Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy最新文献

Building upon recent calls for the integration of abolition into psychology, we develop and validate a measure of Abolitionist Ideology. In two studies with abolitionist leaning (N = 201, abolitionist-identifying n = 58) and nationally representative (N = 350) samples, we identify and confirm a three-factor, 26-item measure including subscales of Alternatives to State Violence, Revolutionary Abolitionism, and Abolitionist Identity. The Abolitionist Ideology Scale demonstrates convergent validity with measures including support for Black Lives Matter, critical consciousness, openness to experience, radical imagination, and attribution of violence to the state. The scale demonstrates divergent validity from measures including social dominance orientation (SDO) and political conservatism. Finally, the scale predicted activism tenacity above and beyond a related measure of carceral system justification. The Abolitionist Ideology Scale demonstrates initial reliability and validity and will be useful for those aiming to engage abolition in liberatory theory, research, and practice.

Previous research has shown that majority group members are more willing to help minority group members of the same nation, particularly when the majority group members strongly identify with the national group. However, existing research has overlooked the extent to which the majority group's perception of how strongly minority groups identify with the national group (i.e., the perceived national identification of minority groups) explains minority helping (i.e., the majority group's intentions to help minority groups). To fill this void, we conducted a correlational survey among 980 Javanese, the ethnic majority in Indonesia. The results revealed that the perceived national identification of non-Javanese minorities positively corresponded with the majority group's national identification. More perceived national identification of the minority groups and the majority group's national identification significantly correlated with more positive attitudes, liking, and helping intentions toward the minority groups. Finally, the perceptions that the non-Javanese rejected the majority group's aspiration to exert control over them (i.e., the perceived denial of the need for power) negatively predicted the perceived national identification of the minority groups and minority helping. The perceived national identity of minority groups can influence minority helping; however, the perceived denial of the need for power may hinder it.

Although awareness and understanding of LGBTIQ+ people's experiences of homelessness are rising, their broader housing experiences remain under-researched. This paper uses qualitative interview data to explore takatāpui and LGBTIQ+ people's experiences of housing instability in Aotearoa New Zealand. In expanding the focus to housing instability, this paper explores how LGBTIQ+ people experience and navigate the housing system, which sheds light on the upstream factors that contribute to the disproportionately high rates of homelessness amongst LGBTIQ+ communities worldwide. A reflexive thematic analysis of the data generated four themes to takatāpui and LGBTIQ+ people's experiences of housing instability; personal experiences are political, survival within inequitable systems is nuanced, instability is relational, and selfhood is mediated through instability. These results highlight the impact of policy and structural failures on LGBTIQ+ communities.

Racialized inequalities in organizations and workplaces are reproduced not only by the discrimination of non-whites but also by behaviors among whites aimed at counteracting and resisting initiatives and measures aimed at achieving racial equality. On this background, the purpose of the present study was to empirically investigate expressions of white fragility, white counterreactions, and institutional resistance in organizational contexts in Sweden, as well as how these processes relate to system justificatory ideologies such as colorblind racism and meritocracy. In doing so, the study used a cross-sectional design and a large sample (N = 2774) of adults from the Swedish labor market to test hypotheses about the investigated concepts. The results of the study provided support for the hypotheses that white fragility, white counterreactions, and institutional resistance are relevant concepts to the understanding of the racial dynamics and the reproduction of racialized inequalities in organizations also outside the North American context (in this case Sweden). In addition, the study shows that white fragility is positively associated with colorblind racism and belief in meritocracy and highlights the role of these ideologies in legitimizing and maintaining workplace inequalities.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people experience higher levels of economic insecurity and poverty compared to non-LGBT people. Social safety net programs may reduce this disparity, but the uptake of these programs among LGBT adults has rarely been assessed. We conducted a secondary data analysis of the 2018–2020 Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey to compare differences in material hardship and social safety net program utilization between LGBT and non-LGBT adults in the United States. LGBT participants were more likely to report lack of an emergency fund, food insecurity, utilities hardship, medical hardship, and multiple material hardships. LGBT adults had higher odds compared to non-LGBT adults of using SNAP, income- or disability-based insurance, SSI or SSDI, and housing assistance. There were no differences in use of WIC, reduced-price/free school lunch benefits, or charitable food. Future studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of the social safety net programs for reducing material hardship.

Drawing on social identity theory (SIT), this study explored social class group identity, intergroup attitudes, and views about social mobility and inequality among socioeconomically and racially/ethnically diverse adults in the U.K. (n = 457) and the U.S. (n = 595). U.K. participants evidenced greater consensus about the social class groups present in their society than did U.S. participants, but lower, working, middle, and upper class were commonly perceived in both contexts, and many participants self-identified as working class (38% U.K., 17% U.S.) or middle class (45% U.K., 47% U.S.) Consistent with SIT, participants in both contexts identified with their social class ingroup (e.g., felt they belonged) and stereotyped it less harshly on dimensions (warmth or competence) on which it was generally negatively stereotyped. Importantly, middle and upper class participants tended to feel more positively (e.g., proud) about their ingroup, and believed society was more fair and equal, and upward mobility more likely, than did lower and working class participants.

The term Islamophobia is used in research studies; however, it is evident many researchers do not similarly use the term and, subsequently, measure the construct. We evaluate measures based upon their alignment with one first definition of Islamophobia that includes: (1) a perceived fear or threat of Islam/Muslims and (2) an engagement in prejudicial attitudes and/or discriminatory actions. We conducted a systematic literature search of 15 databases to identify Islamophobia-related measures used in the literature from 1992 to 2018 (updated 2022). The measures were reviewed to examine alignment with the definition of Islamophobia and their psychometric properties. We identified 12 validated measures of Islamophobia and provided an in-depth review of each measure. Additionally, we cataloged the 249 validated and nonvalidated measures of Islamophobia (N = 24), and the five remaining content areas—prejudicial attitudes (N = 80), discriminatory actions (N = 21), fear of Muslims (N = 23), anti-other group (N = 52), and experiences of discrimination for Muslims (N = 49) by validity, measure structure, and other criteria (Tables 1–12). This systematic review can assist researchers in identifying and selecting the most reliable and valid measure related to their definition of Islamophobia.

This study explored factors affecting affirmative action attitudes. Undergraduates at a Hispanic-Serving Institution completed measures assessing support for Black-targeted and Hispanic-targeted affirmative action, perceived discrimination against Blacks and Hispanics, and demographic information. Prior to completing these measures, some participants were randomly assigned to read 10 facts about current racial inequities. An ANOVA revealed a marginally significant effect of condition (with greater affirmative action support by participants who read facts about racial inequities vs. the control condition), a significant effect of participant race (with greater affirmative action support by Black and Hispanic vs. White participants), and a significant interaction between participant and target race (with greater support of Hispanic-targeted vs. Black-targeted affirmative action by White and Hispanic participants, but no difference in support for Hispanic-targeted vs. Black-targeted affirmative action by Black participants). Regression analyses revealed that affirmative action support was significantly associated with a Democrat affiliation, a Black or Hispanic race, and perceived discrimination against Blacks and Hispanics. These findings are consistent with social dominance theory (whereby group status threat may influence Hispanic affirmative action support) and the altruism-born-of-suffering theory (whereby adverse discriminatory experiences of Blacks may lead to greater empathy and support for affirmative action).

The COVID-19 pandemic has divided societies, especially regarding vaccine mandates. While research suggests that political ideology plays a crucial role in whether people support or oppose COVID-19 countermeasures, the relationship between these attitudes and political ideology remains unclear, with varying results across different countries. The present research focuses on right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) in Germany, examining its role as a predictor. Prior studies highlight that, conservatives and right-wing authoritarians, particularly in the USA, tend to hold more negative attitudes toward COVID-19 countermeasures despite RWA's usual association with unwavering support for state authorities. Therefore, the present survey study (N = 1063) investigated whether trust in politics and science moderates this relationship. Contrary to expectations, the findings revealed that RWA consistently predicted support for vaccine mandates independent of trust levels. Results are discussed about the specifics of the German case and more general relationships between political ideology and the support of state authorities.