RESUMEN

Embracing intellectual humility has been touted as a potential key factor in improving relationships among people with different perspectives. Surprisingly, little research has been conducted on how individuals perceive those who express their views with intellectual humility, and no research, to our knowledge, examined perceptions of intellectual humility in political leaders specifically. This study aimed to examine to what extent perceivers value intellectual humility in the face of a polarizing topic (abortion) and when it is expressed by political leaders (hypothetical presidential candidates) sharing or opposing one's view. We predicted that individuals would like the same-view leader more than the opposing-view leader; however, they would also prefer leaders expressing intellectual humility overall. Importantly, we also explored whether individuals would be more tolerant of intellectual arrogance when arrogance came from a leader who shared (vs. opposed) their ideology. A pilot study (N = 94) confirmed all these predictions. A preregistered study with a larger sample (N = 927) replicated these patterns and showed that positive evaluations of leaders' intellectual humility were also contingent on their views and the ways they expressed intellectual humility (openness to alternative views or fallibility of their own view). While perceivers evaluated both the same and opposing-view leaders' openness to alternative views positively, they evaluated the same-view (but not the opposing-view) leaders' expression of fallibility negatively. Our findings shed light on the boundary conditions of valuing intellectual humility while offering insights on when and why people may refrain from expressing humility themselves and knowingly or unknowingly contribute to polarizing discourse.

RESUMEN

During the most recent wave of anti-racism movements in the U.S., Critical Race Theory has gained attention as a key mechanism to identify, deconstruct, and challenge dominant white American ideologies and their associated institutional practices. Given that Critical Race Theory threatens to unmask and destabilize centralized white racialized power in the United States, dominant white cultural and institutional backlash to attack, suppress, and invalidate anti-racist ideologies and practices has reached new levels. This article proposes that the American conservative right-wing uses a core rhetorical strategy known as Institutional DARVO to undermine anti-racism movements and Critical Race Theory. Institutional DARVO is a systems-level extension of DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) which identifies three specific patterns of abuse seen in intimate partner violence. This article will provide an analysis of the document issued by former President Donald J. Trump on September 22, 2020, "Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping," to illustrate the governmental-political use of Institutional DARVO in the backlash against Critical Race Theory. This Executive Order has influenced conservative political ideas and rhetoric that has fueled the growing surge of book bans, anti-DEI governmental practices and policies, anti-education legislation, and the recent supreme court decision to declare affirmative action unlawful. Identifying these core patterns and strategies used by primarily white conservative groups and institutions to challenge anti-racist movements is critically important in addressing both the realities and false narratives around race and inequity in the United States, as these narratives are impacting our current social, political, legal, and educational culture, practices, and policies.

RESUMEN

Humans must identify others as enemies or allies to develop, protect, maintain, and refine their sense of self. This is a part of their normal psychological development. These phenomena operate on individual and large group levels and are pronounced under threat. In peril, they help create psychological boundaries between conflicting parties and bonds between allies. These boundaries and bonds are invested with strong emotions. The narcissism of minor differences concept is involved in identifying and delineating enemies at times of perceived danger. This article introduces the concept of the narcissism of minor resemblances. This concept is discussed from the psychodynamic perspective and illustrated with examples of socio-political developments from modern history. The narcissism of minor resemblances concept may help us understand the underlying dynamics of bonding with allies and identifying with others when undergoing threat and hardship. This concept connects the public arena of political action with individual psychological development. Awareness of this phenomenon can help mitigate the negative aspects of rigid enemy-ally distinctions and promote cooperation and peace. It may also help individuals impacted by psychological trauma to make meaning of psychological and societal processes experienced and contribute to their healing.

RESUMEN

Political polarization has become a growing concern in democratic societies, as it drives tribal alignments and erodes civic deliberation among citizens. Given its prevalence across different countries, previous research has sought to understand under which conditions people tend to endorse extreme opinions. However, in polarized contexts, citizens not only adopt more extreme views but also become correlated across issues that are, a priori, seemingly unrelated. This phenomenon, known as "ideological sorting", has been receiving greater attention in recent years but the micro-level mechanisms underlying its emergence remain poorly understood. Here, we study the conditions under which a social dynamic system is expected to become ideologically sorted as a function of the mechanisms of interaction between its individuals. To this end, we developed and analyzed a multidimensional agent-based model that incorporates two mechanisms: homophily (where people tend to interact with those holding similar opinions) and pairwise-coherence favoritism (where people tend to interact with ingroups holding politically coherent opinions). We numerically integrated the model's master equations that perfectly describe the system's dynamics and found that ideological sorting only emerges in models that include pairwise-coherence favoritism. We then compared the model's outcomes with empirical data from 24,035 opinions across 67 topics and found that pairwise-coherence favoritism is significantly present in datasets that measure political attitudes but absent across topics not considered related to politics. Overall, this work combines theoretical approaches from system dynamics with model-based analyses of empirical data to uncover a potential mechanism underlying the pervasiveness of ideological sorting.

RESUMEN

We investigated how individuals judge politicians embroiled in scandal. Drawing on social identity and realistic group conflict theory, we predicted that beyond an overall ingroup bias, partisans would be particularly forgiving of in-party politicians who denied or justified their misconduct rather than apologize for it. By insisting that they did nothing wrong, these politicians defend the public image of their party and signal their commitment to partisan goals. We find qualified support for this prediction across three experiments. Participants did not respond negatively to in-party politicians who apologized but did react more positively to those who denied or justified wrongdoing (relative to silence). These accounts worked only for in-party politicians and were more effective for those whose misconduct furthered their party's agenda or whose seat was high-status or pivotal for party goals. In intergroup contexts like politics, people may accept explanations for misconduct that they would otherwise find offensive.

RESUMEN

The spread of misinformation is a pressing societal challenge. Prior work shows that shifting attention to accuracy increases the quality of people's news-sharing decisions. However, researchers disagree on whether accuracy-prompt interventions work for U.S. Republicans/conservatives and whether partisanship moderates the effect. In this preregistered adversarial collaboration, we tested this question using a multiverse meta-analysis (k = 21; N = 27,828). In all 70 models, accuracy prompts improved sharing discernment among Republicans/conservatives. We observed significant partisan moderation for single-headline "evaluation" treatments (a critical test for one research team) such that the effect was stronger among Democrats than Republicans. However, this moderation was not consistently robust across different operationalizations of ideology/partisanship, exclusion criteria, or treatment type. Overall, we observed significant partisan moderation in 50% of specifications (all of which were considered critical for the other team). We discuss the conditions under which moderation is observed and offer interpretations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study reassesses the claim made in Navarrete et al. (2010) Study 1, that women's voter preference for male candidates who demonstrate cues of strong genetic fitness increases across the reproductive cycle as a function of conception risk. We report an attempt to conceptually replicate these findings, modifying the outcome variables for voter preference to reflect the 2020 election rather than the 2008 election, while maintaining fidelity to the original study by including Barack Obama as a candidate. Contrary to the original findings, conception risk did not predict greater voter support for Obama as a younger, more attractive alternative to Donald J. Trump, nor was conception risk a significant factor in other matchups we presented to participants. Candidate intelligence and participant psychopathy scores on the Dark Triad were found to be factors in preference for Obama/Biden or Trump, respectively. We discuss these results in the context of evolutionary and political psychology, suggesting the need for further research that takes political factors into account.

RESUMEN

This article is a response to the insightful pieces written about my beginning attempt of defining and elaborating on a cultural political psychology (Carriere, 2022), of which there were four - Beckstead and Jordan (2023); Busch-Jensen and Røn-Larsen (2023); Mazur (2023a); and Rutherford (2023). Their commentaries were varied in their expansions and thoughts on the work, and each provided a unique perspective on the future of a cultural political psychology. Here, I expand on the points made by each of the authors and synthesize their expansions to look forward to further theoretical elaborations within a cultural political psychology.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Politics can seem home to the most calculating and yet least rational elements of humanity. How might we systematically characterize this spectrum of political cognition? Here, we propose reinforcement learning (RL) as a unified framework to dissect the political mind. RL describes how agents algorithmically navigate complex and uncertain domains like politics. Through this computational lens, we outline three routes to political differences, stemming from variability in agents' conceptions of a problem, the cognitive operations applied to solve the problem, or the backdrop of information available from the environment. A computational vantage on maladies of the political mind offers enhanced precision in assessing their causes, consequences, and cures.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We analyze in this article the effects of personality on attitudes toward foreign policy through a comprehensive aspect-level approach. We claim that previous observed null domain-level effects are the product of the aspect-level effects of opposing signs. By and large, we show that some personality effects are of comparable size or bigger than demographics studied in the literature, and that some of these effects are unique and independent of demographic covariates. Our results show that openness, orderliness, and compassion render people to be more supportive of cooperation. Assertiveness is the primary driver of support for the use of military force, whereas politeness and withdrawal ground reverse effects. Volatility roots isolationism postures, whereas industriousness, enthusiasm, and compassion show strong opposing effects. Moving beyond the Big Five personality domain approach provides us with a deeper and more nuanced understanding of how personality is associated with attitudes toward international issues.

RESUMEN

This study aims to answer the question "Are voting behaviours of postgraduate students, a voter group who are politically educated and well-informed about voting behaviours, affected by socio-psychological factors?." In particular, if so, it also aims to reveal which socio-psychological factors affect their voting behaviours. The Q-methodology is utilised in this study. The main reason for this methodological preference is that the Q-methodology is a good tool for systematically identifying and examining a particular group's subjective views that are held around the factors shaping and affecting their voting behaviours by providing factor loadings. Factor loadings, or the cluster of participants, allow us better to illustrate each participant's association with each of the identified socio-psychological or otherwise factors, similar or different orders of ranking by the participants, to detect individual differences, and, therefore, to indicate (1) whether the socio-psychological factors affect the voting behaviours of the participants, and (2) if so, which socio-psychological factor(s) affects most. This also helps us to conclude that the participants who are mostly associated with one or more factors have similar voting behaviours corresponding to or in opposition to the assumptions of the socio-psychological approach. The participants of the research are 57 postgraduate students studying Political Science and Public Administration at Akdeniz University. The results of the research indicate that most of the participants cluster around two separate factors: while the participants gathered under Factor 1 take their political decisions more rationally and are ready to vote for alternative candidates and political parties in different elections, those who load under Factor 2 are affected by some socio-psychological factors: loyalty to her family's (the family factor) and inner circles' political preferences (the inner circle factor), and a long-term commitment and an emotional attachment to a political party and/or the candidate (the time factor). The voting behaviours of the participants gathered under no factors are, however, affected by relatively mixed factors. In addition, it is also revealed that the titles that most differentiate the preferences of the participants cluster around both Factors 1 and 2 are family, education, and rationality.

RESUMEN

A polarização política pode ser entendida como o afastamento severo de grupos com pensamentos e sentimentos opostos aos do seu grupo político. No cenário brasileiro, a polarização está presente em diversos contextos, principalmente no contexto político e pode ser capaz de influenciar o endosso de notícias falsas. Buscando entender as fake news em um contexto de polarização política, o presente artigo buscou avaliar a relação entre a polarização política e a crença em notícias falsas, tanto de esquerda quanto de direita. Para tanto, 211 participantes responderam um questionário contendo quatro instrumentos distintos: termômetro de sentimentos; avaliação de notícias; posicionamento político; e suscetibilidade às notícias falsas. Os resultados indicaram que os indivíduos tendem a acreditar em notícias falsas do seu próprio grupo político, embora participantes de direita apresentem uma maior tendência de endossar fake news em comparação com participantes de esquerda. De maneira geral, verificou-se que a polarização política afeta o endosso de fake news. Implicações para compreensão e combate às fake news são discutidas.

Political polarization can be understood as the strong alienation of groups with thoughts and feelings opposite to those of their political group. In the Brazilian scenario, polarization is present in different contexts, especially in the political context and can influence the endorsement of fake news. Seeking to understand fake news in the context of political polarization, the present article sought to evaluate the relationship between political polarization and belief in fake news, both on the left and on the right. To this end, 211 participants completed a questionnaire that included four different instruments: mood thermometer; news rating; political positioning; and susceptibility to fake news. The results indicate that individuals tend to believe fake news from their own political group, although participants from the right-wing participants are more likely to endorse fake news than participants to left-wing participants. Overall, political polarization was found to affect the endorsement of fake news. Implications for understanding and combating fake news are discussed.

RESUMEN

This article presents a discussion inspired by the invitation formed by Kevin Carriere's book: "Psychology in Policy - Redefining Politics Through The Individual". From a theoretical standpoint in culture psychology Carriere challenges the idea of politics as a particular practice carried out by mainly politicians. Instead, he attempts to anchor processes of politics in the everyday lives of individuals, directed at changing their worlds. In this article, we discuss how this ambition could evolve even further by relating it to other theoretical approaches working with similar ambitions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Empathy has the potential to bridge political divides. Here, we examine barriers to cross-party empathy and explore when and why these differ for liberals and conservatives. In four studies, U.S. and U.K. participants (total N = 4,737) read hypothetical scenarios and extended less empathy to suffering political opponents than allies or neutral targets. These effects were strongly shown by liberals but were weaker among conservatives, such that conservatives consistently showed more empathy to liberals than liberals showed to conservatives. This asymmetry was partly explained by liberals' harsher moral judgments of outgroup members (Studies 1-4) and the fact that liberals saw conservatives as more harmful than conservatives saw liberals (Studies 3 and 4). The asymmetry persisted across changes in the U.S. government and was not explained by perceptions of political power (Studies 3 and 4). Implications and future directions are discussed.

RESUMEN

The highly influential theory of "Motivated System 2 Reasoning" argues that analytical, deliberative ("System 2") reasoning is hijacked by identity when considering ideologically charged issues-leading people who are more likely to engage in such reasoning to be more polarized, rather than more accurate. Here, we fail to replicate the key empirical support for this theory across five contentious issues, using a large gold-standard nationally representative probability sample of Americans. While participants were more accurate in evaluating a contingency table when the outcome aligned with their politics (even when controlling for prior beliefs), we find that participants with higher numeracy were more accurate in evaluating the contingency table, regardless of whether or not the table's outcome aligned with their politics. These findings call for a reconsideration of the effect of identity on analytical reasoning.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Voters generally value competence in politicians. Four studies, all conducted in Germany, show that this is especially pronounced in people of higher compared with lower social class. The first study, with a representative sample (N1 = 2239), found that the reported importance of competence in politicians increased with increasing socioeconomic status (SES). This was mediated by self-perceived competence which was higher in participants of higher SES. In three further studies (two preregistered, N2a&2b = 396, N3 = 400) participants merely saw pictures of politicians' faces. Perceived competence based on facial appearance increased the likelihood of voting for a politician. Again, this effect was stronger among participants of higher compared with lower SES. This moderation persisted after controlling for participants' political orientation and politicians' perceived warmth and dominance. We discuss implications for future research on the psychological underpinnings of social class as well as appearance effects in the political context.

RESUMEN

Building on literature from political science and psychology, I argue that political attention on animals and animal-friendly political candidates cause voter backlash. I test this using two different kinds of experiments with large, representative samples. I ask respondents to consider political candidates running for office in a U.S. presidential primary context. I find that, overall, political attention on the need to reduce meat consumption for environmental reasons caused voter backlash compared to both a control condition and attention on the need to reduce reliance on gasoline-powered vehicles (also for environmental reasons). But, the heterogeneous effects of partisan identification were strong: voter backlash was mainly driven by Republicans and Democrats were neutral. Surprisingly, candidates who put attention on farm animal rights during elections faced no voter backlash from Republicans or Democrats. Animal-friendly candidates, particularly Black women and Latinas, with attributes that demonstrate personal concern for farm animals and strong support for animal rights generally fared very well in elections, receiving large boosts in voter support. This work launches a research agenda in political psychology that "brings the animal in" to politics.

RESUMEN

Economically progressive candidates-candidates who champion redistributive policies designed to reduce inequality-rarely win elections in the United States. Here, we propose that progressive candidates achieve greater support by framing their policy platforms in terms of values that resonate beyond their progressive base. In two experiments (total N = 4,138), including one preregistered experiment conducted on a nationally representative probability sample, we found that a presidential candidate who framed his progressive economic platform using values consistent with the "binding" moral foundations-e.g. patriotism, family, and respect for tradition-as opposed to values consistent with the "individualizing" foundations, e.g. equality and social justice, received significantly stronger support. This effect was driven by increased support among conservatives and, unexpectedly, moderates as well. By comparison, a manipulation of how progressive the candidate's platform was had small and inconsistent effects. Despite the potential gains associated with binding framing, analyses using presidential candidates' debate speeches reveal that appeals to binding values are least common among progressive candidates. These findings show, however, that the alignment between values and candidate support is malleable, suggesting economically progressive candidates can build broader coalitions by reframing the values they associate with their platforms.

RESUMEN

Abstract The study traces the historical elements that have influenced the development of political-critical thinking in Colombian Psychology. Four historical periods have been identified and discussed: The intellectual colonialism of Colombian Psychology (1947-1960); the social Psychiatry in the years of La comisión [The commission] (1961-1980); the community Psychology and the coexistence (1980-1991); and the psychosocial studies after recent peace processes between government and armed groups (1991-2018). Colombian political Psychology did not follow a homogeneous and linear development. The reality experienced by Colombians during more than five decades of armed conflict required Psychology to abandon the direct paths of politics and opt for psychosocial studies that promise to be the most radical heirs of a generation of Latin American critical thinking as represented by Ignacio Martín-Baró, Maritza Montero and Silvia Lane.

Resumen El estudio rastrea los elementos históricos que han influido en el desarrollo del pensamiento político-crítico en la psicología colombiana. Se identifican y discuten cuatro periodos históricos: el colonialismo intelectual de la psicología colombiana (1947-1960); la psiquiatría social en los años de La Comisión (1961-1980); la psicología comunitaria y la convivencia (1980-1991); y, finalmente, los estudios psicosociales tras los recientes procesos de paz entre el Gobierno y los grupos armados (1991-2018). La psicología política colombiana no siguió un desarrollo homogéneo y lineal. La realidad vivida por los colombianos durante más de cinco décadas de conflicto armado exigió que la psicología abandonara los caminos directos de la política y optara por los estudios psicosociales que prometen ser los herederos más radicales de una generación de pensamiento crítico latinoamericano representada por Ignacio Martín-Baró, Maritza Montero y Silvia Lane.

RESUMEN

Low public concern about anthropogenic climate change (ACC)-due in part to distrust in the scientific community-may decrease demand for policies aimed at mitigating its deleterious effects. Encouragingly, though, recent research finds that experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic has elevated trust in scientific expertise worldwide. We explore the possibility that positive attitudes toward the medical community are "spilling over" to increase ACC acceptance via globally representative survey data from 107 countries (N = 119,088) conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We show that trust in medical experts' handling of the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with increased ACC acceptance, worldwide. Problematically, though, we also show that the effects of trust in medical professionals is strongest in countries experiencing the most positive change in attitudes toward the scientific community, which tend to be disproportionately wealthy, and less likely to bear the unequal effects of climate change.

Asunto(s)