The online educational program ‘Perspectives’ improves affective polarization, intellectual humility, and conflict management

IF 1.8 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Social and Political Psychology Pub Date : 2023-08-21 DOI:10.5964/jspp.10651
Keith M. Welker, Mylien T. Duong, A. Rakhshani, M. Dieffenbach, Peter Coleman, J. Haidt
{"title":"The online educational program ‘Perspectives’ improves affective polarization, intellectual humility, and conflict management","authors":"Keith M. Welker, Mylien T. Duong, A. Rakhshani, M. Dieffenbach, Peter Coleman, J. Haidt","doi":"10.5964/jspp.10651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Solving the most pressing problems of our time requires broad collaboration across political party lines. Yet, the United States is experiencing record levels of affective polarization (distrust of the opposing political party). In response to these trends, we developed and tested an asynchronous online educational program rooted in psychological principles called Perspectives. In Study 1, using a large longitudinal dataset (total N = 35,209), we examined Perspectives users’ scores on affective polarization and intellectual humility at pre- and post-intervention. Studies 2 and 3 were longitudinal randomized controlled trials with government finance officers (N = 341) and college students (N = 775), respectively, and examined the effects of Perspectives on affective polarization, intellectual humility, and conflict resolution skills. Across these studies, we found that Perspectives users experienced small to medium-sized decreases in affective polarization and small to medium-sized increases in intellectual humility. In Study 3, we found that Perspectives led to small yet significant improvements in conflict resolution skills. These findings suggest promise for a brief and scalable intervention to improve affective polarization, intellectual humility, and conflict management.","PeriodicalId":16973,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social and Political Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social and Political Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.10651","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Solving the most pressing problems of our time requires broad collaboration across political party lines. Yet, the United States is experiencing record levels of affective polarization (distrust of the opposing political party). In response to these trends, we developed and tested an asynchronous online educational program rooted in psychological principles called Perspectives. In Study 1, using a large longitudinal dataset (total N = 35,209), we examined Perspectives users’ scores on affective polarization and intellectual humility at pre- and post-intervention. Studies 2 and 3 were longitudinal randomized controlled trials with government finance officers (N = 341) and college students (N = 775), respectively, and examined the effects of Perspectives on affective polarization, intellectual humility, and conflict resolution skills. Across these studies, we found that Perspectives users experienced small to medium-sized decreases in affective polarization and small to medium-sized increases in intellectual humility. In Study 3, we found that Perspectives led to small yet significant improvements in conflict resolution skills. These findings suggest promise for a brief and scalable intervention to improve affective polarization, intellectual humility, and conflict management.
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
在线教育项目“透视”改善了情感两极分化、智力谦逊和冲突管理
解决我们这个时代最紧迫的问题需要跨党派的广泛合作。然而,美国正经历着前所未有的情感两极分化(对对立政党的不信任)。为了应对这些趋势,我们开发并测试了一个基于心理学原理的异步在线教育项目,名为“视角”。在研究1中,我们使用一个大型纵向数据集(总N = 35209),研究了在干预前和干预后,透视用户在情感极化和智力谦卑方面的得分。研究2和研究3为纵向随机对照试验,分别以政府财务官员(N = 341)和大学生(N = 775)为研究对象,考察了视角对情感极化、智力谦卑和冲突解决技能的影响。在这些研究中,我们发现透视用户经历了小到中等程度的情感极化减少和小到中等程度的智力谦逊增加。在研究3中,我们发现视角导致了冲突解决技能的微小但显著的改进。这些发现表明,有希望采取一种简短而可扩展的干预措施来改善情感两极分化、智力谦逊和冲突管理。
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
Journal of Social and Political Psychology
Journal of Social and Political Psychology Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
43
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Social and Political Psychology (JSPP) is a peer-reviewed open-access journal (without author fees), published online. It publishes articles at the intersection of social and political psychology that substantially advance the understanding of social problems, their reduction, and the promotion of social justice. It also welcomes work that focuses on socio-political issues from related fields of psychology (e.g., peace psychology, community psychology, cultural psychology, environmental psychology, media psychology, economic psychology) and encourages submissions with interdisciplinary perspectives. JSPP is comprehensive and integrative in its approach. It publishes high-quality work from different epistemological, methodological, theoretical, and cultural perspectives and from different regions across the globe. It provides a forum for innovation, questioning of assumptions, and controversy and debate. JSPP aims to give creative impetuses for academic scholarship and for applications in education, policymaking, professional practice, and advocacy and social action. It intends to transcend the methodological and meta-theoretical divisions and paradigm clashes that characterize the field of social and political psychology, and to counterbalance the current overreliance on the hypothetico-deductive model of science, quantitative methodology, and individualistic explanations by also publishing work following alternative traditions (e.g., qualitative and mixed-methods research, participatory action research, critical psychology, social representations, narrative, and discursive approaches). Because it is published online, JSPP can avoid a bias against research that requires more space to be presented adequately.
期刊最新文献
Heterosexist system justification: Identity and ideology explain variability in sexual minorities’ opposition to homophobia and support for LGBTQ+ rights Predicting radicalism after perceived injustice: The role of separatist identity, sacred values, and police violence Gender inequality discourse as a tool to express attitudes towards Islam Colonial mechanisms for repudiating indigenous sovereignties in Australia: A Foucauldian-genealogical exploration of Australia day ‘Warming up’ to populist leaders: A comparative analysis of Argentina and Spain
×
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