Suchergebnisse

Why do some people find online hate material more disturbing than others? We use a random sample of Americans between the ages 15 and 36 to address this question. Descriptive results indicate that a majority of respondents surveyed find online hate material very or extremely disturbing, while smaller shares find it moderately, slightly, or not at all disturbing. We utilize an ordinal logistic regression to explore factors associated with these varying perceptions of hate material. Results demonstrate that males and political conservatives find hate material less disturbing than females and political moderates or liberals. These results are expected, as online hate is largely dominated by right‐wing extremists who frequently target females and non‐conservatives. We also find that individuals who see hate material more frequently find it more disturbing, as do those who have been the target of hate or criminality online. Finally, individuals who are more accepting of violating social norms are less disturbed by online hate.

This article focuses on a new and growing trend in the United States: multiracial (or mixed race) identification. Multiracial self-identification forces us to consider that the norms of racial identification are shifting in which Americans perceive greater individual agency in how they choose to racially identify compared to the choices offered in the past. Given this, is the willingness to identify as multiracial a proxy for changing political attitudes about American race relations? Using a unique data set that includes multiple measures of racial identification, this article examines the individual-level determinants that predict who is willing to self-identify as multiracial and the political consequences of this identity. This research demonstrates the complexity of racial identification today as well as the need to reconsider how race is measured in public opinion surveys. Most importantly, the data demonstrate that those who self-identify as multiracial hold different racial attitudes than those who do not. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

This article focuses on a new and growing trend in the United States: multiracial (or mixed race) identification. Multiracial self-identification forces us to consider that the norms of racial identification are shifting in which Americans perceive greater individual agency in how they choose to racially identify compared to the choices offered in the past. Given this, is the willingness to identify as multiracial a proxy for changing political attitudes about American race relations? Using a unique data set that includes multiple measures of racial identification, this article examines the individual-level determinants that predict who is willing to self-identify as multiracial and the political consequences of this identity. This research demonstrates the complexity of racial identification today as well as the need to reconsider how race is measured in public opinion surveys. Most importantly, the data demonstrate that those who self-identify as multiracial hold different racial attitudes than those who do not.

"Most studies of minority identity have utilized black American children. Drawing on the diverse traditions of this research, four summary conclusions are advanced. Particularly relevant investigations of minority identity conducted on other groups are also reviewed, and they suggest two further conclusions about the generalization of these black American results. Implications are drawn for future research and social policy. To understand better how social policy shapes minority identity, a systematic program of cross-national studies of guestworkers in Western Europe is especially urged." (author's abstract)

We present a laboratory experiment that measures the effects of induced group identity on social preferences. We find that when participants are matched with an ingroup member, they show a 47 percent increase in charity concerns and a 93 percent decrease in envy. Likewise, participants are 19 percent more likely to reward an ingroup match for good behavior, but 13 percent less likely to punish an ingroup match for misbehavior. Furthermore, participants are significantly more likely to choose social-welfare-maximizing actions when matched with an ingroup member. All results are consistent with the hypothesis that participants are more altruistic toward an ingroup match. (JEL C91, D03, Z13)

This article discusses the social identity approach (social identity theory and self-categorization theory) for understanding children's ingroup biases in attitudes and behaviors. It is argued that developmental research on ingroup bias will be enhanced by more fully considering the implications of this approach. These implications include (a) the conceptualization of group identity, (b) the importance of social reality and children's epistemic motivation, (c) the role of processes of normative influence and social projection, and (d) the relevance of moral considerations. These four implications have not been fully considered in the developmental literature but indicate that the social identity approach offers the possibility for theoretically integrating and empirically examining various processes involved in children's ingroup biases.

This article examines the concepts of group membership, group identity & racial identity, & group consciousness. For each of these we discuss theoretical definitions, research using the various definitions, & issues of measurement. We show that these concepts are distinct & build on each other, rather than being interchangeable. We also explore the concept of linked fate, which evolved from the concept of group consciousness & is central in the race & politics literature. Finally, we address the very important question of whether we are in danger of overextrapolation -- taking concepts developed in research on one group & grafting them onto other groups. Adapted from the source document.