关于变化的世界观:它们的结构及其对理解对可持续性、技术和政治变化的反应的含义

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Asian Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2023-06-28 DOI:10.1111/ajsp.12574
Paul G. Bain, Renata Bongiorno, Kellie Tinson, Alanna Heanue, Ángel Gómez, Yanjun Guan, Nadezhda Lebedeva, Emiko Kashima, Roberto González, Sylvia Xiaohua Chen, Sheyla Blumen, Yoshihisa Kashima
{"title":"关于变化的世界观:它们的结构及其对理解对可持续性、技术和政治变化的反应的含义","authors":"Paul G. Bain,&nbsp;Renata Bongiorno,&nbsp;Kellie Tinson,&nbsp;Alanna Heanue,&nbsp;Ángel Gómez,&nbsp;Yanjun Guan,&nbsp;Nadezhda Lebedeva,&nbsp;Emiko Kashima,&nbsp;Roberto González,&nbsp;Sylvia Xiaohua Chen,&nbsp;Sheyla Blumen,&nbsp;Yoshihisa Kashima","doi":"10.1111/ajsp.12574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>People hold different perspectives about how they think the world is changing or should change. We examined five of these “worldviews” about change: Progress, Golden Age, Endless Cycle, Maintenance, and Balance. In Studies 1–4 (total <i>N</i> = 2733) we established reliable measures of each change worldview, and showed how these help explain when people will support or oppose social change in contexts spanning sustainability, technological innovations, and political elections. In mapping out these relationships we identify how the importance of different change worldviews varies across contexts, with Balance most critical for understanding support for sustainability, Progress/Golden Age important for understanding responses to innovations, and Golden Age uniquely important for preferring Trump/Republicans in the 2016 US election. These relationships were independent of prominent individual differences (e.g., values, political orientation for elections) or context-specific factors (e.g., self-reported innovativeness for responses to innovations). Study 5 (<i>N</i> = 2140) examined generalizability in 10 countries/regions spanning five continents, establishing that these worldviews exhibited metric invariance, but with country/region differences in how change worldviews were related to support for sustainability. These findings show that change worldviews can act as a general “lens” people use to help determine whether to support or oppose social change.</p>","PeriodicalId":47394,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajsp.12574","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Worldviews about change: Their structure and their implications for understanding responses to sustainability, technology, and political change\",\"authors\":\"Paul G. Bain,&nbsp;Renata Bongiorno,&nbsp;Kellie Tinson,&nbsp;Alanna Heanue,&nbsp;Ángel Gómez,&nbsp;Yanjun Guan,&nbsp;Nadezhda Lebedeva,&nbsp;Emiko Kashima,&nbsp;Roberto González,&nbsp;Sylvia Xiaohua Chen,&nbsp;Sheyla Blumen,&nbsp;Yoshihisa Kashima\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajsp.12574\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>People hold different perspectives about how they think the world is changing or should change. We examined five of these “worldviews” about change: Progress, Golden Age, Endless Cycle, Maintenance, and Balance. In Studies 1–4 (total <i>N</i> = 2733) we established reliable measures of each change worldview, and showed how these help explain when people will support or oppose social change in contexts spanning sustainability, technological innovations, and political elections. In mapping out these relationships we identify how the importance of different change worldviews varies across contexts, with Balance most critical for understanding support for sustainability, Progress/Golden Age important for understanding responses to innovations, and Golden Age uniquely important for preferring Trump/Republicans in the 2016 US election. These relationships were independent of prominent individual differences (e.g., values, political orientation for elections) or context-specific factors (e.g., self-reported innovativeness for responses to innovations). Study 5 (<i>N</i> = 2140) examined generalizability in 10 countries/regions spanning five continents, establishing that these worldviews exhibited metric invariance, but with country/region differences in how change worldviews were related to support for sustainability. These findings show that change worldviews can act as a general “lens” people use to help determine whether to support or oppose social change.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47394,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Social Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajsp.12574\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajsp.12574\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajsp.12574","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们对世界如何变化或应该如何变化持有不同的观点。我们研究了关于变化的五种“世界观”:进步、黄金时代、无尽循环、维持和平衡。在研究1-4(总N = 2733)中,我们建立了每一种变化世界观的可靠测量方法,并展示了这些方法如何帮助解释人们在可持续性、技术创新和政治选举等背景下何时支持或反对社会变革。在绘制这些关系时,我们确定了不同变化世界观在不同背景下的重要性,其中平衡对于理解对可持续性的支持最为关键,进步/黄金时代对于理解对创新的反应至关重要,而黄金时代对于在2016年美国大选中偏爱特朗普/共和党人尤为重要。这些关系独立于突出的个体差异(例如,价值观、选举的政治倾向)或特定环境因素(例如,对创新的反应自我报告的创新程度)。研究5 (N = 2140)考察了跨越五大洲的10个国家/地区的普遍性,确定了这些世界观表现出度量不变性,但在世界观变化与可持续发展支持的关系上存在国家/地区差异。这些发现表明,改变世界观可以作为人们用来帮助决定是否支持或反对社会变革的一般“镜头”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Worldviews about change: Their structure and their implications for understanding responses to sustainability, technology, and political change

People hold different perspectives about how they think the world is changing or should change. We examined five of these “worldviews” about change: Progress, Golden Age, Endless Cycle, Maintenance, and Balance. In Studies 1–4 (total N = 2733) we established reliable measures of each change worldview, and showed how these help explain when people will support or oppose social change in contexts spanning sustainability, technological innovations, and political elections. In mapping out these relationships we identify how the importance of different change worldviews varies across contexts, with Balance most critical for understanding support for sustainability, Progress/Golden Age important for understanding responses to innovations, and Golden Age uniquely important for preferring Trump/Republicans in the 2016 US election. These relationships were independent of prominent individual differences (e.g., values, political orientation for elections) or context-specific factors (e.g., self-reported innovativeness for responses to innovations). Study 5 (N = 2140) examined generalizability in 10 countries/regions spanning five continents, establishing that these worldviews exhibited metric invariance, but with country/region differences in how change worldviews were related to support for sustainability. These findings show that change worldviews can act as a general “lens” people use to help determine whether to support or oppose social change.

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
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Social Psychology publishes empirical papers and major reviews on any topic in social psychology and personality, and on topics in other areas of basic and applied psychology that highlight the role of social psychological concepts and theories. The journal coverage also includes all aspects of social processes such as development, cognition, emotions, personality, health and well-being, in the sociocultural context of organisations, schools, communities, social networks, and virtual groups. The journal encourages interdisciplinary integration with social sciences, life sciences, engineering sciences, and the humanities. The journal positively encourages submissions with Asian content and/or Asian authors but welcomes high-quality submissions from any part of the world.
期刊最新文献
Internationalising imperatives and decolonising aspirations: Navigating social psychology teaching in Asia Past, present and future: Colonial comparative victimhood hinders reconciliation with Chinese Indonesians through prejudice among natives Embodied spatial metaphor of cultural concept from the perspective of cultural tightness–looseness: Cultural compatibility concept is closer to the body From marital conflict to life satisfaction: How basic psychological need satisfaction operates—A dyadic analysis study Hierarchical drift‐diffusion modelling uncovers differences of valenced self‐evaluation
×
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学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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