Perceiving multiple truths: Does dialectical thinking harmonize colourblind and multicultural ideals?

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY British journal of psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-19 DOI:10.1111/bjop.12697
Jessica Gale, Kumar Yogeeswaran
{"title":"Perceiving multiple truths: Does dialectical thinking harmonize colourblind and multicultural ideals?","authors":"Jessica Gale,&nbsp;Kumar Yogeeswaran","doi":"10.1111/bjop.12697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Multicultural and colourblind approaches to managing diversity are often conceptualized to be antagonistic. However, in principle, both have underlying motives for social justice, making it important to understand how they may be psychologically reconciled. In the present research, we examined dialectical thinking as an individual characteristic or condition under which people may endorse them in a conciliatory way. Across five studies (three pre-registered; <i>N</i> = 1899), using well-established materials that have measured and experimentally manipulated dialectical thinking, we found that individual differences in dialectical thinking were a replicable factor that moderated the relationship between colourblind and multicultural ideals. By contrast, situational priming of dialectical thinking did not reliably impact this relationship. Therefore, people with a greater propensity to view issues from multiple perspectives and to reconcile seemingly contradictory information appear more likely to take a harmonized approach to endorsing colourblind and multicultural ideals. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":9300,"journal":{"name":"British journal of psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjop.12697","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjop.12697","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Multicultural and colourblind approaches to managing diversity are often conceptualized to be antagonistic. However, in principle, both have underlying motives for social justice, making it important to understand how they may be psychologically reconciled. In the present research, we examined dialectical thinking as an individual characteristic or condition under which people may endorse them in a conciliatory way. Across five studies (three pre-registered; N = 1899), using well-established materials that have measured and experimentally manipulated dialectical thinking, we found that individual differences in dialectical thinking were a replicable factor that moderated the relationship between colourblind and multicultural ideals. By contrast, situational priming of dialectical thinking did not reliably impact this relationship. Therefore, people with a greater propensity to view issues from multiple perspectives and to reconcile seemingly contradictory information appear more likely to take a harmonized approach to endorsing colourblind and multicultural ideals. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
感知多重真理:辩证思维能否协调色盲和多元文化理想?
管理多样性的多元文化方法和色盲方法在概念上往往是对立的。然而,从原则上讲,这两种方法都有促进社会公正的潜在动机,因此,了解如何从心理上调和这两种方法就显得尤为重要。在本研究中,我们将辩证思维视为一种个体特征或条件,在这种条件下,人们可能会以一种调和的方式认可它们。在五项研究(三项预先登记;N = 1899)中,我们使用了测量和实验操纵辩证思维的成熟材料,发现辩证思维的个体差异是调节色盲和多元文化理想之间关系的一个可复制的因素。相比之下,辩证思维的情境引物对这种关系没有可靠的影响。因此,更倾向于从多角度看待问题和调和看似矛盾信息的人似乎更有可能采取协调的方法来赞同色盲和多元文化理想。本文讨论了理论和实践意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British journal of psychology
British journal of psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.50%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Psychology publishes original research on all aspects of general psychology including cognition; health and clinical psychology; developmental, social and occupational psychology. For information on specific requirements, please view Notes for Contributors. We attract a large number of international submissions each year which make major contributions across the range of psychology.
期刊最新文献
Daily effects of a brief compassion-focused intervention for self-compassion. Inter-brain synchrony is associated with greater shared identity within naturalistic conversational pairs. The differences in essential facial areas for impressions between humans and deep learning models: An eye-tracking and explainable AI approach. Explainability increases trust resilience in intelligent agents. A new way to conceptualize intolerance of uncertainty among adolescents: Embracing the network perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1