Journal of Social Issues最新文献

Amid historically low societal trust in science, four cross-sectional studies (N = 3856) reveal a link between generic science denial and national narcissism. The findings support the pre-registered hypotheses that (1) national narcissism (a desire for national recognition) and ingroup satisfaction (pride in national value) have opposite unique associations with science denial (rejection of scientific consensus and generalized suspicion toward scientific experts) and (2) opposite indirect associations with specific outcomes of science denial during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond (climate change denial, anti-vaccination attitude, and support for unregulated “alternative” medicine). After their common variance is controlled, national narcissism is positively associated with generic science denial and its outcomes, while national ingroup satisfaction is associated negatively. National narcissism was the strongest predictor of science denial, surpassing other established predictors such as low education and political conservatism. Studies 1 and 2 showed additionally, that vulnerable narcissistic personality was the second strongest predictor of generic science denial, demonstrating for the first time, that the narcissistic need to be recognized as better than others underlies generic science denial.

In four experiments (three preregistered; N_total = 4511), we investigated the influence of psychological distance to science (PSYDISC) on science evaluations. PSYDISC reflects the extent to which science is perceived as an (in)tangible undertaking conducted by people (dis)similar to oneself (social), with effects in the here (far away; spatial) and now (in the distant future; temporal), and as (un)useful and (in)applicable in the real world (hypothetical distance). In Study 1, framing the science of nanotechnology/genetic modification (GM) of food as psychologically close (vs. distant) lowered science skepticism. For GM science, we also found that psychological closeness increases perceived credibility and fosters more positive attitudes toward GM science. In a high-powered replication for GM science (Study 2), we replicated the effects on attitude positivity and skepticism (but not credibility). Closely framed GM science was perceived as more personally relevant (Studies 3 and 4), which increased perceptions of credibility and attitude positivity, and reduced skepticism (Study 4). An internal meta-analysis (Studies 1, 2, and 4) corroborated the main effects of PSYDISC on science evaluations. In sum, the current work provides evidence for a malleable antecedent of science evaluations—PSYDISC—that can be utilized to increase science acceptance.

Science denialism is at the heart of many conspiracy theory beliefs. We propose that such beliefs are manifestations of a distal social process: spite. In three pre-registered studies, we test the hypothesis that established predictors of these beliefs (epistemic, existential, and social motives) are specific cues of competitive disadvantage that provoke a common facultative “spiteful” psychological response, making a person more open to believing in conspiracy theories. Study 1 (N = 301; UK representative Prolific sample), found that spite mediated the relationship between realistic threat and in-group narcissism (social motives), political powerlessness (existential motive), and intolerance for uncertainty (epistemic motive), and conspiracy theory belief and COVID-19 conspiracies. This pattern was replicated in Study 2 (N = 405; UK representative Prolific sample). In Study 3 (N = 405; UK representative Prolific sample), we found that those who engaged in a spite-inducing task reported higher levels of spite which indirectly resulted in stronger beliefs in conspiracy theories. The overall pattern of results provides initial evidence that spite may play a role in why people engage with false information. Research and policy implications of these findings are discussed.

Despite education's potential to reshape societal inequalities, recent gains in broadening university access across the socioeconomic spectrum have not translated into parallel gains in the transition from school to work. This work applies a socioecological approach to understanding this pattern, considering the role of job factors and individual financial background in shaping undergraduate student job choices and perceived career prospects. In two discrete choice experiments (n = 800) UK undergraduate students chose between pairs of job descriptions varying primarily along two dimensions: immediate versus delayed benefits (e.g., starting salary vs. salary progression), and concrete versus abstract benefits (e.g., salary vs. values fit). The findings suggest that career choice may be shaped by socioeconomic constraints above and beyond individual preferences for meaningful work, while the relationship between financial strain and career pessimism is mediated by inequalities in perceived control over life outcomes and personal connections to the job.

In introducing the special issue, Society in the Classroom: Multilevel Perspectives on Socioeconomic Inequalities in Education, we begin by challenging the assumption that educational institutions are neutral sites merely reflecting socioeconomic inequalities that originate beyond them. Instead, we consider how socioeconomic disparities and biases pervade educational settings and may be perpetuated by the very function of privileging particular standards and practices, a function that is central to institutions serving the dominant societal classes. Compiled 20 years after the last time the Journal of Social Issues focused on the psychology of social class in the context of education, this issue takes stock of research on this topic with a focus on approaches that go beyond the individual level of analysis. Although research reported in the issue is predominantly conducted with majority ethnic samples in the United States and Western Europe, it engages with intersectional concerns by attending to power and interlocking processes of oppression.

Socioeconomic and ethnicity-based achievement gaps plague education. Both sociological theories and recent social-psychological work consider cultural mismatches between schools’ and students’ ways of being and relating (i.e., self-construal) as a potential mechanism. However, stringent empirical evidence remains lacking. Drawing on a sample of 5076 Belgian adolescents, this study aims to provide rigorous and robust novel evidence by (i) establishing high SES and ethnic majority group average patterns of self in relation to their teacher; (ii) calculating students’ ‘fit’ with these dominant group's patterns; and (iii) linking fit indices to objective and subjective achievement scores. As expected, fit with both high-SES and ethnic majority self-patterns were significantly positively related to achievement. Our findings suggest hitherto less visible systemic barriers to equal attainment due to engrained school practices that selectively value and reward majority middle-class self-ways. One way to promote equity in education is recognising and reforming such practices in schools.

The Covid-19 outbreak forced families and teachers to use digital technology to support students to engage in distance learning at home. According to their social class, families’ digital equipment, competences and uses vary markedly, which in turn, impacts children's academic achievement. Social class has also a great influence on cultural and parental practices at home, as well as on parental self-efficacy regarding supporting children's academic achievement. The present study investigated whether, within a single model, structural factors, including home environment, cultural capital, and digital capital, contribute both directly and indirectly (via parental self-efficacy) to the development of academic inequalities during homework. As predicted, analyses showed that families from working-class backgrounds are less equipped and feel less competent in digital technology as compared to families from middle- and upper-class backgrounds. Our findings also showed that families’ social class is a significant predictor of cultural capital and parental self-efficacy which in turn contributes to educational inequalities in achievement. Future studies should delve deeper into the role of parental practices and their involvement, during homework, to educational inequalities.