They Saw a Hearing: Democrats' and Republicans' Perceptions of and Responses to the Ford-Kavanaugh Hearings.

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-05 DOI:10.1177/01461672231185605
Emma L Grisham, Pasha Dashtgard, Daniel P Relihan, E Alison Holman, Roxane Cohen Silver
{"title":"They Saw a Hearing: Democrats' and Republicans' Perceptions of and Responses to the Ford-Kavanaugh Hearings.","authors":"Emma L Grisham, Pasha Dashtgard, Daniel P Relihan, E Alison Holman, Roxane Cohen Silver","doi":"10.1177/01461672231185605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In several highly publicized hearings, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh presented two opposing accounts of an alleged sexual assault. In the wake of these proceedings, partisans appeared similarly divided in how they regarded this political event. Using a U.S. national sample (<i>N</i> = 2,474) and a mixed-methods design, we investigated partisans' perceptions of, and responses to, the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings. Respondents reported their views of the hearings soon after they occurred. We used topic modeling to analyze these open-ended responses and found uniquely partisan topics emerged, including judicial impartiality and due process. Acute stress (AS) responses to the hearings were also related to partisan identities and perceptions; both Republicans (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.78, 0.84]) and individuals who wrote more about Republican topics (IRR = 0.72, 95% CI = [0.56, 0.92]) reported lower AS than their Democratic counterparts. Results demonstrate different partisan perceptions with implications for mental health outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":19834,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"730-741"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11930631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231185605","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In several highly publicized hearings, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh presented two opposing accounts of an alleged sexual assault. In the wake of these proceedings, partisans appeared similarly divided in how they regarded this political event. Using a U.S. national sample (N = 2,474) and a mixed-methods design, we investigated partisans' perceptions of, and responses to, the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings. Respondents reported their views of the hearings soon after they occurred. We used topic modeling to analyze these open-ended responses and found uniquely partisan topics emerged, including judicial impartiality and due process. Acute stress (AS) responses to the hearings were also related to partisan identities and perceptions; both Republicans (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.78, 0.84]) and individuals who wrote more about Republican topics (IRR = 0.72, 95% CI = [0.56, 0.92]) reported lower AS than their Democratic counterparts. Results demonstrate different partisan perceptions with implications for mental health outcomes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
他们看到了一场听证会:民主党和共和党对福特-卡瓦诺听证会的看法和回应。
在几次备受关注的听证会上,克里斯汀·布莱西·福特博士和布雷特·卡瓦诺法官对一起性侵指控提出了两种相反的说法。在这些诉讼之后,党派人士对这一政治事件的看法也出现了类似的分歧。使用美国全国样本(N=2474)和混合方法设计,我们调查了党派人士对福特-卡瓦诺听证会的看法和反应。受访者在听证会发生后不久就报告了他们对听证会的看法。我们使用主题建模来分析这些开放式回应,发现出现了独特的党派主题,包括司法公正和正当程序。对听证会的急性应激反应也与党派身份和看法有关;共和党人(发病率比率[IRR]=0.81,95%置信区间[CI]=[0.78,0.84])和写更多关于共和党主题的文章的人(IRR=0.72,95%CI=[0.56,0.92])的AS均低于民主党人。研究结果表明,不同党派的看法对心理健康结果有影响。
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
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
5.00%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: The Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin is the official journal for the Society of Personality and Social Psychology. The journal is an international outlet for original empirical papers in all areas of personality and social psychology.
期刊最新文献
Shifts in Racial Inequalities and White Backlash in the 21st Century U.S. Alluring or Alarming? The Polarizing Effect of Forbidden Knowledge in Political Discourse. Deception Detection: Using Machine Learning to Analyze 911 Calls. Inoculating Against Moral Disengagement Creates Ethical Adherence for Narcissism. Why Life Moves Fast: Exploring the Mechanisms Behind Autobiographical Time Perception.
×
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:604180095
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