Aoife‐Marie Foran, Aisling T. O’Donnell, Dearbhla Moroney, O. Muldoon
While political apologies cannot undo what has been done, they are often perceived as highly relevant for healing and reconciliation. However, these apologies are often mired in controversy and highly political. While research on political apologies has focused on the role of intergroup relations, limited research has explored the intragroup dynamics involved. The present article explores how the paradoxical features of a political apology to ingroup members have their source in partisanship. The analysis used methods derived from discursive psychology. Using data from six parliamentary statements that were given in response to the political apology offered to Irish mother and baby home survivors, we demonstrated how these speakers constructed and understood the apology and how these constructions relate to their own political positions. Specifically, the apology to mothers and babies is used for political purpose, allowing majority members of government to position the wrongdoings experienced by mothers and babies in the past and to encourage the national collective to move on. Others seeking progressive social change—a parliamentary minority—use the apology to shape a political narrative that demands national collective action. Our work highlights the important role that identity‐based power relations play in confronting historical injustice, and how this may result in a dual schism with people within a nation becoming divided over both the apology and the appropriate response.
{"title":"When saying sorry is not enough: The paradox of a political apology offered to Irish mother and baby home survivors","authors":"Aoife‐Marie Foran, Aisling T. O’Donnell, Dearbhla Moroney, O. Muldoon","doi":"10.1111/pops.13012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13012","url":null,"abstract":"While political apologies cannot undo what has been done, they are often perceived as highly relevant for healing and reconciliation. However, these apologies are often mired in controversy and highly political. While research on political apologies has focused on the role of intergroup relations, limited research has explored the intragroup dynamics involved. The present article explores how the paradoxical features of a political apology to ingroup members have their source in partisanship. The analysis used methods derived from discursive psychology. Using data from six parliamentary statements that were given in response to the political apology offered to Irish mother and baby home survivors, we demonstrated how these speakers constructed and understood the apology and how these constructions relate to their own political positions. Specifically, the apology to mothers and babies is used for political purpose, allowing majority members of government to position the wrongdoings experienced by mothers and babies in the past and to encourage the national collective to move on. Others seeking progressive social change—a parliamentary minority—use the apology to shape a political narrative that demands national collective action. Our work highlights the important role that identity‐based power relations play in confronting historical injustice, and how this may result in a dual schism with people within a nation becoming divided over both the apology and the appropriate response.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141830115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
People seem willing to censor disagreeable political and moral ideas. Five studies explore why people engage in political censorship and test a potential route to decreasing censorship. While Americans report being generally supportive of free speech and against censorship (Study 1), we find that people censor material that seems harmful and false (Study 2), which are often ideas from political opponents (Study 3). Building on work demonstrating the perceived truth of harmful experiences (i.e., experiences of victimization), we test an experience‐sharing intervention to reduce censorship. Among college students, the intervention indirectly decreased students' willingness to censor controversial campus speakers' ideas, through reducing beliefs that these speakers were sharing harmful and false ideas related to gun policy (Study 4). We also find benefits of sharing harmful experiences related to the abortion debate. Americans were less willing to censor and report the social media posts of opponents who base their views on experiences of victimization rather than scientific findings (Study 5).
{"title":"Political censorship feels acceptable when ideas seem harmful and false","authors":"Emily Kubin, Christian von Sikorski, Kurt Gray","doi":"10.1111/pops.13011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13011","url":null,"abstract":"People seem willing to censor disagreeable political and moral ideas. Five studies explore why people engage in political censorship and test a potential route to decreasing censorship. While Americans report being generally supportive of free speech and against censorship (Study 1), we find that people censor material that seems harmful and false (Study 2), which are often ideas from political opponents (Study 3). Building on work demonstrating the perceived truth of harmful experiences (i.e., experiences of victimization), we test an experience‐sharing intervention to reduce censorship. Among college students, the intervention indirectly decreased students' willingness to censor controversial campus speakers' ideas, through reducing beliefs that these speakers were sharing harmful and false ideas related to gun policy (Study 4). We also find benefits of sharing harmful experiences related to the abortion debate. Americans were less willing to censor and report the social media posts of opponents who base their views on experiences of victimization rather than scientific findings (Study 5).","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141679436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Annayah M. B. Prosser, Saffron O’Neill, Lorraine Whitmarsh, J. Bolderdijk, Tim Kurz, Leda Blackwood
Moralized minority actors can play important roles in social change processes by rejecting majority social norms and modeling alternative societal pathways. However, being a minority actor can be difficult, often resulting in stigma, derogation, and hostility from the majority group. For actions intrinsically linked with daily life (e.g., eating), such social obstacles might become so great that individuals acting alone experience activist burnout' and social isolation, and may stop pursuing social change altogether. Event‐based interventions are a promising (yet currently understudied) avenue for ameliorating these negative consequences and maintaining minority‐driven social change. Through on‐site field interviews (N = 20), we explore how attending an identity‐centering mass gathering (“The Vegan Campout”) acts to validate and empower a minority group (vegans) seeking social change. We show how the event functioned as a space where vegan identity, food, and action were centered and celebrated, in stark contrast to vegans' experiences of a majority meat‐eating society, where they often experienced negativity. Experiencing a 'temporary social majority' context provided important respite for vegans to gain strength, rekindle their vegan identities, and (re)affirm their commitment to activism. Our findings provide insight into the benefits of identity‐centering events for sustaining social change efforts among moralized minority groups.
{"title":"Overcoming (vegan) burnout: Mass gatherings can provide respite and rekindle shared identity and social action efforts in moralized minority groups","authors":"Annayah M. B. Prosser, Saffron O’Neill, Lorraine Whitmarsh, J. Bolderdijk, Tim Kurz, Leda Blackwood","doi":"10.1111/pops.13009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13009","url":null,"abstract":"Moralized minority actors can play important roles in social change processes by rejecting majority social norms and modeling alternative societal pathways. However, being a minority actor can be difficult, often resulting in stigma, derogation, and hostility from the majority group. For actions intrinsically linked with daily life (e.g., eating), such social obstacles might become so great that individuals acting alone experience activist burnout' and social isolation, and may stop pursuing social change altogether. Event‐based interventions are a promising (yet currently understudied) avenue for ameliorating these negative consequences and maintaining minority‐driven social change. Through on‐site field interviews (N = 20), we explore how attending an identity‐centering mass gathering (“The Vegan Campout”) acts to validate and empower a minority group (vegans) seeking social change. We show how the event functioned as a space where vegan identity, food, and action were centered and celebrated, in stark contrast to vegans' experiences of a majority meat‐eating society, where they often experienced negativity. Experiencing a 'temporary social majority' context provided important respite for vegans to gain strength, rekindle their vegan identities, and (re)affirm their commitment to activism. Our findings provide insight into the benefits of identity‐centering events for sustaining social change efforts among moralized minority groups.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141341778","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Dealing with uncertainty and cognitive biases in international politics","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/pops.13004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141339294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Scholarly research on emotions tackles various domains, among which opposition to immigration ranks as socially and politically critical. While earlier literature captures distinct aspects of this domain, certain emotions are less studied than others, primarily compassion. By focusing on the unique role of compassion in comparison with anger and anxiety, we tackle how and under which conditions compassion changes social distancing and political preferences regarding refugees. Drawing on representative data collected in Turkey—the country with the highest number of Syrian refugees—we test whether feelings of compassion toward refugees can hold back the escalation in opposition to immigration as a result of heightened threat. Our results show that compassion functions as the key to lowering the negative effects of perceived threat in shaping refugees' social and political integration.
{"title":"Perceived threat, compassion, and public evaluations toward refugees","authors":"Cengiz Erişen, Duygu Merve Uysal","doi":"10.1111/pops.13010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13010","url":null,"abstract":"Scholarly research on emotions tackles various domains, among which opposition to immigration ranks as socially and politically critical. While earlier literature captures distinct aspects of this domain, certain emotions are less studied than others, primarily compassion. By focusing on the unique role of compassion in comparison with anger and anxiety, we tackle how and under which conditions compassion changes social distancing and political preferences regarding refugees. Drawing on representative data collected in Turkey—the country with the highest number of Syrian refugees—we test whether feelings of compassion toward refugees can hold back the escalation in opposition to immigration as a result of heightened threat. Our results show that compassion functions as the key to lowering the negative effects of perceived threat in shaping refugees' social and political integration.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141343104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Geoffrey C. Layman, David E. Campbell, Levi G. Allen
As America grows more secular, secularism is increasingly relevant for American political attitudes and behavior. In this article, we contend that secularism—conceptualized as the affirmative embrace of secular belief and identity—is distinct from nonreligiosity, which is simply the absence of religion. We also argue that, at present, secularism is primarily a psychological, and not a social, orientation. Secular belonging and behavior are quite rare and generally unimportant politically, but secular belief and identity are far more prevalent and politically relevant. We examine the relationships that secular belief and identity, secular behavior, and nonreligiosity have with political orientations. Secular belief and identity have a much stronger and more consistent political connection than do secular behavior or nonreligiosity. Then, operationalizing secularism simply as secular belief and identity, we assess its connection to contemporary conspiracy beliefs and to support for democratic values. We find that secularists disavow most conspiracy theories and support the core democratic values of participatory democracy, freedom of expression, and political tolerance. Secularism's connection to political tolerance and support for freedom of expression is quite interesting because it is very different from those of liberal ideology and Democratic partisanship.
{"title":"The secular voter: Secularism and political attitudes in the United States","authors":"Geoffrey C. Layman, David E. Campbell, Levi G. Allen","doi":"10.1111/pops.13007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.13007","url":null,"abstract":"As America grows more secular, secularism is increasingly relevant for American political attitudes and behavior. In this article, we contend that secularism—conceptualized as the affirmative embrace of secular belief and identity—is distinct from nonreligiosity, which is simply the absence of religion. We also argue that, at present, secularism is primarily a psychological, and not a social, orientation. Secular belonging and behavior are quite rare and generally unimportant politically, but secular belief and identity are far more prevalent and politically relevant. We examine the relationships that secular belief and identity, secular behavior, and nonreligiosity have with political orientations. Secular belief and identity have a much stronger and more consistent political connection than do secular behavior or nonreligiosity. Then, operationalizing secularism simply as secular belief and identity, we assess its connection to contemporary conspiracy beliefs and to support for democratic values. We find that secularists disavow most conspiracy theories and support the core democratic values of participatory democracy, freedom of expression, and political tolerance. Secularism's connection to political tolerance and support for freedom of expression is quite interesting because it is very different from those of liberal ideology and Democratic partisanship.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141271118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
W. M. L. Finlay, J. Cattier, K. Donois, L. Goodings, E. Kaminskiy, C. Owen, L. Storey, V. Swami
Acknowledging the victims on both sides of a conflict is crucial to peacebuilding and reconciliation. However, recognizing the victims of one community can challenge an opposing group's conflict narrative, particularly when their own group is seen as the primary victim. Suggestions of inclusive victimhood and blame can also threaten the sense of distinctiveness of each group's experience, leading to resistance. This article examines the conflict that arose when historical victimhood was discussed in the online comments sections of U.K. newspapers in response to the 2021 Coroner's Inquest into the Ballymurphy massacre. We focus on one common turn in sectarian argument in Northern Ireland: “Whatabouteries,” and the conflict that arises when whatabouteries appear in discussions. We describe the variety of forms whatabouteries—and responses to them—can take and analyze two extended conflict sequences in which they occur. Responses to such posts often invoke an implicit norm in these discussions: That when the victims of one group are publicly recognized in truth‐finding mechanisms, raising the issue of the opposing group's victims is illegitimate and can be treated as an act of provocation. This illustrates the need for sensitivity and an understanding of local, context‐specific norms when discussing victimhood and violence.
{"title":"Norms concerning the recognition of victimhood in postconflict societies: An analysis of “whatabouteries” in online sectarian arguments","authors":"W. M. L. Finlay, J. Cattier, K. Donois, L. Goodings, E. Kaminskiy, C. Owen, L. Storey, V. Swami","doi":"10.1111/pops.12988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12988","url":null,"abstract":"Acknowledging the victims on both sides of a conflict is crucial to peacebuilding and reconciliation. However, recognizing the victims of one community can challenge an opposing group's conflict narrative, particularly when their own group is seen as the primary victim. Suggestions of inclusive victimhood and blame can also threaten the sense of distinctiveness of each group's experience, leading to resistance. This article examines the conflict that arose when historical victimhood was discussed in the online comments sections of U.K. newspapers in response to the 2021 Coroner's Inquest into the Ballymurphy massacre. We focus on one common turn in sectarian argument in Northern Ireland: “Whatabouteries,” and the conflict that arises when whatabouteries appear in discussions. We describe the variety of forms whatabouteries—and responses to them—can take and analyze two extended conflict sequences in which they occur. Responses to such posts often invoke an implicit norm in these discussions: That when the victims of one group are publicly recognized in truth‐finding mechanisms, raising the issue of the opposing group's victims is illegitimate and can be treated as an act of provocation. This illustrates the need for sensitivity and an understanding of local, context‐specific norms when discussing victimhood and violence.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141127294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The unusually loyal supporters of Donald Trump are often described as a cult. How can we understand this extreme phenomenon in U.S. politics? We develop theoretical expectations and use the Big Five personality dimensions to investigate whether Trump's most loyal supporters share personality characteristics that might make them inclined to cult‐like support. We find that (1) Trump's supporters share high levels of Conscientiousness; (2) this is substantively and statistically distinguishable from the commonly identified association between Conscientiousness and Conservatism; and (3) the association is highly robust to a range of sensitivity tests. Our main findings are robust across two surveys. Study 1 is an online survey conducted in 2021 designed specifically for this project. Study 2 is the 2016 American National Election Study (ANES).
{"title":"The personality of a personality cult? Personality characteristics of Donald Trump's most loyal supporters","authors":"Benjamin E. Goldsmith, Lars J. K. Moen","doi":"10.1111/pops.12991","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12991","url":null,"abstract":"The unusually loyal supporters of Donald Trump are often described as a cult. How can we understand this extreme phenomenon in U.S. politics? We develop theoretical expectations and use the Big Five personality dimensions to investigate whether Trump's most loyal supporters share personality characteristics that might make them inclined to cult‐like support. We find that (1) Trump's supporters share high levels of Conscientiousness; (2) this is substantively and statistically distinguishable from the commonly identified association between Conscientiousness and Conservatism; and (3) the association is highly robust to a range of sensitivity tests. Our main findings are robust across two surveys. Study 1 is an online survey conducted in 2021 designed specifically for this project. Study 2 is the 2016 American National Election Study (ANES).","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140980382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Political participation (PP) has been found to be associated with socioeconomic status (SES) indicators, most strongly with educational attainment. At the same time, previous research has been inconclusive regarding potentially biasing effects of personality and cognitive characteristics on this association. In the present study, we investigated the association between different forms of youth PP and attained SES, taking youth's and parents' individual characteristics into account. We used data from 983 German twin families with same‐sex twin pairs of emerging adults (aged 21–25) that provided information on electoral, nonelectoral individual and collective political participation as well as on youth's and their parents relevant personality and cognitive characteristics. After adjusting for youth's and parents' individual characteristics, regression analyses showed educational attainment and household income to be solely significantly associated with emerging adults' electoral political participation. Genetically informative analyses revealed confoundedness due to shared environmental factors for electoral PP and due to genetic factors for individual and collective PP. Depending on the form of PP, the covariance between attained SES indicators and youth's PP mostly or fully overlapped with variance in political interest, general cognitive ability, and/or openness to experience. Findings are discussed against the backdrop of genotype‐environment interplay.
{"title":"Accounting for the association between socioeconomic status and youth political participation: A twin family study","authors":"Alexandra Zapko-Willmes, Yannis Theocharis","doi":"10.1111/pops.12987","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12987","url":null,"abstract":"Political participation (PP) has been found to be associated with socioeconomic status (SES) indicators, most strongly with educational attainment. At the same time, previous research has been inconclusive regarding potentially biasing effects of personality and cognitive characteristics on this association. In the present study, we investigated the association between different forms of youth PP and attained SES, taking youth's and parents' individual characteristics into account. We used data from 983 German twin families with same‐sex twin pairs of emerging adults (aged 21–25) that provided information on electoral, nonelectoral individual and collective political participation as well as on youth's and their parents relevant personality and cognitive characteristics. After adjusting for youth's and parents' individual characteristics, regression analyses showed educational attainment and household income to be solely significantly associated with emerging adults' electoral political participation. Genetically informative analyses revealed confoundedness due to shared environmental factors for electoral PP and due to genetic factors for individual and collective PP. Depending on the form of PP, the covariance between attained SES indicators and youth's PP mostly or fully overlapped with variance in political interest, general cognitive ability, and/or openness to experience. Findings are discussed against the backdrop of genotype‐environment interplay.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140982525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In recent years, reactionary movements have overtaken the politics of western democracies and developing countries alike. Using the United States is a case in point, we offer a theory of what motivates reactionary movements. While controlling for conventional individual‐level accounts of reactionary psychological dispositions, we offer a fresh explanation: status threat. We argue that status threat, a reaction to rapid sociocultural change on the part of dominant groups, pushes some members of these groups into joining and supporting reactionary movements and parties, respectively. We first outline the social psychology of the group (White, Christian, patriarchal, native born, heteronormative) that animates a movement (MAGA) that, in turn, has taken over a party (the GOP). We then test a wide range of hypotheses using two original data sets, finding robust evidence to support our claim: status threat is a major source of the increasing fractionalization of American society and politics, one that threatens American democracy.
{"title":"Status threat: The core of reactionary politics","authors":"Christopher Sebastian Parker, Howard Lavine","doi":"10.1111/pops.12983","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12983","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, reactionary movements have overtaken the politics of western democracies and developing countries alike. Using the United States is a case in point, we offer a theory of what motivates reactionary movements. While controlling for conventional individual‐level accounts of reactionary psychological dispositions, we offer a fresh explanation: status threat. We argue that status threat, a reaction to rapid sociocultural change on the part of dominant groups, pushes some members of these groups into joining and supporting reactionary movements and parties, respectively. We first outline the social psychology of the group (White, Christian, patriarchal, native born, heteronormative) that animates a movement (MAGA) that, in turn, has taken over a party (the GOP). We then test a wide range of hypotheses using two original data sets, finding robust evidence to support our claim: status threat is a major source of the increasing fractionalization of American society and politics, one that threatens American democracy.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140985810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：