Pluralistic Ignorance Research in Psychology: A Scoping Review of Topic and Method Variation and Directions for Future Research

IF 3.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Review of General Psychology Pub Date : 2021-03-26 DOI:10.1177/1089268021995168
Rikki H. Sargent, L. Newman
{"title":"Pluralistic Ignorance Research in Psychology: A Scoping Review of Topic and Method Variation and Directions for Future Research","authors":"Rikki H. Sargent, L. Newman","doi":"10.1177/1089268021995168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pluralistic ignorance occurs when group members mistakenly believe others’ cognitions and/or behaviors are systematically different from their own. More than 20 years have passed since the last review of pluralistic ignorance from a psychological framework, with more than 60 empirical articles assessing pluralistic ignorance published since then. Previous reviews took an almost entirely conceptual approach with minimal review of methodology, making existing reviews outdated and limited in the extent to which they can provide guidelines for researchers. The goal of this review is to evaluate and integrate the literature on pluralistic ignorance, clarify important conceptual issues, identify inconsistencies in the literature, and provide guidance for future research. We provide a comprehensive definition for the phenomenon, with a focus on its status as a group-level phenomenon. We highlight three areas of variation in particular in the current scoping review: variation in topics assessed, variation in measurement, and (especially) variation in methods for assessing the implications of individual-level misperceptions that, in aggregate, lead to pluralistic ignorance. By filling these gaps in the literature, we ultimately hope to motivate further analysis of the phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":48306,"journal":{"name":"Review of General Psychology","volume":"25 1","pages":"163 - 184"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1089268021995168","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268021995168","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: 16

Abstract

Pluralistic ignorance occurs when group members mistakenly believe others’ cognitions and/or behaviors are systematically different from their own. More than 20 years have passed since the last review of pluralistic ignorance from a psychological framework, with more than 60 empirical articles assessing pluralistic ignorance published since then. Previous reviews took an almost entirely conceptual approach with minimal review of methodology, making existing reviews outdated and limited in the extent to which they can provide guidelines for researchers. The goal of this review is to evaluate and integrate the literature on pluralistic ignorance, clarify important conceptual issues, identify inconsistencies in the literature, and provide guidance for future research. We provide a comprehensive definition for the phenomenon, with a focus on its status as a group-level phenomenon. We highlight three areas of variation in particular in the current scoping review: variation in topics assessed, variation in measurement, and (especially) variation in methods for assessing the implications of individual-level misperceptions that, in aggregate, lead to pluralistic ignorance. By filling these gaps in the literature, we ultimately hope to motivate further analysis of the phenomenon.
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
心理学多元无知研究:主题、方法变化及未来研究方向综述
当群体成员错误地认为他人的认知和/或行为与自己的系统不同时,就会出现多元无知。自上次从心理学框架对多元无知进行审查以来,已经过去了20多年,自那时以来发表了60多篇评估多元无知的实证文章。以前的综述采取了几乎完全概念性的方法,很少对方法进行审查,使现有的综述过时,并且在为研究人员提供指导的程度上受到限制。本综述的目的是评估和整合关于多元无知的文献,澄清重要的概念问题,找出文献中的不一致之处,并为未来的研究提供指导。我们为这种现象提供了一个全面的定义,重点是它作为一种群体级现象的地位。在当前的范围审查中,我们特别强调了三个差异领域:评估主题的差异,测量的差异,以及(特别是)评估个人层面误解影响的方法的差异,这些误解总的来说会导致多元无知。通过填补这些文献空白,我们最终希望激发对这一现象的进一步分析。
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
Review of General Psychology
Review of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
4.80%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Review of General Psychology seeks to publish innovative theoretical, conceptual, or methodological articles that cross-cut the traditional subdisciplines of psychology. The journal contains articles that advance theory, evaluate and integrate research literatures, provide a new historical analysis, or discuss new methodological developments in psychology as a whole. Review of General Psychology is especially interested in articles that bridge gaps between subdisciplines in psychology as well as related fields or that focus on topics that transcend traditional subdisciplinary boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Relational Ontology in the Mapuche Thinking: Possibilities for Indigenous Well-Being Amidst Colonial Settings Education and Training: Professional The 4D Model of American Political Conservatism: Disgust, Disorder Aversion, Deontology, and (Social) Dominance The Kokoro in Japanese Spiritual Care Antiracist Psychology to Advance Equitable Public Policy
×
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