This research explored the strategic beliefs that people have about science and the extent to which it can explain moral and immoral behaviors. Although people do not believe that science is able to explain certain aspects of their mind, they might nevertheless accept a scientific explanation for their immoral behaviors if that explanation is exculpatory. In a first study, participants reflected on moral and immoral deeds that they performed or that other people performed. Participants were somewhat skeptic that science can account for people\'s behavior-except for when they reflected on the wrongdoings that they committed. Two further studies suggest that strategic belief in science arises because it enables external attributions for the behavior, outside of the wrongdoers\' control. Implications are discussed for science understanding and communication.

UNASSIGNED: People are generally characterized by a self-serving bias which describes the tendency to ascribe positive outcomes or success to internal or personal causes (self-enhancement motivation) and ascribe negative outcomes or failure to external or situational causes (self-protection motivation). It has been found that the individuals with internet gaming disorder (IGD) who have low self-esteem and high depression exhibit an attenuated self-serving bias. However, the relationships among self-esteem, depression and self-serving bias are not clearly identified.
UNASSIGNED: A sample of 138 IGD participants completed self-esteem and depression scales and a causal attribution task (Study 1) to examine the relationships among self-esteem, depression and self-serving bias (both self-enhancement and self-protection). In follow-up Study 2, 28 IGD participants were recruited to undertake self-affirmation intervention which can affirm one\'s sense of global self-view and bolster self-esteem to explore whether self-affirmation would trigger a reduction of depression and a raise of self-serving bias.
UNASSIGNED: The results of path analysis in Study 1 showed that the self-serving bias was predicted by self-esteem and depression, and the depression played a mediating role between self-esteem and self-serving bias. The results of Study 2 showed that the IGD participants reported higher self-esteem, lower depression and engaged in more self-protection motivation after affirming-self manipulation as compared with affirming-other manipulation.
UNASSIGNED: These findings suggest that self-esteem predicts self-serving bias through depression and self-affirmation could trigger an increase of self-esteem, further decrease depression and improve self-serving bias for the individuals with IGD. The present article clearly identified the relationships among these factors and provided a new approach to promote positive self-concept in individuals with IGD. Future research is warranted to explore the lasting benefits of self-affirmation on domains of education, relationships and gaming withdrawal for the individuals with IGD among different populations.

People often fail to acknowledge external influences on their food intake, but there might be some circumstances in which people are willing to report that those external factors influenced their behavior. This study examined whether participants who believed that they had overeaten would indicate that the portion size they were served influenced their food intake. Participants (119 women) ate a pasta lunch at two separate sessions, one week apart. At the second session, participants were randomly assigned to receive either a regular portion of pasta (the same portion as the first session) or a large portion of pasta (a portion that was twice the size), and to receive false feedback about their food intake indicating that they had either eaten about the same as or substantially more than they had at the previous session. Participants were then asked to indicate the extent to which the amount of food served influenced how much they ate at that second session. Compared to participants who were informed that they had eaten the same amount across the two sessions, those who were informed that they ate more at the second session reported a stronger influence of the amount of food served if they also received a large portion of pasta, but not if they received a regular portion of pasta. These findings suggest that the willingness to implicate external influences (e.g., portion size) on one\'s food intake may be driven by a self-serving bias, providing an \"excuse\" for overeating. However, the external cue must be salient enough to be a plausible explanation for one\'s behavior.

Previous research has focused on examining embarrassment in sensitive product purchase situations. Although embarrassment is a widespread emotion in consumption situations, few studies have explored its impact on service encounters, especially in the service failure context. This study examines how customers react to different service failures that cause embarrassment and explores whether self-serving bias exists when customers perceive higher embarrassment in service failure. This study uses a 2 (source of failure) × 2 (level of embarrassment) scenario experimental method to examine the effect of two sources of failure on consumer locus attributions, negative emotions, and negative behaviors, considering the moderating effects of the level of embarrassment. Data were collected from 218 student subjects in Taiwan. The results show that embarrassment is important in service failure contexts. Specifically, when consumers perceive higher embarrassment, they attribute more responsibility to the service provider. These attributions, in turn, influence customers\' emotions and behavioral responses. These findings have several important theoretical and practical implications in terms of embarrassing service failures.

Unethical behavior is discovered that is more contagious than ethical behavior. This article attempts to propose one of the possible underlying mechanisms-people may have underconfidence bias in information updating due to motivated reasoning, and such bias exhibits in a different direction compared to the overconfident bias documented in the literature on ethical environment, which generate the asymmetric pattern in contagion. This study designs an experiment which relates the unethical behavior to social learning, where a series of subjects with private information about penalty decide sequentially whether to conduct unethical behavior publicly. This study adopts a quantal response equilibrium to construct a structural model for estimation of the bias. In total, 162 university students participated in our experiment and the results confirm the asymmetric patterns that people rely more on others\' precedent decisions rather than their private signal; therefore, the bias facilitates the contagion. This study also tests two punishment systems in the experiment and the results suggest a policy: slightly increasing penalties for the \"followers\" in the early stages would effectively suppress the contagion.

While working with a long-distance running event organizer, the authors of this study observed considerable differences between event participants\' official finish time (i.e., bib time) and their self-reported finish time in the post-event survey. Drawing on the notion of self-serving bias, we aim to explore the source of this disparity and how such psychological bias influences participants\' event experience at long-distance running events. Using evidence of 1,320 marathon runners, we demonstrated how people are more likely to be subject to a biased self-assessment contingent upon achieving their best finish time at the event. The study samples were split into record-high-achieved and record-high-missed groups, and the self-serving biases of each group were explored. Results from the t-test comparing record-high-achieved and -missed groups showed that runners in the record-high-missed group were significantly more likely to report a positively biased finish time than runners in the record-high-achieved group (p < 0.01). Additionally, results from logistic regression showed that as runners missed their best finish time by a wider margin, the probability of reporting a positively biased incorrect finish time increased. Lastly, we conducted an additional t-test and revealed that runners who are subject to self-serving bias showed a lower level of overall event satisfaction. The current study suggests one way to bypass the adverse effects of participant sport event participants\' worse-than-expected athletic performance. We specifically suggest that the event organizers target runners who had worse-than-expected performance and make extra efforts on non-race service attributes (e.g., finish line experience, rest and recovery area, and transportation after the event) because these runners are more likely to be unsatisfied with the event.

Previous research has mostly focused on Internet use behaviors, such as usage time of the Internet or social media after individuals experienced offline social exclusion. However, the extant literature has ignored online response behaviors, such as online review responses to social exclusion. To address this gap, drawing on self-protection and self-serving bias, we proposed three hypotheses that examine the effect of offline social exclusion on online reviews, which are verified by two studies using different simulating scenarios with 464 participants. The results show that when individuals are socially excluded offline, regardless of where the exclusion comes from (businesses or peers), they will be more likely to give negative online reviews. In addition, brand awareness moderates the effect of offline social exclusion on online reviews. Specifically, if the brand is less known, compared with social inclusion, offline social exclusion will lead individuals to give more negative online reviews; conversely, for well-known brands, no significant difference exists in the online reviews between social exclusion and inclusion.

In an often-cited study, Murdock et al. (2010) found that therapists are more likely to attribute premature treatment termination to client characteristics than to themselves, a finding that the authors interpreted in terms of a self-serving bias (SSB). We replicated and extended the study of Murdock et al. (2010, study 2). Psychologists and psychotherapists (N = 91) read two case vignettes about premature treatment terminations of clients that, in a between-subjects set-up, were either described as own clients or other therapists\' clients. Next, participants used three attribution subscales (blaming therapist, client and situation) to evaluate potential causes for the premature terminations. This way, we tested whether participants would manifest SSB. We also investigated whether therapists\' scores on self-confidence and need for closure were linked to SSB tendencies. Unlike Murdock et al. (2010), we found no overall SSB. However, a stronger need for closure was related to more SSB tendencies (i.e., less endorsement of \'blame therapist\' attributions) in the own-client condition (r = -.35, p < .05, r2  = .12), but not in the other-therapist\'s-client condition (r = .17, p = .27). Our results suggest that SSB is not a ubiquitous phenomenon when therapists evaluate premature termination problems and that their willingness to attend to their own role depends to some extent on their need for closure.

Responsibility judgements have important consequences in human society. Previous research focused on how someone\'s responsibility determines the outcome they deserve, for example, whether they are rewarded or punished. Here, we investigate the opposite link: How outcome ownership influences responsibility attributions in a social context. Participants in a group of three perform a majority vote decision-making task between gambles that can lead to a reward or no reward. Only one group member receives the outcome and participants evaluate their and the other players\' responsibility for the obtained outcome. Two hypotheses are tested: 1) Whether outcome ownership increases responsibility attributions even when the control over an outcome is similar. 2) Whether people\'s tendency to attribute higher responsibility for positive vs negative outcomes will be stronger for players who received the outcome. The findings of this study may help reveal how credit attributions can be biased toward particular individuals who receive outcomes as a result of collective work.

Research has consistently found that committing immoral actions in video games is capable of eliciting feelings of guilt in players. This study aimed to investigate the mediating role of theoretically-relevant psychological mechanisms: Perceived morality of the player-controlled character and self-attribution of virtual behavior. Based in psychological and communication theory, we derived a model that links these variables to character portrayal and guilt. A between-subjects experiment manipulated the portrayal of the player-controlled character (immoral vs. moral) and measured the mediating variables and self-reported guilt. The hypothesized model was tested using a path model. Data were generally consistent with hypotheses. Controlling an immoral character reduced perceived character morality. Perceived character morality positively predicted self-attribution of character behavior and negatively predicted guilt. Self-attribution positively predicted guilt but self-attribution and perceived character morality did not interact. Our findings suggest novel directions for continued research into how game features elicit emotional responses in players.