Personality and Social Psychology Review最新文献

Public abstract: How do people make judgments about actions that violate moral norms yet maximize the greater good (e.g., sacrificing the well-being of a small number of people for the well-being of a larger number of people)? Research on this question has been criticized for relying on highly artificial scenarios and for conflating multiple distinct factors underlying responses in moral dilemmas. The current article reviews research that used a computational modeling approach to disentangle the roles of multiple distinct factors in responses to plausible moral dilemmas based on real-world events. By disentangling sensitivity to consequences, sensitivity to moral norms, and general preference for inaction versus action in responses to realistic dilemmas, the reviewed work provides a more nuanced understanding of how people make judgments about the right course of action in moral dilemmas.

Academic abstract: Despite increased popular and academic interest, there is conceptual ambiguity about what allyship is and the forms it takes. Viewing allyship as a practice, we introduce the typology of allyship action which organizes the diversity of ways that advantaged individuals seek to support those who are disadvantaged. We characterize allyship actions as reactive (addressing bias when it occurs) and proactive (fostering positive outcomes such as feelings of inclusion, respect, and capacity), both of which can vary in level of analysis (i.e., targeting oneself, one or a few other individuals, or institutions). We use this framework to profile six productive yet largely independent bodies of social psychological literature on social action and directly compare relative benefits and constraints of different actions. We suggest several future directions for empirical research, using the typology of allyship to understand when, where, and how different forms of allyship might succeed.

Public abstract: Despite increased popular and academic interest in the word, people differ in what they believe allyship is and the forms it takes. Viewing allyship as a practice, we introduce a new way (the typology of allyship action) to describe how advantaged individuals seek to support those who are disadvantaged. We characterize allyship actions as reactive (addressing bias when it occurs) and proactive (increasing positive outcomes such as feelings of inclusion, respect, and capacity), both of which can vary in level (i.e., targeting oneself, one or a few other individuals, or institutions). We use this framework to profile six large yet mostly separate areas of social psychological research on social action and directly compare the relative benefits and limitations of different actions. We suggest several future directions for how the typology of allyship action can help us understand when, where, and how different forms of allyship might succeed.

Academic abstract: Humans frequently engage in mental time travel, reflecting on the past and anticipating the future. Although these processes may seem similar, research documents systematic differences between retrospection and prospection. We propose a conceptual framework to organize and explain these differences based on three axiomatic temporal asymmetries: The past occurs before the future; the past is more certain than the future; and the past is less controllable than the future. People's experience with these axiomatic differences is internalized and overgeneralized to shape mental representations of the past and future. Our review shows that people generally prioritize prospection over retrospection, attending more to the future than the past and reacting more intensely to future events than to past events. We consider potential moderators of and constraints on the generality of prioritizing prospection. We explore the implications of these temporal asymmetries, emphasizing their theoretical and practical significance.

Public abstract: While daily life centers on the present, people often reflect on the past and anticipate the future. But which direction of mental time travel-backward or forward-has more influence? We identify three key differences that shape how people engage with the past and future: time flows from past to future, the future is more uncertain, and people have more control over the future. These differences affect the frequency, intensity, and nature of thoughts and feelings, leading to predictable biases in how we mentally represent and emotionally engage with events over time. Because focusing on the future often provides greater benefits, people tend to prioritize prospection over retrospection in everyday life.

Public abstract: Our thoughts, behaviors, and well-being are deeply influenced by the economic system we live in-capitalism. While psychologists have explored capitalist ideologies like neoliberalism, they often overlook capitalism's core foundations driving inequality. This work argues that capitalism, rooted in Western colonial history, generates powerful cultural narratives prioritizing profit, competition, and private ownership. These capitalist principles manifest as pervasive societal mindsets obsessed with personal gain, viewing life as a zero-sum rivalry, and deriving self-worth from possessions. Collectively, they breed an individualistic syndrome of selfish striving at the expense of community. By understanding how these capitalist cultural forces psychologically shape us, maintaining oppressive societal hierarchies, we can reimagine economic systems that truly uplift the human spirit across all peoples and the planet we share. Unveiling capitalism's influence is crucial to recover from its alienating effects and envision liberating alternatives.

Academic abstract: The present article discusses victimization, perpetration, and denial in mass atrocities, using four recent case studies from Southeast Asia. The four cases include Indonesia (in which hundreds of thousands died in anti-Communist violence), Cambodia (in which the Khmer Rouge killed more than one million civilians), East Timor (in which more than one hundred thousand civilians died during the Indonesian occupation), and Myanmar (in which the state/army is accused of genocide toward the Rohingyas). Our aim is to bring a psychological lens to these histories, with a focus on three processes relevant to genocide. We examine, first, how the victims were targeted; second, how the perpetrators were mobilized; and third, the denial, justification, meaning-making, and commemoration of the atrocities. We propose a novel theoretical model, TOPASC: A Theory of the Psychology of Atrocities in Societal Contexts, highlighting the psychology of atrocities as involving factors across the macro, meso, and micro contexts.

Public abstract: We introduce a new model, "TOPASC: A Theory of the Psychology of Atrocities in Societal Contexts," to explain why people justify mass killings and why certain group members are consistently targeted. In our model, we explore how mass atrocities against specific groups are influenced by psychological dynamics in intergroup situations which, in turn, are shaped by socio-historical contexts and individual psychologies. To illustrate these ideas, we analyze four cases of mass atrocities in Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Cambodia, East Timor, and Myanmar. These cases highlight how different social groups, characterized by diverse ideologies, ethnicities, genders, or religions, exhibit varying vulnerabilities as perpetrators or victims based on their social and power status. Mass atrocities are not sudden occurrences but rather result from a series of complex processes and events.

Academic abstract: Stronger theory on the nature of human well-being is needed, especially as well-being indicators are increasingly utilized in policy contexts. Building on Erik Allardt, who argued that a theory of well-being is, in essence, a theory of human nature, I propose four modes of existence each capturing one dimension central to human well-being: Having recognizes humans as biological creatures requiring certain material resources for survival. Loving captures human social nature and our dependence on others for well-being. Doing highlights the active and agentic nature of human existence. Being acknowledges humans as experiencing their existence. Each mode of existence gives rise to a few more specific needs, and a full assessment of human well-being requires both subjective and objective indicators tapping into these needs. The proposed theory integrates psychological well-being research with sociological and philosophical traditions and contributes to debates about how the progress of nations and sustainability should be measured.

Public abstract: Well-being is something we all value individually, and it is also a key political goal. Accordingly, how we define and measure well-being influences what physicians, managers, policy-makers, politicians, and international organizations aim to improve through their work. Better theories of well-being make better measurement of well-being possible, which makes possible more effective and evidence-based advancement of human well-being. In this spirit, the present article argues that there are four fundamental dimensions to human well-being: Having highlights that as biological creatures, we have physical needs, loving highlights human social needs, doing highlights that we are active and agentic beings with goals and strivings, and being highlights that we feel and evaluate our lives. To assess well-being, we need measures tapping into all four of these dimensions. And to assess the sustainability of well-being, we need to examine how to provide well-being for all humanity while remaining within planetary boundaries.

Academic abstract: We articulate an intergenerational model of positive psychosocial development that centers storytelling in an ecological framework and is motivated by an orientation toward social justice. We bring together diverse literature (e.g., racial-ethnic socialization, family storytelling, narrative psychology) to argue that the intergenerational transmission of stories about one's group is equally important for elders and youth, and especially important for groups who are marginalized, because stories provide a developmental resource for resistance and resilience in the face of injustice. We describe how storytelling activities can support positive psychosocial development in culturally dynamic contexts and illustrate our model with a case study involving LGBTQ+ communities, arguing that intergenerational storytelling is uniquely important for this group given issues of access to stories. We argue that harnessing the power of intergenerational storytelling could provide a culturally safe and sustaining practice for fostering psychosocial development among LGBTQ+ people and other equity-seeking populations.

Public abstract: Understanding one's identity as part of a group with shared history and culture that has existed through time is important for positive psychological functioning. This is especially true for marginalized communities for whom identity-relevant knowledge is often erased, silenced, or distorted in mainstream public discourses (e.g., school curricula, news media, television, and film). To compensate for these limitations around access, one channel for the transmission of this knowledge is through oral storytelling between generations of elders and youth. Contemporary psychological science has often assumed that such storytelling occurs within families, but when families cannot or would not share such knowledge, youth suffer. We present a model of intergenerational storytelling that expands our ideas around who counts as "family" and how knowledge can be transmitted through alternative channels, using LGBTQ+ communities as a case example.