When Does Gossip Lead to Increased Learning Motivation? The Self-Reflective Function of Gossip
University of Groningen Master’s Thesis HRM
EBM722B20
16 June, 2019
Irina Tamminga S3377709
i.s.tamminga@student.rug.nl
Prof. dr. B. A. Nijstad b.a.nijstad@rug.nl
Abstract
Whereas gossip is argued to be fundamental to human nature, it has gained a negative reputation in society. Because to date little is known about when gossip can have positive consequences for the individual gossip receiver, this research aimed to investigate whether and when the presence of (positive) gossip is associated with increased learning motivation for gossip receivers. Furthermore, this research examined whether self-reflection mediated the relationship between gossip and learning motivation. To answer when gossip leads to an increased self-reflection, Social Comparison Theory was used to hypothesize that the relationship between gossip and self-reflection is moderated by the degree of similarity between the gossip receiver and gossip target. The hypotheses were tested in a scenario study in which 213 students were placed in 3 different conditions, and in which gossip and the degree of similarity between the gossip receiver and gossip target was manipulated. The results showed that the presence of positive gossip was positively related with engagement in self- reflection. More specifically, the degree of similarity between the gossip receiver and gossip target moderated the relationship in such a way, that the relationship between gossip and engagement in self-reflection was stronger when similarities were high, and weaker when similarities were low. Furthermore, the results show that the positive relationship between gossip and learning motivation is mediated by engagement in self-reflection, but only when the similarity between gossip targets and receivers was high.
Keywords:
Gossip, Self-Reflection, Learning Motivation, Target Similarity, Social Comparison
When Does Gossip Lead to Increased Learning Motivation? The Self-Reflective Function of Gossip
“A blow with a word strikes deeper than a blow with a sword” (Burton, 1857, p. 207). Gossip, defined as the exchange of evaluative information regarding absent third parties (Foster, 2004), has received a negative reputation (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2011). Yet, Beersma and van Kleef (2011) argue that even though gossip is frowned upon, many individuals engage in gossip with a noteworthy frequency and eagerness. Research found that individuals spend over two thirds of their daily conversations in engagement in interpersonal evaluation (Dunbar, Duncan &
Marriott, 1997; Emler, 1994). This frequent occurrence in everyday life suggest that, despite the negative reputation, gossip may serve a useful and desirable function for those partaking in the activity. For example, one study highlighted that individuals were primarily interested in engagement in gossip, due to the self-evaluative function it provides (Martinescu, Janssen, &
Nijstad, 2014). This research revealed that gossip recipients use the obtained gossip information to improve, promote and protect oneself. It illustrates how gossip triggers self- reflection in comparison to others, improvement of behavior and identification of threats.
Although gossip may be spiteful, most of it is shared in good faith between individuals.
Therefore, opposing the negative perceptions, gossip might provide a contribution towards knowing oneself and adapting to our surroundings.
Previous research predominantly focused on understanding gossip and the effect it has on group-serving functions (Martinescu et al., 2014), such as limiting self-serving behavior at the expense of the group (Beersma & van Kleef, 2011). However, the majority of this research has thereby largely overlooked how gossip affects the individual who receives and responds to the gossip, what (positive) consequences it may provide, and specifically when these consequences arise. One can question whether the same consequences could be found for all individuals. Therefore, this research investigates whether and when gossip results in self-
reflective behavior when individuals receive gossip regarding others. This research addresses an important gap in existing literature, by examining the immediate benefits that gossip provides to gossip recipients by looking at the self-evaluative function of gossip. Martinescu et al. (2014) illustrated that gossip provides self-evaluative information for the gossip recipient, yet did not indicate whether specific (individual) conditions ought to be met in order for this to occur. Therefore, the research question is;
When is gossip, through the positive relationship with self-reflection, associated with increased learning motivation?
We propose that gossip can be functional to receivers, because individuals need information regarding others in order to engage in self-reflection (Martinescu et al., 2014).
Reflecting upon one’s capabilities, skills and knowledge is a need that is fulfilled through social comparison and identification (Festinger, 1954; Sedikides & Skowronski, 2000; Sedikides &
Strube, 1997). Thus, gossip may actually provide information regarding others that could be used for self-reflection purposes (Wert & Salovey, 2004). Importantly, such self-reflection may bring benefits. Wang et al. (2017) state that self-reflection is a powerful strategy to increase learning motivation, as more reflective individuals have a greater understanding of their own learning needs and preferences. By examining the question what (positive) consequences gossip may provide the gossip recipient, this research proposes a model in which the relationship between gossip and learning motivation is mediated by self-reflection.
However, not all types of gossip may be effective in stimulating reflection and learning.
In particular, Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954) suggests that self-reflection is stimulated more when individuals receive comparison information about others who are similar to the self (Ho, Lee, & Liao, 2016). This research therefore assumes that a stronger relationship
between gossip and learning motivation is obtained when a high degree of similarity between the gossip target and recipient exists, and a weaker relationship when similarity is low.
This research aims to provide a more nuanced perception regarding gossip, showing that gossip does not have harmful effects, and should not always be avoided at all costs. This research hopes to illustrate that gossip may have positive consequences and may serve a useful function within organizations, however that individual differences should be considered.
Especially answering the question when gossip would encourage individuals to engage more in self-reflection and learning motivation would provide further support on the functional perspective of gossip as argued by Martinescu et al. (2014). Furthermore, we aim to show that the functional aspect of gossip is in line with the social comparison approach as argued by Baumeister, Zhang and Vohs (2004) and Wert and Salovey (2004), and that the functional effect of gossip is stronger, when the gossip receiver obtains information about individuals similar to the self. Should associations be discovered, organizations will be provided with new insights regarding dealing with the matter of gossip in the workplace. These new insights could help managers decide whether a zero-tolerance policy regarding gossip should be adopted, or may give them another perspective towards what company culture they should aim for.
Theoretical background
Gossip is one of the most omnipresent behaviors that people engage in. Research shows that gossip is present across a variety of cultures, societies and industries, and it was estimated that individuals spend up to two thirds of their daily conversation time engaging in gossip (Dunbar, Duncan & Marriott, 1997; Emler, 1994). Moreover, gossip is a fundamental need of the human condition, and human society as we know it would not be able to exist without it (Dunbar, 2004). However, despite its commonness, gossip obtained a negative reputation in society (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012): practically all societies criticize gossip across time and cultures (Goodman & Ben-Ze’ev, 1994). Gossip is perceived as self-serving behavior, which
is utilized to manipulate and influence individuals in spiteful ways (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012). Only recent researches have argued for a positive perspective on gossip, claiming it proves to be purposeful and contributes towards social functioning (Baumeister, Zhang &
Vohs, 2004; Dunbar, 2004; Foster, 2004), as gossip provides social (comparison) information about others that direct encounters could not provide (Suls, 1977; Wert & Salovey, 2004) and that this serves a self-evaluative function (Martinescu et al., 2014).
Martinescu et al. (2014) argue that the most all-encompassing definition of gossip is
“the evaluative talk exchanged informally about an absent third party” (e.g. Dunbar, 2004;
Foster, 2004). Bergmann (1993) states that while gossip may be both positive and negative, gossip is never merely descriptive, as an evaluative component is always present. Individuals are social beings: they rely on one another and engage in social exchanges of information in order to survive and thrive (Martinescu et al., 2014). In order for humans to function in complex social environments, evolutionary theories describe gossip as primary reason why humans developed language (Dunbar, 2004; Martinescu et al., 2014), as gossip allows for exercising social influence through reputational systems (Burt, 2008; Martinescu et al., 2014;
Sommerfeld, Krambeck, Semmann & Milinski, 2007). It is reputation that reflects one’s impression rather than objective information regarding another person (Burt, 2008).
Four main motives underlie the function of gossip, namely that gossip is used to (1) influence others (2) provide information, (3) for enjoyment purposes and (4) maintain group norms (Foster, 2004; Rosnow, 1977; Stirling, 1956). The motive for gossip to influence other individuals rests on the assumption that individuals engage in self-serving behavior, which has caused the negative reputation of gossip (Foster, 2004). Secondly, through gossip, individuals acquire information about other individuals and check whether they agree with the opinion of the individual spreading the gossip (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012). Gossip enables individuals to exchange news and to create so-called “social maps” of the environment they live in
(Rosnow, 1977). It is often the only way to get access to (unfavorable) information (Foster, 2004). Thirdly, gossip provides a sense of fun and distracts individuals from themselves and from their daily routines (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012). Finally, engaging in gossip protects the social group, its norms and can create social bonding (Gluckman, 1963). It is used by insiders to exclude outsiders (Dunbar, 2004; Noon & Delbridge, 1993) and gossip warns group members against those who violate group norms (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012).
The gossip receiver has a passive role in the communication of gossip compared to the gossip sender (Martinescu et al., 2014). People are most interested in gossip regarding those that are alike in the sense of similar to us in age and gender, as they may be perceived as social rivals (McAndrew, Bell, Garcia, 2007). Moreover, people feel the need to compare themselves with other individuals in their environment whom they are to compete with for the limited resources available in the group (McAndrew et al., 2007). It seems that gossip regarding others is personally relevant for receivers, as it contains information about their direct social environment, making social comparisons with the gossip targets possible (Baumeister et al., 2004; Sul 1977; Wert & Salovey, 2004). However, it still remains unclear what specific function gossip will have for its receiver.
Individuals use evaluative information regarding other individuals in order to improve, promote and protect themselves, and gossip serves as a self-evaluative function for the receiver and triggers self-conscious emotions (Martinescu et al., 2014). The capacity to consciously reflect upon one’s sense of self is a crucial aspect of self-awareness (Johnson et al., 2002).
Moreover, one’s sense of self is defined as the collection of representations regarding one’s traits, attitudes and abilities that guide one’s behavior, choices and social interactions (Johnson et al., 2002). It is the accuracy of one’s sense of self that allows an individual to function effectively in the world. Humans are actively motivated to continuously renew the cognitive representation of their attributes, with the main goal of maintaining a positive self-concept
(Martinescu et al., 2014; Sedikides & Gregg, 2008; Sedikides & Strube, 1997). This research proposes that receiving gossip leads to increased self-reflection. Gossip regarding other individuals’ behavior and capabilities is expected to be functional for self-reflection purposes, as it suggests ways in which recipients could become better or which behaviors they should avoid.
Hypothesis 1: Receiving gossip regarding others is positively associated with self- reflection.
In addition, gossip provides social comparison information about other individuals (Martinescu et al., 2014). This information reflects whether the gossip receiver is doing better or worse compared to the gossip target. Being able to acquire this information and determine one’s social position is a form of social comparison argued to be central within the theme of gossip (Wert & Salovey, 2004). Social comparison theory (SCT) proposes that individuals have an innate drive to evaluate themselves in comparison to others (Festinger, 1954). Individuals make all kinds of judgement calls about themselves, and the key is that one observes oneself in relation to others in the absence of objective standards (Goldenberg, Andres, & Resteigne, 2016). Individuals compare themselves to others to reduce uncertainty and help them create meaning (Suls and Wheeler, 2000). Moreover, social comparison is considered a central aspect of social life, and engaging in social comparison with other individuals plays an essential role in the construction of our social reality (Buunk & Gibbons, 2007).
Three types of social comparison exists in the SCT framework, namely downward (with an individual who is worse off), upward (with an individual who is better off) and lateral comparison (with similar individuals) (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008; Ho, Lee, & Liao, 2016;
Wills, 1981). Individuals are prone to compare themselves with similar others (Ho et al., 2016) and the lateral comparison provides individuals with the most reliable and stable evaluation regarding themselves (Festinger, 1954; Ho et al., 2016; Taylor & Lobel, 1989).
This research examines whether it is always the case that receiving gossip would lead to an increased self-reflection. It is expected that gossip only increases self-reflection, when the received gossip is about an individual similar to the self on important dimensions. The reason is that, a high degree of similarity between gossip receiver and the gossip target, would provide gossip receivers with information directly relevant to their personal situation. It shows gossip receivers how they are doing compared to relevant others, whereas information regarding individuals with a low degree of similarity may not be specifically applicable.
Hypothesis 2: The relationship between gossip and self-reflection is moderated by similarity between the gossip receiver and gossip target. Similarity moderates the relationship in such a manner that the relationship is stronger when similarity is high, and weaker when similarity is low.
Self-reflection is considered as a continuous process that individuals engage in, and is found to be central to creating a purposeful and directed change (Carver & Scheier, 1998). Self- reflection is seen as the inspection, understanding and evaluation of one’s thoughts, feelings and behavior (Carver & Scheier, 1998). In the context of learning, Boud, Keogh and Walker (1985) state that reflection is a broad term for the intellectual and affective activities individuals engage in, in order to explore their experiences, and to result in new findings and understandings. The process of reflection can go deeper and deeper – like peeling off the layers of an onion – starting with awareness regarding one’s performance, towards critically assessing one’s beliefs and ideology behind their thinking and feeling (Yip, 2006). Reflection is affirmed to be a process involving three phases (Rolfe, 1998). Firstly, individuals attend to thoughts and feelings stimulated by a certain event or situation. Secondly, the individual will (re)assess their experience of this particular event. The final step involves the individual to generate new perspectives or insights for this event or situation (Rolfe, 1998). It is particularly these new perspectives and insights that could provide improvement of practices and competences (Boud,
Keogh & Walker, 1985; Morrison, 1997; Ruch, 2000). Therefore, purposeful progress depends on an individual’s ability to engage in self-reflection and use the feedback to improve performance (Grant, Franklin & Langford, 2002).
Individuals engaging frequently in self-reflective activities are not merely able to identify opportunities for improvement and change, but also increase their positive thinking and learning motivation (Wang et al., 2007). It seems essential for personal learning and development, that individuals obtain a realistic view of the challenges and opportunities they may face (Niemi, 1997), and the exploration of all available alternatives in order to commit to certain choices and goals (Niemi, 1997). By frequent engagement in self-reflection, individuals become more capable of identifying essential professional problems, challenging self-evident
“truths”, are more likely to seek for feedback and use this of professional development purposes (Schön, 1983; von Wright, 1992). Moreover, Wang et al. (2007) states that the realistic and well considered view individuals obtain regarding their specific situation, results in an increased internalized understanding and more positive emotions towards learning.
Therefore, it is argued that one’s readiness for and engagement in self-reflection forms an essential basis for lifelong learning and professional development (Niemi, 1997).
In line of this argumentation, it is hypothesized that self-reflection will result in an increased learning motivation. We expect that individuals (frequently) engaging in self- reflection are more aware of their thoughts, feelings, skills and capabilities, thereby identifying personal development and learning opportunities and a deeper exploration of all available alternatives when committing to certain choices and future goals. Therefore, when individuals have gained knowledge regarding their strengths and weaknesses, obtained through self- reflection, they gain personal insight leading to an increased learning motivation.
Hypothesis 3: An increased self-reflection, as obtained by receiving gossip about other individuals, will lead to increased learning motivation.
Furthermore, we hypothesize that a conditional indirect effect will take place amongst the previously described variables. Following the line of argumentation presented for the past three hypotheses, we expect that an increased self-reflection, as caused by receiving gossip about other individuals, will lead to an increased learning motivation, but only when the degree of similarity between gossip receiver and gossip target is high. A visual representation of this research model is presented in figure 1.
Hypothesis 4: Self-reflection mediates the relationship between the receiving of gossip with learning motivation, only when the degree of similarity between gossip receiver and gossip target is high.
Figure 1 – Conceptual Model
Method Population and sample
The experiment was conducted at the FEB Research Lab of the University of Groningen, in which students of the faculty of Economics and Business were all able to participate. Within the lab setting, a homogenous group of 213 participants was asked to complete a survey digitally in English, and were compensated monetary or with course credits.
A total of 213 students (Mage = 22.11, SD = 2.95; 34.30% female, 65.30% male) participated. The students represented a total of 40 different nationalities of which the majority had the Dutch nationality (26.8%). Other participants held German (12.2%), Indonesian (10.8%), Chinese (6.6%), Bulgarian (4.7%) and Romanian (4.2%) nationalities.
With 62.0%, following a Bachelor education was the most common educational level amongst participants, followed by a Master degree (31.0%), pre-MSc (6.1%), PhD (0.5%), and 0.5% indicated not to be currently studying. The participants represented over 37 different study courses, of which the majority was enrolled in International Business (36.5%), Marketing (15.2%) and Economics & Business Economics (10.9%). With 49.5%, almost half of all participants were within their first year. 22.6% of the participants were second year students, 23.1% within their third year, and 4.7% indicated to be in their fourth year. Finally, 70.9% of the participants indicated not to be working (part-time) next to their studies. The 29.1% that did indicate to work, worked on average 12.52 hours per week (SD= 7.06, min= 2, max = 30).
Operationalizations
The participants were placed in a hypothetical situation where they visualized themselves as young professionals (3-5 years working experience) within the working field.
They were told that they had been employed for that period of time at the same employer and were working in a team of approximately 10 – 15 colleagues, with an equal distribution of males and females. They were asked to answer all questions with this context in mind, and it took approximately 30 minutes to complete the full survey.
The participants were randomly divided into 3 groups of each 71 participants in which the different manipulations took place. The first manipulation concerned the absence or presence of gossip. In the control condition, no gossip was present, whereas in the other two gossip was. Moreover, in the two conditions in which gossip was present, another manipulation took place. One condition was created so that the degree of similarity between gossip receiver and gossip target was low, whereas in the other condition this degree of similarity was manipulated to be high. The first group (control condition, without gossip) received the additional information that they were, whilst having a cup of coffee, talking to one of their
colleagues, Sandra, whom provided them with their opinion on what would be the best way to complete a certain task.
The second group received a modified version of the additional information. They were presented with the situation in which they were also having a cup of coffee, talking to one of their colleagues, Sandra. However, in this scenario, Sandra was positively gossiping about another colleague (as frequently occurred) about how he/she completed a certain task, manipulating the presence of gossip. The similarities between gossip target and receiver were manipulated to be low: by indicating that the gossip target was of the opposite gender, 20 years older, had a different function in the team and had been working at the company for 15 years.
The final group also received a manipulated version of the additional information.
Again, this group was presented with the scenario that they were having a cup of coffee, talking to Sandra, and she was positively gossiping about another colleague (as frequently occurred) regarding how he/she completed a certain task, thereby manipulating the presence of gossip.
Now the similarities regarding the gossip target were manipulated to be high: the gossip target had the same gender, was about the same age, worked in a similar position, and had been with the company for a comparable amount of time.
Participants in all conditions completed measures that evaluated their engagement in self-reflection and learning motivation as the dependent variables in this research. Moreover, their need for self-reflection, need for cognition and social comparison orientation were measured as individual difference measures, to include as potential control variables. The hypotheses were tested using one-way ANOVA with post hoc (Tukey) and contrast tests, and an ordinary least squared regression conducted in SPSS by means of Process function by Andrew F. Hayes.
Measurements – Dependent variables
Engagement in Self-reflection. A modified version of the “self-reflection and insight scale (SRIS)” (appendix I) (Grant, Franklin, & Langford, 2002) was used to measure participants’ engagement in self-reflection. The first 6 items, measuring the actual engagement in self-reflection were used. The items used a seven-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). An example question measuring the variable was: “Imagine that you return to your desk after the conversation with Sandra. Sitting at your desk, to what degree would you spend time in self-reflection on how you perform your job?”
Learning motivation. A modified version of the Learning Goal Orientation Scale was used to measure learning motivation (Button, Mathieu & Zajac, 1996) (appendix II), consisting of 8 items measured on a seven-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Example questions were: “How motivated would you be after your conversation with your colleague to challenge yourself” or “How motivated would you be to improve your performance?”
Measurements – Personality variables
Need for Self-reflection. A modified version of the “self-reflection and insight scale (SRIS)” (appendix I) (Grant, Franklin, & Langford, 2002) was used to measure participants’
need for self-reflection. Only the 6 items, measuring the need for self-reflection were used. The items used a seven-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Example questions measuring the need for self-reflection were: “It is important for me to evaluate the things that I do” and “I am very interested in examining what I think about”.
Need for Cognition. In order to measure participants’ need for cognition, a shortened version of the need for cognition scale as developed by Cacioppo and Petty (1982) was used (appendix III). It aims to measure the tendency for participants to engage in and enjoyment in thinking. The shortened version of the scale consisted of 18 items measured on a seven-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Two example questions of the questions were:
“I prefer complex to simple problems” and “Thinking is not my idea of fun” (reversed).
Social Comparison Orientation. Gibbons and Buunk (1999) developed a scale measuring the social comparison orientation of individuals. The originally developed scale consisting of 11 items measured on a seven-point scale (1= strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) was used for this research (appendix IV). The scale included questions such as “I always pay a lot of attention to how I do things compared with how others do things”. The scale also included the two reversed questions: “I am not the type of person who compares often with others” and “I never consider my situation in life relative to that of other people”.
Internal consistency. Before performing all the analyses, the measurement variables were checked on their internal consistency, as indicated in table 1 below. All variables displayed a Cronbach’s Alpha to be >.80, indicating that the internal consistency of all measures was high and thereby reliable to use in this research.
Table 1: Variable internal consistency
Variable Cronbach’s Alpha
Need for Self-Reflection .885
Need for Cognition .854
Social Comparison Orientation .823
Engagement in Self-Reflection .842
Learning Motivation .881
Data management
Participants subscribing to the research provided their name and student number and thereby received a unique identification number to participate. The researcher did not have any insight in participants name or student number, but only identified the participants based upon their unique identification number. The data collection took 14 days after which the final
dataset was composed. The research provided a guarantee of anonymity and confidentiality for all respondents and therefore their name and student number were not registered in the survey.
Only general demographical questions were asked and registered in the data set. Furthermore, only the researcher had access to the dataset, and no other individuals were granted access to this data, in order to safeguard all provided participant information.
Results Preliminary analysis
Outlier analysis. Before performing the analyses, assumptions regarding the data were checked, to see whether any abnormalities were visible. First of all, all variables were checked for outliers. All analyses in this research have been conducted both including and excluding the outliers. However, the outcome of the analyses did not significantly alter the pattern of results and therefore does not substantially influence any conclusions that were drawn from the data. Therefore, all presented data and analyses in this chapter include the outliers.
Normality. Additionally, the distribution of all data was checked for normality. The assumption of the analyses to be conducted was that the data must be normally distributed. A Shapiro-Wilk test revealed that all variables were non-normally distributed and were strongly negatively, right-skewed. In order to obtain normally distributed variables, a power transformation was used. All analyses were conducted both with the normally distributed (and thus power transformed) data, as well as the raw, unaltered data, and that the power transformation did not significantly alter the conclusions drawn from the data. As no significant conclusions arise when using the power transformed data or the raw unaltered data, all further information presented made use of the raw and unaltered data.
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics and Intercorrelations
Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Age 22.11 2.95 -
2. Need for Self-Reflection 5.60 .97 .09 -
3. Need for Cognition 4.51 .75 -.09 .32** -
4. Social Comparison Orientation 5.11 .81 -.08 .23** .17* -
5. Engagement in Self-Reflection 4.79 .94 -.07 .27** .14* .36** -
6. Learning Motivation 5.22 .82 -.19** .24** .30** .38** .47** -
7. Gossip Dummy .67 .47 .11 .07 .00 -.06 .16* .07 -
8. Similarities Dummy .33 .47 -.06 .05 -.02 .00 .21** .11 .50** -
Notes. N=213. *p < .05, **p < .01.
Gossip dummy: 0= Control, 1= Gossip & Low Similarity, 1=Gossip & High Similarity.
Similarities dummy: 0= Control, 0= Gossip & Low Similarity, 1=Gossip & High Similarity.
Descriptive statistics. Table 2 presents the mean, standard deviations and the Pearson correlations for all the variables included in this research. Observation of the data revealed that the variables Need for Self-Reflection, Need for Cognition and Social Comparison Orientation are all three weakly to moderately associated with one another. The strongest correlation amongst the three variables appeared to be the association of Need for Self-Reflection with Need for Cognition (r = .32, p = .00). The Need for Self-Reflection was weakly associated with Social Comparison Orientation (r =.23, p = .00) and the weakest association of the three exists between Need for Cognition and Social Comparison Orientation (r = .17, p = .02).
This analysis also provided preliminary support for the hypothesis that gossip regarding highly similar targets would result in a higher engagement in self-reflection. Two dummy variables were created in order to see whether the presence of gossip, and the degree of similarity was correlated with the other variables. First of all, a gossip dummy was created, by coding the control condition (absence of gossip) as 0, and both the low similarity condition and high similarity condition (both in which gossip was present) as 1. The gossip dummy displayed a moderately weak correlation with Engagement in Self-Reflection (r = .16, p = .02). Secondly, a similarity dummy was created, by coding the control condition and the low similarity condition as 0, and the high similarity gossip condition as 1. The similarities dummy provided a slightly stronger relationship with Engagement in Self-Reflection (r = .21, p = .00).
Moreover, the variable Engagement in Self-Reflection showed significant associations with the Need for Self-Reflection (r = .27, p = .00), Need for Cognition (r = .14, p = .05) and Social Comparison Orientation (r = .36, p = .00). The variable Learning Motivation also was positively associated with the three variables; Need for Self-Reflection (r = .24, p = .00), Need for Cognition (r = .30, p = .00) and Social Comparison Orientation (r = .38, p = .00). This matter highlighted the importance to use these three variables as control variables in the main regression analysis, to ensure any effects through these variables were accounted for.
The strongest association in the correlation table was the correlation between Engagement in Self-Reflection and Learning Motivation (r = .47, p = .00), which is consistent with the hypothesis that engagement in self-reflection is related to increased learning motivation.
Hypotheses testing
Hypothesis 1. To examine the effects of the manipulations on engagement in self- reflection, a one-way ANOVA with post hoc (Tukey) analysis was conducted. This analysis was used to compare the means of engagement in self-reflection in the three scenarios’ (control, low similarity and high similarity). Therefore, the scenario a participant is presented was the independent variable and engagement in self-reflection was the dependent variable. The results of the analysis, as shown in table 3, showed that the 3 conditions differ significantly from one another (Mcontrol = 4.58; Mlow = 4.71; MHigh = 5.07, F (2, 210) = 5.29, p = .01, hp2 = .05).
Table 3: One-Way ANOVA
In order to evaluate the nature of the differences between the three groups, the statistically significant one-way ANOVA was followed up with post-hoc test. The post-hoc comparison making use of the Tukey HSD test showed that the average score for the high similarity gossip condition (M = 5.07, SD = .82) was significantly different (p = .01) from the control scenario (M = 4.58, SD = .82). The high similarity control condition displayed a marginally significant difference (p = .06) with the low similarity gossip condition (M = 4.71,
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Engagement in Self-Reflection
Between Groups 9.064 2 4.53 5.29 .01
Within Groups 179.818 210 .86
Total 188.882 212
SD = 1.10). The control scenario did not significantly differ from the low similarity gossip condition.
The first hypothesis predicted that a difference would exist in the engagement in self- reflection between the non-gossip conditions and the gossip conditions. Therefore, to directly test this hypothesis, a contrast test was conducted in order to compare the control condition with both the low similarity and high similarity gossip conditions. The weights for the contrasts were: -2 (control condition), +1 (low similarity gossip condition), and +1 (high similarity gossip condition). The contrast test revealed that indeed a significant effect was found (t (210)
= 2.30, p = .02) when comparing the control condition with both gossip conditions. This significant effect is in line with the first hypothesis that presence of gossip leads to higher levels of engagement in self-reflection.
Hypothesis 2. The second hypothesis predicted that the high degree in similarity would result in higher levels of self-reflection compared to the low similarity conditions. In order to examine the hypothesis, two more contrast tests were conducted. The first contrast test compared the control condition with the low similarity gossip condition. According to the second hypothesis, gossip with high similarities should lead to higher levels of self-reflection, but not gossip with low similarities. In line with this reasoning, this contrast aims to test that the control and low similarity gossip condition are similar in terms of self-reflection. The weights for the first contrast test to compare the control condition with the low similarity gossip condition were: -1 (control condition), +1 (low similarity gossip condition), 0 (high similarity gossip condition). Additionally, the second contrast test aimed to compare the control condition and the low similarity gossip condition on the one hand with the high similarity gossip condition on the other. By conducting this specific contrast, statistical proof was obtained whether the control and low similarity gossip condition are significantly different from the high similarity gossip condition, as predicted by the second hypothesis. Therefore, this second
contrast test made use of the following weights: -1 (control condition), -1 (low similarity gossip condition), and -2 (high similarity gossip condition).
The contrast tests revealed that the first contrast, between the control condition and the low similarity gossip condition, was not significant (t (210) = .85, p = .40). Therefore, the null hypothesis that no difference exists between the two conditions is maintained. However, the second contrast between the control condition with the low similarity gossip condition and the high similarity gossip condition did reveal a significant effect (t (210) = 3.14, p = .00). The outcomes of the contrast effects were in line with the second hypothesis of this research, and show that the high similarity gossip condition stimulated engagement in self-reflection, whereas the low similarity gossip condition did not (compared to the control condition).
Hypothesis 3. Finally, a mediation regression analysis by means of model 4 of the Hayes analysis in SPSS was used to test the overall model and thereby the final two hypotheses.
In this regression analysis the different conditions were recoded into a dummy. Both the control condition and the low similarity condition were coded as 0, and the high similarity gossip condition was coded as 1. This dummy was used as the independent variable in the model. The variable learning motivation was the dependent variable, engagement in self-reflection the mediator, and the three personality variables (need for self-reflection, need for cognition and social comparison orientation) were used as covariates. Referring back to the descriptive statistics and intercorrelation (Table 2), these three covariates were all correlated with both engagement in self-reflection and learning motivation. Hence, the importance of controlling for these three covariates to question whether the path from self-reflection to learning motivation remains once controlled for these variables.
Table 4: Regression Analyses
Engagement in Self-Reflection Learning Motivation
b (t) b (t)
Dummy .41 (3.29) ** .06 (.63)
Need for Self-Reflection .18 (2.72) ** .02 (.35)
Need for Cognition .04 (.46) .23 (3.48) **
Social Comparison Orientation .37 (4.94) ** .22 (3.45) **
Engagement in Self-Reflection .31 (5.46) **
Indirect effect
Engagement in Self-Reflection .12 .05 [.04; .24]
Notes. N=213. *p < .05, **p < .01; dummy: 0 = control & low similarity condition, 1 = high similarity condition; coefficients in boldface display the hypothesized effects.
As the results displayed in table 4 show, the dummy has a significant effect on engagement in self-reflection (b = .41, p = .00). This implies that the high similarity gossip condition leads to higher levels of engagement in self-reflection, compared to the control and low similarity gossip condition. Moreover, controlling for the significant effects the covariates have on the dependent variable, the analysis revealed that the variable engagement in self- reflection was significantly associated with the variable learning motivation (b = .31, p = .00).
This result confirms the third hypothesis, stating that engagement in self-reflection results in increased learning motivation. The covariate social comparison orientation is observed to have a significant effect on both engagement in self-reflection (b = .37, p = .00), and learning motivation (b = .22, p = .00).
Hypothesis 4. The same mediation regression analysis revealed that no significant direct effect of the dummy variable on learning motivation was observed (b =.06, p = .53). This reveals that the mediation relation between the variable engagement in self-reflection and learning motivation is significant. No direct effect between the dummy and learning motivation was found, yet the dummy is associated with engagement in self-reflection, which in turn is associated with learning motivation. Moreover, the bootstrapping results of the indirect effect show that the confidence interval does not contain zero. This means that the indirect effect of gossip regarding high similarity, through engagement in self-reflection leads to higher levels of learning motivation. Therefore, this analysis explicitly shows that the effect of gossip regarding high similarity targets on learning motivation is mediated by the engagement in self- reflection, and thereby confirms the final hypothesis.
An additional analysis was conducted to observe whether one of the control variables (need for self-reflection, need for cognition and social comparison orientation) might act as a moderator within the mediation model in which gossip leads to engagement in self-reflection, leading to learning motivation. This analysis was conducted to investigate whether certain individual characteristics – such as a higher sensitivity towards social comparison with others – might lead certain individuals to be more receptive for gossip information, leading to stronger effects for their self-reflection and learning motivation. Therefore, each of these control variables has been tested to moderate the relationship between gossip with engagement in self- reflection, using model 7 of the moderated-mediation Hayes regression analysis in SPSS. None of these three analyses proved a significant outcome, thereby no proof was found that these control variables moderated the relationship.
Discussion
Gossip has gained a very negative reputation in society, even though it has been argued to be fundamental to human nature. Beersma and van Kleef (2011) argued that, despite this
negative reputation, many people do engage in gossip in a noteworthy eagerness and frequency.
It is this frequent occurrence that seemed to suggest that gossip may actually serve a desirable function for the individuals involved in the activity. The main aim of this research was to investigate whether and when gossip results in self-reflective behavior when individuals received gossip regarding others, and if this in turn resulted in higher learning motivation. The research thereby specifically aimed to explain how gossip affects the individual who received and responded to the gossip, and the (positive) consequences it may provide, as literature to date was not able to provide the answer. By focusing on individuals’ need for self-reflection, need for cognition, social comparison orientation and degree of similarities between gossip receiver and gossip target, this research looked into whether specific conditions or personality traits are to be considered in order for gossip to lead to engagement in self-reflection and increased learning motivation.
Overall, the results of this are in line with the hypotheses set at the beginning of this research. First of all, the results reveal that receiving positive gossip regarding other individuals is positively associated with self-reflection. The manipulation of the presence of gossip was related to higher levels of self-reflection, compared to the control condition in which gossip was absent. Therefore, the first hypothesis is confirmed. The second hypothesis stated that the relationship between gossip and self-reflection would be moderated by the degree of similarity between the gossip receiver and gossip target. It was expected that the degree of similarity moderated the relationship in such a manner that the relationship would be stronger when similarity was high, and weaker when similarity is low. The contrast tests that were conducted displayed that a significant difference between the high similarity gossip condition and the control and low similarity condition existed. This significant effect showed that individuals in the high similarity gossip condition had higher levels of engagement in self-reflection, and that the individuals in the control and low similarity gossip condition scored significantly lower on
engagement in self-reflection. Hence, these results confirm that the relationship between gossip and self-reflection is indeed moderated by the degree of similarity between the gossip receiver and gossip target. A high degree of similarities between the gossip receiver and gossip target will lead to higher levels of engagement in self-reflection, compared to lower degrees of similarities. Finally, the regression analysis highlighted that an increased self-reflection leads to increased learning motivation. Moreover, this analysis specifically revealed that self- reflection acts as a mediator between gossip regarding high similarity gossip targets and learning motivation. Gossip regarding a highly similar gossip target leads to increased levels of self-reflection, which in turn leads to increased learning motivation. Thus, the results were also able to provide statistical proof in line with the final hypothesis.
Theoretical Implications
Gossip is often perceived as merely self-serving behaviour, used to manipulate and influence other individuals in spiteful ways (Beersma & Van Kleef, 2012). Only more recent researches have focused on a positive perspective on gossip, claiming it is purposeful and can enhance social functioning (Baumeister, Zhang & Vohs, 2004; Dunbar, 2004; Foster, 2004).
Our findings are in line with this functional view on gossip and thereby add to the broader understanding of gossip, specifically from the gossip recipients’ perspective. Gossip provides gossip receivers with social (comparison) information regarding other individuals, that direct encounters would not be able to provide (Suls, 1977; Wert & Salovey, 2004). By illustrating that receiving gossip has an impact in the self-evaluation process of individuals, this research shows why gossip is such a widespread phenomenon in all kinds of social contexts. Martinescu et al. (2014) stated that the gossip receiver had the most passive role within the gossip triad, however the findings of this research show that despite the passive role, receiving gossip sets a psychological process in motion affecting the individuals’ thoughts, feelings and behavior.
Gossip helps gossip receivers to adapt to their social environment, by providing them with an
indirect manner to evaluate themselves. This research complements research that argues for the social function of gossip, and thereby adds by shifting the dominantly negative perception of gossip (Baumeister et al., 2004; Foster, 2004; Martinescu et al., 2014) towards a perception that gossip can be useful and positive.
In this research, we did not only contribute to the gossip research, as we also related different theories to gossip. First of all, we found that this research has implications for the literature of self-reflection. These findings highlight the importance of informal communication in the self-reflection process. Previous research already indicated that obtaining evaluative information about other individuals could facilitate achievement pursuits and have value for self-improvement (Foster, 2004), explaining why individuals may be interested in receiving competence-related gossip. However, this research shows that engagement in self-reflection is affected by informal communication by means of gossip. Burt (2008) claimed that it is subjectivity and reputation that will reflect one’s impression, not objective information regarding others. The findings of this research support this claim, as it seems that individuals engage in self-reflection after obtaining subjective information regarding others.
Moreover, in this research, we were able to show the importance of the Social Comparison Theory (SCT). SCT proposed that all humans have the drive to evaluate themselves in comparison to other individuals (Festinger, 1954). We were able to show that when individuals are capable of comparing themselves to similar others (by manipulating a high degree of similarity), individuals are inclined to engage in self-reflection. However, when individuals are faced with low levels of similarity between themselves and the other individual, it becomes harder to observe oneself in relation to others. Literature states that individuals are prone to compare oneself with similar others (Ho et al., 2016), and that lateral comparison would provide the most reliable and stable evaluations (Festinger, 1954; Ho et al., 2016; Taylor
& Lobel, 1989). This research adds to the existing literature by indicating that individuals are not only prone to compare themselves with similar others, but that a high degree of similarity is needed in order for individuals to use the evaluative information and apply it to their personal situation.
Finally, our research also has implications for the theories used on learning motivation.
This research showed that engagement in self-reflection and critical thinking about one’s feeling, emotions and behavior results in higher levels of learning motivation. These findings are consistent with the literature regarding learning motivation. Previous research indicated that purposeful progress towards goals all depend in an individuals’ ability to monitor and evaluate themselves (Grant, Franklin & Langford, 2002). Individuals need to be able identify opportunities for improvement and change (Wang et al., 2007), and these can only be found when increased attention for self-reflection and internalized understanding is achieved. Our research highlights that exploration of oneself and consideration of all the available options and alternatives for an individual are necessary in order to commit and become more motivated towards learning.
Practical Implications
In today’s business environment gossip seems to be omnipresent, where it at the same time has a negative reputation. Gossip is frowned upon, and is often heavily criticized by the moral guidelines of society, implying it should actively be avoided (Goodman & Ben-Ze’ev, 1994). Dunbar (2004) even states that social norms explicitly prescribe punishments for those individuals engaging in gossip. Many organizations have developed strategies to deal with – and often completely eliminate – workplace gossip, thereby adopting policies such as a zero- tolerance policy regarding gossip (Waddington, 2012). However, gossip seems to be present in a wide variety of social contexts, due to the beneficial functions it provides both groups and individuals. Recent research highlighted that gossip is actually essential for proper functioning
of individuals and the groups they partake in (Beersma & van Kleef, 2011; Sommerfeld et al, 2007). Due to this contradiction found in the gossip literature, and the fact gossip is always present on it seems there is little to be gained from trying to eliminate or ban gossip completely.
Nicholson (2001) argues that gossip is a natural activity people engage in when sharing a collective identity in all social environments, thereby including the workplace. Moreover, it seems workplace satisfaction is directly related to the opportunities a job provides individuals to talk with one another (Emler, 1994). This illustrates that a more constructive approach is needed to ensure, both individuals and the organizations they are working for, are to accept gossip.
In line with the results of this research, individuals and organizations ought to reflect more thoroughly on the functions and the implications gossip holds for them. This research implies that rather than completely eliminating gossip, or actually denying its existence in the workplace, organizations should adopt an open and more constructive attitude. Moreover, organizations should consider the potential of learning regarding the gossip that circulates the workplace. Gossip could provide organizations with opportunities for their employees to learn and improve, and also provide a signal about problematic matters occurring in the workplace.
Organizations should especially increase the awareness of the beneficial effects of positive gossip amongst employees. Positive gossip may increase self-reflection, and thereby increase employees’ learning motivation. By increasing employees’ learning motivation, organizations can ensure their employees engage in a high personal development and remain resilient for the highly dynamic and fast-paced environments organizations today operate in. Moreover, organizations ought to realize that positive gossip should especially stimulated amongst highly similar employees. Employees are more likely to engage in self-reflection when receiving gossip about similar coworkers, as this would prove to be highly applicable to their own personal situation. Thus, positively gossiping about similar people will encourage higher levels
of self-reflection and learning motivation. Possible actions and strategies for organizations to engage in are: implementing moral codes of conduct in organizations, allowing room for (positive) gossip with no malicious intent, and using more cooperative (incentive) structures over competitive structures (Kniffin & Wilson, 2010). Organizations should strive towards a cooperative organizational climate and culture, in order to stimulate cooperation and sharing of information amongst coworkers.
Limitations and future research
The conducted research also had several limitations. First of all, this research was conducted in a research lab, placing students in hypothetical situation in which information was manipulated. Therefore, the research is not based upon actual behavior, yet measured intended behavior. It would be valuable for future research to look at actual behavior of individuals, rather than providing them with a hypothetical situation in which they are asked to state how they would react. It would minimize the effect of participants providing socially desirable answers, and would provide the researcher with a more realistic and representative outcomes, thereby increasing the validity of the findings.
Moreover, aspects of the sample used should be considered. In this research, a homogenous group of students was used. These students can be considered to be similarly minded, in similar stages of their life. More specifically, they are higher educated and young people whom are most likely to be more open to learning (new) things. Therefore, it ought to be questioned what would happen to the outcome of this study if one would change the sample.
Would the same effects be found in the data, or would the effects become weaker/stronger?
Therefore, for future research it would be strongly suggested to make use of a more diverse sample. This diversity can be achieved by including different age groups in the sample, or including participants in different stages of their life (students compared to young professionals, and professionals whom have been in the working field for a longer period of
time). As was indicated in table 2, learning motivation seemed to be negatively related with age. Therefore, one could question whether the outcomes of this research would remain stable, if older participants would be included as well.
Furthermore, a limitation of this study is the absence of manipulation checks in the survey. As this research made use of several manipulations, they should have been tested in order to check whether the manipulations had the desired psychological impact. These manipulation checks ought to be conducted to measure whether the psychological effect took place we expected that would occur after the manipulations. However, looking at the results of this research, they suggest the impact was exactly as predicted, thereby making the results very hard to interpret and understand should the manipulations not have succeeded.
Another limitation that may be considered is causality due to the used scenarios. It may be argued that by placing the participants in a hypothetical situation containing limited information, they would evidently use this information which could lead to stronger effects. In real life situations the presence of these variables may be less visible or the information may be much more diluted, thereby resulting in weaker effects.
Suggestions for future research would be the use of both positive and negative gossip in the different conditions. Due to the limited predicted number of participants, it was chosen to only make use of positive gossip. However, it may prove to be very insightful to see how it would affect the outcomes, when negative gossip is considered as well. This study particularly chose positive gossip, as positive gossip was found to lead to self-improvement and self- promotion, whereas negative gossip is more likely to lead to self-protection (Martinescu et al., 2014). Therefore, future research could still investigate whether a focus on self-protection would have a positive or negative effect on both engagement in self-reflection and one’s learning motivation.
Moreover, this research tried to identify what characteristics or personality traits might lead for certain individuals to engage in self-reflection after receiving gossip, whereas others might not engage in this process. This research did so by looking at need for self-reflection, need for cognition, social comparison orientation and the degree of similarities between the gossip target and gossip receiver. However, it could be that other factors – such as self-esteem for example – play a significant role within this relationship
Finally, this research has revealed another possible area for future research. This research specifically focused on how gossip would be used for self-serving purposes. It looked at how gossip triggers self-reflection and therefore how individuals would relate it to themselves. However, perhaps gossip could also trigger other types of reflection as well. Future research could investigate how gossip could help an individual to reflect on the organization or the team they work in. It could also provide an effect on how the gossip receiver would reflect on the individual providing the gossip. Therefore, a suggestion is to see how gossip could influence reflection on external factors.
Conclusion
We were able to show that, despite the negative perception many have of gossip, gossip actually has a bright side. Gossip fulfills the function of informally providing individuals with evaluative information about others, that formal and objective paths are not able to provide.
Moreover, gossip can stimulate individuals to engage in self-reflection and continuously develop themselves. It allows for individuals to cope with their dynamic environments and to ensure they are optimally adapted. Therefore, gossip holds both a self-improvement and learning function for the gossip receiver. Overall, this study provides fundamental insights into how informal evaluative information, combined with need and effectiveness of comparison to similar others, can stimulate individuals to critically monitor and evaluate themselves. It allows
for people to consider all alternatives options and opportunities and deliberately choose for certain goals and changes.
References
Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Baumeister, R. F., Zhang, L., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). Gossip as cultural learning. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 111-121. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.111.
Beersma, B., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2011). How the grapevine keeps you in line: Gossip increases contributions to the group. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(6), 642–649. doi:10.1177/1948550611405073.
Beersma, B., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2012). Why People Gossip: An Empirical Analysis of Social Motives, Antecedents, and Consequences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 2640-2670. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00956.
Bergmann, J. R. (1993). Discreet Indiscretions. The Social Organization of Gossip. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning.
London, UK: Kogan Page.
Burt, R. S. (2008). Management Et Réseaux Sociaux: Ressource Pour L’action Ou Outil de Gestion? Paris, France: Hermès Science.
Burton, R. (1857). The Anatomy of Melancholy. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://books.google.nl/books?id=jTwJAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_
ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=snippet&q=blow&f=false
Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal Orientation in Organizational Research: A Conceptual and Emperical Foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 26–48. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0063.
Buunk, A. P., & Gibbons, F. X. (2007). Social comparison: The end of a theory and the emergence of a field. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 3–
21. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.007.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The Need for Cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Dunbar, R. I. M. (2004). Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 100–110. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.100.
Dunbar, R. I. M., Duncan, N. D. C., & Marriott, A. (1997). Human conversational behavior.
Human Nature, 8, 231-246. doi:10.1007/BF02912493.
Emler, N. (1994). Gossip, reputation and social adaptation. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
doi:10.1177/001872675400700202.
Foster, E. K. (2004). Research on gossip: Taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Review of General Psychology, 8, 78-99. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.78.
Gibbons, F. X., & Buunk, B. P. (1999). Individual Differences in Social Comparison:
Development of a Scale of Social Comparison Orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 129-142. doi:10.37/0022-3514.76.1.129.
Gluckman, M. (1963). Papers in Honor of Melville J. Herskovits: Gossip and Scandal. Current Anthropology, 4(3), 307-316. doi:10.1086/200378.
Goldenberg, I., Andres, M., & Resteigne, D. (2016). Is Military Employment Fair? Application of Social Comparison Theory in a Cross-National Military Sample. Armed Forces &
Goodman, R. F., & Ben-Ze’ev, A. (1994). Good Gossip. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Grant, A. M., Franklin, J., & Langford, P. (2002). The Self-Reflection and Insight Scale: a New Measurement of Private Self-Consciousness. Social Behavior and Personality, 30(8), 821–836. doi:10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821.
Ho, S. S., Lee, E. W. J., & Liao, Y. (2016). Social Network Sites, Friends, and Celebrities: The Roles of Social Comparison and Celebrity Involvement in Adolescents’ Body Image Dissatisfaction. Social Media + Society, 2(3), 1–11. doi:10.1177/2056305116664216.
Johnson, S. C., Baxter, L. C., Wilder, L. S., Pipe, J. G., Heiserman, J. E., Prigatano, G. P.
(2002). Neural correlates of self-reflection. Brain, 125(8), 1808–
1814. doi:10.1093/brain/awf181.
Kniffin, K. M., & Wilson, D. S. (2010). Evolutionary perspectives on workplace gossip: Why and how gossip can serve groups. Group & Organization Management, 35, 150-176.
doi:10.1177/1059601109360390.
Martinescu, E., Janssen, O., & Nijstad, B. A. (2014). Tell Me the Gossip: The Self-Evaluative Function of Receiving Gossip About Others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(12), 1668–1680. doi:10.1177/0146167214554916.
McAndrew, F. T, Bell, E. K., & Garcia, C. M. (2007). Who do we tell, and whom do we tell on? Gossip as a strategy for status enhancement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1562-1577. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00227x.
Morrison, T. (1997). Learning, training and change in child protection work towards reflective organizations. Social Work Education, 16(2), 20-43.
Nicholson, N. (2001). The new word on gossip. Psychology Today. 41-45.
Niemi, P. M. (1997). Medical student’s professional identity: self-reflection during the preclinical years. Medial Education, 31, 408-415. doi:10.1046/j.1365-
2923.1997.00697.x.
Noon, M., & Delbridge, R. (1993). News from behind my hand: Gossip in organizations.
Organization Studies, 14, 23-36. doi:10.1177/017084069301400103.
Rolfe, G. (1998). Expanding Nursing Knowledge: Understanding and Researching your own practice. Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Rosnow, R. L. (1977). Gossip and marketplace psychology. Journal of Communication, 27(1), 158-163. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1977.tb01811.x.
Ruch, G. (2000). Self and social work: towards an integrate model of learning. Journal of Social Work Practice, 14(2), 99-112. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch323.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. How Professionals Think in Action. London, UK: Temple Smith.
Sedikides, C., & Gregg, A. P. (2008). Self-enhancement: Food for thought. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 102-116. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00068.x.
Sedikides, C., & Skowronski, J. J. (2000). On the evolutionary functions of the symbolic self:
The emergence of self- evaluation motives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1997). Self-evaluation: To thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure, to thine own self be true, and to thine own self be better. Advances in experimental social psychology, 29, 209-269. doi:10.1016/ S0065-2601(08)60018-0.
Sommerfeld, R. D., Krambeck, H., Semmann, D., & Milinski, M. (2007). Gossip as an alternative for direct observation in games of indirect reciprocity. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 17435-17440. doi:10.1073/ pnas.0704598104.
Stirling, R. B. (1956). Some psychological mechanisms operative in gossip. Social Forces, 34, 262-267. doi:10.2307/2574050.
Suls, J. (1977). Gossip as social comparison. Journal of Communications, 27, 164-168.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1977.tb01812.x.
Suls, J., & Wheeler, L. (2000). A selective history of classic and neo-social comparison theory.
New York, NY: Plenum.
Taylor, S. E., & Lobel, M. (1989). Social comparison activity under threat: Downward evaluation and upward contacts. Psychological Review, 96, 569–575. doi:10.1037/0033- 295X.96.4.569.
Von Wright, J. (1992). Reflections on reflection. Learning and Instructions, 2, 59-68.
doi:10.1016/0959-4752(92)90005-7.
Waddington, K. (2012). Gossip and organizations. New York/Abingdon: Routledge.
Wang, H., Chen, H., Lin, H., Hong, Z., Chen, H., Lin, H., & Hong, Z. (2017). The effects of college students’ positive thinking, learning motivation and self-regulation through a self- reflection intervention in Taiwan. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 201–216. doi:10.1080/07294360.2016.1176999.
Wert, S. R., & Salovey, P. (2004). A social comparison account of gossip. Review of General Psychology, 8, 122-137. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.122.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245–271. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245.
Yip, K. S. (2006). Self-reflection in Reflective practice: A Note of Caution. The British Journal of Social Work, 36(5), 777-788. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch323.
