Resources and Partisanship: Response to Commentaries

IF 7.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychological Inquiry Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.1080/1047840X.2023.2192654
R. Baumeister, B. Bushman
{"title":"Resources and Partisanship: Response to Commentaries","authors":"R. Baumeister, B. Bushman","doi":"10.1080/1047840X.2023.2192654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We thank all the commentators for their diligent and thoughtful efforts on our article. The detailed and scholarly work by several of them went far beyond the call of duty, which was most gratifying. In this brief response, we seek to articulate what can be learned from them and to resolve some misunderstandings. Our article was motivated by the recognition that partisan hostility has increased in recent years, particularly in the United States of America (USA). We thought social psychologists might be well positioned to seek ways of reducing the conflict, given the field’s accumulated expertise regarding human interactions and group processes. Judging by these commentaries, we were perhaps overly optimistic about social psychology’s potential for promoting social harmony in this fashion. Indeed, only the Aquino et al. (this issue) commentary took up the theme of how to reduce partisan conflict.","PeriodicalId":48327,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2023.2192654","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

We thank all the commentators for their diligent and thoughtful efforts on our article. The detailed and scholarly work by several of them went far beyond the call of duty, which was most gratifying. In this brief response, we seek to articulate what can be learned from them and to resolve some misunderstandings. Our article was motivated by the recognition that partisan hostility has increased in recent years, particularly in the United States of America (USA). We thought social psychologists might be well positioned to seek ways of reducing the conflict, given the field’s accumulated expertise regarding human interactions and group processes. Judging by these commentaries, we were perhaps overly optimistic about social psychology’s potential for promoting social harmony in this fashion. Indeed, only the Aquino et al. (this issue) commentary took up the theme of how to reduce partisan conflict.
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
资源与党派:对评论的回应
我们感谢所有评论者为我们的文章所做的勤奋和周到的努力。他们中有几个人的详细和学术工作远远超出了职责的要求,这是最令人满意的。在这个简短的回应中,我们试图阐明可以从他们身上学到什么,并解决一些误解。我们写这篇文章的动机是认识到近年来党派间的敌意有所增加,特别是在美利坚合众国。我们认为,鉴于社会心理学在人际交往和群体过程方面积累的专业知识,社会心理学家可能会很好地寻找减少冲突的方法。从这些评论来看,我们可能对社会心理学以这种方式促进社会和谐的潜力过于乐观了。事实上,只有阿基诺等人(本期)的评论谈到了如何减少党派冲突的主题。
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
Psychological Inquiry
Psychological Inquiry PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
1.10%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Psychological Inquiry serves as an international journal dedicated to the advancement of psychological theory. Each edition features an extensive target article exploring a controversial or provocative topic, accompanied by peer commentaries and a response from the target author(s). Proposals for target articles must be submitted using the Target Article Proposal Form, and only approved proposals undergo peer review by at least three reviewers. Authors are invited to submit their full articles after the proposal has received approval from the Editor.
期刊最新文献
How Prevalent is Social Projection? The Future of Social Perception Models: Further Directions for Theoretical Development of the Inductive Reasoning Model Social Projection and Cognitive Differentiation Co-Explain Self-Enhancement and in-Group Favoritism Three Pokes into the Comfort Zone of the Inductive Reasoning Model Inductive Reasoning Renewed: A Reply to Commentators
×
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