Written by an international team of renowned scholars, this volume addresses the multitude of factors that may lead to the deadly breakdown of ethnic relations. The book Draws on real-world case studies, such as Rwanda, Sudan, and the Second Palestinian Intifada Brings together original contributions and theoretical perspectives by a team of experts in psychology and related disciplines such as sociology and political science Identifies events and processes that can break down inhibitions against violence, and lead to mass killings and genocide Examines explanations that must be considered
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
This research examined the effects of Personal Need for Structure, Need for Closure, and Personal Fear of Invalidity on information processing during the development of stereotypes. In Study 1, participants read as many group member descriptions as they wanted before expressing group stereotypes. Participants higher in Personal Fear of Invalidity sought more information; they also developed more detailed stereotypes when they received more information, whereas participants lower in Personal Fear of Invalidity did not. There was a tendency for participants higher in Need for Structure & Closure to develop less accurate stereotypes. Finally, participants higher in Need for Structure & Closure or Personal Fear of Invalidity were less confident about their stereotypes when they received more information, whereas participants lower in Need for Structure & Closure or Personal Fear of Invalidity were more confident. In Study 2, participants were presented with two, four, or eight descriptions of group members before expressing stereotypes. Participants lower in Personal Fear of Invalidity developed more detailed stereotypes when they received more information, whereas participants higher in Personal Fear of Invalidity did not. When two or eight group member descriptions were presented (fewer or more than participants probably would have chosen themselves), participants higher in Personal Fear of Invalidity and lower in Need for Structure & Closure generated the most accurate stereotypes. Finally, participants higher in Need for Structure & Closure did not differ in stereotype confidence as a function of how much information they received, whereas participants lower in Need for Structure & Closure were more confident when they received more information. These results indicate that cognitive style plays a role in the development of group stereotypes.
Supporters of the Confederate battle flag often argue that their support is driven by pride in the South, not negative racial attitudes. Opponents of the Confederate battle flag often argue that the flag represents racism, and that support for the flag is an expression of racism and an attempt to maintain oppression of Blacks in the Southern United States. We evaluate these two competing views in explaining attitudes toward the Confederate battle flag in the Southern United States through a survey of 526 Southerners. In the aggregate, our latent variable model suggests that White support for the flag is driven by Southern pride, political conservatism, and blatant negative racial attitudes toward Blacks. Using cluster-analysis we were able to distinguish four distinct sub-groups of White Southerners: Cosmopolitans, New Southerners, Traditionalists, and Supremacists. The greatest support for the Confederate battle flag is seen among Traditionalists and Supremacists; however, Traditionalists do not display blatant negative racial attitudes toward Blacks, while Supremacists do. Traditionalists make up the majority of Confederate battle flag supporters in our sample, weakening the claim that supporters of the flag are generally being driven by negative racial attitudes toward Blacks. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion
Supporters of the Confederate battle flag often argue that their support is driven by pride in the South, not negative racial attitudes. Opponents of the Confederate battle flag often argue that the flag represents racism, and that support for the flag is an expression of racism and an attempt to maintain oppression of Blacks in the Southern United States. We evaluate these two competing views in explaining attitudes toward the Confederate battle flag in the Southern United States through a survey of 526 Southerners. In the aggregate, our latent variable model suggests that White support for the flag is driven by Southern pride, political conservatism, and blatant negative racial attitudes toward Blacks. Using cluster-analysis we were able to distinguish four distinct sub-groups of White Southerners: Cosmopolitans, New Southerners, Traditionalists, and Supremacists. The greatest support for the Confederate battle flag is seen among Traditionalists and Supremacists; however, Traditionalists do not display blatant negative racial attitudes toward Blacks, while Supremacists do. Traditionalists make up the majority of Confederate battle flag supporters in our sample, weakening the claim that supporters of the flag are generally being driven by negative racial attitudes toward Blacks.
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.
This study examined the influence of affectively‐based weight prejudice versus weight control beliefs on perceptions of and support for an ambiguously discriminatory medical policy: denying surgery to overweight patients. Participants read a news article describing a new policy in the United Kingdom of denying surgery to overweight patients, and reported their reactions to the policy. Results revealed that participants who scored higher on an affectively‐based measure of weight prejudice that was completed 3–4 weeks before the main session were less likely to perceive the medical policy as discriminatory, more likely to agree with the policy and to support adoption of a similar policy in their own country, and recommended lower body mass index (BMI) cutoff values for denying surgery to overweight patients, whereas weight control beliefs had less of a role to play. In addition, perceptions of the policy as (non)discriminatory mediated the effects of weight prejudice on policy agreement, support, and recommended BMI cutoff. These results indicate that affective prejudice influences individuals' support for an ambiguously discriminatory medical policy, which has important implications for policy makers and researchers.
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.
The number of refugees across the globe is at an alarming high and is expected to continue to rise for the foreseeable future. As a result, finding durable solutions for refugees has become a major challenge worldwide. The literature reviewed and policy implications discussed in this article are based on the premise that one of the major solutions to the refugee crisis must be refugee resettlement in new host countries. For such a solution to succeed, however, requires relatively favorable attitudes by members of host societies, protection of the well‐being of refugees, and effective integration of refugees into new host countries. In this context, we begin by reviewing the literature on determinants of public attitudes toward refugees, the acculturation of refugees in host societies, and factors affecting refugee mental health, all of which are directly relevant to the success of the resettlement process. We then turn our attention to the policy implications of these literatures, and discuss strategies for improving public attitudes toward refugees and refugee resettlement in host countries; for improving the resettlement process to reduce mental health challenges; and for supporting the long‐term acculturation and integration of refugees in their new homes.
In this paper, we describe recent trends in attitudes toward immigration in North America, and we suggest how these attitudes are likely to be affected by the September 11, 2001 "Attack on America." We begin by explaining why public attitudes toward immigration are important, and describe recent trends in these attitudes in the United States and Canada. Then, we apply psychological perspectives to predicting how these attitudes are likely to change in response to the events of September 11th. In particular, we describe expected short‐term changes in immigration attitudes and expected long‐term trends. We conclude by suggesting that an understanding of the psychological processes underlying unfavorable attitudes may assist in counteracting these effects; we also suggest that policy makers will be faced with the difficult task of balancing the need for a sense of security for members of the national group, and maintenance of the positive features of current immigration policies.
AbstractWe investigate discrimination experiences of (1) immigrants and racialized individuals, (2) Indigenous peoples, and (3) comparison White non‐immigrants in nine regions of Southwestern Ontario containing small‐ and mid‐sized communities. For each region, representative samples of the three groups were recruited to complete online surveys. In most regions, over 80 percent of Indigenous peoples reported experiencing discrimination in the past 3 years, and in more than half of the regions, over 60 percent of immigrants and racialized individuals did so. Indigenous peoples, immigrants and racialized individuals were most likely to experience discrimination in employment settings and in a variety of public settings, and were most likely to attribute this discrimination to racial and ethnocultural factors, and for Indigenous peoples also their Indigenous identity. Immigrants and racialized individuals who had experienced discrimination generally reported a lower sense of belonging and welcome in their communities. This association was weaker for Indigenous peoples. The findings provide new insight into discrimination experienced by Indigenous peoples, immigrants and racialized individuals in small and mid‐sized Canadian communities, and are critical to creating and implementing effective anti‐racism and anti‐discrimination strategies.
