交际中的系统辩护:想象对话接受性研究

IF 1.9 Q2 COMMUNICATION Communication Research Reports Pub Date : 2021-03-15 DOI:10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039
A. C. Cargile, Adam S. Kahn
{"title":"交际中的系统辩护:想象对话接受性研究","authors":"A. C. Cargile, Adam S. Kahn","doi":"10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT According to system justification theory, system-threatening messages decrease the legitimacy of the status quo. Thus, individuals who endorse system justice beliefs will employ a variety of system justification behaviors when encountering such messages. In this study, we hypothesized that such behaviors include resisting dialogue with an interlocuter who propounds a system-threatening message. To test this, a sample of MTurk respondents was randomly assigned to listen to one genuine testimony of an African-American male (either system-threatening or neutral in content) and then completed a nine-item measure of imagined dialogue receptivity. Results demonstrated that participants with above-average justice beliefs reported less dialogue receptivity toward the speaker with system-threatening, compared to neutral, testimony. We interpret these findings to indicate that system justification does indeed play a significant role in people’s attitudes toward communication.","PeriodicalId":47084,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research Reports","volume":"38 1","pages":"103 - 111"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"System justification in communication: a study of imagined dialogue receptivity\",\"authors\":\"A. C. Cargile, Adam S. Kahn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT According to system justification theory, system-threatening messages decrease the legitimacy of the status quo. Thus, individuals who endorse system justice beliefs will employ a variety of system justification behaviors when encountering such messages. In this study, we hypothesized that such behaviors include resisting dialogue with an interlocuter who propounds a system-threatening message. To test this, a sample of MTurk respondents was randomly assigned to listen to one genuine testimony of an African-American male (either system-threatening or neutral in content) and then completed a nine-item measure of imagined dialogue receptivity. Results demonstrated that participants with above-average justice beliefs reported less dialogue receptivity toward the speaker with system-threatening, compared to neutral, testimony. We interpret these findings to indicate that system justification does indeed play a significant role in people’s attitudes toward communication.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication Research Reports\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"103 - 111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication Research Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2021.1891039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

根据制度正当性理论,制度威胁性信息降低了现状的正当性。因此,认同系统正义信念的个体在遇到这样的信息时会采取各种系统正当化行为。在这项研究中,我们假设这些行为包括拒绝与提出威胁系统信息的对话者对话。为了验证这一点,一组土耳其裔受访者被随机分配去听一名非裔美国男性的真实证词(要么是威胁体制的证词,要么是内容中立的证词),然后完成一项包含9个项目的想象对话接受度测试。结果表明,与中立的证词相比,具有高于平均水平的正义信念的参与者对具有系统威胁的说话者的对话接受度较低。我们对这些发现的解释表明,制度辩护确实在人们对沟通的态度中起着重要作用。
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
System justification in communication: a study of imagined dialogue receptivity
ABSTRACT According to system justification theory, system-threatening messages decrease the legitimacy of the status quo. Thus, individuals who endorse system justice beliefs will employ a variety of system justification behaviors when encountering such messages. In this study, we hypothesized that such behaviors include resisting dialogue with an interlocuter who propounds a system-threatening message. To test this, a sample of MTurk respondents was randomly assigned to listen to one genuine testimony of an African-American male (either system-threatening or neutral in content) and then completed a nine-item measure of imagined dialogue receptivity. Results demonstrated that participants with above-average justice beliefs reported less dialogue receptivity toward the speaker with system-threatening, compared to neutral, testimony. We interpret these findings to indicate that system justification does indeed play a significant role in people’s attitudes toward communication.
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
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Extending the communication during sexual activity model: what role does sexual communication self-efficacy play? Conflict styles within individualistic, low power distance, and low context nations: a four nation comparison Science terms elicit ideological differences in message processing Development and validation of the commitment to social activism scale using the Thurstone scaling procedure Patient perceptions of healthcare provider (un)helpful approaches to explaining health information
×
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