Attributional Ambiguity of Affirmative Action

We propose that affirmative action policies that are perceived to give preference to individuals solely or primarily on the basis of their group membership create attributional ambiguity about the personal deserving of individuals affected by these procedures. This ambiguity about the extent to which outcomes are deserved is hypothesized to be self-protective for people who are denied a position, but to have detrimental consequences among beneficiaries, especially if they are members of groups whose competence is doubted (either by themselves or others). Selection procedures that are perceived to be based both on individual merit and group membership, in contrast, are hypothesized to reduce attributional ambiguity about deserving and thus attenuate the effects of group-based preferential selection procedures on those who are benefited and bypassed by these procedures. An experiment was conducted to test these hypotheses. Men and women were randomly selected or rejected for a leadership role under one of three procedures: outcomes based (a) solely on sex, (b) solely on merit, or (c) on both sex and merit. Results provided partial support for our hypotheses.     

WHAT DO FEMINISTS BELIEVE?

When a woman says "I am a feminist" what does she mean? What do other people think she means? We asked 71 women to complete the Feminist Perspectives Scale (Henley, Meng, O'Brien, McCarthy, & Sockloskie, 1998) from their own perspective and from the perspective of a "typical feminist." Women who self-identified as feminists had stronger beliefs than those who did not on all feminist perspectives except cultural feminism. Both groups believed that a typical feminist held stronger radical, socialist, and cultural feminist beliefs than they themselves did, although the discrepancies were greater for nonfeminists. Nonfeminists viewed a typical feminist as endorsing stronger cultural feminist views than did feminists. Our results indicate that feminist self-identity is related to endorsement of feminist ideologies, and that both feminists and nonfeminists think that a typical feminist is more extreme than they are. The results also suggest that cultural feminism is a contested ideology; it is not endorsed by feminists, but is ascribed to them by nonfeminists     

Comparing genderblind and colorblind ideologies in public and private contexts

People endorse colorblind and genderblind ideologies to appear unbiased toward race or gender, but although they have similar meanings these two ideologies have not been compared across public and private contexts. Given that laws make both gender and race discrimination illegal in public settings, such as schools and workplaces, people may hold similar ideologies in public, professional settings. However, differences in how gender and race are viewed in private contexts, such as friendships or families, could contribute to differential endorsement and use of the ideologies. The current research measured the self-reported endorsement of genderblind or colorblind ideologies in different contexts (Studies 2 and 3) and a behavioral manifestation of blindness within a decision-making paradigm (Studies 1, 2, and 3). In this paradigm, participants imagined themselves in an academic and/or social situation and chose which of two targets of different genders or races should join them in a group. Being blind to race or gender involved opting out of this choice. Participants also rated the appropriateness of using gender and race to make these decisions (Study 3). As predicted, in private, social situations participants (a) endorsed colorblindness more than genderblindness, (b) were more likely to show blind decision-making in cross-race than cross-gender choices, and (c) perceived race-based decisions as more inappropriate than gender-based decisions. In public (academic and work) situations, colorblind and genderblind measures were equivalent. Thus, people's beliefs about the value of being blind to gender and race differ in social situations and this difference has implications for equality.     

Error Patterns in the Prediction of Fertility Behavior1

Two separate three-wave, 2-year, longitudinal studies investigated error patterns in two decision models' predictions of couples' birth-planning decisions. One study tested the subjective expected utility model with a sample of married couples from the state of Washington and the other study tested the Fishbein model using a sample of married women from Illinois. Consistent with the proposal that predictions of deviation from the status quo result in a higher proportion of prediction errors than predictions of nondeviation from the status quo, both studies demonstrated that when couples were predicted to decide not to become pregnant, predictive accuracy was very high, but when couples were predicted to decide to become pregnant, predictive accuracy was significantly lower. Two hypothesized explanations for the biased error pattern were considered and received some support. The first, resembling the concept of inertia, is that a stronger motivational force is required to compel a person to elect a change from the status quo than is required to maintain the status quo. The second focuses on changes in decisions as a function of time and events. The heuristic value of directly examining prediction errors, in contrast to the more prevalent practice of reporting only one summary index of goodness of fit, was discussed.     

The Relation of Perceived Neighborhood Danger to Childhood Aggression: A Test of Mediating Mechanisms

In the current study, two mediational mechanisms, parenting practices and children's beliefs about aggression, were hypothesized to account for the relationship between perceived neighborhood danger and childhood aggression. Using structural equation modeling, data were analyzed from an inner-city school-based sample of 732 predominantly African American 5th graders. Results suggested that perceived neighborhood danger was associated with strong positive beliefs about aggression, which in turn was associated with high levels of aggression. The hypothesized mediating role of parenting practices (restrictive discipline, parental monitoring, and parental involvement) on the relation between perceived neighborhood danger and child aggression was not supported. However, the current findings suggest that children's positive beliefs about aggression mediated the relationship between restrictive discipline and aggression. Directions for future research are discussed.     

Attributing illness to 'old age:' consequences of a self-directed stereotype for health and mortality

Stereotypic beliefs about older adults and the aging process have led to endorsement of the myth that 'to be old is to be ill.' This study examined community-dwelling older adults' (N?=?105, age 80+) beliefs about the causes of their chronic illness (ie, heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.), and tested the hypothesis that attributing the onset of illness to 'old age' is associated with negative health outcomes. A series of multiple regressions (controlling for chronological age, gender, income, severity of chronic conditions, functional status and health locus of control) demonstrated that 'old age' attributions were associated with more frequent perceived health symptoms, poorer health maintenance behaviours and a greater likelihood of mortality at 2-year follow-up. The probability of death was more than double among participants who strongly endorsed the 'old age' attribution as compared to those who did not (36% vs. 14%). Findings are framed in the context of self-directed stereotypes and implications for potential interventions are considered.     

Beyond anti-Muslim sentiment: opposing the Ground Zero mosque as a means to pursuing a stronger America

Americans' opposition toward building an Islamic community center at Ground Zero has been attributed solely to a general anti-Muslim sentiment. We hypothesized that some Americans' negative reaction was also due to their motivation to symbolically pursue a positive U.S. group identity, which had suffered from a concurrent economic and political downturn. Indeed, when participants perceived that the United States was suffering from lowered international status, those who identified strongly with the country, as evidenced especially by a high respect or deference for group symbols, reported a stronger opposition to the "Ground Zero mosque" than participants who identified weakly with the country did. Furthermore, participants who identified strongly with the country also showed a greater preference for buildings that were symbolically congruent than for buildings that were symbolically incongruent with the significance of Ground Zero, and they represented Ground Zero with a larger symbolic size. These findings suggest that identifying group members' underlying motivations provides unusual insights for understanding intergroup conflict.     

Believing in a Purpose of Events: Cross‐Cultural Evidence of Confusions in Core Knowledge

We examined beliefs in the purpose of events in the American population. Previously, separate researchers surveyed these beliefs in the Finnish population. Their methodology was used to assess the beliefs in a dissimilar demographic. Four hypotheses were tested using questionnaire responses (N = 429; 301 women; M_age = 20.46) and analyzed with structural equation modeling. As hypothesized, a positive correlation was found between beliefs in the purpose of events and paranormal beliefs. Confusions of core biological, physical, and psychological knowledge predicted the belief variables—as hypothesized, although model fit was mediocre. Core knowledge confusions were also hypothesized to predict religiousness and purposeful‐event beliefs. A close‐fitting model displayed weak predictive power and was interpreted as insufficient support for the third hypothesis. Lastly, we hypothesized and found that participants rated events they experienced as more purposeful than events that they did not experience. We provide insight for the findings and make suggestions for future studies. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Status legitimizing beliefs predict positivity toward Whites who claim anti-White bias

Although Whites are increasingly likely to perceive themselves as victims of racial bias, research provides little insight into how anti-White bias claimants are perceived. Two studies examined whether Whites' endorsement of status legitimizing beliefs (SLBs) moderates their reactions toward White discrimination claimants. In Study 1, Whites who rejected SLBs reacted less favorably to an anti-White bias claimant relative to one who made a nondiscriminatory external claim, whereas Whites who endorsed SLBs expressed equally positive attitudes toward an anti-White bias claimant and a non-claimant. In Study 2, Whites who were not primed with status legitimizing beliefs displayed negative reactions toward an anti-White bias claimant compared to a non-claimant, whereas those primed with SLBs expressed more positive attitudes and a desire to help the anti-White bias claimant. Implications for affirmative action litigation are discussed.     

The entertainment value of conspiracy theories

Many citizens around the globe believe conspiracy theories. Why are conspiracy theories so appealing? Here, we propose that conspiracy theories elicit intense emotions independent of emotional valence. People therefore find conspiracy theories entertaining – that is, narratives that people perceive as interesting, exciting, and attention-grabbing – and such entertainment appraisals are positively associated with belief in them. Five studies supported these ideas. Participants were exposed to either a conspiratorial or a non-conspiratorial text about the Notre Dame fire (Study 1) or the death of Jeffrey Epstein (preregistered Study 2). The conspiratorial text elicited stronger entertainment appraisals and intense emotions (independent of emotional valence) than the non-conspiratorial text; moreover, entertainment appraisals mediated the effects of the manipulation on conspiracy beliefs. Study 3 indicated that participants endorsed stronger conspiracy beliefs when an election event was described in an entertaining rather than a boring manner. Subsequent findings revealed that both organisational (Study 4) and societal conspiracy beliefs (Study 5) are positively associated with sensation seeking – a trait characterised by a preference for exciting and intense experiences. We conclude that one reason why people believe conspiracy theories is because they find them entertaining.     

The Rokeach Value Survey and Social Desirability

Abstract

Social influence and social power were examined in two studies. In Study 1, samples of U.S. students who had been presented with randomly ordered lists of 13 influence tactics and power bases predicted the likelihood that an influence agent would use the tactics or power bases, for seven status-differentiated, hypothetical relationships. Lower status agents were perceived to use influence tactics, and higher status agents were perceived to use power bases. In Study 2, female students were assigned either a supervisory role or a subordinate role. The participants in the supervisory and subordinate roles identified power bases or influence tactics that had been rated by the participants in Study 1 as commonly used by higher or lower status influence agents, respectively. The results of the present study seem to support the notion that social influence and social power are separate strategies.     

Do Applicants' Perceptions Matter? Investigating Reapplication Behavior Using Fairness Theory

This study used a fairness theory approach to examine a link between applicants' perceptions and their actual reapplication behavior. We suggested that applicants who do not receive job offers form ‘Would’ counterfactuals based on perceived performance and ‘Should’ counterfactuals based on two procedural justice rules (job relatedness and opportunity to perform). Participants (N=542) were applicants for a United States federal government position. After not being hired in the initial selection process, 9% of the applicants reapplied for the job the following year. We found some support for the hypothesized interactions. The job relatedness–perceived performance interaction was not significant, but the opportunity to perform–perceived performance interaction was. Opportunity to perform had a stronger influence when perceived performance was higher.