@misc{MakowiczTiedemannSteeleetal.2016,
  author    = {Makowicz, Amber M. and Tiedemann, Ralph and Steele, Rachel N. and Schlupp, Ingo},
  title     = {Kin recognition in a clonal fish, Poecilia formosa},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-411329},
  pages     = {20},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Relatedness strongly influences social behaviors in a wide variety of species. For most species, the highest typical degree of relatedness is between full siblings with 50\% shared genes. However, this is poorly understood in species with unusually high relatedness between individuals: clonal organisms. Although there has been some investigation into clonal invertebrates and yeast, nothing is known about kin selection in clonal vertebrates. We show that a clonal fish, the Amazon molly (Poecilia formosa), can distinguish between different clonal lineages, associating with genetically identical, sister clones, and use multiple sensory modalities. Also, they scale their aggressive behaviors according to the relatedness to other females: they are more aggressive to non-related clones. Our results demonstrate that even in species with very small genetic differences between individuals, kin recognition can be adaptive. Their discriminatory abilities and regulation of costly behaviors provides a powerful example of natural selection in species with limited genetic diversity.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{NiestaKayserGraupmannFryeretal.2016,
  author    = {Niesta Kayser, Daniela and Graupmann, Verena and Fryer, James W. and Frey, Dieter},
  title     = {Threat to Freedom and the Detrimental Effect of Avoidance Goal Frames},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00632},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Two experiments examined how individuals respond to a restriction presented within an approach versus an avoidance frame. In Study 1, working on a problem-solving task, participants were initially free to choose their strategy, but for a second task were told to change their strategy. The message to change was embedded in either an approach or avoidance frame. When confronted with an avoidance compared to an approach frame, the participants' reactance toward the request was greater and, in turn, led to impaired performance. The role of reactance as a response to threat to freedom was explicitly examined in Study 2, in which participants evaluated a potential change in policy affecting their program of study herein explicitly varying whether a restriction was present or absent and whether the message was embedded in an approach versus avoidance frame. When communicated with an avoidance frame and as a restriction, participants showed the highest resistance in terms of reactance, message agreement and evaluation of the communicator. The difference in agreement with the change was mediated by reactance only when a restriction was present. Overall, avoidance goal frames were associated with more resistance to change on different levels of experience (reactance, performance, and person perception). Reactance mediated the effect of goal frame on other outcomes only when a restriction was present.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{NiestaKayserGraupmannFryeretal.2016,
  author    = {Niesta Kayser, Daniela and Graupmann, Verena and Fryer, James W. and Frey, Dieter},
  title     = {Threat to Freedom and the Detrimental Effect of Avoidance Goal Frames},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-91510},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Two experiments examined how individuals respond to a restriction presented within an approach versus an avoidance frame. In Study 1, working on a problem-solving task, participants were initially free to choose their strategy, but for a second task were told to change their strategy. The message to change was embedded in either an approach or avoidance frame. When confronted with an avoidance compared to an approach frame, the participants' reactance toward the request was greater and, in turn, led to impaired performance. The role of reactance as a response to threat to freedom was explicitly examined in Study 2, in which participants evaluated a potential change in policy affecting their program of study herein explicitly varying whether a restriction was present or absent and whether the message was embedded in an approach versus avoidance frame. When communicated with an avoidance frame and as a restriction, participants showed the highest resistance in terms of reactance, message agreement and evaluation of the communicator. The difference in agreement with the change was mediated by reactance only when a restriction was present. Overall, avoidance goal frames were associated with more resistance to change on different levels of experience (reactance, performance, and person perception). Reactance mediated the effect of goal frame on other outcomes only when a restriction was present.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KayserGraupmannFryeretal.2016,
  author    = {Kayser, Daniela Niesta and Graupmann, Verena and Fryer, James W. and Frey, Dieter},
  title     = {Threat to Freedom and the Detrimental Effect of Avoidance Goal Frames: Reactance as a Mediating Variable},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00632},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Two experiments examined how individuals respond to a restriction presented within an approach versus an avoidance frame. In Study 1, working on a problem-solving task, participants were initially free to choose their strategy, but for a second task were told to change their strategy. The message to change was embedded in either an approach or avoidance frame. When confronted with an avoidance compared to an approach frame, the participants' reactance toward the request was greater and, in turn, led to impaired performance. The role of reactance as a response to threat to freedom was explicitly examined in Study 2, in which participants evaluated a potential change in policy affecting their program of study herein explicitly varying whether a restriction was present or absent and whether the message was embedded in an approach versus avoidance frame. When communicated with an avoidance frame and as a restriction, participants showed the highest resistance in terms of reactance, message agreement and evaluation of the communicator. The difference in agreement with the change was mediated by reactance only when a restriction was present. Overall, avoidance goal frames were associated with more resistance to change on different levels of experience (reactance, performance, and person perception). Reactance mediated the effect of goal frame on other outcomes only when a restriction was present.},
  language  = {en}
}