The University of Chicago
Department of Psychology
5848 South University Avenue
Chicago, IL, 60637
Office Phone:(773) 834-
1515
Fax: (773) 702-0886
Office:Green Hall, 302
Labs: Kelly Hall, 305, 306, 409
Email me
Marlone D. Henderson
Background
Marlone D. Henderson joined the faculty of the University of Chicago in 2006. He received his B.S. from Michigan State University in 1999 and Ph.D. from New York University in 2006.
Topics of Special Interest to Me
Attitudes
Social Judgments
Negotiation
Attitudes
Although daily life is filled with examples of people expressing their strong attitudes in social settings (e.g., pro-choice protesters, religious fundamentalists), it is clear that people also frequently evaluate objects and issues that elicit weak reactions as well. These weak reactions include, for example, attitudes that are rife with contradictory feelings and beliefs, attitudes that are moderate rather than extreme, and attitudes that are expressed with some hesitancy or slowness. An interesting question is what leads some people to go from having weak attitudes to having strong attitudes. I am broadly interested in situational and personal factors that lead people to form strong attitudes. Much of my work has been aimed at examining the intersection between the motivation and attitudes domain. Click on the paper below to get a flavor for this research:
Social Judgments
Making sound and accurate decisions is vital to the well-being of individuals and social groups. People are frequently in the position of trying to explain why other people perform certain actions (Did he bump me because he's a jerk or because he's in a hurry?) and predict how people will behave in the future (If my husband has a history of cheating but has recently showed signs of being faithful, has he really made a permanent change for the better?). Often times, people have to make such judgments about people who are quite psychologically far away from them (Why is that group in Africa killing people?; Why is my long-distance girlfriend not returning my calls?; Why are those politicians in Iraq having so much trouble forming a government?). I am broadly interested in what impact psychological distance has on people's social judgments. Much of my work has been aimed at examining the consequences of geographical (spatial) distance on people's social judgments. Click on one of the papers below to get a flavor for this research:
Henderson, M.D., Fujita, K., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Transcending the “here”: The effect of spatial distance on social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91, 845-856.
Fujita, K., Henderson, M.D., Eng, J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Spatial distance and mental construal of social events. Psychological Science, 17, 278-282.
Negotiation
One of the main procedures used to deal with social disagreement or differences is open communication, frequently referred to as negotiation. Negotiation is necessary whenever people have different interests and opinions on how to distribute some resource or carry out some action, and there are no fixed or established rules or procedures to resolve those differences and whenever people want to search for agreement without resorting to aggression or open fighting. Negotiation occurs in business and academic settings and in informal social interactions such as deciding with a friend or significant other where to dine or vacation. Clearly, negotiation is essential for anyone who must interact with other people to accomplish their goals. I am broadly interested in what impact abstract vs. concrete thinking has on the entire process and outcome of negotiation. So, you might be asking, "What does abstract or concrete thinking mean exactly?" The content of more abstract thoughts consist of the perceived essence, gist, or summary of the given information about events (i.e., a general description of something), whereas the content of more concrete thoughts consist of the situation-dependent, readily observable features of events (i.e., a specific description of something). For example, when labor negotiates with management, they might abstractly think about the issues that matter to them (e.g., health coverage, salary, vacation time, sick leave, grievance procedures) as "ways to support a family" rather than on the specific options available to them (e.g., full-health care vs. partial health care). Much of my work has focused on the consequences of psychological distance on negotiation. From a distant perspective, people are assumed to think about events in a more abstract manner, whereas from a near perspective people are assumed to think about events in a more concrete, detail-oriented manner. I am specifically interested in examining the consequences of psychological distance and abstraction on people's willingness
to cooperate and compromise. Click on one of the papers below to get a flavor for this research:
I am currently exploring exciting new directions in each of the topic areas mentioned above, and if you are interested in learning more, collaborating, or working in my lab, feel free to contact me.
