Journal of Social Psychology最新文献

To some, measures to curb COVID-19 were reasonable and prudent; to others, they were unacceptable signs of losing a more symbolic battle. We propose that such symbolic thinking is key to how people perceive reality. We report three studies (total N = 5535 across eight countries, conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic) linking what we term Symbolic Show of Strength (SSS) in the context of COVID (SSS-COVID) with several important outcomes. Across countries, SSS-COVID was the strongest predictor of perception of COVID-19's danger, attitudes toward vaccines, and belief in COVID-related misinformation in multiple regressions taking into a host of other reasoning and sociopolitical variables. In a fourth study (N = 430) we adapt the concept to attitudes toward cryptocurrency, with SSS-Crypto uniquely predicting perceived risk of cryptocurrency, general conspiracy beliefs, and preferences for autocratic government. Our results also suggest that SSS shapes perceptions of products, marketing ethics, and symbols more broadly.

We investigate whether exposure to a woman who expresses anger about gender inequality is negatively evaluated and undermines collective action for gender equality. Research suggests that women are derogated when they express anger because this emotion violates feminine social norms and communal gender roles. Across two studies (Study 1 N = 227; Study 2 N = 254), participants were exposed to a speech from a woman political candidate discussing gender inequality. Participants evaluated the candidate more negatively, and were less willing to engage in collective action with her when she expressed anger about gender inequality compared to no anger. We also examined whether this finding could be attenuated when the candidate expressed anger about gender inequality for communal reasons and found partial support. Our findings suggest that we need to tackle the narrow expectations of what it means to be a woman to facilitate collective action for greater gender equality.

The study examines the impact of hostile and benevolent sexism on attitudes toward public versus private breastfeeding. According to ambivalent sexism theory, we hypothesized that hostile sexism would result in disapproval of public breastfeeding, while benevolent sexism would be linked to approval of private breastfeeding. A sample of 4,143 German adults completed questionnaires about their attitudes toward public breastfeeding, including general approval, acceptance of breastfeeding in different settings, and evaluative reactions to mothers breastfeeding in public. The results showed that the view of public breastfeeding was generally positive. Hostile sexism was consistently associated with opposition to breastfeeding, regardless of location. Contrary to expectations, benevolent sexism was negatively related to breastfeeding in private and public settings. These results emphasize the importance of addressing sexist beliefs to reduce prejudice and stigmatization of breastfeeding women.

The current study sought to extend an understanding of how individual differences related to hedonic (pleasure-oriented) purchase goals affect persuasion and ad liking. Specifically, we investigated the effect of differences in consumers' hedonic versus utilitarian goals and the desire to engage in purchase-related conversations (conversational tendencies) on responses to advertisements with either a hedonic or utilitarian focus. We also examined feelings of missing out as a factor that leads to a preference for hedonic messaging. Our experiment (N = 286) measured consumer goals and conversational tendencies and then randomly assigned participants to see either a hedonic or utilitarian ad. Hedonic goal seekers and those with a greater fear of missing out showed a higher preference for hedonic advertisements, but conversational tendencies (the tendency to talk about the purchase category) did not create a difference in ad preference.

Latinx Americans are often stereotyped as perpetual foreigners, perceived as low in both ethnic nationalism (shared heritage and language) and civic nationalism (commitment to national ideals). We examine whether displaying national symbols on clothing affects perceptions of their nationalism. In Study 1 (N = 302), participants rated images of a White or Latinx man wearing a U.S. Army symbol or no symbol. The Latinx man was rated lower in both types of nationalism compared to the White man. However, displaying a national symbol increased perceptions of civic nationalism for both, and ethnic nationalism specifically for the Latinx man. Study 2 (N = 301) replicated these results, showing that a Latinx man wearing an American flag was perceived as higher in ethnic and civic nationalism than without a symbol. These findings demonstrate that trait-related symbols can influence the traits and behaviors attributed to members of groups stereotypically perceived as lacking them.

The purpose of this research was to examine people's fear and perception of threat toward artificial intelligence (AI) as a function of various psychological features attributed to it. To investigate this, participants (Exp. 1, N = 206) read descriptions of AI with high or low cognitive and emotional capabilities. They were most (least) averse to AI described as having the strongest (weakest) of these capabilities (Exp. 1). Similarly, in Experiment 2, a representative U.S. sample (N = 686) was more afraid of and threatened by AI described as having equally strong cognitive and emotional capabilities than AI described as with weaker capabilities (weak cognition, strong emotion), but that pattern was reversed when the faculties were attributed to pharmacologically altered humans. These findings provide evidence for competing predictions about the configuration of these faculties to evoke negateve responses. Furthermore, they provide a novel test of these competing predictions applied to AI.

To understand how laypeople define empathy, Hall, Schwartz, and Duong (2021) asked U.S. participants to rate how well items from various empathy measures matched their own definitions. The current paper (N = 549) is a replication of Hall, Schwartz, and Duong (2021, Study 2) using a highly similar study procedure, with a small extension consisting of items from an emotional contagion scale. We conducted a multi-group CFA to test the replicability of Hall et al.'s model, but the factor structure was not replicated. As an extension, we conducted an exploratory graph analysis (EGA), that revealed a similar factor structure, though some items were discarded due to poor fit. Additionally, the ranking of the items (i.e. what the participants saw as closest to their definition of empathy) shows the same pattern as in the original study. We consider this to be a successful partial replication of Hall et al.'s (2021) findings.

Empathy is susceptible to contextual cues that alter empathic reactions. When empathy is associated with unbearable discomfort, anticipated emotional pain, or financial burden, people tend to downregulate it. Reduced empathy has destructive consequences, but to date, the contextual antecedents of reduced empathy in close relationships due to perceived costs remain unexplored. In three studies (N = 733), we examined how the perceived cost of empathy influenced empathic responses toward close friends. When empathizing with a friend involved sharing negative emotions or where the friend hindered a valuable opportunity, participants consistently showed reduced empathy for friends. Moreover, they allocated less time to spend with their friends. These findings suggest that the perceived cost undermines empathic experiences in friendship. When people perceive a downside of empathy, their close friends may no longer be within the sphere of empathic concern.

In this paper, we use data from a longitudinal online study to examine how characteristics of prosocial behaviors influence the level of positive affect they produce. Although much work has found that prosocial behaviors benefit those who enact them, the question remains if and how these effects vary based on characteristics of those acts. Using models that adjust for co-occurrence among act characteristics, we find that positive affect produced by prosocial acts is greater for those acts that: involve giving money or items, are seen as unusually kind, elicit positive feedback, and are varied over time. However, we find that the actor's relationship to the beneficiary, reaping benefits from prosocial acts, and the number of successive acts made no difference in terms of resultant positive affect. We conclude with a discussion of potential mechanisms explaining these differing effects and explore practical implications for kindness interventions.

This study tested the notion of ideological asymmetry, which proposes that conservatives are more prejudiced than liberals. It involved 682 self-identified conservative (n = 383) and liberal (n = 299) perceivers (MTurk workers; 54% female) who evaluated a target person's professional attributes, personal character, and job suitability based on the target's social media posts. The results did not support ideological asymmetry as both conservative and liberal participants negatively evaluated an ideologically opposite target. Interestingly, liberals showed three times more bias than conservatives. This study better supports a worldview conflict hypothesis, an alternative to ideological asymmetry, with both sides showing indirect aggression in an apolitical setting.