Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis study investigated cultural differences in the role of economic competitiveness in prejudice toward immigrants and foreign workers between Northern European‐heritage and East Asian cultures. Because economic competitiveness and achievement are associated with core cultural values in Northern European‐heritage cultures, we hypothesized that economic competitiveness would be associated with prejudice toward immigrants and foreign workers more strongly in Northern European‐heritage than in East Asian cultures. Results based on nationally representative samples drawn from the World Values Survey revealed that prejudice toward immigrants and foreign workers was generally higher in East Asian (South Korea and China) than in Northern European‐heritage (Norway and the United States) cultures. However, as predicted, a stronger association was found between economic competitiveness and prejudice toward immigrants and foreign workers in Northern European‐heritage than East Asian cultures, controlling for sociodemographic backgrounds of participants (gender, age, education, and income), ecological diversity of each country, values of uniqueness and conformity, attitude toward ethnic diversity, and racism. These findings support the hypothesis that the central values of a culture shape the nature of prejudice within it, including prejudice toward immigrants and foreign workers, and highlight the importance of understanding the cultural dynamics of prejudice.

A plethora of research indicates that viewing media can reduce prejudice. Emerging work on computer gaming shows that games can also influence social attitudes. The present studies investigated the influence of an interactive computer game about living in poverty on attitudes and beliefs about the poor. Playing the poverty game was compared to playing a control game and merely observing the poverty game. In Study 1, playing an interactive poverty game did not influence attitudes while watching someone else play the game increased positive attitudes, empathic concern, and support for government-funded anti-poverty policies. In Study 2, meritocracy beliefs moderated the influence of the game; people lower in meritocracy showed less positive attitudes toward the poor after playing the poverty game. This effect was mediated by an increase in the belief that poverty is personally controllable. Future directions for and implications of studying the unique intergroup effects of games are discussed.

AbstractIn the current work, we discuss how moving beyond the traditional emphasis in social psychology on differences in group memberships to diversity has both theoretical and practical benefits for the field and for policy. Specifically, we introduce a diversity paradigm that builds upon and complements traditional approaches to the study of prejudice and social identity by (1) incorporating multiple levels of analysis; (2) studying a range of different mechanisms that account for the separate and joint influences of factors operating at societal, group, and individuals levels; (3) including relations among multiple groups and recognizing the diversity that exists within diversity; and (4) examining both the potential benefits as well as the challenges of diversity. A diversity paradigm is important and timely because of rapidly changing technologies and shifts in demographics that increase encounters among members of diverse groups. We discuss several of the pressing questions and point to possible answers based on diversity principles and research. Questions such as "Why is accomplishing diversity objectives so challenging/difficult?"; "How is a focus on diversity different from a focus on prejudice and stereotyping?"; "Why is it important to have, promote and value diversity?"; and "What does/should approaches to diversity encompass?" In the final section, we identify possible paths forward in conceptualizing the paradigm and apply the work to the diversity challenges that lie ahead.

Comment on Marjanovic, Struthers, and Greenglass (2012). We build on the authors' ideas, data, and interpretations to suggest future avenues for research, focusing on situations that hold potential for empathic concern to shape helping responses. Specifically, we suggest investigating the time course of reactions to natural disasters and the group membership of the victims as moderators. Additionally, we suggest that considering different forms of helping responses and their predictors can shed theoretical light on variables that promote helping following natural disasters.

In this reflection on our term as coeditors of Social Issues and Policy Review (SIPR), we consider what we have learned from our work on the journal and what challenges lie ahead. We suggest that SIPR has been successful as a platform for work demonstrating the relevance of psychological research to issues of concern to policy makers and to the general public. It has been less effective, however, in its goal of stimulating more scholars in the discipline to engage in socially relevant research. We suggest that the current reward system within our discipline is not conducive to research that addresses broad societal issues, and that the emphasis on internal validity has limited the focus of our work. We call on psychologists to bridge micro and macro levels of analysis and to take their rightful place among those making a difference in the world.

Opportunities for communicating psychological findings beyond the discipline are limited and often under‐rewarded. In this article, we discuss reasons why psychological research often fails to be communicated beyond the discipline, and we provide suggestions for what needs to be changed in order to bridge this gap. Specifically, we identify barriers to communicating beyond the discipline, and we note that more effectively and broadly disseminating knowledge requires a different style than conveying information within the profession. We further illustrate how psychology offers unique perspectives and information that are of considerable value to lay audiences and policy makers. We conclude by articulating the potential benefits for society and psychology of efforts and venues whose explicit intention is to understand social problems and inform policy through the psychological study of social issues.