Search results

This innovative study develops a feminist perspective on issues such as nationalism, religious fundamentalism and the process of democratization, examining the role of women in varying political contexts around the world.

In this article, we examine psychological features of extreme political ideologies. In what ways are political left- and right-wing extremists similar to one another and different from moderates? We propose and review four interrelated propositions that explain adherence to extreme political ideologies from a psychological perspective. We argue that (a) psychological distress stimulates adopting an extreme ideological outlook; (b) extreme ideologies are characterized by a relatively simplistic, black-and-white perception of the social world; (c) because of such mental simplicity, political extremists are overconfident in their judgments; and (d) political extremists are less tolerant of different groups and opinions than political moderates. In closing, we discuss how these psychological features of political extremists increase the likelihood of conflict among groups in society.

Attempts to explain the nature of ideologies & to specify their functions in society as a whole can be seen as falling into 6 distinct groups: (1) as systems of theoretical propositions purporting to tell how things really are; (2) as systems of normative or evaluating statements; (3) as calculated lies, for the furtherance of particular pol'al purposes; (4) as myths; (5) as expressions of the needs & demands of soc groups; & (6) as expressions of the att's of diff human personality types. The only approach that will always be found to pay a dividend is to preserve an open mind with respect to the diff ways that may lead us to our goal. IPSA.

This study explored the relationships among political ideologies, masculinity ideologies, and shame ideologies within three online communities. Three different ideological communities, all on Reddit (a discussion-based social news website), were chosen based on previous research suggesting they differ in terms of their conceptualizations of gender and support for or rejection of feminism: r/TheRedPill, r/MensRights, and r/MensLib. This study uses a framework for understanding Ideologies as Complex Adaptive Systems (ICAS) as articulated by Thagard (2017), which uses Cognitive and Affective Maps (CAMs) as its primary tool of analysis. Using the postings on the Reddit sites as our raw data, we created CAMs to assist in comparing the conceptual and affective qualities of each community. We conducted the study in three phases: in Phase One, we used Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR) methods and correlational analyses to create a set of general ideological CAMs for each community. We also constructed a set of CAMs depicting whom each group views as ingroups and outgroups in their creation of social identities. In Phase Two, we created a set of CAMs for each community's dominant conception of gender. In Phase Three, we constructed a set of CAMs depicting each community's relationship with the ideas of shame and injustice. The discussion section is organized into five main chapters. The first chapter contains reflections on the process of using CAMs, the next chapter is on the study's limitations and future directions, and the final three are on the study findings' empirical, theoretical, and clinical implications. The empirical implications of the study contribute to the following areas of research: the role of shame in ideology, the political construction of victimhood, and Ambivalent Sexism. In the theoretical implications chapter, I discuss the study's potential contributions to theory development in the CAMs methodology. The final chapter offers reflections on the study's clinical implications, especially related to gender identity development, sexual violence, and the role of ideology in emotion regulation.