Defensive Partisanship? Evidence that In-Party Scandals Increase Out-Party Hostility

Contemporary U.S. politics is characterized by polarization and interpartisan antipathy. This is accompanied by a media landscape saturated with coverage of political scandals. Applying a social identity perspective, we examined whether exposure to scandals that threaten partisan's moral group image (i.e., in-party scandals), may motivate defensive hostility against opposing partisans. Across three experiments we exposed U.S. partisans to scandals attributed to either in-party or out-party politicians. We then assessed partisan hostility using a variety of operationalizations, including anger at a real outgroup politician (Study 1), judgments about the alleged misdeeds of a fabricated outgroup politician (Study 2), and negative perceptions of opposing party members (Study 3). Strength of partisan identity was assessed as a predicted moderator (Study 3). As expected in- (vs. out-) party scandals, were perceived as group-image threats and elicited greater hostility towards opposing partisans, independent of partisans' ideological extremity or prior affective polarization.     

Partisan Provocation: The Role of Partisan News Use and Emotional Responses in Political Information Sharing in Social Media

Citizens increasingly rely on social media to consume and disseminate news and information about politics, but the factors that drive political information sharing on these sites are not well understood. This study focused on how online partisan news use influences political information sharing in part because of the distinct negative emotions it arouses in its audience. Using panel survey data collected during the 2012 U.S. presidential election, we found that use of proattitudinal partisan news online is associated with increased anger, but not anxiety, directed at the opposing party's presidential candidate and that anger subsequently facilitated information sharing about the election on social media. The results suggest partisan media may drive online information sharing by generating anger in its audience.     

How Sexuality Information Impacts Attitudes and Behaviors Toward Gay Service Members

The repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy raises several questions and this article examines two of these: (1) Do gay/lesbian service members elicit personal discomfort in coworkers? and (2) Do gay/lesbian service members receive equitable administrative actions? Active duty Air Force office personnel (N?=?181) reported their attitudes toward open service and responded to hypothetical scenarios depicting gay/lesbian or heterosexual male/female subordinates. Gays/lesbians elicited more personal comfort than heterosexuals, and no differences existed between gays/lesbians and heterosexuals in administrative actions. Attitudes toward open service predicted personal comfort but not administrative action ratings.     

U.S. and Canadian Attitudes Toward International Interactions: A Cross-National Test of the Double-Standard Hypothesis

In the early 1960s Oskamp (1965) found that American university students displayed a double standard toward similar or identical actions of the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Our research replicates and extends Oskamp's study. Using some of Oskamp's original statements that are still applicable to U.S. and Soviet actions (as well as adding several to update US-Soviet relations), parallel questionnaires were distributed to American and French-Canadian university students. Both groups displayed a double standard, although this was more pronounced for Americans than for Canadians. The effects of gender, education, and partisan affiliation are also examined, but generally found to be insignificant.     

The Formation of Attitudes Toward New Immigrant Groups1

People often receive information about new immigrant groups prior to any direct contact with group members. However, it is not clear how this information shapes attitudes toward the groups. To explore this issue, 204 subjects were told about an unknown immigrant group that was presented as high or low in personal relevance. Subjects were then given positive or negative consensus information about the emotions that group members elicit from others, group members' personality traits, and group members' values. As expected, results indicated that the presentation of positive information about emotional reactions, personality traits, and values caused attitudes to be more favorable than did the presentation of negative information. Importantly, however, the combined impact of the emotion and personality trait information depended on whether the group was perceived to be of high or low personal relevance. Specifically, when the information about emotions and personality traits was similarly valanced (i.e., both were positive or both were negative), attitudes toward the group tended to be less favorable in the high personal relevance condition than in the low personal relevance condition. In contrast, when mixed information was presented (i.e., positive emotions and negative personality traits or negative emotions and positive personality traits), attitudes tended to be more favorable in the high personal relevance condition. In addition, attitudes, once formed, predicted further perceptions of the group and behavioral intentions toward group members. The implications of the findings for the reduction of prejudice toward new immigrant groups are discussed.     

A DEFENSE OF BUDDHISM,MEDITATION, AND FREE WILL: A THEORY OF MENTAL FREEDOM

This is my response to the criticisms of Gregg Caruso, David Cummiskey, and Karin Meyers, in their roles as members of the “Author Meets Critics” panel devoted to my book, Buddhism, Meditation, and Free Will: A Theory of Mental Freedom at the 2019 annual meeting of the Eastern Division of the American Philosophical Association, organized by Christian Coseru. Caruso's main objection is that I am not sufficiently attentive to details of opposing arguments in Western philosophy, and Cummiskey's and Meyers’ objections, similarly, are that I am insufficiently attentive to details of Buddhism. I argue that all such objections, however putatively correct, do not rise to the level of objections that actually undermine my account of mental freedom.     

Partisan Bias and Information Discounting in Economic Judgments

Research shows that partisanship biases people's views about the economy. Yet, there is little understanding of the factors, if any, that might mitigate the influence of partisanship on these judgments or the effect of partisanship on metacognitive judgments. This study uses an experimental design to show that partisanship continues to bias economic judgments even when subjects receive direct and neutral information about specific aspects of the economy. Moreover, it extends our understanding of partisan bias by showing it has a direct effect on people's metacognitive assessments of their own attitudes—particularly the degree of uncertainty people have in their own economic judgments. However, it appears that people are aware of the conflict between their partisan‐based judgment and economic information since we observe increases in economic uncertainty when information is counter to a subject's partisan predisposition. The results provide new insight into the extent of partisan bias and the difficulty of countering partisan‐based judgments.     

God's Triunity and Self-Determination: A Conversation with Karl Barth, Bruce McCormack and Paul Molnar

Abstract: A recent disagreement between Bruce McCormack and Paul Molnar highlights some of the issues involved in discussing the relationship between God's triunity and determination to be God‐with‐us. Can we say that God's determination to be with us is the basis of God's triunity? Must we identify the Son's being as eternally toward‐incarnation? How does God's freedom relate to God's eternal decision to be God‐with‐humanity? In this article I argue (contra McCormack) that God's triunity logically precedes God's determination to be with us, but (contra Molnar) that this logical precedence entails neither that the pre‐incarnate Son is utterly unknown to us nor that God retains some freedom to be God‐without‐humanity.     

Motivated to Forgive? Partisan Scandals and Party Supporters

In this study, we investigate how partisan motivations shape voters' reactions to a political scandal by drawing on a unique survey experiment fielded immediately after Justin Trudeau's brownface/blackface scandal broke during the 2019 Canadian election. We thus explore motivated reasoning in real time in a competitive and highly partisan election context. Are voters more willing to forgive politicians for past behavior when their own party leader's impropriety is cued? To what extent do personal interests, such as cross-pressures or electoral concerns, affect the motivation to forgive? Our findings show that partisan-motivated reasoning is overwhelmingly powerful, producing politically biased judgments of politicians implicated in scandals. Furthermore, voters' willingness to forgive scandals is also influenced by “strategic” considerations, in that preferences over which political party wins or loses in the election affect opinions about whether someone should be forgiven or whether the scandal is considered important at all. However, we find no evidence that personal involvement in the issue raised by the scandal conditions partisan motivations. We posit that the environment—in this case, a competitive election—is an important consideration for understanding the extent and limits of partisan-motivated reasoning.     

Influence of social factors in the development of the young child's moral judgment

In a series of seven different studies, the author attempted to test Piaget's theoretical position of social factors as primary contributors to the development of moral judgment. Populations of American and Swiss subjects were presented with moral dilemmas stories opposing adult—child and child—child situations and classified into three moral levels (heteronomous, intermediate, autonomous). The influence of school was studied by camparing moral levels of subjects who had never attended school to moral levels of kindergarten and first grade students. Questionnaires sent to Swiss and American parents provided information about their attitude toward the children's socialization. Effect of interaction was measured by interviewing subjects individually, then in pairs and on an individual post-test three weeks later. Results demonstrate the role of social factors such as dynamic exchanges, discussions and oppositions in the learning of moral values. Cognitive conflicts are seen as fostering decentration and achievement of higher level responses through the equilibration process.     

“I,Me, Mine” or “Us,We, Ours?”: The Influence of Cultural Psychology on Web-Based Customization

A profusion of recent research on consumer responses to individualized messages points to an enduring interest in the psychology of web-based customization. Across disciplines, the consensus is that highly individualized messages will generate more favorable outcomes than less individualized ones because they match message recipients' need for unique self-identity. We challenge this popular notion by arguing that highly individualized messages will not be as effective in collectivistic cultures that discourage unique self-identity. We test this proposition in a 2 × 3 experiment by randomly assigning participants (N = 120) representing either an individualistic or collectivistic culture (American, Chinese, respectively) to one of two levels of a customized message (highly individualized vs. less highly individualized) or a noncustomized, generic message (control condition). The experimental findings suggest a significant mediated moderation effect: Culture moderates the relationship between message type and attitude such that American participants report a more favorable attitude toward highly individualized messages and Chinese participants report a more favorable attitude toward less highly individualized messages, and this moderation is mediated by a psychological sense of community. Besides theoretical implications, we also highlight an original methodological procedure for manipulating customized messages in online environments.     

Representation of ideal figure size in Ebony magazine: a content analysis

Studies examining trends over time in mainstream magazines observe decreases in women's figure size, and increases in figure exposure and amount of diet/exercise content. Little is known, however, regarding the content of African American magazines. Utilizing methods from classic studies, this investigation examined content in Ebony, a magazine with wide African American readership, from 1969 to 2008. We included the full content of N = 462 issues, with a total of N = 539 cover images of women, of which N = 208 were full-body shots. Analyses indicated a curvilinear relationship between time and figure exposure, with a recent trend toward more full-body shots, similar to mainstream magazines. Contrary to previous studies, however, the majority of figures across time were average size, and a curvilinear relationship between time and diet/exercise content showed peak content in the early 1990s. Results are considered in context of research indicating African American women show less body dissatisfaction than other racial/ethnic groups.     

God and Country: The Partisan Psychology of the Presidency,Religion, and Nation

Overt love of God and country have seemingly been prerequisites to be president in the United States in recent decades, if not always. Indeed, the 2008 presidential race was replete with campaign messages showcasing such perspectives—that Barack Obama and John McCain were religiously faithful and deeply patriotic. Scholarship demonstrates the potential political power of explicit appeals to America and Christianity; however, little research has examined (a) citizens' perceptions of candidates' ties to faith and nation and (b) how these impressions may be related to electoral attitudes and intended vote. We address this gap, measuring both explicit and implicit indicators of the Christian‐ness and American‐ness of Obama and McCain. We expected and found that both explicit and—in a final‐entry regression position—implicit perceptions of these traits related to voters' overall candidate attitudes and intended vote choice and that they were connected significantly more strongly for our sample of self‐described Republicans than Democrats. Results illuminate these partisan differences and raise questions about their implications for U.S. presidential politics in years to come.     

Not Simply in the Eye of the Beholder: Authenticity as a Product of Candidate Preference and Unfettered Speech

Authenticity has emerged over recent decades as a prominent theme in both the press and in political research—and peaked in the 2016 presidential contest that pitted Donald Trump against Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz. In this context, we attempted to answer the question: How do voters judge a presidential candidate's authenticity? Here we use motivated reasoning and correspondent inference theory as theoretical frameworks to examine how partisan preference combines with perceptions of unfettered speech and strategic impression management to influence voter judgments of a candidate's authenticity. An online survey of 525 respondents demonstrated that individuals' partisan preferences influenced both judgments of a candidate's authenticity and their perceptions of behaviors signifying authenticity (use of unfettered speech versus strategic impression management). These behavioral signals partially mediated the relation between candidate preferences and authenticity judgments. Moreover, voters, given their partisan preferences, differentially weighted candidates' use of unfettered speech and strategic impression management tactics in their judgments of authenticity. Finally, unfiltered/politically incorrect speech was found to have both positive and negative effects on authenticity judgments. Findings further elucidate the nature of authenticity as perceived in others and identify intermediary variables and boundary conditions that influence those perceptions.     

Tracing the Boundaries of Motivated Reasoning: How Deliberative Minipublics Can Improve Voter Knowledge

A large body of work shows that reasoning motivated by partisan cues and prior attitudes leads to unreflective decisions and disparities in empirical beliefs across groups. Surprisingly little research, however, has tested the limits of motivated reasoning. We argue that the publicly circulated findings of deliberative minipublics can spark a more reflective motivation in voters when these bodies provide policy-relevant factual information. To test that proposition, we conducted a survey experiment using information generated by one such minipublic during an election. Results showed that exposure to the minipublic's findings improved the accuracy of voters' empirical beliefs regarding a ballot proposition on the regulation of genetically modified seeds. This treatment effect transcended voters' partisan identities and prior environmental attitudes. In some instances, the respondents showing the greatest knowledge gains were those who a directional motivated-reasoning account would have expected to resist the treatment most effectively, owing to party identity or prior attitudes.     

To connect is to be influenced: What determines a third‐party's forgiveness attitudes to conflicting groups' violent partisan members?

The present research seeks to answer the question of what determines an uninvolved third party's forgiveness attitudes toward conflicting groups' violent partisan members. Specifically, Bangladeshi participants read a fictitious interview with a radicalized Palestinian who declared his intention to avenge himself against Israelis for his personal and collective plight by carrying out a suicide bombing attack. Findings reveal that an empathy manipulation (high empathy = other focused or low empathy = objective focused) influenced participants' forgiveness attitudes towards the radicalized Palestinian such that in the high empathy condition participants were more forgiving of the target than participants in the low empathy condition. Moreover, while the strength of their religious identification (Islam) played no significant role, participants' tendency to attribute the target's decision to situational factors fully mediated the effects of empathy on forgiveness.     

When groups are wrong and deviants are right

How do group members respond when their group wrongfully punishes a group member? In two experiments, participants were presented with an ingroup member who argued for group change on moral (Experiment 1, N = 73) or scientific grounds (Experiment 2, N = 94). Despite being right, the member was treated as deviant by the group. We manipulated whether the group retained its former opinion or adopted the deviant's position, and whether the deviant's punishment was ongoing or whether the deviant was reinstated. We tested opposing predictions about how these group actions would affect group members' negativity towards the deviant. Both studies showed that negativity towards the deviant was highest when the group opinion was unchanged and the deviant was not reinstated. Further, opinion change or reintegration defused negativity towards the deviant. Implications of groups rejecting or embracing change, and their effects on the evaluation of wrongfully accused deviants are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Humiliate My Enemies or Mock My Friends? Applying Disposition Theory of Humor to the Study of Political Parody Appreciation and Attitudes Toward Candidates

The research examines politically entertaining media through a mass communication lens, applying the disposition theory of humor toward the study of political parody appreciation and the effects of exposure to varied humor types on political attitudes. The analyses rely on experimental data (N = 269) collected in 2013. The results of the first analysis suggest that the interaction of disposition and exposure to different types of humor significantly influences variation in political parody appreciation. The findings from the second analysis show that negative affect toward the opposing candidate, or the presumed victor of a humorous situation, can dampen attitudes toward the victim given exposure to critical humor. The strategic implications for campaigns looking to engage with humor are discussed.     

Morphological learning in a novel language: A cross-language comparison

Being able to extract and interpret the internal structure of complex word forms such as the English word dance+r+s is crucial for successful language learning. We examined whether the ability to extract morphological information during word learning is affected by the morphological features of one's native tongue. Spanish and Finnish adult participants performed a word–picture associative learning task in an artificial language where the target words included a suffix marking the gender of the corresponding animate object. The short exposure phase was followed by a word recognition task and a generalization task for the suffix. The participants' native tongues vary greatly in terms of morphological structure, leading to two opposing hypotheses. On the one hand, Spanish speakers may be more effective in identifying gender in a novel language because this feature is present in Spanish but not in Finnish. On the other hand, Finnish speakers may have an advantage as the abundance of bound morphemes in their language calls for continuous morphological decomposition. The results support the latter alternative, suggesting that lifelong experience on morphological decomposition provides an advantage in novel morphological learning.     

Triangulating Political Responsibility: The Motivated Formation of Responsibility Judgments

This article analyzes the process through which partisan bias arises during the formation of citizens' judgments of political responsibility. Informed by theories of motivated political reasoning, it argues that exposure to partisan cues motivates partisans to pursue directional goals, goals which bias the cognitive processing of information and, in turn, overall judgments of responsibility. It further argues that the nature of this biased processing will be such that partisans devalue information inconsistent with their partisan affect. Using a pair of experiments, I test these hypotheses by manipulating both objective evidence concerning gubernatorial responsibility for a state's fiscal imbalance and the presence of partisan cues. Findings support both sets of expectations. The results also suggest that the effects of partisan bias are greater in judgments tied to institutional actions than in those tied to institutional roles and expectations.