Journal of Social Issues最新文献

Despite the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change, conspiracy narratives suggesting that it is a hoax created to mislead people still exist. While research studies and public opinion polls have shown that belief in this hoax conspiracy is not uncommon, they often overlook that climate change conspiracy narratives can extend beyond just this simple “hoax” accusation. Given that conspiracy narratives can evolve from geopolitical conflicts, we propose expanding the psychology of climate change conspiracy beliefs by considering the impacts of these conflicts. We identify two additional dimensions of climate change conspiracy narratives: the historical anti-West narrative of “Western imperialism” from the Cold War, and the “China behind” narrative that stems from United States President Donald Trump's assertion that China is primarily responsible for climate change. We conducted a US–China cross-national survey to examine if people believe these conspiracy narratives and whether such beliefs really represent distinct dimensions. We recruited 1009 and 1024 adult participants from the two countries, respectively, with gender and age groups resembling the distribution in the population census. Both confirmatory factor analyses and latent profile analyses supported the distinction between the three dimensions of climate change conspiracy beliefs, with a more heterogeneous pattern observed among mainland Chinese participants. Furthermore, these conspiracy beliefs were predicted by national collective narcissism, conspiracy mentality, and perceived cost/benefit of climate actions. Our findings suggest that estimating climate change conspiracy beliefs solely based on the “hoax” narratives may underestimate the prevalence of conspiratorial explanations of climate change beyond the Western context. They also highlight how rising tensions between the United States and China would contribute to climate change conspiracy beliefs. We discuss the potential implications of incorporating geopolitical conflicts into understanding belief in conspiracy theories.

Despite considerable resources invested in diversity training, there has been a paucity of studies that examine the enduring impact of diversity training. The current study was conducted in a workplace setting and is a quasi-experimental empirical evaluation of a widely used diversity training program that includes a daylong workshop and 8 weeks of structured interracial interactions. We examined the effects of this program on diversity-relevant outcomes—motivational, ideological, and attitudinal—over 2 months later. Although the program features content and assigns activities intended to reduce social biases in general, this examination focuses on biases toward Black Americans. In a pre-test/post-test analysis of employees who participated in training, we found that participants reported a significantly lower social dominance orientation (SDO) and significantly more motivation to be nonprejudiced 2 months after the training compared to before. Converging results were observed such that employees who participated in the training program exhibited significantly lower SDO and exhibited marginally higher internal motivation to respond without prejudice compared to employees in a control group who did not participate. No differences were observed for explicit attitudes, implicit bias, or right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). The current study thus documents that diversity interventions administered in “real-world” contexts can have a relatively long-term impact on egalitarian orientations. The research also highlights the need for further investigation of how specific elements of the program (e.g., the training itself, the nature, and duration of interracial contact exercises), and the way they are implemented, may or may not affect different outcomes.

This paper investigates social psychological mechanisms underlying selective solidarity with refugees in two experimental studies conducted in Germany. We hypothesized, in line with the geopolitics of racialization and masculinization of refugees, and rooted in social–psychological theories, that refugee origin and gender affect expressions of solidarity and that this can be explained through perceived similarity and threat. Study 1 (N = 969) explored differences in solidarity with Ukrainian and Afghan refugees in an intersection with refugee gender. Study 2 (N = 1228) extended the design to include Syrian and Eritrean refugees and investigated the effect of perceived proportion of gender within each refugee group. Supporting our hypotheses, in both studies, solidarity was highest when refugees were Ukrainian, which was linked to perceptions of cultural similarity and, in turn, lower threat. Moreover, refugees received more solidarity when they were (expected to be) women, which was primarily explained by lower levels of perceived threat. Findings suggest that similarity (e.g., via superordinate European identity categorizations, which are contextually flexible and geopolitically influenced) may explain higher solidarity with Ukrainian refugees. In contrast, Black, Arab, and Muslim refugee men, shaped by negative stereotypes and narratives about cultural dissimilarity, were viewed as more threatening, exacerbating exclusionary attitudes. We argue that selective solidarity reflects ingroup projection processes, strategic helping motives, and identity-based preferences that underscore the fragile and conditional nature of current refugee support. The paper concludes by addressing the implications of these findings, emphasizing the need for proactive measures to uncover and counteract neocolonial migration narratives to foster sustainable and equitable support for all refugees.

In the Netherlands, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts typically avoid using the term “race”, instead adopting a broader “diversity inclusion” framework that shifts focus from racial inequalities to cultural differences. Our project aimed to introduce, test, and apply a framework to reduce color-evasive racial attitudes while fostering empathy among White participants toward racialized individuals. We tested a video intervention designed to reduce color-evasive attitudes and explored whether a self-compassion-based writing exercise could enhance ethnocultural empathy—encompassing awareness, beliefs, and actions toward racialized individuals. Specifically, we examined whether this intervention reduced White fear (anxiety about interacting with racialized individuals) and increased guilt and affective empathy when learning about racism. In an online, within-between-subjects experiment, 301 White Dutch participants completed a writing task. In the experimental condition (n = 151), participants reflected on a marginalized identity and practiced self-compassion; in the control condition (n = 150), they wrote on a neutral topic. All participants then watched a video of racialized individuals discussing the harms of color-evasive attitudes. A paired-sample t-test showed the video intervention reduced color-evasive racial attitudes in all participants. However, general linear model analyses found no direct or indirect effect of the writing intervention on ethnocultural empathy. These findings informed a White privilege awareness and allyship workshop (see Supporting Information).

Faculty of Color and women faculty face significant obstacles (e.g., isolation, marginalization, tokenism) on the road to tenure and promotion. We translate social psychological research on the contact hypothesis and belonging and adapt previous interventions at other universities to deliver an institutional-level intervention designed to support faculty belonging and retention. This study utilizes a faculty climate survey and institutional-level demographic data to assess tenure-track faculty belonging and retention following the intervention. We observe greater perceptions of institutional support for diversity and lesser disparities in belonging and tenure rates among historically marginalized faculty over three years following the intervention. We discuss how social psychologists may help translate basic research into institutional interventions that promote racial justice and equity. Our work illustrates the potential for targeted initiatives to reduce disparities and promote equity and representation in academia, ultimately benefiting both faculty and students.