@article{StrackDeutsch2004,
  author    = {Strack, Fritz and Deutsch, Roland},
  title     = {Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-40447},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {This article describes a 2-systems model that explains social behavior as a joint function of reflective and impulsive processes. In particular, it is assumed that social behavior is controlled by 2 interacting systems that follow different operating principles. The reflective system generates behavioral decisions that are based on knowledge about facts and values, whereas the impulsive system elicits behavior through associative links and motivational orientations. The proposed model describes how the 2 systems interact at various stages of processing, and how their outputs may determine behavior in a synergistic or antagonistic fashion. It extends previous models by integrating motivational components that allow more precise predictions of behavior. The implications of this reflective-impulsive model are applied to various phenomena from social psychology and beyond. Extending previous dual-process accounts, this model is not limited to specific domains of mental functioning and attempts to integrate cognitive, motivational, and behavioral mechanisms.},
  subject      = {Psychologie},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Jilg2004,
  author    = {Jilg, Marion},
  title     = {Das Inventar Bevorzugter T{\"a}tigkeiten (IBT) - Erfassung freizeitbezogener Belastungswirkungen mit skalometrisch beschriebenen Freizeitt{\"a}tigkeiten},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-9122},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {Das Inventar Bevorzugter T{\"a}tigkeiten (IBT) ist ein hochreliables Verfahren zur Erfassung freizeitbezogener Belastungswirkungen. Es fußt auf Erkenntnissen zum Themenkreis Belastung-Beanspruchung-Erholung, sowie ressourcentheoretischen Vorstellungen der Aktivationstheorie. Beschrieben wird neben den theoretischen Grundlagen die Konstruktion des IBT. Außerdem werden Ver{\"a}nderungen von Freizeitinteressen untersucht, die als Folge der Bew{\"a}ltigung k{\"o}rperlicher, geistig-mentaler und sozialer Belastungen eintreten. In Untersuchungen verschiedener Personengruppen zeigten sich deutliche Effekte. Je st{\"a}rkere Belastungen bew{\"a}ltigt wurden, desto st{\"a}rker reduzierte sich das Interesse an der Aus{\"u}bung anfordernder T{\"a}tigkeiten. Zugleich nahm das Interesse an passiven, entspannenden T{\"a}tigkeiten zu. Der Effekt ist unabh{\"a}ngig davon, ob die Belastung k{\"o}rperlicher, geistig-mentaler oder sozialer Art war, er ist die Folge des Ausmaßes der bew{\"a}ltigten Belastung. Daneben traten qualitativ unterschiedliche Wirkungen auf: Die k{\"o}rperliche Belastung beeintr{\"a}chtigte besonders das Interesse an k{\"o}rperlicher Anstrengung, die geistig-mentale Belastung zeigte sich verst{\"a}rkt in einem R{\"u}ckgang des Interesses an Geistig-nervlicher Anspannung und die soziale Belastung beeintr{\"a}chtigte v.a. das Interesse an Sozialer Bezogenheit. Die jeweils anderen Interessenbereiche waren deutlich weniger stark beeintr{\"a}chtigt, wenn auch der Einfluß auf sie mit zunehmender bew{\"a}ltigter Belastung wuchs. M{\"o}glicherweise beginnt - so k{\"o}nnte man dies interpretieren - die Wirkung der Belastungsbew{\"a}ltigung im einschl{\"a}gigen Funktionsbereich und verursacht so die st{\"a}rkste Beeintr{\"a}chtigung. Mit zunehmender Belastung generalisiert die Wirkung dann auf die anderen Dimensionen. Insgesamt zieht die Bew{\"a}ltigung von Belastungen also den k{\"o}rperlichen, den geistig-mentalen und den sozialen Funktionsbereich des Menschen gemeinsam in Mitleidenschaft, wenn auch in unterschiedlichem Ausmaß. Das IBT offenbart insgesamt eine ganze Reihe interessanter Ergebnisse und beleuchtet dabei einen wichtigen, bislang kaum untersuchten Aspekt von Belastungswirkungen: Die bevorzugte Gestaltung der erholungswirksamen Zeit. Die Betrachtung freizeitbezogener Belastungswirkungen geht {\"u}ber das Geschehen am Arbeitsplatz hinaus und erlaubt, den Menschen mit seinen Belastungen, seinen Belastungswirkungen und seiner ihm zur Verf{\"u}gung stehenden Erholung in der Gesamtheit zu betrachten.},
  subject      = {Arbeitsbelastung},
  language  = {de}
}
@phdthesis{Rueter2004,
  author    = {R{\"u}ter, Katja},
  title     = {The efficiency of routine standards in social comparison},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-9448},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t W{\"u}rzburg},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {One primary source for self-knowledge is social comparison. Often objective criteria for self-evaluations are not available or useful and therefore comparisons with other people play a crucial role in self-evaluations. But the question is whether social comparisons could indeed provide information about the self without consuming too much cognitive resources or time. Therefore, in this research I wanted to look at practice effects in social comparison and the particular significance of routine standards. Whereas traditional research on standard selection mostly focused on goal-oriented and strategic standard selection processes, this research sets out to integrate social cognitive knowledge, ideas, and methods. Researchers from many different fields agree that people's behavior and thinking is not fully determined by rational choices or normative considerations. Quite the contrary, factors like knowledge accessibility, habits, procedural practice, stereotyping, categorization, and many more cognitive processes play an important role. The same may be true in social comparison and standard selection. In my research I demonstrate that efficiency concerns play an important role in social comparison. Since people may not be able to engage in a strategic standard selection whenever they engage in social comparison processes, there has to be a more efficient alternative. Using routine standards would be such an alternative. The efficiency advantage of routine standards may thereby be founded not only in the abandonment of a strategic but arduous standard selection process, but also in a higher efficiency of the comparison process itself. I therefore set out to show how the use of routine standards facilitates the social comparison processes. This was done in three steps. First, I replicated and improved our former research (Mussweiler \& R{\"u}ter, 2003, JPSP) indicating that people really do use their best friends as routine standards to evaluate themselves. Second, I demonstrated that it is more efficient to compare with a routine standard than with another standard. In Studies 2 and 3 I therefore show that comparisons between the self and a routine standard (either a natural routine standard like the best friend or a experimentally induced routine standard based on practice) are faster and more efficient than comparisons with other standards. Finally, I looked at the underlying mechanism of the efficiency advantage of routine standards. The results of Studies 4 and 5 point out, that both general as well as specific practice effects occur with repeated comparisons. Whereas a specific practice effect implies the repeated processing of the same content (i.e., knowledge about the routine standard), general practice effects indicate that the pure process (i.e., comparing the self with a routine standard) becomes more efficient regardless whether new content (i.e., comparison relevant knowledge) has to be processed. Taken together, the efficiency advantage of routine standards during self-evaluation is based not only on the lack of necessity for an arduous standard selection, but is additionally supported by the facilitation of the comparison process itself. The efficiency of routine standards may provide an explanation as to why people base self-evaluations on comparisons with these standards and dispense with strategic considerations to select the most suitable standard.},
  language  = {en}
}