Pub Date : 2022-03-01DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000479
Megan Oaten, R. Stevenson, S. Occhipinti, Caley Tapp, Trevor I. Case
Abstract. We aimed to determine (1) the attributes of multiple stigmatized populations, (2) whether Kurzban and Leary’s (2001) functional typology of stigma emerges and identifies the dimensions upon which each stigma type differs, and (3) the emotional responses toward emergent stigma types. Participants ( N = 2,674) were assigned to 1/52 stigma target conditions and their attitudes surveyed. Data were analyzed by multilevel factor analysis with stigma targets at Level 2. There were five within-factors at Level 1 (social competence, interpersonal access, social inclusion, immorality, perceived permanence) and three between-factors at Level 2 (interpersonal stigmatization, morality-based stigmatization, chronic stigmatization). Interpersonal stigmatization was predicted by disgust and pity, and morality-based stigmatization was predicted by disgust and [-]happiness, with no predictors for chronic stigmatization. These results support a functional typology of stigma.
{"title":"The Factorial Structure of Stigma and Its Targets","authors":"Megan Oaten, R. Stevenson, S. Occhipinti, Caley Tapp, Trevor I. Case","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000479","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000479","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. We aimed to determine (1) the attributes of multiple stigmatized populations, (2) whether Kurzban and Leary’s (2001) functional typology of stigma emerges and identifies the dimensions upon which each stigma type differs, and (3) the emotional responses toward emergent stigma types. Participants ( N = 2,674) were assigned to 1/52 stigma target conditions and their attitudes surveyed. Data were analyzed by multilevel factor analysis with stigma targets at Level 2. There were five within-factors at Level 1 (social competence, interpersonal access, social inclusion, immorality, perceived permanence) and three between-factors at Level 2 (interpersonal stigmatization, morality-based stigmatization, chronic stigmatization). Interpersonal stigmatization was predicted by disgust and pity, and morality-based stigmatization was predicted by disgust and [-]happiness, with no predictors for chronic stigmatization. These results support a functional typology of stigma.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86850203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. This study describes two experiments conducted to investigate the modifying effect of trait empathy on attentional processing of emotionally laden (i.e., aggression-related) words in frustrating situations. A dot-probe task was used in the first experiment. The results showed that low-empathy individuals exhibited attentional bias toward aggressive words under both frustrating and nonfrustrating conditions. High-empathy individuals demonstrated attentional bias only under frustrating conditions. In the second experiment, the effect of frustration on high-empathy individuals’ aggression was reflected by N200, P300, and late positive potential amplitudes. It was discussed that these amplitudes might indicate that frustrating situations caused high-empathy individuals to show attentional bias toward aggressive words. Our findings suggested that high-empathy individuals were sensitive to emotionally laden (i.e., aggression-related) stimuli under frustrating conditions.
{"title":"A Modifying Effect of Trait Empathy on Frustration-Related Attentional Processing of Aggression-Related Words","authors":"Wen He, Wenjun Jiang, Jiali Zhu, Yuepei Xu, Huanhuan Zhao","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000480","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This study describes two experiments conducted to investigate the modifying effect of trait empathy on attentional processing of emotionally laden (i.e., aggression-related) words in frustrating situations. A dot-probe task was used in the first experiment. The results showed that low-empathy individuals exhibited attentional bias toward aggressive words under both frustrating and nonfrustrating conditions. High-empathy individuals demonstrated attentional bias only under frustrating conditions. In the second experiment, the effect of frustration on high-empathy individuals’ aggression was reflected by N200, P300, and late positive potential amplitudes. It was discussed that these amplitudes might indicate that frustrating situations caused high-empathy individuals to show attentional bias toward aggressive words. Our findings suggested that high-empathy individuals were sensitive to emotionally laden (i.e., aggression-related) stimuli under frustrating conditions.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83962358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-28DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000469
Paweł Koniak, W. Cwalina
Abstract. Previous research showed that responses to questions about forbidding something differed from those to the seemingly equivalent questions about allowing the same object (forbid/allow asymmetry). We postulate that the effect of the forbid vs. allow framing may be also consequential for the processing of attitude related information and attitude change. The forbid frame (compared with the allow frame) may increase the impact of negative (vs. positive) arguments and/or reduce the impact of initial attitudes on the elaboration the presented information. To test these predictions we conducted three experiments (one preregistered, total N = 655). Participants were reading both pro and con arguments, differing in consistency with their initial attitudes, and concerning three different attitude objects: genetically modified organisms (GMOs), euthanasia, and barbecuing in public places. The results show that the forbid (vs. allow) frame decreases the tendency for generating thoughts prevailingly consistent with participants, initial attitudes (Experiment 2). It also reduces bias in the evaluation and interpretation of the presented arguments and yields more similar assessments of arguments that are consistent and inconsistent with initial attitudes (Experiment 3). As a result, the attitudes are more susceptible to change within the forbid frame (they move more in the direction opposite to the initial attitude) than within the allow frame (Experiments 1-3). The results for the first time show the existence of forbid vs. allow asymmetry in persuasion. This effect has practical consequences, e.g., when designing referenda.
{"title":"Forbid/Allow Asymmetry in Persuasion","authors":"Paweł Koniak, W. Cwalina","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000469","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000469","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Previous research showed that responses to questions about forbidding something differed from those to the seemingly equivalent questions about allowing the same object (forbid/allow asymmetry). We postulate that the effect of the forbid vs. allow framing may be also consequential for the processing of attitude related information and attitude change. The forbid frame (compared with the allow frame) may increase the impact of negative (vs. positive) arguments and/or reduce the impact of initial attitudes on the elaboration the presented information. To test these predictions we conducted three experiments (one preregistered, total N = 655). Participants were reading both pro and con arguments, differing in consistency with their initial attitudes, and concerning three different attitude objects: genetically modified organisms (GMOs), euthanasia, and barbecuing in public places. The results show that the forbid (vs. allow) frame decreases the tendency for generating thoughts prevailingly consistent with participants, initial attitudes (Experiment 2). It also reduces bias in the evaluation and interpretation of the presented arguments and yields more similar assessments of arguments that are consistent and inconsistent with initial attitudes (Experiment 3). As a result, the attitudes are more susceptible to change within the forbid frame (they move more in the direction opposite to the initial attitude) than within the allow frame (Experiments 1-3). The results for the first time show the existence of forbid vs. allow asymmetry in persuasion. This effect has practical consequences, e.g., when designing referenda.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83139181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-21DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000470
Sarah D. McCrackin, Francesca Capozzi, Florence Mayrand, J. Ristic
Abstract. With the widespread adoption of masks, there is a need for understanding how facial obstruction affects emotion recognition. We asked 120 participants to identify emotions from faces with and without masks. We also examined if recognition performance was related to autistic traits and personality. Masks impacted recognition of expressions with diagnostic lower face features the most and those with diagnostic upper face features the least. Persons with higher autistic traits were worse at identifying unmasked expressions, while persons with lower extraversion and higher agreeableness were better at recognizing masked expressions. These results show that different features play different roles in emotion recognition and suggest that obscuring features affects social communication differently as a function of autistic traits and personality.
{"title":"Face Masks Impair Basic Emotion Recognition","authors":"Sarah D. McCrackin, Francesca Capozzi, Florence Mayrand, J. Ristic","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000470","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000470","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. With the widespread adoption of masks, there is a need for understanding how facial obstruction affects emotion recognition. We asked 120 participants to identify emotions from faces with and without masks. We also examined if recognition performance was related to autistic traits and personality. Masks impacted recognition of expressions with diagnostic lower face features the most and those with diagnostic upper face features the least. Persons with higher autistic traits were worse at identifying unmasked expressions, while persons with lower extraversion and higher agreeableness were better at recognizing masked expressions. These results show that different features play different roles in emotion recognition and suggest that obscuring features affects social communication differently as a function of autistic traits and personality.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85386678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-07DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/A000178
R. A. Klein, Kate A. Ratliff, M. Vianello, Reginald B. Adams, Š. Bahník, M. Bernstein, K. Bocian, M. Brandt, B. Brooks, C. Brumbaugh, Z. Cemalcilar, Jesse J. Chandler, Winnee Cheong, W. E. Davis, T. Devos, M. Eisner, Natalia Frankowska, D. Furrow, E. Galliani, F. Hasselman, Joshua A. Hicks, James F. Hovermale, S. J. Hunt, Jeffrey R. Huntsinger, H. Ijzerman, Melissa-Sue John, Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba, H. Kappes, Lacy E. Krueger, Jaime L. Kurtz, C. Levitan, Robyn K. Mallett, Wendy L. Morris, A. J. Nelson, J. Nier, Grant Packard, Ronaldo Pilati, Abraham M. Rutchick, Kathleen Schmidt, Jeanine L. M. Skorinko, Robert W. Smith, Troy G Steiner, Justin Storbeck, Lyn M. Van Swol, Donna M. Thompson, A. V. Veer, L. Vaughn, M. Vranka, A. Wichman, Julie A. Woodzicka, Brian A. Nosek
Although replication is a central tenet of science, direct replications are rare in psychology. This research tested variation in the replicability of thirteen classic and contemporary effects across 36 independent samples totaling 6,344 participants. In the aggregate, ten effects replicated consistently. One effect – imagined contact reducing prejudice – showed weak support for replicability. And two effects – flag priming influencing conservatism and currency priming influencing system justification – did not replicate. We compared whether the conditions such as lab versus online or U.S. versus international sample predicted effect magnitudes. By and large they did not. The results of this small sample of effects suggest that replicability is more dependent on the effect itself than on the sample and setting used to investigate the effect.
{"title":"Investigating Variation in Replicability: A “Many Labs” Replication Project","authors":"R. A. Klein, Kate A. Ratliff, M. Vianello, Reginald B. Adams, Š. Bahník, M. Bernstein, K. Bocian, M. Brandt, B. Brooks, C. Brumbaugh, Z. Cemalcilar, Jesse J. Chandler, Winnee Cheong, W. E. Davis, T. Devos, M. Eisner, Natalia Frankowska, D. Furrow, E. Galliani, F. Hasselman, Joshua A. Hicks, James F. Hovermale, S. J. Hunt, Jeffrey R. Huntsinger, H. Ijzerman, Melissa-Sue John, Jennifer A. Joy-Gaba, H. Kappes, Lacy E. Krueger, Jaime L. Kurtz, C. Levitan, Robyn K. Mallett, Wendy L. Morris, A. J. Nelson, J. Nier, Grant Packard, Ronaldo Pilati, Abraham M. Rutchick, Kathleen Schmidt, Jeanine L. M. Skorinko, Robert W. Smith, Troy G Steiner, Justin Storbeck, Lyn M. Van Swol, Donna M. Thompson, A. V. Veer, L. Vaughn, M. Vranka, A. Wichman, Julie A. Woodzicka, Brian A. Nosek","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/A000178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/A000178","url":null,"abstract":"Although replication is a central tenet of science, direct replications are rare in psychology. This research tested variation in the replicability of thirteen classic and contemporary effects across 36 independent samples totaling 6,344 participants. In the aggregate, ten effects replicated consistently. One effect – imagined contact reducing prejudice – showed weak support for replicability. And two effects – flag priming influencing conservatism and currency priming influencing system justification – did not replicate. We compared whether the conditions such as lab versus online or U.S. versus international sample predicted effect magnitudes. By and large they did not. The results of this small sample of effects suggest that replicability is more dependent on the effect itself than on the sample and setting used to investigate the effect.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89651187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding others is a key component of successful social interactions, and declines in social abilities during later life can lead to social isolation and loneliness. We investigated the relationship between different sub-components of social cognition and loneliness in a large sample of older adults. We tested perspective-taking and mentalizing skills, alongside self-reported loneliness and social functioning. Results revealed a significant effect of loneliness on older adults’ ability to resist egocentric interference when taking others’ perspectives. However, this effect was eliminated when age was added to models, which suggests that egocentric tendencies increase with age, and people experience increasing levels of loneliness and feelings of social isolation with increasing age. Mentalizing and interference from others’ perspectives were not influenced by loneliness or age.
{"title":"Exploring the relationship between loneliness and social cognition in older age","authors":"H. Ferguson, Martina De Lillo, Andrew K. Martin","doi":"10.31234/osf.io/ru3dm","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ru3dm","url":null,"abstract":"Understanding others is a key component of successful social interactions, and declines in social abilities during later life can lead to social isolation and loneliness. We investigated the relationship between different sub-components of social cognition and loneliness in a large sample of older adults. We tested perspective-taking and mentalizing skills, alongside self-reported loneliness and social functioning. Results revealed a significant effect of loneliness on older adults’ ability to resist egocentric interference when taking others’ perspectives. However, this effect was eliminated when age was added to models, which suggests that egocentric tendencies increase with age, and people experience increasing levels of loneliness and feelings of social isolation with increasing age. Mentalizing and interference from others’ perspectives were not influenced by loneliness or age.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84772351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000473
Adam K. Fetterman, N. L. Muscanell, Dongjie Wu, K. Sassenberg
Abstract. Intellectually humble behavior, like admitting when you are wrong, leads to better impression formation. However, online social networks (OSNs) have changed the impression formation process. We investigated the impact of wrongness admission on impression formation during an OSN argument. In four experiments ( N = 679), participants witnessed a user engage in wrongness admission, refuse to admit, or not respond, in an argument on a Facebook wall. Participants reported their impressions of whether they would be willing to interact with the (non)admitting user. User reputation ratings and interaction intentions were higher in the admission (vs. nonadmission) condition. The latter effect was mediated by user reputation ratings. Wrongness admission appears to have a positive impact on impression formation on OSNs.
{"title":"When You Are Wrong on Facebook, Just Admit It","authors":"Adam K. Fetterman, N. L. Muscanell, Dongjie Wu, K. Sassenberg","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000473","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000473","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Intellectually humble behavior, like admitting when you are wrong, leads to better impression formation. However, online social networks (OSNs) have changed the impression formation process. We investigated the impact of wrongness admission on impression formation during an OSN argument. In four experiments ( N = 679), participants witnessed a user engage in wrongness admission, refuse to admit, or not respond, in an argument on a Facebook wall. Participants reported their impressions of whether they would be willing to interact with the (non)admitting user. User reputation ratings and interaction intentions were higher in the admission (vs. nonadmission) condition. The latter effect was mediated by user reputation ratings. Wrongness admission appears to have a positive impact on impression formation on OSNs.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75299370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000472
M. Sekerdej, Roger Giner-Sorolla
Abstract. Interpersonal research has shown that guilt motivates perpetrators to compensate victims at the expense of a third party, indicating that the emotion’s goal involves reparative outcomes rather than self-mortification. However, this motivation has yet to be tested in an intergroup context. Based on findings about ingroup wrongdoing, compensation was expected to draw primarily on shame rather than guilt. Three experiments (total N = 617) showed that participants only allocated more to the victims versus their own group when compensation was assigned from a third party’s rather than their own group’s resources. There was also evidence that shame was felt, and related to compensating victims, more strongly than guilt, whether at the expense of the ingroup or the third party.
{"title":"Members of Transgressor Groups Prefer Reparations to Come From Third Parties","authors":"M. Sekerdej, Roger Giner-Sorolla","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000472","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000472","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Interpersonal research has shown that guilt motivates perpetrators to compensate victims at the expense of a third party, indicating that the emotion’s goal involves reparative outcomes rather than self-mortification. However, this motivation has yet to be tested in an intergroup context. Based on findings about ingroup wrongdoing, compensation was expected to draw primarily on shame rather than guilt. Three experiments (total N = 617) showed that participants only allocated more to the victims versus their own group when compensation was assigned from a third party’s rather than their own group’s resources. There was also evidence that shame was felt, and related to compensating victims, more strongly than guilt, whether at the expense of the ingroup or the third party.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81296330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-01-01DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000471
Martin H. Jones, Toby J. Cooke, J. Symonds
Abstract. As adolescents desire the benefits of having greater social status, some teenagers cannot acquire their desired level of popularity. The current study uses a single high school to examine how the discrepancy between popularity goals and actual popularity aligns with aggression and prosocial behaviors. The current study suggests that the discrepancy between popularity and popularity goals aligns with having more aggression and prosocial behaviors when adolescents are in less popular peer groups. Within one’s own peer group, adolescents with greater discrepancy between popularity and popularity goals utilize more aggression. The results provide additional insight toward understanding how pursuing popularity might align with using aggression and prosocial behaviors toward peers in school.
{"title":"Not Getting What You Want","authors":"Martin H. Jones, Toby J. Cooke, J. Symonds","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000471","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000471","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. As adolescents desire the benefits of having greater social status, some teenagers cannot acquire their desired level of popularity. The current study uses a single high school to examine how the discrepancy between popularity goals and actual popularity aligns with aggression and prosocial behaviors. The current study suggests that the discrepancy between popularity and popularity goals aligns with having more aggression and prosocial behaviors when adolescents are in less popular peer groups. Within one’s own peer group, adolescents with greater discrepancy between popularity and popularity goals utilize more aggression. The results provide additional insight toward understanding how pursuing popularity might align with using aggression and prosocial behaviors toward peers in school.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74932159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-16DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000462
Annalisa Theodorou, A. Kosic
Abstract. Several studies demonstrated that a high need for closure (NFC) is associated with higher prejudice toward the out-group. This study aims to investigate how this effect can be moderated by attributions of morality to the in-group and the out-group. A questionnaire was administered to 725 participants. The results showed a positive relationship between NFC and prejudice when the in-group was evaluated as more moral than the out-group. This relationship was weaker when the out-group was evaluated as more moral than the in-group. These findings implicated that it is possible to reduce prejudice in individuals with high NFC by manipulating perceptions of in-group and out-group morality.
{"title":"Need for Closure, Morality, and Prejudice","authors":"Annalisa Theodorou, A. Kosic","doi":"10.1027/1864-9335/a000462","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000462","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Several studies demonstrated that a high need for closure (NFC) is associated with higher prejudice toward the out-group. This study aims to investigate how this effect can be moderated by attributions of morality to the in-group and the out-group. A questionnaire was administered to 725 participants. The results showed a positive relationship between NFC and prejudice when the in-group was evaluated as more moral than the out-group. This relationship was weaker when the out-group was evaluated as more moral than the in-group. These findings implicated that it is possible to reduce prejudice in individuals with high NFC by manipulating perceptions of in-group and out-group morality.","PeriodicalId":47278,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74325337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","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：