Suchergebnisse

Previous research suggests that threat can bolster anti-immigration attitudes, but less is known about the effects of threat on ideological tolerance. We tested the hypothesis that realistic threats — tangible threats to e.g., the safety or financial well-being of one's group — bolster support for right-wing extremists. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 200) learned that crime and unemployment rates were either increasing (high threat condition) or remaining the same (low threat condition). Consistent with our hypothesis, higher threat lead to a significant increase in tolerance for right-wing, but not left-wing, extremists. In a second, pre-registered extended replication experiment (N = 385), we added a baseline (no threat) condition. Additionally, attitudes to immigrants were examined as a mediator. This experiment produced non-significant threat effects on tolerance of right-wing extremists. Overall, the current research provides weak support for the hypothesis that realistic threats have asymmetric effects on tolerance of political extremists. However, consistent with previous research, people were more tolerant of extremists within their own ideological camp.

Previous research suggests that threat can bolster anti-immigration attitudes, but less is known about the effects of threat on ideological tolerance. We tested the hypothesis that realistic threats — tangible threats to e.g., the safety or financial well-being of one's group — bolster support for right-wing extremists. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 200) learned that crime and unemployment rates were either increasing (high threat condition) or remaining the same (low threat condition). Consistent with our hypothesis, higher threat lead to a significant increase in tolerance for right-wing, but not left-wing, extremists. In a second, pre-registered extended replication experiment (N = 385), we added a baseline (no threat) condition. Additionally, attitudes to immigrants were examined as a mediator. This experiment produced non-significant threat effects on tolerance of right-wing extremists. Overall, the current research provides weak support for the hypothesis that realistic threats have asymmetric effects on tolerance of political extremists. However, consistent with previous research, people were more tolerant of extremists within their own ideological camp. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

Previous research suggests that threat can bolster anti-immigration attitudes, but less is known about the effects of threat on ideological tolerance. We tested the hypothesis that realistic threats — tangible threats to e.g., the safety or financial well-being of one's group — bolster support for right-wing extremists. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 200) learned that crime and unemployment rates were either increasing (high threat condition) or remaining the same (low threat condition). Consistent with our hypothesis, higher threat lead to a significant increase in tolerance for right-wing, but not left-wing, extremists. In a second, pre-registered extended replication experiment (N = 385), we added a baseline (no threat) condition. Additionally, attitudes to immigrants were examined as a mediator. This experiment produced non-significant threat effects on tolerance of right-wing extremists. Overall, the current research provides weak support for the hypothesis that realistic threats have asymmetric effects on tolerance of political extremists. However, consistent with previous research, people were more tolerant of extremists within their own ideological camp.

Abstract. De-racialization research suggests that depicting members of ethnic minority groups as gay leads to less stereotypic perceptions of their ethnic group. However, whether the consequences of de-racialization translate into real-world behavior is unclear. In a large "lost letter" field experiment ( N = 6,654) where an email was ostensibly sent to the wrong recipient by mistake, we investigate whether the relative impact of signaling gayness (vs. heterosexuality) differs for Arab (minority) versus Swedish (majority) senders. The results show clear evidence of ethnic discrimination where Arab (minority) senders receive fewer replies (prosocial response) than Swedish (majority) senders. However, there is no evidence indicating that Arab senders would receive a lower penalty for revealing gayness. Implications for multiple categorization research are discussed.

Previous research suggests that threat can bolster anti-immigration attitudes, but less is known about the effects of threat on ideological tolerance. We tested the hypothesis that realistic threats — tangible threats to e.g., the safety or financial well-being of one's group — bolster support for right-wing extremists. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 200) learned that crime and unemployment rates were either increasing (high threat condition) or remaining the same (low threat condition). Consistent with our hypothesis, higher threat lead to a significant increase in tolerance for right-wing, but not left-wing, extremists. In a second, pre-registered extended replication experiment (N = 385), we added a baseline (no threat) condition. Additionally, attitudes to immigrants were examined as a mediator. This experiment produced non-significant threat effects on tolerance of right-wing extremists. Overall, the current research provides weak support for the hypothesis that realistic threats have asymmetric effects on tolerance of political extremists. However, consistent with previous research, people were more tolerant of extremists within their own ideological camp. ; Funding: Linnaeus University Centre for Discrimination and Integration Studies

Previous research ( Libby, Shaeffer, & Eibach, 2009 ) has established that a third-person (external) visual perspective elicits more abstract processing than a first-person (inner) perspective. Because many moral principles constitute abstract psychological constructs, we predicted that they should weigh more heavily when people adopt a third-person visual perspective. In two experiments we show that a third- (vs. first-) person visual perspective leads to harsher judgments of one's own morally questionable actions. Moreover, we demonstrate that this effect can be partially explained by level of mental construal. The present research suggests that simple visual perspective techniques may be used to promote moral behavior.

This study examined the influence of affective personality, perfectionism, gender, arousal and dilemma content on moral reasoning. 264 participants were presented with moral dilemmas to which they had to provide a solution that reflected various degrees of justice and care. The results
indicated that a) affective personality had an effect on moral reasoning, b) female participants reported higher levels of care morality than did male participants, c) gender interacted with perfectionism in the production of moral standpoints, d) dilemma content exerted a strong effect on
the participants' use of moral strategy. It was concluded that although moral reasoning appears to be governed primarily by the dilemma content at hand, an individual's moral solutions are influenced by gender and affective state.