Suchergebnisse

The ISPP Presidential Address typically is an opportunity for the President to outline his or her research contribution and trajectory, and the publication of the Address takes the form of a research article. Given that in 2017, ISPP celebrated its 40th conference and 2018 is its 40th anniversary as an academic society, the 2017 Presidential Address and this article are focused on the state of the Society; What have we achieved? How have we changed? Where are we heading? Looking back, ISPP is a more diverse and international society than in 1978, and it is confidently fulfilling its mission. Looking forward, three areas that warrant further attention are outlined: (1) The issue of a possible decline in scientific rationalism and threat of anti‐liberalism (2) challenges with measurement and prediction of political opinion, political attitudes, and voting behavior, and (3) as a maturing field, the need to establish common theoretical frameworks that integrate current knowledge such as building a case that humans are political animals. Each direction is briefly outlined with the aim of provoking thought and stimulating discussion and debate about the future of political psychology.

Behavioural data are important for group research and are widely used to inform and validate relevant theoretical propositions. There is more debate about the role of such data in illuminating the psychological processes that underpin group behaviour itself. This article focuses on this debate and outlines that behavioral data are limited because (a) they have difficulty distinguishing between interactions between individuals-as-individuals and individuals-as-group members, and (b) when the psychological group is properly understood it becomes clear that much of group research concerns individuals-as-group members and the emergence of a shared social identity (along with shifts in self-definition from I to we). The implication is that behavioural data per se are limited in being able to infer the very psychological processes that are central to group research. In conclusion, examples are outlined where in combination with a social identity perspective (and related work) behavioural data have been informative in advancing group research.

Social psychology, as a discipline, has a long tradition of empirical and theoretical research in the field of prejudice and racism, and these are core elements of undergraduate and postgraduate teaching. Many researchers have emphasized that a variety of theoretical and conceptual approaches are necessary to fully understand this social phenomenon

The long-standing policy of "practical reconciliation" between Australian Indigenous and Non-Indigenous people has actively disregarded the need to redress past injustice as the basis of current intergroup inequality. While this approach has received extensive critique from reconciliation scholars, its implications for Non-Indigenous involvement in reconciliation have been neglected. When Indigenous disadvantage is divorced from its social and historical context it is also more likely to be seen as having little to do with "us" as Non-Indigenous Australians. In contrast, when inequality is seen as stemming from the past and present reality of intergroup relations, and as such shapes the meaning of Non-Indigenous identity, it will be seen as more illegitimate, in need of change, and is more likely to motivate political engagement in the reconciliation process. The current study tests and finds support for this idea. Importantly, controlling for the contributions of perceived legitimacy of inequality and need for social change, Non-Indigenous identity meaning continued to significantly predict intentions to vote and engage in political action in support of reconciliation.

The long-standing policy of "practical reconciliation" between Australian Indigenous and Non-Indigenous people has actively disregarded the need to redress past injustice as the basis of current intergroup inequality. While this approach has received extensive critique from reconciliation scholars, its implications for Non-Indigenous involvement in reconciliation have been neglected. When Indigenous disadvantage is divorced from its social and historical context it is also more likely to be seen as having little to do with "us" as Non-Indigenous Australians. In contrast, when inequality is seen as stemming from the past and present reality of intergroup relations, and as such shapes the meaning of Non-Indigenous identity, it will be seen as more illegitimate, in need of change, and is more likely to motivate political engagement in the reconciliation process. The current study tests and finds support for this idea. Importantly, controlling for the contributions of perceived legitimacy of inequality and need for social change, Non-Indigenous identity meaning continued to significantly predict intentions to vote and engage in political action in support of reconciliation.

The issues surrounding rising levels of atmospheric CO2 and climate change have become part of the collective conscious and the vernacular of world leaders, media, and the public alike. Despite the widespread concern and attention, attempts to achieve a global commitment to mitigate climate change are failing. In this article, we suggest that the Actualizing Social and Personal Identity Resources model (ASPIRe; Haslam, Eggins, & Reynolds, 2003), developed to help organizations become more sustainable and productive, can promote more efficient negotiations in matters of global environmental concern. Using this model as a framework, the dynamics of the United Nations (UN) meeting in Copenhagen are scrutinized along with suggestions for how to structure future negotiations. Building on an understanding of existing UN‐type committee structures, it is argued that as the interests of individual nations and those of like‐minded other nations (subgroup interests) become the real basis for decision making on the issue of climate change the more likely it is that a higher‐order superordinate identity will emerge, which promotes aligned action. To date, the psychological aspects of social and behavioral change have been neglected, which could be a factor in explaining the lack of coordinated action on climate change.

The long-standing policy of 'practical reconciliation' between Australian Indigenous and Non-Indigenous people has actively disregarded the need to redress past injustice as the basis of current intergroup inequality. While this approach has received extensive critique from reconciliation scholars, its implications for Non-Indigenous involvement in reconciliation have been neglected. When Indigenous disadvantage is divorced from its social and historical context it is also more likely to be seen as having little to do with 'us' as Non-Indigenous Australians. In contrast, when inequality is seen as stemming from the past and present reality of intergroup relations, and as such shapes the meaning of Non-Indigenous identity, it will be seen as more illegitimate, in need of change, and is more likely to motivate political engagement in the reconciliation process. The current study tests and finds support for this idea. Importantly, controlling for the contributions of perceived legitimacy of inequality and need for social change, Non-Indigenous identity meaning continued to significantly predict intentions to vote and engage in political action in support of reconciliation. Adapted from the source document.

Social norms are of increasing interest to public policy experts and those conducting behaviour change interven-tions (e.g. safe driving, recycling). While there is agreement that social norms play a central role in explaining behaviour, such consensus is lacking when it comes to explaining the process through which this occurs. Economics, social marketing and political science focus on individual self-interest and goal satisfaction and social (dis)approval. In contrast social psychology also incorporates collective interests through its analysis of social identity and ingroup processes. To fully understand behaviour change, it is argued that greater engagement is needed with the links between shifts in social identity, and ingroup norms. As definitions of who "we" are shift, so too does what "we" do. Implications for behaviour change interventions are discussed. ; This research was supported by ANU internal funding in order to further develop theory andresearch on the social psychology of social and behaviour change, as well as funding from theAustralian Research Council (including an Australian Postdoctoral Fellowship awarded toEmina Subašić).

This paper examines the impact of social division associated with the emergent "race debate" in Australia (and the so-called "Hanson phenomenon") on the consensus of Australian students' stereotypes of their national ingroup. It compares the stereotypes held by a sample of students in 1997 (N = 20) with those revealed in studies conducted from 1992 onwards (N = 102). Results provide strong evidence that stereotype consensus was reduced in the current phase of research and post-testing also indicates that participants themselves interpreted this as being the product of political change in Australian society. The findings are consistent with the argument that stereotypes are sensitive to changes in intergroup and intragroup relations, and that they respond to the reality of social division rather than to the rhetoric of unity.

Social and political change involves a challenge to the status quo in intergroup power relations. Traditionally, the social psychology of social change has focused on disadvantaged minority groups collectively challenging the decisions, actions, and policies of those in positions of established authority. In contrast, this article presents a political solidarity model of social change that explores the process by which members of the majority challenge the authority in solidarity with the minority. It is argued that political solidarity as a social change process involves a contest between the authority and the minority over the meaning of a shared (higher order) identity with the majority. When identity ceases to be shared with the authority and becomes shared with the minority, majority challenge to authority in solidarity with the minority becomes possible. The model's contributions to existing social psychological approaches to social change are also discussed.

Common experience of injustice can be a potent motivator of collective action and efforts to achieve social change - and of such efforts becoming more widespread. In this research, we propose that the effects of co-victimization on collective action are a function of inclusive social identity. Experiment 1 (N= 61) demonstrated that while presence (compared to absence) of co-victimization positively predicted consumer (i.e., participants) willingness to act collectively in solidarity with sweatshop workers, this effect was mediated by inclusive social identity. In Experiment 2 (N= 120), the salience of inclusive social identity was experimentally manipulated and interacted with co-victimization to predict collective action. When inclusive social identity was salient, co-victimization enhanced collective action, including willingness to pay extra for products made ethically and in support of fair wages for workers. In contrast, collective action was attenuated when co-victimization took place in the absence of inclusive social identity. Implications for understanding when co-victimization is transformed into common fate and political solidarity with the disadvantaged are discussed.