Suchergebnisse

The history and context of study -- The concept of ethnocentrism -- The causes of ethnocentrism : fear and self-aggrandisement -- The causes of ethnocentrism : social factors, biology, and evolution -- The consequences of ethnocentrism -- Integrating the causes and the consequences -- Ethnocentrism in psychology

IntroductionAlthough ethnocentrism is one of the fundamental concepts in the social sciences, its study has been impeded by a diversity of conceptualizations and measures. In recent years, a growing number of political scientists and psychologists have undertaken in-depth research into ethnocentrism. In addition, researchers have recently proposed a comprehensive reconceptualization of ethnocentrism and developed a new Ethnocentrism scale. There is strong evidence for this scale's reliability and validity in indexing ethnocentrism, but like most measures in psychology and political science, this scale is based on classical test theory. Item response theory (IRT) is a powerful psychometric technique that can provide a much more sophisticated test of test performance and is currently under-utilized in research.MethodsWe performed IRT to assess the psychometric properties of the Ethnocentrism scale on a sample of 4,187 participants.ResultsThe scale's items had strong psychometric properties to capture the ethnocentrism latent construct, particularly in the below average to above average range. Men required marginally lower levels of ethnocentrism to endorse less socially acceptable items than women (items relating to superiority, purity, or exploitativeness). When compared to liberals, conservatives responded more readily to nearly all ethnocentrism items. Given this variation, the IRT approach highlighted that future measurements must adjust for differential item functioning, albeit more for political orientation than gender identity.DiscussionThe findings detail how IRT can enhance measurement in political science and demonstrate the implications for how gender and political ideology may affect the differential performance of items.

Authoritarianism has been an important explanatory concept for more than 60 years and a powerful predictor of social, political, and intergroup attitudes and behaviour. An important impediment to research on authoritarianism has been the length of the measures available, particularly with the contemporary emphasis on the need for social research to use larger, more representative samples and measure multiple constructs across multiple domains. We therefore developed a six-item Very Short Authoritarianism (VSA) scale that equally represented the three content subdimensions and two directions of wording of Altemeyer's widely used Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Over four samples (N = 1,601) from three countries the VSA scale showed satisfactory internal consistency and the expected hierarchical factor structure with three primary factors loading on a single higher-order factor. Additionally, the scale predicted variables such as nationalism, ethnocentrism, political orientation, political party/candidate support, attitudes towards ingroups or outgroups and anti-minority bias at moderate to strong levels with effects very close to those obtained for much longer established measures of RWA (including Altemeyer's scale). The VSA scale also showed clearly better reliability and validity than a short measure of authoritarian parental values that has been used to measure authoritarianism. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

Authoritarianism has been an important explanatory concept for more than 60 years and a powerful predictor of social, political, and intergroup attitudes and behaviour. An important impediment to research on authoritarianism has been the length of the measures available, particularly with the contemporary emphasis on the need for social research to use larger, more representative samples and measure multiple constructs across multiple domains. We therefore developed a six-item Very Short Authoritarianism (VSA) scale that equally represented the three content subdimensions and two directions of wording of Altemeyer's widely used Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Over four samples (N = 1,601) from three countries the VSA scale showed satisfactory internal consistency and the expected hierarchical factor structure with three primary factors loading on a single higher-order factor. Additionally, the scale predicted variables such as nationalism, ethnocentrism, political orientation, political party/candidate support, attitudes towards ingroups or outgroups and anti-minority bias at moderate to strong levels with effects very close to those obtained for much longer established measures of RWA (including Altemeyer's scale). The VSA scale also showed clearly better reliability and validity than a short measure of authoritarian parental values that has been used to measure authoritarianism.

Conceptual analysis has not been systematically implemented in psychology, and many concepts have often been defined in different and contradictory ways. This article focuses on a conceptual clarification of ethnocentrism. It points out the conceptual confusion surrounding the term, reviews numerous definitions and operationalizations, and attempts to clarify it. Ethnocentrism is reconceptualized as a strong sense of ethnic group self-centeredness, which involves intergroup expressions of ethnic group preference, superiority, purity, and exploitativeness, and intragroup expressions of ethnic group cohesion and devotion. It is conceptually and empirically distinguished from other concepts, such as outgroup negativity and mere ingroup positivity. The article presents a theoretical framework and related empirical analyses supporting the usefulness of reconceptualized ethnocentrism. It also details important and unique implications of reconceptualized ethnocentrism for political phenomena. It is expected that reliance on the clarified reconceptualization should enable researchers to systematically study ethnocentrism, its origins, and consequences.

Conceptual analysis has not been systematically implemented in psychology, and many concepts have often been defined in different and contradictory ways. This article focuses on a conceptual clarification of ethnocentrism. It points out the conceptual confusion surrounding the term, reviews numerous definitions and operationalizations, and attempts to clarify it. Ethnocentrism is reconceptualized as a strong sense of ethnic group self-centeredness, which involves intergroup expressions of ethnic group preference, superiority, purity, and exploitativeness, and intragroup expressions of ethnic group cohesion and devotion. It is conceptually and empirically distinguished from other concepts, such as outgroup negativity and mere ingroup positivity. The article presents a theoretical framework and related empirical analyses supporting the usefulness of reconceptualized ethnocentrism. It also details important and unique implications of reconceptualized ethnocentrism for political phenomena. It is expected that reliance on the clarified reconceptualization should enable researchers to systematically study ethnocentrism, its origins, and consequences.

Traditionally Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) has been seen as a unidimensional construct. Recently, however, researchers have begun to measure three distinct RWA dimensions (Feldman, 2003; Funke, 2005; Van Hiel, Cornelis, Roets, & De Clercq, 2006). One of these new multidimensional RWA approaches has conceptualized these three dimensions as Authoritarianism, Conservatism, and Traditionalism (ACT), which are viewed as expressions of basic social values or motivational goals that represent different, though related, strategies for attaining collective security at the expense of individual autonomy. Findings are reported from two studies to assess the validity and predictive utility of the multidimensional ACT approach. First, a direct cross‐national comparison showed that the three ACT dimensions were reliable and factorially distinct and demonstrated the measurement invariance of the three latent constructs across Serbian and NZ (New Zealand) samples. The three ACT dimensions predicted self‐reported behavior differentially in both samples, and a comparison of latent means showed the Serbian sample higher than the NZ sample on the ACT dimensions of Authoritarianism and Traditionalism but markedly lower on Conservatism. Second, a reanalysis of previously collected NZ data showed that the three ACT scales differentially predicted three dimensions of generalized prejudice in a theoretically meaningful manner. These findings underline the importance of studying ideological attitudes, such as RWA, multidimensionally.

Conceptual analysis has not been systematically implemented in psychology, and many concepts have often been defined in different and contradictory ways. This article focuses on a conceptual clarification of ethnocentrism. It points out the conceptual confusion surrounding the term, reviews numerous definitions and operationalizations, and attempts to clarify it. Ethnocentrism is reconceptualized as a strong sense of ethnic group self‐centeredness, which involves intergroup expressions of ethnic group preference, superiority, purity, and exploitativeness, and intragroup expressions of ethnic group cohesion and devotion. It is conceptually and empirically distinguished from other concepts, such as outgroup negativity and mere ingroup positivity. The article presents a theoretical framework and related empirical analyses supporting the usefulness of reconceptualized ethnocentrism. It also details important and unique implications of reconceptualized ethnocentrism for political phenomena. It is expected that reliance on the clarified reconceptualization should enable researchers to systematically study ethnocentrism, its origins, and consequences.

Ethnocentrism can be seen as an expression of narcissism at the group level. However, the relationship between ethnocentrism and narcissism has rarely been studied, and there is little agreement about what this relationship might be. Both have also been treated as simple, unidimensional constructs, whereas research indicates they are better viewed as complex and multidimensional. New research using multidimensional measures of both constructs was therefore conducted in a sample of 264 undergraduates. Narcissism, primarily its covert form, related positively to intergroup expressions of ethnocentrism, but negatively to intragroup expressions. In addition, both intergroup expressions of ethnocentrism and covert narcissism were related to disliking others. The findings suggest that intergroup expressions of ethnocentrism are based on personal self‐aggrandizement, whereas intragroup expressions are based on personal self‐transcendence. In addition, they suggest that narcissistic people have generally selfish and exploitative attitudes, even towards their own groups. They also emphasize the importance of investigating both ethnocentrism and narcissism as complex multidimensional constructs.