T. Ariel Yang, Abby Dolan, Valeria Hernandez, Ava Kaufman, Mary Kruk, Katherine Robbins, Terri D. Conley
Sex guilt refers to a feeling of shame or anxiety induced by sexual behavior due to the inconsistency between a person's value and their sexuality. Sex guilt often stems from traditional, gender stereotypical sexual views and attitudes. In this study, we inquired what factors could be predicting sex guilt. Negative sexual messaging (NSM) refers to the promotion of abstinence and the glorification of virginity, representing a set of sex‐negatives views. We evaluated the relationships between NSM in childhood and sex guilt in adulthood. We include childhood sexual abuse as an alternative predictor of sex guilt to anchor our results with NSM. Participants were recruited through undergraduate groups and online platforms (total N = 1322) and completed an online survey regarding about their sexual experience. We found that NSM was a strong, persistent predictor of sex guilt. Those who experienced more NSM reported higher sex guilt. Our findings could be particularly informative for educators and policy maker who creates sex education curricula. Further study is needed to clarify the mechanisms through which NSM are associated with sex guilt.
{"title":"Associations between negative sexual messaging in childhood and sex guilt in adulthood","authors":"T. Ariel Yang, Abby Dolan, Valeria Hernandez, Ava Kaufman, Mary Kruk, Katherine Robbins, Terri D. Conley","doi":"10.1111/asap.12423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12423","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:italic>Sex guilt</jats:italic> refers to a feeling of shame or anxiety induced by sexual behavior due to the inconsistency between a person's value and their sexuality. Sex guilt often stems from traditional, gender stereotypical sexual views and attitudes. In this study, we inquired what factors could be predicting sex guilt. Negative sexual messaging (NSM) refers to the promotion of abstinence and the glorification of virginity, representing a set of sex‐negatives views. We evaluated the relationships between NSM in childhood and sex guilt in adulthood. We include childhood sexual abuse as an alternative predictor of sex guilt to anchor our results with NSM. Participants were recruited through undergraduate groups and online platforms (total <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 1322) and completed an online survey regarding about their sexual experience. We found that NSM was a strong, persistent predictor of sex guilt. Those who experienced more NSM reported higher sex guilt. Our findings could be particularly informative for educators and policy maker who creates sex education curricula. Further study is needed to clarify the mechanisms through which NSM are associated with sex guilt.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142194401","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Darren E. J. Austin, Mathew D. Marques, Arthur A. Stukas
Men are privileged economically, politically, and socially, yet some deny this. Previous research suggests that denial of privilege can help to manage the discomfort associated with a privileged identity, but we propose that it serves primarily to preserve privilege. In two preregistered studies (Ntotal = 911 Australian participants) we show that denial of male privilege is not unique to men and that it is strongly predicted by anti‐egalitarianism, even when controlling for gender and other variables known to predict attitudes toward inequality (facets of right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation). In Study 1, a multiple regression model accounted for 59% of the variability in reported male privilege awareness, with anti‐egalitarianism contributing 47% of the explanatory power. In Study 2, the explanatory power of anti‐egalitarianism was more modest (26%) and similar to that of gender (27%), and both also positively predicted claims of female privilege. This suggests that rather than simply reflecting unawareness of male privilege or being a way to manage a privileged identity, denying the existence of male privilege and claiming that women are privileged helps to preserve gender inequality by presenting it as a just result of meritocracy.
{"title":"Anti‐egalitarianism motivates denial of male privilege","authors":"Darren E. J. Austin, Mathew D. Marques, Arthur A. Stukas","doi":"10.1111/asap.12424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12424","url":null,"abstract":"Men are privileged economically, politically, and socially, yet some deny this. Previous research suggests that denial of privilege can help to manage the discomfort associated with a privileged identity, but we propose that it serves primarily to preserve privilege. In two preregistered studies (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic><jats:sub>total</jats:sub> = 911 Australian participants) we show that denial of male privilege is not unique to men and that it is strongly predicted by anti‐egalitarianism, even when controlling for gender and other variables known to predict attitudes toward inequality (facets of right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation). In Study 1, a multiple regression model accounted for 59% of the variability in reported male privilege awareness, with anti‐egalitarianism contributing 47% of the explanatory power. In Study 2, the explanatory power of anti‐egalitarianism was more modest (26%) and similar to that of gender (27%), and both also positively predicted claims of female privilege. This suggests that rather than simply reflecting unawareness of male privilege or being a way to manage a privileged identity, denying the existence of male privilege and claiming that women are privileged helps to preserve gender inequality by presenting it as a just result of meritocracy.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142194241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Adam J. Beam, Lauren N. Jordan, Katherine E. Purdom, C. Veronica Smith
Sexual violence is far too common in the U.S. and across the world (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). Bystander interventions are one type of intervention that aim to reduce contact sexual violence incidence as well as other problematic features of sexual violence like victim blame. Despite bystander intervention popularity, research has yet to address what people think about bystanders themselves and if people blame them in sexual violence scenarios. Across three sets of studies (N = 887), participants read a simple vignette that explicitly stated a man had raped/sexually assaulted a woman and participants were then asked to allocate blame to the perpetrator, victim, and bystanders. In some studies, bystanders were not explicitly mentioned, and participants had to self‐nominate others who they thought could be responsible. In other studies, possible bystanders were listed by the researchers. Our results replicated across all sets of studies and indicated that people rarely thought to allocate blame to bystanders when they were not explicitly mentioned. When bystanders were explicitly mentioned, participants gave some blame to the bystanders and consequently reduced blame to the perpetrator. Our results have important implications for both legal settings and sexual assault prevention.
{"title":"Do I have to blame the perpetrator if I can't blame the victim anymore? Bystander responsibility in contact sexual violence scenarios","authors":"Adam J. Beam, Lauren N. Jordan, Katherine E. Purdom, C. Veronica Smith","doi":"10.1111/asap.12422","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12422","url":null,"abstract":"Sexual violence is far too common in the U.S. and across the world (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). Bystander interventions are one type of intervention that aim to reduce contact sexual violence incidence as well as other problematic features of sexual violence like victim blame. Despite bystander intervention popularity, research has yet to address what people think about bystanders themselves and if people blame them in sexual violence scenarios. Across three sets of studies (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 887), participants read a simple vignette that explicitly stated a man had raped/sexually assaulted a woman and participants were then asked to allocate blame to the perpetrator, victim, and bystanders. In some studies, bystanders were not explicitly mentioned, and participants had to self‐nominate others who they thought could be responsible. In other studies, possible bystanders were listed by the researchers. Our results replicated across all sets of studies and indicated that people rarely thought to allocate blame to bystanders when they were not explicitly mentioned. When bystanders were explicitly mentioned, participants gave some blame to the bystanders and consequently reduced blame to the perpetrator. Our results have important implications for both legal settings and sexual assault prevention.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142194402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This narrative review examines the cumulative dehumanization process within the United States carceral system, highlighting how current policies perpetuate harm and undermine the well‐being of incarcerated individuals. Through a narrative review of interdisciplinary research, we explore the psychological, sociological, and legal dimensions of life within prison walls. We argue that the cumulative dehumanization inherent in these practices not only risks the safety and futures of prisoners but also creates environments that increase the likelihood of rule infractions and extended sentences. We identify and highlight the process of dehumanization across individual, interpersonal, institutional, and systemic levels. Our analysis focuses on three critical policy areas: the goals and directives of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the use of subminimum wages and forced labor, and the impact of fees on prisoners’ access to healthcare. By prioritizing respect, fairness, and humane treatment, we can dismantle the structures perpetuating dehumanization and harm.Public Significance StatementThis paper reviews the research surrounding cumulative dehumanization in prison life. It provides three policy recommendations in order to combat the dehumanization of prisoners, including changing the directive of the Bureau of Prisons, ending the use of subminimal wages, and removing fees from prisoners seeking medical treatment.
{"title":"Dehumanization in the United States carceral system: Pathways to policy reform","authors":"Kevin R. Carriere, Maria Ravn","doi":"10.1111/asap.12420","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12420","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>This narrative review examines the cumulative dehumanization process within the United States carceral system, highlighting how current policies perpetuate harm and undermine the well‐being of incarcerated individuals. Through a narrative review of interdisciplinary research, we explore the psychological, sociological, and legal dimensions of life within prison walls. We argue that the cumulative dehumanization inherent in these practices not only risks the safety and futures of prisoners but also creates environments that increase the likelihood of rule infractions and extended sentences. We identify and highlight the process of dehumanization across individual, interpersonal, institutional, and systemic levels. Our analysis focuses on three critical policy areas: the goals and directives of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the use of subminimum wages and forced labor, and the impact of fees on prisoners’ access to healthcare. By prioritizing respect, fairness, and humane treatment, we can dismantle the structures perpetuating dehumanization and harm.Public Significance StatementThis paper reviews the research surrounding cumulative dehumanization in prison life. It provides three policy recommendations in order to combat the dehumanization of prisoners, including changing the directive of the Bureau of Prisons, ending the use of subminimal wages, and removing fees from prisoners seeking medical treatment.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"81 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142194408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study investigates the complex relationship between Transgression type (for‐profit vs. non‐profit) and individual‐level variables in shaping moral perceptions and online victimization of wrongdoer organizations (OVWOM) following transgressions by conducting two experimental studies (N1 = 111, N2 = 164). Study 1 utilizes real‐world organizations to investigate the impact of transgression type (for‐profit vs. non‐profit), whereas Study 2 employs fictitious entities to alleviate potential response bias and focuses on moral disengagement as a moderating factor. Findings reveal a decrease in perceived morality post‐transgression across both transgression types, with non‐profits not eliciting significantly higher OVWOM. However, the influence of transgression type on perceived morality is found to be contingent upon individual moral disengagement, affecting OVWOM in Study 2. Moreover, factors such as desire for revenge, social desirability bias, gender, and educational background emerge as significant predictors of perceived morality and OVWOM. These results highlight the nuanced nature of public responses to organizational transgressions, emphasizing the complex interplay between organizational characteristics and individual psychological mechanisms. The study underscores the necessity of integrating moral disengagement and individual‐level factors into crisis management strategies for organizations.
{"title":"Expectancy violations after moral transgressions: Exploring the role of moral disengagement on online vindictive word of mouth","authors":"Enis Yakut, Ramazan Gökbunar","doi":"10.1111/asap.12418","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12418","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the complex relationship between Transgression type (for‐profit vs. non‐profit) and individual‐level variables in shaping moral perceptions and online victimization of wrongdoer organizations (OVWOM) following transgressions by conducting two experimental studies (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic><jats:sub>1</jats:sub> = 111, <jats:italic>N</jats:italic><jats:sub>2</jats:sub> = 164). Study 1 utilizes real‐world organizations to investigate the impact of transgression type (for‐profit vs. non‐profit), whereas Study 2 employs fictitious entities to alleviate potential response bias and focuses on moral disengagement as a moderating factor. Findings reveal a decrease in perceived morality post‐transgression across both transgression types, with non‐profits not eliciting significantly higher OVWOM. However, the influence of transgression type on perceived morality is found to be contingent upon individual moral disengagement, affecting OVWOM in Study 2. Moreover, factors such as desire for revenge, social desirability bias, gender, and educational background emerge as significant predictors of perceived morality and OVWOM. These results highlight the nuanced nature of public responses to organizational transgressions, emphasizing the complex interplay between organizational characteristics and individual psychological mechanisms. The study underscores the necessity of integrating moral disengagement and individual‐level factors into crisis management strategies for organizations.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142194410","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sebastian Gyamfi, Ebenezer Martin‐Yeboah, Mark Fordjour Owusu, Joseph Adu
Stigma reduces the status of individuals from full social acceptance, motivating the stigmatized person to find ways to cope with the perceived threat as much as possible. The present study explored the experience of dealing with a mental illness daily within the public space. We applied an interpretive description method using a semi‐structured interview guide to elicit subjective responses from 12 purposefully recruited outpatients. Study participants described various ways through which individuals coped with their illness, including secrecy, avoidance/withdrawal, relaxation techniques, confrontation, ignoring the stigmatizing agent, ingroup comparisons, and engaging in diversion activities. The participants' observations suggest they were unhappy about how society perceived and treated them. To deal with stigma, multifaceted approaches of active engagement with the public, healthcare providers, policymakers, and government are needed to mitigate the phenomenon.
{"title":"Coping with the stigma of mental illness: An interpretive descriptive study of out‐patients in a public mental health hospital in Ghana","authors":"Sebastian Gyamfi, Ebenezer Martin‐Yeboah, Mark Fordjour Owusu, Joseph Adu","doi":"10.1111/asap.12419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12419","url":null,"abstract":"Stigma reduces the status of individuals from full social acceptance, motivating the stigmatized person to find ways to cope with the perceived threat as much as possible. The present study explored the experience of dealing with a mental illness daily within the public space. We applied an interpretive description method using a semi‐structured interview guide to elicit subjective responses from 12 purposefully recruited outpatients. Study participants described various ways through which individuals coped with their illness, including secrecy, avoidance/withdrawal, relaxation techniques, confrontation, ignoring the stigmatizing agent, ingroup comparisons, and engaging in diversion activities. The participants' observations suggest they were unhappy about how society perceived and treated them. To deal with stigma, multifaceted approaches of active engagement with the public, healthcare providers, policymakers, and government are needed to mitigate the phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"158 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142194404","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kathryn M. Kincaid, Angela C. Ma, David E. Rast, Michael A. Hogg
Canada's 2022 Freedom Convoy protests and blockades caused significant disruption, and many Canadians advocated for strong, forceful, and even autocratic responses from their government. In democratic nations, autocratic leadership is typically seen as undesirable and receives less support than democratic leadership. However, when group members experience significant identity‐related self‐uncertainty, they may have an accentuated desire for strong, directive leadership to help manage the uncertainty. Canadian participants (N = 406) reported their level of self‐uncertainty, rated how autocratic they perceived Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to be, reported their level of support for Justin Trudeau, and reported their support for strong responses to the Freedom Convoy. Self‐uncertainty moderated the relationship between leadership style and leader support. Perceived autocratic leadership style predicted significantly less leader support, but this relationship was weakened among participants high in self‐uncertainty, who reported increased support for an autocratic leader. Further, self‐uncertainty predicted a greater desire for a strong leader, willingness to restrict civil liberties, and support for expanded government powers. These results suggest that the typical preference for democratic leadership weakens when self‐uncertainty is elevated.Public significance statementUncertainty about one's identity lays the groundwork for autocratic leadership to emerge. Elevated self‐uncertainty was associated with a greater desire for a strong leader who is willing to challenge democratic values and practices, a greater willingness to restrict civil liberties, greater support for expanded government powers in response to a national crisis, and greater support for a national leader perceived as autocratic.
{"title":"That's my autocrat: Self‐uncertainty elevates support for autocratic leadership during Canada's Freedom Convoy","authors":"Kathryn M. Kincaid, Angela C. Ma, David E. Rast, Michael A. Hogg","doi":"10.1111/asap.12414","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12414","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>Canada's 2022 Freedom Convoy protests and blockades caused significant disruption, and many Canadians advocated for strong, forceful, and even autocratic responses from their government. In democratic nations, autocratic leadership is typically seen as undesirable and receives less support than democratic leadership. However, when group members experience significant identity‐related self‐uncertainty, they may have an accentuated desire for strong, directive leadership to help manage the uncertainty. Canadian participants (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 406) reported their level of self‐uncertainty, rated how autocratic they perceived Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to be, reported their level of support for Justin Trudeau, and reported their support for strong responses to the Freedom Convoy. Self‐uncertainty moderated the relationship between leadership style and leader support. Perceived autocratic leadership style predicted significantly less leader support, but this relationship was weakened among participants high in self‐uncertainty, who reported increased support for an autocratic leader. Further, self‐uncertainty predicted a greater desire for a strong leader, willingness to restrict civil liberties, and support for expanded government powers. These results suggest that the typical preference for democratic leadership weakens when self‐uncertainty is elevated.Public significance statementUncertainty about one's identity lays the groundwork for autocratic leadership to emerge. Elevated self‐uncertainty was associated with a greater desire for a strong leader who is willing to challenge democratic values and practices, a greater willingness to restrict civil liberties, greater support for expanded government powers in response to a national crisis, and greater support for a national leader perceived as autocratic.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"160 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141932557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Diana Camila Garzón‐Velandia, María Idaly Barreto‐Galeano, José Manuel Sabucedo‐Cameselle
Political polarization on social media, particularly during electoral campaigns, has become a growing concern. This study aimed to assess levels of affective polarization in political communication, considering temporal orientation, delegitimizing beliefs, and intergroup emotions. Two studies were conducted: one during the Andalusian elections in Spain, and another during the Colombian presidential campaign. Tweets from candidates and X users were analyzed in both studies. Linguistic analysis was used to develop an index for measuring affective polarization in linguistic pieces. This index offers an alternative to the lack of linguistic measurement tools for psychological processes regarding political polarization. Findings showed that communicative strategies often exhibited high indicators of ingroup bias in contexts without political violence, resulting in lower polarization that increased with positive emotions and a forward‐looking perspective. Conversely, in contexts of political violence, strategies shifted towards outgroup discrimination and delegitimization. Positive emotions decreased polarization in these situations, while a past focus intensified it. The study concluded that affective polarization could indicate the willingness to pursue reconciliation in violent contexts. Consequently, this research provides a map of emotions associated with polarization.Public significance statementTwo studies conducted in Spain and Colombia analyzed how political figures and users of the social network X communicate during elections. It was identified that the use of emotions can contribute to political polarization in both populations. Positive emotions can exacerbate polarization by glorifying one's group, while negative emotions can fuel polarization through attacks on opponents.
社交媒体上的政治极化，尤其是竞选期间的政治极化，已成为人们日益关注的问题。本研究旨在评估政治传播中的情感极化程度，同时考虑时间取向、去合法化信念和群体间情感。我们进行了两项研究：一项是在西班牙安达卢西亚选举期间，另一项是在哥伦比亚总统竞选期间。两项研究都对候选人和 X 用户的推文进行了分析。语言分析被用来开发一种指数，用于测量语言片段中的情感极化。该指数为缺乏政治极化心理过程的语言测量工具提供了一种替代方法。研究结果表明，在没有政治暴力的情况下，交际策略往往表现出较高的内群体偏见指标，从而导致较低的两极分化，并随着积极情绪和前瞻性视角的增加而增加。相反，在有政治暴力的情况下，交流策略则转向外群体歧视和去合法化。在这种情况下，积极情绪会降低两极分化，而对过去的关注则会加剧两极分化。研究得出的结论是，情感极化可以表明在暴力环境中寻求和解的意愿。公共意义声明在西班牙和哥伦比亚进行的两项研究分析了政治人物和社交网络 X 用户在选举期间的沟通方式。研究发现，在这两个国家的人群中，情绪的使用会助长政治极化。积极情绪可以通过美化自己的群体来加剧两极分化，而消极情绪则可以通过攻击对手来助长两极分化。
{"title":"When political elites talk, citizens reply. Affective polarization through temporal orientation and intergroup emotions","authors":"Diana Camila Garzón‐Velandia, María Idaly Barreto‐Galeano, José Manuel Sabucedo‐Cameselle","doi":"10.1111/asap.12416","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12416","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:label/>Political polarization on social media, particularly during electoral campaigns, has become a growing concern. This study aimed to assess levels of affective polarization in political communication, considering temporal orientation, delegitimizing beliefs, and intergroup emotions. Two studies were conducted: one during the Andalusian elections in Spain, and another during the Colombian presidential campaign. Tweets from candidates and X users were analyzed in both studies. Linguistic analysis was used to develop an index for measuring affective polarization in linguistic pieces. This index offers an alternative to the lack of linguistic measurement tools for psychological processes regarding political polarization. Findings showed that communicative strategies often exhibited high indicators of ingroup bias in contexts without political violence, resulting in lower polarization that increased with positive emotions and a forward‐looking perspective. Conversely, in contexts of political violence, strategies shifted towards outgroup discrimination and delegitimization. Positive emotions decreased polarization in these situations, while a past focus intensified it. The study concluded that affective polarization could indicate the willingness to pursue reconciliation in violent contexts. Consequently, this research provides a map of emotions associated with polarization.Public significance statementTwo studies conducted in Spain and Colombia analyzed how political figures and users of the social network X communicate during elections. It was identified that the use of emotions can contribute to political polarization in both populations. Positive emotions can exacerbate polarization by glorifying one's group, while negative emotions can fuel polarization through attacks on opponents.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141885282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Emma K. Bridger, Angela Tufte‐Hewett, David Comerford, Daniel Nettle
Studies of aversion to health inequality have found that this is often greater when health outcomes are presented as varying with socioeconomic conditions. We sought to understand better why this is by studying the cognitive appraisals made about health inequality when presented with distinct explanatory framings. Across two pre‐registered studies (N = 1321), UK and US participants judged the acceptability of life expectancy differences attributed to distinct framings: income, education, social class, neighborhood, lifestyle choices, and genetics. Health inequality was least acceptable when attributed to the four socioeconomic framings, and most acceptable for lifestyle choices and genetics. Six appraisal dimensions—complexity, malleability, inevitability, and extent driven by biological, psychological, and sociocultural causes—varied with framing and predicted views on health inequality. These dimensions could explain most of the drop in acceptability for health inequality attributed to socioeconomic factors relative to a condition with no framing. This work illustrates for the first time the cognitive appraisals and causal intuitions that link different explanatory framings to views on health inequality. These framings are viewed as least acceptable because they reduce the perceived involvement of biological causes while increasing the perception that sociocultural and psychological factors contribute to health inequality.Public significance statement: Academics use different socioeconomic variables to describe health inequalities. We show that different explanatory framings change appraisals about the causes, malleability, and inevitability of health inequalities. Socioeconomic explanations (income, education, social class, and neighborhood) reduce acceptability because they reduce the perception that health is biologically caused and increase the perceived role of socio‐cultural factors. Public support for intervention on health inequalities will be best served by framings that emphasize these differences
{"title":"Why are socioeconomic health inequalities unacceptable? Studying the influence of explanatory framings on cognitive appraisals","authors":"Emma K. Bridger, Angela Tufte‐Hewett, David Comerford, Daniel Nettle","doi":"10.1111/asap.12415","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12415","url":null,"abstract":"Studies of aversion to health inequality have found that this is often greater when health outcomes are presented as varying with socioeconomic conditions. We sought to understand better why this is by studying the cognitive appraisals made about health inequality when presented with distinct explanatory framings. Across two pre‐registered studies (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 1321), UK and US participants judged the acceptability of life expectancy differences attributed to distinct framings: income, education, social class, neighborhood, lifestyle choices, and genetics. Health inequality was least acceptable when attributed to the four socioeconomic framings, and most acceptable for lifestyle choices and genetics. Six appraisal dimensions—complexity, malleability, inevitability, and extent driven by biological, psychological, and sociocultural causes—varied with framing and predicted views on health inequality. These dimensions could explain most of the drop in acceptability for health inequality attributed to socioeconomic factors relative to a condition with no framing. This work illustrates for the first time the cognitive appraisals and causal intuitions that link different explanatory framings to views on health inequality. These framings are viewed as least acceptable because they reduce the perceived involvement of biological causes while increasing the perception that sociocultural and psychological factors contribute to health inequality.Public significance statement: Academics use different socioeconomic variables to describe health inequalities. We show that different explanatory framings change appraisals about the causes, malleability, and inevitability of health inequalities. Socioeconomic explanations (income, education, social class, and neighborhood) reduce acceptability because they reduce the perception that health is biologically caused and increase the perceived role of socio‐cultural factors. Public support for intervention on health inequalities will be best served by framings that emphasize these differences","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"202 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141865415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Eduardo J. Rivera Pichardo, Sushmeena A. Parihar, John T. Jost
Previous research suggests that societal threats often increase ideological support for the social system, but the attitudinal effects of COVID‐19 seem to have varied greatly. Here we present the results of a natural experiment involving New York City college students (Total N = 1300 observations). One group (n = 835) completed questionnaires before the onset of COVID‐19, while another completed them afterward (n = 465). Shortly after COVID (within 3 months of the outbreak), students scored higher on general system justification than before; this effect was driven by political conservatives. At the same time, students scored lower on economic system justification and right‐wing authoritarianism after COVID (vs. before); these effects emerged later (4–5 months after the outbreak) and were driven by liberals. A subsample completed the same questionnaires both before and after COVID‐19 (n = 107), enabling us to investigate intraindividual change. The within‐participants analysis revealed that students exhibited an increase in general system justification and a decrease in economic system justification, which was driven by those who exhibited a liberal shift. Together, these results indicate that the ideological effects of the pandemic and the governmental response to it were complex and polarizing, with liberals and conservatives moving in opposite directions at different times and on different attitudinal dimensions.
{"title":"Polarizing effects of the coronavirus pandemic on system justification: A natural experiment involving New York City college students","authors":"Eduardo J. Rivera Pichardo, Sushmeena A. Parihar, John T. Jost","doi":"10.1111/asap.12412","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12412","url":null,"abstract":"Previous research suggests that societal threats often increase ideological support for the social system, but the attitudinal effects of COVID‐19 seem to have varied greatly. Here we present the results of a natural experiment involving New York City college students (Total <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 1300 observations). One group (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 835) completed questionnaires before the onset of COVID‐19, while another completed them afterward (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 465). Shortly after COVID (within 3 months of the outbreak), students scored higher on general system justification than before; this effect was driven by political conservatives. At the same time, students scored lower on economic system justification and right‐wing authoritarianism after COVID (vs. before); these effects emerged later (4–5 months after the outbreak) and were driven by liberals. A subsample completed the same questionnaires both before and after COVID‐19 (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 107), enabling us to investigate intraindividual change. The within‐participants analysis revealed that students exhibited an increase in general system justification and a decrease in economic system justification, which was driven by those who exhibited a liberal shift. Together, these results indicate that the ideological effects of the pandemic and the governmental response to it were complex and polarizing, with liberals and conservatives moving in opposite directions at different times and on different attitudinal dimensions.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141769591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：