文化关税:挪用和跨越文化界限的权利

IF 4.7 2区 化学 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY ACS Applied Polymer Materials Pub Date : 2024-02-21 DOI:10.1177/00031224231225665
Abraham Oshotse, Yael Berda, Amir Goldberg
{"title":"文化关税:挪用和跨越文化界限的权利","authors":"Abraham Oshotse, Yael Berda, Amir Goldberg","doi":"10.1177/00031224231225665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Why are some acts of cultural boundary-crossing considered permissible whereas others are repudiated as cultural appropriation? We argue that perceptions of cultural appropriation formed in response to the emergence of cultural omnivorousness as a dominant form of high-status consumption, making boundary-crossing a source of cultural capital. Consequently, the right to adopt a practice from a culture that is not one’s own is determined on the basis of the costs and benefits one is presumed to accrue. People express disapproval at boundary-crossing if they believe it devalues or extracts value at the expense of the target culture. We call this process cultural tariffing. We test our theory in a between-subject experimental design, demonstrating that individuals who enjoy a privileged social position, as inferred from their social identity or socioeconomic status, have less normative latitude to cross cultural boundaries. This is explained by perceptions that these actors are either devaluing or exploiting the target culture. While symbolic boundaries and cultural distinction theories are inconsistent with our results, we find that Americans who are disenchanted about group-based social mobility are the most likely to be outraged by cultural boundary-crossing. Cultural tariffing, we therefore posit, is a form of symbolic redistribution.","PeriodicalId":7,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Polymer Materials","volume":"194 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cultural Tariffing: Appropriation and the Right to Cross Cultural Boundaries\",\"authors\":\"Abraham Oshotse, Yael Berda, Amir Goldberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00031224231225665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Why are some acts of cultural boundary-crossing considered permissible whereas others are repudiated as cultural appropriation? We argue that perceptions of cultural appropriation formed in response to the emergence of cultural omnivorousness as a dominant form of high-status consumption, making boundary-crossing a source of cultural capital. Consequently, the right to adopt a practice from a culture that is not one’s own is determined on the basis of the costs and benefits one is presumed to accrue. People express disapproval at boundary-crossing if they believe it devalues or extracts value at the expense of the target culture. We call this process cultural tariffing. We test our theory in a between-subject experimental design, demonstrating that individuals who enjoy a privileged social position, as inferred from their social identity or socioeconomic status, have less normative latitude to cross cultural boundaries. This is explained by perceptions that these actors are either devaluing or exploiting the target culture. While symbolic boundaries and cultural distinction theories are inconsistent with our results, we find that Americans who are disenchanted about group-based social mobility are the most likely to be outraged by cultural boundary-crossing. Cultural tariffing, we therefore posit, is a form of symbolic redistribution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Polymer Materials\",\"volume\":\"194 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Polymer Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224231225665\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Polymer Materials","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224231225665","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为什么有些文化跨界行为被认为是允许的,而另一些则被斥为文化挪用?我们认为,对文化挪用的看法是随着文化杂食性作为一种主流的高地位消费形式的出现而形成的,这使得跨界成为一种文化资本的来源。因此,采用非本民族文化习俗的权利是根据人们假定的成本和收益来决定的。如果人们认为跨界行为贬低了目标文化的价值或以目标文化为代价获取了价值,他们就会对这种行为表示反对。我们将这一过程称为文化关税化。我们在主体间实验设计中检验了我们的理论,结果表明,根据社会身份或社会经济地位推断出的享有特权社会地位的个体,其跨越文化界限的规范性自由度较低。这是因为人们认为这些行为者贬低或利用了目标文化。虽然符号边界和文化差异理论与我们的研究结果不一致,但我们发现,对基于群体的社会流动性感到失望的美国人最有可能对文化越界行为感到愤怒。因此,我们认为文化关税是一种象征性的再分配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cultural Tariffing: Appropriation and the Right to Cross Cultural Boundaries
Why are some acts of cultural boundary-crossing considered permissible whereas others are repudiated as cultural appropriation? We argue that perceptions of cultural appropriation formed in response to the emergence of cultural omnivorousness as a dominant form of high-status consumption, making boundary-crossing a source of cultural capital. Consequently, the right to adopt a practice from a culture that is not one’s own is determined on the basis of the costs and benefits one is presumed to accrue. People express disapproval at boundary-crossing if they believe it devalues or extracts value at the expense of the target culture. We call this process cultural tariffing. We test our theory in a between-subject experimental design, demonstrating that individuals who enjoy a privileged social position, as inferred from their social identity or socioeconomic status, have less normative latitude to cross cultural boundaries. This is explained by perceptions that these actors are either devaluing or exploiting the target culture. While symbolic boundaries and cultural distinction theories are inconsistent with our results, we find that Americans who are disenchanted about group-based social mobility are the most likely to be outraged by cultural boundary-crossing. Cultural tariffing, we therefore posit, is a form of symbolic redistribution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
6.00%
发文量
810
期刊介绍: ACS Applied Polymer Materials is an interdisciplinary journal publishing original research covering all aspects of engineering, chemistry, physics, and biology relevant to applications of polymers. The journal is devoted to reports of new and original experimental and theoretical research of an applied nature that integrates fundamental knowledge in the areas of materials, engineering, physics, bioscience, polymer science and chemistry into important polymer applications. The journal is specifically interested in work that addresses relationships among structure, processing, morphology, chemistry, properties, and function as well as work that provide insights into mechanisms critical to the performance of the polymer for applications.
期刊最新文献
Issue Publication Information Issue Editorial Masthead Highly Stable Mesoporous Poly(styrene-divinylbenzene) Sulfonic Acid Resins for Efficient Dealkylation of Di-tert-butyl-cresol Micellar Copolymerization Toughened MXene Hybrid PHEAA Hydrogel with Antibacterial and Antifouling Performances for Flexible Sensing Multifunctional Integration and High Dimensional Stability in EVA Foam via Dynamic Ionic Cross-Linking Network
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1