Abstract
Psychological research has revealed that people attribute mental states to groups such as companies, especially to those groups that are highly entitative. Moreover, attributing a mind to a group results in the decreased attribution of mind to individual group members. Recent research has demonstrated that the minds of others are perceived in two dimensions—agency and experience. The present study investigated the possibility that this two-dimensional structure exists in mind attribution to groups, and group entitativity has different patterns of relations with these dimensions. A vignette experiment revealed that highly entitative groups were attributed both agency and experience to greater degrees compared to non-entitative groups, while group entitativity reduced only the attribution of agency to the individual group members. Individual members were attributed an equivalent amount of experience regardless of group entitativity. Mind attribution to individual members showed an unpredicted third factor of other-recognition, which was positively related to group entitativity. The implications of mind attribution to moral issues were discussed.
Highlights
Attribution of Mind to a Group and Its MembersIn our daily life, we use expressions such as “the company is suffering from a recession” or “the government decided it” as if the company and the government possess mental capacities to feel pain or make decisions
The present study aims to break down mind attribution into agency and experience and investigate how entitativity affects the attribution of each dimension to groups and members
Items consisting of the otherrecognition factor all loaded on the agency factor in group mind; this suggested that other-recognition is a subcategory of agentic mental capacity, which is consistent with Gray et al (2007)
Summary
Attribution of Mind to a Group and Its MembersIn our daily life, we use expressions such as “the company is suffering from a recession” or “the government decided it” as if the company and the government possess mental capacities to feel pain or make decisions. Individuals often explain an event based on individual persons’ mental states—for example, “the company’s workers are suffering from pay cut” or “the government officials agreed on the new policy.”. In these examples, the perceivers appear to focus on individual actors and pay less attention to the group as a whole. The perceivers appear to focus on individual actors and pay less attention to the group as a whole These examples suggest that people may attribute mind to a group when the group as a whole is perceived as a single entity, rather than an aggregate of individual entities that independently possess their own mental states. Groups with high entitativity have been shown to be attributed more mind than non-entitative groups, as such groups
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
