiment, males self-administered oxytocin or placebo, and made selection decisions about six high-threat and six low-threat targets as potential allies in intergroup competition. Males given oxytocin rather than placebo viewed high-threat targets as more useful allies and more frequently selected them into their team than low-threat targets. </description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Passive responses to interpersonal conflict at work amplify employee strain (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/19812/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-12-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Interpersonal conflict at work correlates with stress related outcomes such as psychological strain and exhaustion. Consistent with conflict theory, we argued that this relationship is moderated by the way conflict is managed. Cross-sectional data collected in The Netherlands, from students with part-time jobs (Sample 1, n=104), healthcare workers (Sample 2, n=191), and mid-level administrative personnel (Sample 3,n=161) indeed revealed that conflict was related to psychological strain and exhaustion especially when interpersonal conflict was managed passively (through avoiding and yielding). Active conflict management strategies (forcing and problem solving) did not moderate the relationship between interpersonal conflict and employee strain. Implications for conflict theory, for future research, and for practice are discussed.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Motivated information processing and group decision-making (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/11814/</link>
      <pubDate>2007-07-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Integrating dual-process models [Chaiken, S., &amp; Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. NewYork: Guilford Press] with work on information sharing and group decision-making [Stasser, G., &amp; Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467–1478.], we predicted that groups with high epistemic motivation engage in more information-driven and less preference-driven interaction, and achieve better decisions. An experiment manipulating process accountability showed that groups under process accountability experienced greater need for more information, repeated unshared information more often, and more often chose the correct decision alternative. Mediation analysis established that epistemic motivation produced high quality decisions because it stimulated systematic information processing. Results also revealed that preference heterogeneity stimulated information-driven interaction and led to higher decision quality.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Bridging Faultlines by Valuing Diversity: Diversity Beliefs, Information Elaboration, and Performance in Diverse Work Groups (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/8496/</link>
      <pubDate>2006-09-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Although there are numerous potential benefits to diversity in work groups, converging dimensions of diversity often prevent groups from exploiting this potential. In a study of heterogeneous decision-making groups, we examined whether the disruptive effects of diversity faultlines can be overcome by convincing groups of the value in diversity. Groups were either persuaded of the value of diversity or of the value of similarity for group performance, and they were provided with either homogeneous or heterogeneous information. As expected, informationally diverse groups performed better when they held pro-diversity rather than pro-similarity beliefs, whereas the performance of informationally homogeneous groups was unaffected by diversity beliefs. This effect was mediated by group-level information elaboration. Implications for diversity management in organizations are discussed.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Interacting Dimensions of Diversity: Cross-Categorization and the Functioning of Diverse Work Groups (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/8500/</link>
      <pubDate>2006-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>We conducted an experiment to show how the interplay between informational diversity and other dimensions of diversity can account for some of the inconsistent effects of informational diversity in previous research. 70 four-person groups involved in a decision-making task received homogeneous or heterogeneous information. By manipulating gender composition and bogus personality feedback we created groups that either had a potential faultline (a basis for subgroup categorization) or were homogeneous on these dimensions. In potential faultline groups, heterogeneity of information either converged with or cross-cut the other dimensions of diversity. Results showed that informational diversity enhanced group functioning when it was crossed rather than converged with the potential faultline.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The possessive self as a barrier to conflict resolution: Effects of mere ownership, process accountability, and self-concept clarity on competitive cognitions and behavior. (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/11846/</link>
      <pubDate>2005-09-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>The authors propose that people have difficulty managing conflict because they quickly develop ownership of arguments and positions they use in the dispute, that these arguments and positions become part of their (extended) self-concept, and that any opposition or counterargumentation therefore becomes an ego-threat. Four studies reveal that individuals value arguments and beliefs more when these are associated with the self and that anticipated or real opposition triggers ego-defensive cognition and behavior, including competitive communication, retaliatory responses, negative perceptions of the partner, and attitude polarization. These effects were weaker when epistemic needs were raised through process accountability or when individuals had high rather than low self-concept clarity. The authors conclude that because people develop ownership of arguments and make these part of their self-concept, conflict is difficult to manage and bound to escalate. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved).</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model and Research Agenda (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/12105/</link>
      <pubDate>2004-06-29T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Research on the relationship between work group diversity and performance has yielded inconsistent results. To address this problem, the authors propose the categorization-elaboration model (CEM), which reconceptualizes and integrates information/decision making and social categorization perspectives on work-group diversity and performance. The CEM incorporates mediator and moderator variables that typically have been ignored in diversity research and incorporates the view that information/decision making and social categorization processes interact such that intergroup biases flowing from social categorization disrupt the elaboration (in-depth processing) of task-relevant information and perspectives. In addition, the authors propose that attempts to link the positive and negative effects of diversity to specific types of diversity should be abandoned in favor of the assumption that all dimensions of diversity may have positive as well as negative effects. The ways in which these propositions may set the agenda for future research in diversity are discussed.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>