Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy最新文献

Individuals are stereotyped on the basis of their perceived identities, and there are rising concerns about ableism, ageism, and sexism in the United States. Cultural stereotypes of older adults (including older women and men) living with disability (LWD) are understudied despite their negative stigmatizations and consequences in different contexts such as in healthcare and employment. In this study, we identified and assessed these stereotypes. Students from three U.S. universities (N = 401) listed their understanding of the stereotypes of older adults LWD, older men LWD, older women LWD, older men, older women, older adults, people LWD, men, and women. Data were analyzed using two established methodologies used in stereotyping research. Results revealed that stereotypes of older adults LWD and people LWD contained shared elements, as the top stereotypes listed for both groups were negative and many overlapped (burdensome, dependent, devalued, “handicapped,” mean, physically slow, sad, unintelligent, unproductive, and weak). Negative stereotypes of older adults LWD also included long-standing stereotypes listed of older adults (deteriorating, sick, and mean). Gendered stereotypes also emerged for older men (financially stable and leader) and older women (nice) but stereotypes of older men LWD and older women LWD were more closely related to those of disability than of gender. Unique stereotypes also emerged, highlighting the need to consider intersectionality. Results can help inform much-needed theoretical frameworks and prejudice reduction strategies aimed at improving attitudes toward diverse groups of older adults who may be facing poor health and discrimination due to experiences of ageism, sexism, and/or ableism.

U.S. Republicans endorse more punitive beliefs and support for current systems of law and order, while Democrats tend toward greater acknowledgement of flaws in these systems and endorsement of reforms or even abolition of carceral systems. Yet, following Donald Trump's 2024 convictions on 34 felony counts, Republicans questioned the legitimacy of the legal system and continued to endorse Trump as a fit presidential candidate, while Democrats praised the justice system and construed Trump as unfit for office due to his felon status. In a mixed-method study, we examined how political allegiance and abolitionist ideology shaped perceptions of Trump's felony charges and beliefs about the fitness of felons (including Trump specifically) to hold public office. Data from 196 politically diverse U.S. participants were collected immediately following Trump's re-election. Results indicated Democratic identification and voting for Harris/Walz (vs. Trump/Vance) were generally associated with heightened endorsement of abolition. Yet, political party allegiance consistently trumped abolitionist ideologies in predicting felon-in-office beliefs. Republicans endorsed both general and Trump-specific felon-in-office beliefs more strongly than Democrats; the role of abolitionist ideology in predicting felon-in-office beliefs was suppressed by political party identification. Qualitative analyses supported these findings; Republicans generally were unsupportive of Trump's convictions and endorsed his fitness for the presidency, while Democrats were supportive of Trump's convictions and argued his felony status rendered him unfit for the presidency. Our findings suggest that allegiance to one's political party, rather than one's ideology, appears to predict responses to Trump's convictions. We consider the implications of these findings for political and activist mobilization.

Research has shown that economic inequality and gender inequality go hand in hand. According to Oxfam (2024), Italy has a high level of economic inequality: the richest 1% of the population is 84 times richer than the poorest 20%, which is mainly composed of women. This article presents an experimental study (N = 478) exploring an integrated model in which both emotional and cognitive mechanisms explain the effect of economic inequality on salary requests, among Italian women and men. Results showed that the salience (vs. control) of economic inequality motivated women (but not men) to advance higher salary requests because it (a) increased negative emotions, which, in turn, (b) reduced perceptions of the stability of gender hierarchy (i.e., perceptions that gender-based disparities are unchangeable). These findings provide evidence for novel theoretical insights about the interdependence of emotions and cognitions and potential pathways to reduce gender economic inequality, thereby facilitating social change. Implications and avenues for future research are discussed.

In recent years, research has increasingly focused on identifying the psychological factors that encourage individual commitment to environmental protection, while also highlighting significant gender differences in environmental concern. The present study investigates the psychological variables associated with the prioritization of environmental protection, with a specific focus on the value of universalism and the self-construal dimension of self-interest versus commitment to others. In particular, it explores whether these variables interact with gender and perceived urbanization of the residential context in influencing environmental prioritization. A sample of 282 Italian adults (M_age = 31.02, SD = 12.82) completed an online questionnaire including measures of universalism, self-construal, and environmental prioritization. The results showed that, overall, women assign greater importance to environmental protection compared to men. However, three-way interaction analyses revealed that, among men, the importance attributed to environmental protection varied as a function of perceived urbanization and individual psychological orientation: in rural settings, it was positively associated with universalist values and commitment to others, whereas in urban contexts, it was more strongly linked to self-interest. No significant interaction effects were found among women. These findings suggest that support for environmental protection among men may be associated with different motivational pathways depending on the residential context, offering insights for the design of more effective strategies to promote pro-environmental behaviors.

Contemporary electoral environments are increasingly characterized by political polarization, resulting in close election outcomes in many democratic societies and a substantial proportion of voters supporting losing candidates. Previous research of U. S. presidential elections indicates that voters supporting the losing candidate exhibit social pain responses comparable to those experienced in interpersonal exclusion, often referred to as vicarious exclusion. We replicated these findings with a pre-post measurement design in the 2024 U.S. presidential election context and qualitatively examined potential coping strategies by voters whose preferred candidate lost the election, employing a comprehensive categorization of coping strategies grounded in social exclusion theory and literature. Consistent with our hypotheses, voters of the losing candidates reported significantly more exclusion feelings, negative affect, threats to basic psychological needs (e.g., belonging, control), and more antisocial attitudes towards fellow U.S. citizens, coupled with decreased positive affect and prosocial attitudes after the election. Voters of the winning candidate (Trump) showed the reverse pattern of changes after the election. Voters of the losing candidates employed a diverse range of approach and avoidance coping strategies, with social support seeking, acceptance, and non-engagement with media being most prevalent. Implications and limitations of the study are discussed, alongside suggestions for future research.

Parents serve as primary agents of political socialization for their children. The present study examined how parents in the United States engaged in conversations with their children (5–18 years) about the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Using a nationally diverse sample of 1001 parents (reporting on 1769 children), we investigated the occurrence, frequency, and approach taken toward these discussions, and the factors that predicted them. The majority of parents (84%, n = 843) reported speaking to at least one of their children, of whom 65% (n = 543) spoke to all of their children. Whether and how often the conversations occurred varied by several demographic factors (e.g., child age and gender, parent gender and education, and family size), political interest, child anxiety about the election, and communication approach. Notably, with a more active and less avoidant communication approach, parents were significantly more likely to talk to their children about the presidential election, and with a more active approach the frequency of conversations increased. Given the importance of conversational approaches in the occurrence and frequency of such conversations, predictors of parents’ approach were explored. Together these findings contribute to a growing understanding of the mechanisms that drive parents’ political socialization of their children.

Abortion stigma is a morally and politically divisive issue, often framed through reductive binaries that equate support for abortion with empathy and opposition with moral deficiency. This study explores how prosocial personality traits (i.e., the Light Triad), religiosity, and political ideology interact in shaping stigmatizing attitudes toward abortion. A sample of 304 participants engaged in a survey from October to November 2024, completed measures assessing abortion stigma, Light Triad traits, religiosity, and political orientation. Structural equation modeling revealed that higher Light Triad traits predicted lower abortion stigma. However, this relationship was moderated by political ideology: among conservatives, prosocial traits had a diminished—or even reversed—association with stigma. These findings challenge the notion that moral reasoning on abortion is unidimensional and highlight the role of ideological context in directing moral concern. The study underscores the need for stigma-reduction strategies that consider not only individual empathy but also group norms and ideological commitments that shape how that empathy is expressed.

The 2020 killing of George Floyd by officer Derek Chauvin sparked one of the largest protest movements in the United States. Chauvin was ultimately convicted of murder—a rare but necessary step to police officer accountability for wrongdoing. The media play an important role in framing the public's attitudes surrounding high-profile cases involving police killings of unarmed civilians. The current study investigates media narratives surrounding the Floyd case for evidence of cultural violence, which occurs when direct, physical violence becomes institutionalized, accepted as normative, and legitimized. We looked for evidence of cultural violence across 300 articles from three U.S. newspapers (i.e., New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and The Star Tribune). We coded for cultural violence themes, which we operationalized as the seven mechanisms of moral disengagement, that is, the process of convincing oneself that ethical standards do not apply. Cultural violence was prevalent across all news outlets (i.e., it occurred in 88.9% of articles in the overall sample). These findings have implications for how media framing influences attitudes surrounding high-profile police brutality cases involving Black victims, and psychological theory related to violence, morality, and racism.

In today's society, women are increasingly vulnerable to sexual violence, whether at home, in the workplace, or in public spaces. This study aims to explore how the perceived threat of sexual violence affects the psychological well-being and daily behavior of women aged 20–30 in northern India, with a focus on fear, stress, and anxiety. A qualitative approach was employed, using semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 20 women. Data were collected through text-based online interviews, and thematic analysis was performed to identify key patterns and insights related to the psychological impact of sexual violence. Based on Trauma Theory, Cognitive Processing Theory, and feminist perspectives, the findings revealed that the fear of sexual violence led to heightened stress and anxiety, significantly affecting participants' mental well-being. Many women reported behavioral changes such as avoiding certain locations and altering daily routines to stay safe. The study highlighted the role of societal norms and family pressures in shaping how women deal with these threats. This study also underscores the urgent need for mental health support for women coping with the psychological toll of sexual violence.

Do partisans ever oppose their candidates during U.S. presidential elections? We explored this question across two studies (N = 1106) using U.S. Republicans and Democrats in the context of the 2024 Presidential Election. We propose that partisan identity and ideological orientations related to different criticisms of in-group and out-group leaders, which differently relates to level of candidate support. For Democrats, we focused on the ideological orientation of left-wing authoritarianism (LWA). For Republicans, we focused on the ideological belief in democracy. Study 1 measured participants criticisms of in-group and out-group candidates, while Study 2 manipulated the salience of in-group (or out-group) leadership support. Across both studies, stronger partisan identity related to lower levels of in-group criticism, higher levels of out-group criticism, and more leadership support. Importantly, the examined ideological orientation lead Democrats (but not Republicans) to oppose their in-group leader. Manipulating the salience of leadership support did not impact these relationships.