Individuals who experience stereotype threat – the pressure resulting from social compar- isons that are perceived as unfavourable – show performance decrements across a wide range of tasks. One account of this effect is that the cognitive pressure triggered by such threat drains the same cognitive (or working-memory) resources that are implicated in the respective task. The present study investigates whether mindfulness can be used to moderate stereotype threat, as mindfulness has previously been shown to alleviate work- ing-memory load. Our results show that performance decrements that typically occur under stereotype threat can indeed be reversed when the individual engages in a brief (5 min) mindfulness task. The theoretical implications of our findings are discussed.

The effect of the cause of a disaster, i.e. whether it was perceived to be caused by human or natural factors, on willingness to donate money to disaster victims was examined. In Study 1 (N=76), the cause of a fictitious disaster was experimentally varied. In Study 2 (N=219), participants were asked about their views regarding donations to two real-life disasters, one of which was perceived to be naturally caused while the other one was perceived to be caused by humans. In Study 3 (N=115), the cause of a fictitious disaster was experimentally varied, but this time measures of the proposed psychological mediators of the effect on donations were included, namely perceived victim blame and the extent to which victims were thought to make an effort to help themselves. A measure of real donation behaviour was also added. In Study 4 (N=196), the proposed psychological mediators were manipulated directly, and the effect of this on donations was monitored. Across all studies, more donations were elicited by naturally caused rather than humanly caused disasters. This difference was driven by a perception that the victims of natural disasters are to be blamed less for their plight, and that they make more of an effort to help themselves. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Guideline development groups are an integral part of evidence-based healthcare and will remain so for the foreseeable future. There is a need for the efficient production of high-quality guidelines both to ensure high standards of care and to conserve resources. Social psychological research on group processes provides valuable information that can be applied to studying the functioning of guideline development groups, including the methods they use to develop recommendations. This article describes four key concepts in the group process literature: information sharing, systematic processing, group development, and group potential productivity. We evaluate their importance for guideline development groups and conclude with methodological suggestions for the study of these complex processes.

Intra-group cooperation in a social dilemma is increased after a group has discussed and reached a decision, especially if the dilemma is easily understood (‘demonstrable’). This paper examines how demonstrability affects the decision of a group that consists entirely of participants who are initially non-cooperative. Thirty-eight 6-person groups with unanimous prior preference for cooperation or non-cooperation discussed a prisoner’s dilemma before making a group decision. When demonstrability was low groups reflected the prior (either cooperative or non-cooperative) preferences of their members. When demonstrability was high we found that groups showed no effect of prior preference. Specifically, groups of prior non-cooperators made more cooperative group decisions and subsequently their members remained cooperative when asked to express preferences individually. The combined advantages of group process and high demonstrability for facilitating optimal cooperation are discussed.

This research examined how group processes alter the impact of alcohol on a judgment task requiring vigilance. The authors compared two competing explanations, deindividuation and group monitoring, for the possible effects of alcohol. Two hundred and eighty-six undergraduates with normal drinking habits undertook a vigilance task alone or in four-person groups having consumed either alcohol (calculated to achieve up to .08 blood alcohol content) or a placebo. The vigilance task required them to count occurrences of the word "the" in a spoken passage. Alcohol significantly impaired the performance of individuals but not groups. Group members performed at a similar level in both conditions, making fewer errors than individuals in the alcohol condition. The fit of different decision-making models were tested. In both the alcohol and placebo conditions, group consensus was predicted by processes consistent with the group monitoring hypothesis. The evidence highlights that under certain conditions, group process can compensate for the cognitively impairing effects of alcohol on individuals.

Alcohol is often consumed in group settings. The present article examines the effect of alcohol on intergroup competitiveness through the use of a prisoner's dilemma game. One hundred fifty-eight college students participated in the study, either individually or as a member of a 4-person experimental single-sex group. Participants consumed either alcohol (1.13 g ethanol/kg body weight) or a placebo. Results show no effect of alcohol on cooperative choice within individuals. However, groups were significantly less cooperative after consuming alcohol than they were after consuming a placebo. In addition, after consuming alcohol, groups were less cooperative than were individuals. Results are discussed in terms of the way alcohol may affect focus of attention on group-level cues

Objective: The objective of the present study is to assess the impact of alcohol consumption on the risk orientation of people when they are in groups as opposed to alone. Alcohol is often consumed within social groups, but previous research has not distinguished whether particular group processes affect risk differently as a consequence of alcohol consumption. Three theory-based predictions are tested to see whether, after alcohol consumption, groups encourage or inhibit risk as a result of group polarization, deindividuation, or group monitoring. Method: Male participants (N = 120; ages 18-28), recruited via opportunity sample from students at the University of Kent, were assigned as individuals or as members of four-person groups. They had their breath alcohol concentration analyzed to ensure they were alcohol free and then were asked to consume either a placebo or alcohol in amounts equivalent to the legal limit for driving in the United States and the United Kingdom (.08% blood alcohol concentration). Participants completed a risk-attraction task either alone or in a group. Each participant also completed an alcohol-expectancy questionnaire. Results: Individuals found risky choices significantly more attractive after consuming alcohol. In contrast, members of groups showed no such increase. In alcohol but not placebo conditions, groups made their decisions more slowly than did individuals. Conclusions: The results are consistent with the group-monitoring hypothesis (i.e., that group members attend to each other and promote a greater level of systematic processing of the risks presented). Results indicate that with moderate social drinking, groups may provide an informal means of mutual regulation and monitoring that can offset some aspects of alcohol myopia.

A robust finding in social dilemma research is an increase in individual cooperative choice following group discussion about the dilemma. To elaborate the idea that this effect arises from the development of within-group consensus, groups of six made explicit group decisions about their subsequent individual choice. Perceived demonstrability of cooperativeness in the dilemma was manipulated through changes both to instructions and the incentives of the dilemma. As demonstrability decreased, so did the proportion of groups deciding to cooperate, leading to a reduction in the group discussion effect. Social decision scheme analysis supported the demonstrability-group decision hypothesis. The interaction between demonstrability, individual opinions and group process is proposed to explain the group discussion effect.