当受害者被分类为外群体和内群体时,群体层面的观点采取对不公正标准和共情关注的影响

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2020-05-20 DOI:10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096
Anca M. Miron, N. Branscombe, David A. Lishner, Anthony C. Otradovec, S. Frankowski, Haley R. Bowers, Brittany L. Wierzba, Madison Malcore
{"title":"当受害者被分类为外群体和内群体时,群体层面的观点采取对不公正标准和共情关注的影响","authors":"Anca M. Miron, N. Branscombe, David A. Lishner, Anthony C. Otradovec, S. Frankowski, Haley R. Bowers, Brittany L. Wierzba, Madison Malcore","doi":"10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We investigated the effects of group-level perspective taking when the target is an outgroup versus an ingroup. Men and women adopted the perspective of women suffering from wage inequality or remained objective. Men set lower injustice standards (i.e., required less evidence to conclude that gender inequality was unfair) and experienced higher empathic concern for women when they adopted women’s perspective. For women, these perspective-taking effects were similar if they imagined the situation of an outgroup (Experiment 2) but were small or negligible when they imagined the situation of an ingroup (Experiments 1–4). Results suggest that group-level perspective-taking effects on empathic concern and injustice standards require the perception of a distinction between the group-level self and the target group.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Group-Level Perspective-Taking Effects on Injustice Standards and Empathic Concern When the Victims Are Categorized as Outgroup Versus Ingroup\",\"authors\":\"Anca M. Miron, N. Branscombe, David A. Lishner, Anthony C. Otradovec, S. Frankowski, Haley R. Bowers, Brittany L. Wierzba, Madison Malcore\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract We investigated the effects of group-level perspective taking when the target is an outgroup versus an ingroup. Men and women adopted the perspective of women suffering from wage inequality or remained objective. Men set lower injustice standards (i.e., required less evidence to conclude that gender inequality was unfair) and experienced higher empathic concern for women when they adopted women’s perspective. For women, these perspective-taking effects were similar if they imagined the situation of an outgroup (Experiment 2) but were small or negligible when they imagined the situation of an ingroup (Experiments 1–4). Results suggest that group-level perspective-taking effects on empathic concern and injustice standards require the perception of a distinction between the group-level self and the target group.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2020.1768096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要本研究考察了外群体与内群体对群体层面视角采取的影响。男性和女性采取了妇女遭受工资不平等或保持客观的观点。男性设定的不公正标准较低(即,得出性别不平等是不公平的结论所需的证据较少),当他们采用女性的观点时,他们对女性的同情程度更高。对于女性来说,当她们想象外群体的情况时(实验2),这些换位思考的影响是相似的,但当她们想象内群体的情况时(实验1-4),这些影响很小或可以忽略不计。结果表明,群体层面的换位思考对共情关注和不公正标准的影响需要群体层面的自我和目标群体之间的区别。
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
Group-Level Perspective-Taking Effects on Injustice Standards and Empathic Concern When the Victims Are Categorized as Outgroup Versus Ingroup
Abstract We investigated the effects of group-level perspective taking when the target is an outgroup versus an ingroup. Men and women adopted the perspective of women suffering from wage inequality or remained objective. Men set lower injustice standards (i.e., required less evidence to conclude that gender inequality was unfair) and experienced higher empathic concern for women when they adopted women’s perspective. For women, these perspective-taking effects were similar if they imagined the situation of an outgroup (Experiment 2) but were small or negligible when they imagined the situation of an ingroup (Experiments 1–4). Results suggest that group-level perspective-taking effects on empathic concern and injustice standards require the perception of a distinction between the group-level self and the target group.
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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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