Journal of personality and social psychology最新文献

Existing research examining the creation of positive and prosocial interpersonal relations has established moral elevation as an approach-oriented emotion to be associated with a range of positive and prosocial outcomes. In this article and with the goal to identify emotional mechanism for improving intergroup relations in contexts of conflict, we examined the effects of moral elevation on enhancing intergroup relations. Across four experimental studies (Ns = 1,131), conducted in four understudied countries directly affected or threatened by intergroup conflict, we demonstrated that induced moral elevation elicits important cognitive and emotional shifts toward adversarial groups, resulting in improved intergroup relations. Specifically, we show that inducing moral elevation through stories of outgroup moral exemplars (individuals who have risked their life to save the life of an outgroup member) enhanced perceptions of intergroup moral similarity and positive emotions toward the outgroup, consequently fostering greater approach and prosocial intergroup behaviors. This pattern proved consistent across four distinct contexts: nonconflict (Sweden), ongoing conflict (Pakistan), protracted conflict (Serbia), and postconflict (Bosnia and Herzegovina). This article advances existing theory on positive emotions by identifying a novel emotional mechanism conducive to improving intergroup relations in contexts of conflict and extends the impact of learning about exemplary moral behaviors performed by relevant others. Ultimately, this article underscores the relevance of moral elevation in mitigating intergroup conflicts using intergroup interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Studies have shown that anomie, that is, the perception that a society's leadership and social fabric are breaking down, is a central predictor of individuals' support for authoritarianism. However, causal evidence for this relationship is missing. Moreover, previous studies are ambiguous regarding the mediating mechanism and lack empirical tests for the same. Against this background, we derive a set of integrative hypotheses: First, we argue that perceptions of anomie lead to a perceived lack of political control. The repeated failure to exert control in the political sphere leads to feelings of uncertainty about the functioning and meaning of the political world. This uncertainty heightens people's susceptibility to authoritarianism because, we argue, the latter promises a sense of order, meaning, and the guidance of a "strong leader." We support our hypothesis in a large-scale field study with a representative sample of the German population (N = 1,504) while statistically ruling out alternative explanations. Adding internal validity, we provide causal evidence for each path in our sequential mediation hypothesis in three preregistered, controlled experiments (conducted in the United States, total N = 846). Our insights may support policymakers in addressing the negative political consequences of anomie. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Structural racism has become a household term used in the media and in everyday conversations around diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Despite increased discussion of structural racism, people often struggle to understand how structural racism is perpetuated by individuals. We integrate research on moral psychology, social cognition, and intergroup relations to investigate whether structural explanations can lead to reduced perceptions of responsibility and punishment for managers who engage in discriminatory hiring decisions. A field study of health care system employees who perceived discriminatory hiring as originating from structural factors (vs. individual factors) were less likely to hold the hiring manager accountable (Study 1). Explaining discriminatory hiring to participants as due to structural factors (vs. a no-information control condition; Studies 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3) decreased desires to hold the hiring manager accountable. We found evidence that this lessened accountability was due to participants' simultaneous perceptions that the hiring manager was less responsible for the lack of diversity and did not intend to discriminate under a structural racism explanation. However, when the relationship between individual and structural racism was explained, participants were more likely to hold perpetrators of discrimination accountable while allowing for crucial discussions around structural racism (Study 4). This work suggests that Americans may lack a deep understanding of the complexities surrounding structural racism, and that the connections between individuals and structural racism must be explained in order to motivate people to hold perpetrators of discrimination accountable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Overconfidence is prevalent despite being linked to various negative outcomes for individuals, organizations, and even societies. To explain this puzzling phenomenon, C. Anderson, Brion, et al. (2012) proposed a status-enhancement theory of overconfidence: Expressing overconfidence helps individuals attain social status. In this registered report, we conducted a direct replication of Study 5 by C. Anderson, Brion, et al. (2012), who found that individual differences in desire for status were positively correlated with being overconfident about one's task performance relative to others. We also tested the generalizability of the key relationship to a different measure of desire for status. Furthermore, we complemented traditional significance testing with equivalence testing and Bayesian analysis to test a set of null hypotheses in the original study. We found support for the status-enhancement hypothesis: Desire for status had a positive association with overconfidence using both the original measure of desire for status (β = 0.19, 95% CI [0.09, 0.28]) and the alternative measure (β = 0.31, 95% CI [0.22, 0.39]). A follow-up extension study aimed to test this relationship causally by manipulating the social context where status motives may be stronger (a competitive vs. cooperative context) and testing whether such an effect is driven by state-level desire for status. We did not find a direct causal effect of social context on overconfidence but an indirect association via state-level desire for status: A competitive (vs. cooperative) group context increased desire for status (β = 0.34, 95% CI [0.18, 0.51]), which in turn predicted greater overconfidence (β = 0.38, 95% CI [0.31, 0.46]). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).