Suchergebnisse

The impact of identities encompassing all human beings (e.g., human and/or global identities) on intergroup relations is complex, with studies showing mostly positive (e.g., less dehumanization), but also negative (e.g., deflected responsibility for harm behavior), effects. However, different labels and measures have been used to examine the effects of these all-inclusive superordinate identities, without a systematic empirical examination of the extent to which they overlap or differ in their sociopsychological prototypical content. This study examined whether different labels activate the same contents in laypeople's conceptualization. Two hundred and forty-eight participants openly described one of six labels: "All humans everywhere"; "People all over the world"; "People from different countries around the world"; "Global citizens"; "Citizens of the world"; and "Members of world community." Results from quantitative content analyses showed that the different labels activated different thematic attributes, representing differences in their core prototypical meaning. We propose that a general distinction should be made between labels that define membership based on human attributes (e.g., biological attributes) and those that evoke attributes characteristic of membership in a global political community (e.g., attitudinal attributes), as their effect on intergroup relations may vary accordingly. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion

In two experimental studies, we explored the politicized use of immigrant stereotypes by members of the Portuguese host society. Our goal was to demonstrate that stereotypes strategically vary to support political arguments and mobilize others towards one's political position. In Study 1, the way in which participants described immigrants varied as a function of (a) whether or not they were provided with the opportunity to mobilize an ingroup audience, (b) the direction in which they sought to mobilize that audience, and (c) the instrumentality of particular stereotypical traits in a given argumentative context. Study 2 examined the cognitive processes underlying the strategic expression of stereotypes, by measuring implicit stereotyping and manipulating participants' ability to do cognitive work prior to and during stereotype expression. The findings showed that (a) variability in stereotype expression was matched by a consonant variability in implicit representations of immigrants, and that (b) the ability to do cognitive work was a necessary condition for variability in stereotype expression to emerge. Taken together, these findings suggest that strategic effects in stereotype expression are underpinned by strategic work on intra-psychic representations. We conclude by discussing the complementarity between strategic and cognitive explanations of stereotype expression, as well as by arguing the possibility of a more predictive approach to the politicized use of stereotypes. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion

In this paper, we look at the relationship between European identification and political support for (or opposition to) EU membership. First, we argue that conceptualizing political attitudes towards the EU as a direct product of European identification (a) neglects the distinction between the social reality of Europe and the political reality of the EU and (b) leads to psychological reductionism. We propose that the relationship should instead be conceptualized as mediated by legitimacy perceptions and as moderated by social‐level variables. Second, we look at three spheres of European integration and propose that their perceived legitimacy is appraised through the following principles: (a) normative solidarity for wealth sharing, (b) political authority for sharing political decisions, and (c) collective self‐realization for the sharing of practices. We illustrate the key mediating role of those principles by drawing on data from a survey ran across five European countries. Third, we argue that these meditational relationships are in turn moderated by social, political, and ideological realities and illustrate this point by looking at the case of United Kingdom in the context of the EU membership referendum. We point to an ideological assumption in the U.K. political landscape about the illegitimacy of EU supranational decision making and argue that this contributed to shape both the debate of the referendum campaign and its result. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion