Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

The adversarial mindset

Bibliographic Data

ID12434727
AuthorsDan Simon (0000-0002-9821-3607, University of Southern California, corresponding author), Minwoo Ahn (0009-0006-0606-6176, University of Southern California), Douglas M Stenstrom (California State University Los Angeles), Stephen J Read (0000-0003-4562-7248, University of Southern California)
Year2020
Volume26
Issue3
Pages353-377
Publication date2020-04-09
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePsychology Public Policy and Law (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1076-8971 • E-ISSN: 1939-1528
PublisherAmerican Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1037/law0000226
OpenAlexW3015210902
LanguageEN
Citations received4

Many social outcomes are reached by means of competitions between opposing actors. While the positive effects of competition are beyond dispute, this paper contends that competitive situations also trigger a particular psychological mindset that can distort contestants’ judgment and lead to suboptimal courses of action. The paper presents a theoretical framework that consists of a myside bias, by which people adopt a self-serving view of the competition, evaluate themselves favorably, and evaluate their counterpart unfavorably. The framework also proposes the construct of otherside bias, by which people impute to their counterparts distortions that are similar, but opposite, to their own. The combined effect of these biases is to fuel conflict-promoting behavior. Next, the paper presents two experiments designed to test this framework. Using minimalistic experimental treatments, we find that participants assigned to adversarial roles display the myside and otherside biases. The primary objective of this paper is to offer a comprehensive account of the psychological mindset evoked by competitive situations. We integrate findings established across a variety of research fields into a unifying theoretical framework and demonstrate their joint impact on this important domain of human judgment and behavior. Second, we propose that coherence-based reasoning serves as the cognitive backbone of the framework, in that the array of judgments are intricately interconnected and organized in a coherence maximizing representational structure both within and between the myside and otherside biases. Third, we discuss the framework’s implications for a variety of legal domains, including negotiations, litigation, expert testimony, and police investigations

Adversarial system · Engineering ethics · Mindset · Political science · Computer Science · Engineering · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Artificial Intelligence

  • (Non-)learning to police

    Open Access•Mario S Staller, Swen Koerner•Frontiers in Education•2022

  • Toward a General Framework of Biased Reasoning

    Open Access•Dan Simon, Stephen J Read•Perspectives on Psychological…•2025

  • A three‐factor ethical reasoning model for court‐involved practitioners

    Open Access•Jeffrey P Wittmann•Family Court Review•2022

  • The Adversarial Bias

    Open Access•Dan Simon•Annual Review of Law and Social…•2025

Unique citing works4
Citations per year1
Citation span2022 - 2025 (4)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 4

Tools

Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae