British Journal of Social Psychology最新文献

The paper reports the results of registered conceptual replications of the indirect effect of institutional trust in the relationship between precarity and the endorsement of conspiracy beliefs (CB). The original study of Adam-Troian et al. (2023; British Journal of Social Psychology, 62(S1), 136-159) indicated that subjective appraisals of economic hardship are associated with lower trust in governments and institutions, which in turn is associated with stronger endorsement of CB. Our Studies 1 to 3 report a series of replications using Slovak panel data. Study 4 reports a replication of the mediation model using data from the European Social Survey Round 10 collected in 17 countries. To provide a quantitative synthesis of these and previous results, we conducted mini meta-analysis (N = 50,340). Although the strength of the observed relationships differed across the studies to some degree, the original patterns of relations remained robust, supporting the original model. The study corroborates the view that to curb the spread of CB, it is necessary to address structural issues, such as growing financial insecurity, socioeconomic inequalities, and the deficit of institutional trust. Finally, we discuss the role of cultural and political settings in conditioning the mechanisms through which precarity enhances the endorsement of CB.

Identity fusion – a powerful form of group alignment – is a strong predictor of using violence to defend the ingroup. However, recent theorizing suggests, in the absence of outgroup threat, fusion may instead promote intergroup trust and cooperation. Across five studies we find evidence that fusion to a range of groups (e.g., country, football team) was consistently positively associated with a willingness to trust others generally, trust outgroup members, and social exploration. An internal meta-analysis indicated that fusion was more strongly associated with trust and social exploration, compared to several measures of group identification. These findings provide support for the fusion-secure base hypothesis (Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2023, 27(2), 107–127) and suggest that fusion has the potential to increase a willingness to interact with, and trust, outgroup members.

Quantification, that is, the shaping of human environments in numerical terms, is so widespread in contemporary societies that it has contaminated almost all spheres of human life. We explore the links between performance quantification and individuals' feelings of being treated in a dehumanized way, that is, metadehumanization. We present an integrative research that assessed the relationships between performance quantification, metadehumanization, and on two of metadehumanization's consequences, that is, stress and disidentification, in three contexts, that is, organizations, sport, and social networks. In addition, we test the moderating roles of two individual variables, that is, competitiveness and tender-mindedness, in this model. In three samples (Ns = 204, 300, 297, for Samples A, B, and C, respectively), we show a mediation effect of metadehumanization on the links between performance quantification and stress and disidentification that holds despite of contextual variations. Unexpectedly, our two moderated mediation hypotheses did not hold or showed inconsistent effects across samples.

Building on the seminal studies of Solomon Asch and Muzafer Sherif, recent research has advanced our understanding of the mechanisms underlying social influence by applying a diffusion model analysis. Here, we combined the social identity approach to social influence with a diffusion model analysis to unravel the mechanisms underlying social influence. In particular, we aimed to disentangle whether the difference between in-group and out-group influence on perceptual decision-making is driven by a judgmental bias (i.e., changes in decision criteria) or a perceptual bias (i.e., changes in the uptake of sensory information). Preregistered analyses indicated that in-groups exerted stronger social influence than out-groups because in-groups induced a stronger perceptual bias than out-groups. This finding is in line with the single process assumption of the social identity approach because it implicates that the single process driving social influence (i.e., self-categorisation) translates into a change in a single subprocess of decision-making (i.e., biased information uptake). In conclusion, our results highlight that our theoretical understanding of social influence can be expanded by integrating the social identity approach with a diffusion model analysis.

This article introduces the Perceived Economic Scarcity Scale (PESS), a novel instrument measuring the subjective evaluation and experience of economic scarcity (the feeling of having insufficient financial resources to meet one's needs). We conducted three high-powered preregistered studies (total N = 1900) to rigorously evaluate the PESS's psychometric properties. In Study 1, we generated a pool of items and used both Principal Component Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis to select the most appropriate items. In Study 2, we examined the PESS's construct validity, demonstrating that it measures a distinct construct from related constructs such as subjective social class. In Study 3, we examined the PESS's predictive validity, demonstrating that it is a robust predictor of both affective outcomes (e.g. anxiety-depressive symptoms) and cognitive outcomes (e.g. economic risk-taking). Critically, we found that the PESS not only has incremental validity over and above income but also has greater predictive utility than income. We also found that the PESS score varies depending on the distance-to-pay and has excellent test–retest reliability. Overall, the PESS appears to be a valid and reliable instrument for assessing perceived economic scarcity, and we encourage researchers to use it to better understand the psychological consequences of ‘not having enough’.

With the general aggression model (GAM), Anderson and Bushman (2002) provided an integrative framework to explain the complex nature of aggression. Based on the GAM, we examined whether personological and situational factors (interactively) have an impact on the person's internal state (consisting of aggressive cognition, affect, and physiological arousal), which in turn is assumed to lead to aggressive behaviour. In a large-scale experience sampling study, 403 participants answered 7558 questionnaires over a period of 2 weeks. As hypothesized, participants were more likely to exhibit an aggressive internal state the higher they scored on antagonistic personality traits (trait aggression, narcissism, psychopathy, sadism, anger rumination) and the more interpersonal, intrapersonal, and environmental triggers they experienced. Aggressive behaviour was positively related to trait aggression, psychopathy, sadism, anger rumination, and all situational triggers. Furthermore, the impact of antagonistic personality traits and situational triggers on aggressive behaviour was considerably reduced when the aggressive internal state was taken into account. Contrary to predictions, the relationship between antagonistic personality traits and the aggressive internal state was most pronounced when situational triggers were low. Overall, however, the process by which personal and situational variables predict aggression in daily life can be well explained by the GAM.

Throughout the course of scholarly history, some concepts have been notoriously hard to define. The ‘common good’ is one such concept. While the common good has a long and contested scholarly history, social psychology research on folk theories – lay beliefs that represent an individual's informal and subjective understanding of the world – may provide a key for unlocking this nebulous concept. In the current paper, we analysed lay definitions of the common good using the linguistic inquiry and word count's meaning extraction method. From a nationally representative Australian sample of open-ended text responses (n = 14,303), we uncovered a consistent conceptual structure, with nine themes corresponding to three core aspects: (i) outcomes and objects, (ii) principles and processes and (iii) stakeholders and beneficiaries. From this, we developed a working definition of the folk concept of the common good: ‘achieving the best possible outcome for the largest number of people, which is underpinned by decision-making that is ethically and morally sound and varies by the context in which the decisions are made’. A working definition benefits the academic community and society more broadly, particularly when diverse stakeholders come together to act for the common good to address shared challenges.

The notion of tolerance is widely embraced in plural contexts, but little is known about how majority members interpret the toleration of minorities. With four studies, we investigated majority group members' interpretations of a minority toleration situation (compared to full acceptance and discrimination situations) as a function of outgroup threat. Study 1 (N = 214) showed that higher perception of threat from Syrian refugees was associated with Turkish natives' stronger likelihood of interpreting a refugee toleration situation as ‘acceptance’. Studies 2 (N = 161, threatening context: Syrian refugees-Turkish natives) and 3 (N = 206, non-threatening context: homosexuals-liberal heterosexual students) demonstrated that toleration was interpreted more as a form of acceptance in a high-threat context, whereas it was perceived more like discrimination in the non-threatening context. Experimental Study 4 (N = 150, pre-registered, Muslims-Christians in the UK) indicated that increasing outgroup threat led to higher legitimization of toleration, which, in turn, related to lower support of minority rights. It is concluded that outgroup threat affects how people interpret the way in which minorities are treated, which has implications for initiatives and policies that try to stimulate tolerance towards minority groups.

According to the subordinate male target hypothesis (SMTH), racism is based on an ethnicity-by-gender interaction, with a stronger link between experiencing racist discrimination and subordinate or dominant ethnic group status for men compared to women. This study reevaluates the SMTH, originally focused on objective discrimination, by applying it to self-reported active harm as a theoretically derived measure of racist discrimination and by exploring interindividual differences in female ethnic minority members' discriminatory experiences. We proposed that social dominance orientation (SDO) among female ethnic minorities would influence SMTH predictions. We tested this using multiple linear regression analyses among a sample of New Zealand Europeans as the majority in New Zealand and non-Europeans as the minority. As hypothesized, male non-Europeans reported disproportionally more active harm than female non-Europeans. Unexpectedly, not only female but also male, non-Europeans high in SDO reported more active harm than non-Europeans low in SDO. Therefore, applied to self-reported racist experiences, oppression of ethnic minorities is driven by interindividual differences rather than by gender. Together, these findings provide evidence that the SMTH cannot be unreservedly extended to reports of racist discrimination and that other processes may underlie these subjective experiences of discrimination that need to be considered in more detail.

Deceiving others is generally viewed as immoral. However, most people lie on a daily basis. This article examines the psychological consequences for the liars themselves, as they are participating in what is generally perceived as immoral behaviour. More specifically, this article focuses on the effects of lying on the liar's self-esteem and affect. We tested if lying, in comparison to telling the truth, lowers people's self-esteem and increases negative experienced affect. In total, three cross sectional and one longitudinal studies were conducted (N = 783). Results showed that lying decreased people's self-esteem and increased negative affect, regardless of the type of lie (self-centred vs. other-oriented). Furthermore, lying on a given day decreased people's self-esteem compared to their self-esteem on the previous day and to their average level of self-esteem across 5 days.