Suchergebnisse

The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice aims to answer the questions: why is prejudice so persistent? How does it affect people exposed to it? And what can we do about it? Providing a comprehensive examination of prejudice from its evolutionary beginnings and environmental influences through to its manifestations and consequences, this handbook is an essential resource for scholars and students who are passionate about understanding prejudice, social change, collective action, and prejudice reduction. Featuring cutting-edge research from top scholars in the field, the chapters provide an overview of psychological models of prejudice; investigate prejudice in specific domains such as race, religion, gender, and appearance; and develop explicit, evidence-based strategies for disrupting the processes that produce and maintain prejudice. This handbook challenges researchers and readers to move beyond their comfort zone, and sets the agenda for future avenues of research, policy, and intervention.

It is commonly accepted that social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) are potent unique predictors of a variety of prejudice and prejudice-related constructs. However, contrary to some predictions, there has been little evidence that these constructs interact to produce this outcome-they appear to be additive but not interactive in their prediction of prejudice. We extend the interaction hypothesis to consideration of another broadly relevant construct-political ideology. Drawing from 14 independent New Zealand-based samples, we show, through meta-analysis and multilevel random coefficient modelling, that SDO and RWA additively and interactively predict levels of political conservatism operationalised in a variety of ways. Specifically, both constructs are associated with increasing political conservatism, and the lowest levels of conservatism (or highest levels of political liberalism) are found in those lowest in both SDO and RWA. Adapted from the source document.

Two sets of concerns were expressed in commentary about Liu & Sibley's (2012) article on self‐sacrifice in the face of global warming. Statistical issues can be addressed with a better understanding of Multilevel Random Coefficient Models. We hold that in accord with the theory of planned behavior, it is more likely that beliefs about the importance of global warming predict intentions for willingness to make sacrifices rather than the reverse, and that given this presumed causal direction, the strength of this effect is moderated by cross‐national differences on the human development index. Conceptually, we agree that measuring pro‐environmental action in accord with self‐interest and/or requiring greater effort but not self‐sacrifice would provide a more complete picture.

The failure of the 2009 Copenhagen Summit to produce a greenhouse gas emissions accord highlights the fact that consensus and expertise regarding the physical science of climate change exceeds the political science of changing human factors. We examined whether national differences in economic factors shape the extent to which perceptions of global warming are linked to self‐reported intentions to make self‐sacrifices to help protect the environment (N = 6,651 university students) in developing and developed nations (N = 34 nations). Perceptions of the importance of global warming predicted self‐reported willingness to make sacrifices to help protect the environment, and this association was more pronounced in nations with a higher Human Development Index (HDI). There may be hope for the future, to the extent that young people in developed countries are prepared to match their convictions and intentions to sacrifice for the environment with action.

AbstractFor 2 weeks, 74 New Zealand undergraduate students recorded their reactions to two components of situational dependence during interactions with their romantic partner: low personal control and high partner impact. Lower personal control predicted lower perceived regard and intimacy, greater partner derogation and withdrawal (self‐protective dependence regulation), and reduced attempts to improve interaction quality (relationship‐promotive dependence regulation). Participants also reported greater self‐protective dependence regulation the more their partner was impacting on their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. As expected, more anxious individuals reported higher drops in perceived regard and greater self‐protective dependence regulation when experiencing lower control, whereas more avoidant individuals reported lower regard and reduced relationship‐promotive behavior when experiencing stronger partner impact. The links between attachment and dependence are discussed.

AbstractTwo diary studies examined the effects of domain‐specific representations of romantic relationships (assessed using the Relationship Questionnaire in Study 1 and the Revised Experiences in Close Relationships questionnaire in Study 2) on the subjective quality of social interactions across four relational contexts: those with a romantic partner, family member, platonic friend, or acquaintance/other. In both studies, domain‐specific romantic attachment, particularly attachment avoidance, was more strongly related to subjective experiences of social interactions involving a romantic partner than those with family members, platonic friends, or acquaintances/others. These results complement previous diary research using earlier categorical measures of attachment and elaborate upon the contextual effects of the attachment behavioral system in naturally occurring social interactions with different relational partners. The conditions under which working models of different relationship domains should influence interpersonal functioning are discussed, and a context‐congruence hypothesis of attachment effects, which encompasses the current findings and generates further predictions, is detailed.

A two-stage model of littering behavior in public places differentiated two types of littering: active and passive. The distinction between active littering (e.g., someone drops litter on the ground and continues walking) and passive littering (e.g., someone drops litter on a bench while seated and fails to remove it when leaving) depends on the latency between (a) when the litter is placed in the environment and (b) failure to remove that litter when vacating the territory. Results suggested passive littering was more resistant to change than active littering. Posted feedback significantly reduced cigarette littering by 17% (20% reduction in active littering, 6% increase in passive littering) and noncigarette littering by 19% (0% change in active littering due to minimal baseline levels, 25% reduction in passive littering). The probability of littering also increased with the latency between when litter was placed in the area and when the individual vacated the area.