Suchergebnisse

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the political nature of laboratory experiments. Such experiments can be construed as paradigms of power, open to construction and debate, where different agents and interests are involved in a process of struggle over both (re)presentation and substance. Experimenters should take a reflexive perspective on their own role and power in producing results, and they should recognize that participants in experiments take into account power relations and accordingly modify behavior that is visible or accountable to powerful others (the "panopticon"). This argument is illustrated by recent research on intergroup behavior, which suggests that biases often taken at face value reflect strategic responses to the situation that balance social reality with social resistance.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the political nature of laboratory experiments. Such experiments can be construed as paradigms of power, open to construction & debate, where different agents & interests are involved in a process of struggle over both (re)presentation & substance. Experimenters should take a reflexive perspective on their own role & power in producing results, & they should recognize that participants in experiments take into account power relations & accordingly modify behavior that is visible or accountable to powerful others (the "panopticon"). This argument is illustrated by recent research on intergroup behavior, which suggests that biases often taken at face value reflect strategic responses to the situation that balance social reality with social resistance. 89 References. Adapted from the source document.

As part of a mail survey about their work experiences, university faculty members reported their specific emotional reactions to group inequities in faculty pay and benefits. The results indicate that sadness, fear, and anger are distinct emotional responses to a collective disadvantage. Group‐based anger mediated the relationship between collective disadvantage and willingness to protest whereas group‐based sadness mediated the relationship between collective disadvantage and organizational loyalty. Based on an integration of cognitive appraisal models of emotion with RD theory, four other predictors of intergroup emotions—(1) the legitimacy of the process that produced the deprivation, (2) whether another agent was responsible, (3) group efficacy, and (4) whether the situation would improve or become worse—were identified and tested. The measurement of specific emotional reactions to perceived collective disadvantage extends and refines RD approaches to collective action and organizational loyalty.

AbstractColleges and universities are a unique context in which students encounter similar aged peers from a wide range of economic backgrounds. As emerging adults coping with major life transitions, students may be especially sensitive to upward contrasts with other students who have advantages that they feel they deserve (personal relative deprivation or PRD). We surveyed a population of university students when they were second‐ and third‐year students (N = 309), and 2 years later, when they were fourth‐ and fifth‐year students (N = 400). Increased PRD predicted increased anxiety and depression—even after accounting for students' access to social support, the degree to which they identified with the university, and their gender, family income, ethnic background, and whether the student was a first‐generation college student. For a third separate sample of students who completed both surveys (N = 168), PRD predicted students' mental health two years later even after accounting for their earlier anxiety and depression. In all three samples, PRD mediated the relationship between self‐reported family income and mental health. These data indicate that universities and colleges should consider a broad range of interventions and policies that can mitigate the impact of upward social contrasts.

Two hundred and twelve first-year undergraduates completed an authority interaction checklist every time they had a (self-defined) meaningful interaction with university authorities during the first two weeks of their first semester. Students' degree of university identification before they began the term moderated the influence of campus authorities' treatment quality on academic engagement three months later. These longitudinal data provide support for the argument that people who identify with the group the authority represents will interpret the authority's behavior as indicative of their value to the group.

Trust is a fundamental element of educational success. However, compared to what we know about teachers' perceptions of trust, relatively less is known about students' perceptions of trust. This paper describes two experimental investigations that tested the effects of authority competence and benevolence on students' perceptions of trust and their engagement. The investigations also explored whether university identification moderated the influence of authority competence and benevolence on assessments of authority trustworthiness and university engagement. As part of an online experiment administered in the Fall 2010 and the Spring 2011 academic terms, Italian (n = 211; Study 1) and U.S. (n = 226; Study 2) undergraduates were primed to identity or not identify with their university before they read one of four scenarios describing a professor's behavior (i.e., competent and benevolent; competent but uncaring; incompetent but benevolent; incompetent and uncaring). Results showed that students from both Italy and the United States viewed a competent and caring professor as most trustworthy and an incompetent and uncaring professor as least trustworthy. Furthermore, in both countries, students trusted an incompetent and caring professor more compared to a competent and uncaring professor. University identification did not influence trustworthiness.

AbstractWhen organizational authorities or representatives discriminate, it not only impacts the discrimination target; it also affects those who witness it. In this article, we argue that discrimination within workplace and educational contexts implicates the larger organization in which it occurs in two ways. First, it communicates to targets the extent to which the representatives of an organization respect their group. Second, discrimination implicates the morality of the larger group or organization in which it occurs. This second threat to the organization's morality affects all observers, even those who do not share a social category with the target. We argue that both forms of threat can decrease organization identification, well‐being, and increase withdrawal. For all observers, whether one is a member of the targeted group or not, to witness an organizational authority clearly discriminate against another organizational member is distressing and leads to withdrawal. We offer recommendations for policy and decision‐making procedures aimed at (1) adopting organizational decision‐making structures that minimize the opportunity for personal acts of bias (to prevent discrimination before it occurs), and (2) offering those who witness (or experience) discrimination clear avenues for addressing it (to minimize its destructive consequences). If organization members, especially organizational authorities, confront discrimination, it offsets the negative consequences of a single organizational representative's biased behavior.

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- List of Tables and Figures -- Part 1 Introduction -- 1 The Psychology of Social Justice -- Justice as a Philosophical or Theological Concern -- Justice as a Subjective Issue -- What Is the Psychology of Social Justice About? -- Self-interest, the Instrumental Model, and the Image of Human Nature -- The Framework of Social Justice Research -- The Field of Social Justice -- 2 Relative Deprivation -- Why Is Relative Deprivation Important? -- Clarifying the Meaning of Relative Deprivation -- Choice of Comparison Referent -- Comparisons with Oneself at Other Points in Time (Temporal Comparisons) -- Comparisons With Other People -- Individual Versus Group Relative Deprivation -- Conceptualizing Social Identities -- Multiple Sources of Comparison Information -- Cognitive Antecedents of Relative Deprivation -- Advantaged Groups -- Problems for the Future -- The Hedonic Treadmill -- The Missing Piece -- Part 2 Is Justice Important to People's Feelings and Attitudes? -- 3 Distributive Justice -- Equity Theory -- The Criteria Used to Evaluate Distributive Justice -- Micro Versus Macro Distributive Justice -- The Domain of Distributive Justice Concerns -- 4 Procedural Justice -- Procedural Justice Research -- Implications for Future Procedural Justice Research -- Research Findings -- Social Policy Support -- A Broader Procedural Justice Framework -- Legitimacy -- Procedure and the Effective Functioning of Society -- Procedural Justice Criteria -- Micro Versus Macro Procedural Justice -- Societal Implications -- 5 Retributive Justice -- What Is Retribution? -- America as a Retributive Society -- Why Are People Punitive? -- Retribution in the Future: Will the Future Become the Past? -- Retribution as a Basic Human Motivation -- Retributive Justice in Organized Groups.

AbstractDual‐process theories contend that interplay between higher‐order (i.e., regulatory) and lower‐order (i.e., reactive) systems influences the development of attention in early childhood. We therefore investigated interactions between an aspect of children's top‐down self‐regulation (i.e., effortful control; EC) and positive reactivity (indexed by observed positive affectivity; PA) and negative reactivity (indicated by cortisol stress reactivity and observed fear) in predicting children's early attention problems. We found that observed EC at the age of three predicted lower attention problems 2 years later, controlling for attention problems at baseline. Importantly, the predictive effect of EC was more pronounced for children higher in cortisol stress reactivity at the age of three; this pattern was not found for observed PA or fear. Findings align with dual‐process developmental theories that emphasize the dynamics between regulatory and reactive processes in shaping child development. Our study provides the first evidence supporting dual‐process interactions in the domain of attention problems and has implications for identifying early risk markers and informing early prevention programs for children at greater risk for attention problems.

AbstractTemperamental effortful control has important implications for children's development. Although genetic factors and parenting may influence effortful control, few studies have examined interplay between the two in predicting its development. The current study investigated associations between parenting and a facet of children's effortful control, inhibitory control (IC), and whether these associations were moderated by whether children had a 7‐repeat variant of the DRD4 exon III VNTR. A community sample of 409 3‐year‐olds completed behavioural tasks to assess IC, and observational measures of parenting were also collected. Negative parenting was associated with lower child IC. The association between children's IC and positive parenting was moderated by children's DRD4 7‐repeat status, such that children with at least one 7‐repeat allele displayed lower IC than children without this allele when positive parenting was lower. These effects appeared to be primarily influenced by parent support and engagement. Results extend recent findings suggesting that some genetic polymorphisms may increase vulnerability to contextual influences.

There is evidence that democracies are under threat around the world while the quest for strong leaders is increasing. Although the causes of these developments are complex and multifaceted, here we focus on one factor: the extent to which citizens express materialist and post-materialist concerns. We explore whether objective higher levels of democracy are differentially associated with materialist and post-materialist concerns and, in turn, whether this is related to the wish for a strong leader. Testing this hypothesis across 27 countries (N = 5,741) demonstrated a direct negative effect of democracies' development on the wish for a strong leader. Further, multi-level mediation analysis showed that the relation between the Democracy Index and the wish for a strong leader was mediated by materialist concerns. This pattern of results suggests that lower levels of democracy are associated with enhanced concerns about basic needs and this is linked to greater support for strong leaders. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion