Self‐legislation,Respect and the Reconciliation of Minority Claims

It is a widely supported claim that liberal democratic institutions should treat citizens with equal respect. I neither dispute nor champion this claim, but investigate how it could be fulfilled. I do this by asking, as a sort of litmus test, how liberal democratic institutions should treat with respect citizens holding minority convictions, and thereby dissenting from a deliberative output. The first step of my argument consists in clarifying the sense in which liberal democracies have a primary concern for the respectful treatment of citizens qua self‐legislating persons. Taking the second step, I address critically the common tendency in the literature to concentrate on what I have termed the ex ante legem phase, focusing solely on the structure of institutionalized decision‐making processes. I submit, rather, that the principle of equal respect for persons demands more of liberal democratic institutions to enhance citizens' chances to give voice to their consciences and influence, on that ground, the formulation of the rules to which they should conform. Fulfilling this commitment requires democratic theorizing to go beyond the ex ante legem phase and regard forms of ex post legem contestation as an extension of citizens' right to political participation. Against this backdrop, I take the third and last step and argue that a promising way forward consists in the adoption of an ex post legem version of conscientious exemptionism, granting citizens a conditional moral right to request exemptions on the grounds of conscience from certain controversial legal and political provisions.     

From Group Member to Democratic Citizen: How Deliberating with Fellow Jurors Reshapes Civic Attitudes

This investigation assesses the attitudinal impact of one of America’s most distinctive and famous group activities—jury deliberation. Tocqueville and the U.S. Supreme Court have both reasoned that jury service can promote civic engagement and recent research supports this view. The present study examines whether the attitudinal impact of jury deliberation depends on the quality of one’s jury experience. Two panel surveys of 2,410 total jurors tested the reciprocal relationship between the subjective experience of deliberation and the changes in civic attitudes toward oneself, fellow citizens, and public institutions. Principal results of structural equation models showed multiple effects of jury deliberation on attitudes, but there were no effects on one’s civic identity and political self‐efficacy. Reciprocally, every civic attitude except faith in fellow citizens was predictive of deliberative experience in at least one of the two studies. Overall, the study bolsters the claim of deliberative democratic theorists that the experience of consequential face‐to‐face talk can make private individuals into public citizens by reinforcing their confidence in fellow citizens and public institutions.     

Why Toleration Is Not the Appropriate Response to Dissenting Minorities' Claims

For many liberal democrats toleration has become a sort of pet‐concept, to which appeal is made in the face of a myriad issues related to the treatment of minorities. Against the inflationary use of toleration, whether understood positively as recognition or negatively as forbearance, I argue that toleration may not provide the conceptual and normative tools to understand and address the claims for accommodation raised by at least one kind of significant minority: democratic dissenting minorities. These are individuals, or aggregates of them, who oppose, on principled grounds, the outcomes of the majoritarian decision‐making process. I argue that democratic dissenting minorities' claims are better understood as calls for respect for a person's capacity for self‐legislation. I view respect as the cornerstone of justice in a liberal democracy: all norms resulting in a constraint on a person's conduct should be appropriately justified to her. I argue that the reconciliation of democratic dissenting minorities' claims requires an enhancement of the justificatory strategies of democratic decisions by enhancing in turn citizens' rights to political participation. This should be done both during decision making and after a provision is enacted by also securing space for contestation through such forms of illegal protest as civil disobedience and conscientious objection.     

The Etiology of Individual-Targeted Intolerance: Group Stereotypes and Judgments of Individual Group Members

Virtually all scientific writing on attitudes toward political unorthodoxy in the United States focuses on group-targeted tolerance, or the question of whether Americans are willing to extend constitutional rights and freedoms to groups outside the political mainstream. Less is known about the etiology of individual-targeted tolerance, or the question of whether Americans are willing to tolerate the exercise of constitutional rights and freedoms by individuals who belong to unpopular groups. This paper examines the sources of attitudes toward individuals belonging to disliked and stereotyped political groups—in particular, the extent to which political tolerance judgments about gay and racist targets are influenced by attributes of those targets that are either consistent or inconsistent with group stereotypes. In line with expectations, an empirical analysis showed that individuals exhibiting attributes inconsistent with their group's stereotype (whether neutral with respect to stereotypic beliefs or directly challenging them) are tolerated more than those with stereotype-consistent attributes. Because members of political outgroups can control the timing of disclosing their group membership, they have the power to determine whether and to what extent stereotypic beliefs associated with their group will influence the reactions they provoke. This analysis confirms that the impact of stereotypic beliefs on tolerance varies as a function of timing of group membership revelation, although the direction of this interaction depends on the intensity of dislike for the group of which the individual target is a member.     

Respect for group members: intragroup determinants of collective identification and group-serving behavior

This experiment examined how (disrespectful vs. respectful) treatment and (negative vs. positive) performance evaluation, both received from the same fellow group members, affects collective identification and willingness to engage in group-serving behavior. It was predicted and found that respectful as opposed to disrespectful intragroup treatment increased collective identification and willingness to engage in group-serving behavior in the immediate group situation, irrespective of whether intragroup evaluation was positive or negative. There was also evidence of a mediating role of collective identification. Regression analyses based on the measurement of perceived intragroup treatment and perceived intragroup evaluation as continuous variables corroborated these findings but also pointed to limits of the positive effects of respectful intragroup treatment. Finally, the interrelation of treatment and evaluation by fellow group members as two possible components of intragroup respect are discussed as well as the political dimension of research on intragroup respect.     

The Influence of Institutional Salience on Political Attitudes and Activism among Catholic Priests in the United States

What motivates clergy political attitudes and behavior? We investigate this using a questions‐as‐treatment randomized experiment focusing on Roman Catholic priests in the United States. Our results suggest substantial utility in using a question frame referencing the distinct institutional expectations that clergy regularly confront. Specifically, when randomly primed to consider the expectations of institutional reference groups, clergy exhibit significantly higher levels of conservatism and report higher levels of political engagement, which is in line with their church's institutional preferences more generally. Our findings underscore the need for experimental methodology to make increased inroads into understanding political outcomes in religious contexts.     

Introduction: Beyond Toleration?

Although tolerance is widely regarded as a virtue of both individuals and groups that modern democratic and multiculturalist societies cannot do without, there is still much disagreement among political thinkers as to what tolerance demands, or what can be done to create and sustain a culture of tolerance. The philosophical literature on toleration contains three main strands. (1) An agreement that a tolerant society is more than a modus vivendi; (2) discussion of the proper object(s) of toleration; (3) debate about whether there is a ‘paradox’ of toleration and, if so, how it might be solved. This Introduction outlines how each of the subsequent papers addresses problems in the theory and practice of toleration, in the light of these three strands in the existing literature. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Deliberation from Within: Changing One's Mind During an Interview

This article examines whether a public opinion survey can improve the quality of political attitudes. More specifically, we argue that simply positioning a summary attitudinal question after a balanced series of relevant items can increase people's ability to answer in a way that better reflects their underlying interests, values, and predispositions. By manipulating the location of the vote preference question in two separate national election campaign surveys, we find that there are fewer undecided respondents when the question is asked at the end of the survey rather than early on, that some people are changing their mind during the questionnaire, that a larger set of determinants is structuring late‐survey vote choice, and that voting preferences based on the later question are a better predictor of the actual vote. The findings carry important lessons for students of deliberation and of citizen decision making.     

Examining employee compliance with organizational surveillance and monitoring

Although the prevalence of employee monitoring and surveillance technologies (MSTs; e.g. e‐mail monitoring) is increasing, very little research has explored the question of whether employees simply accept these systems (compliance) or enact strategies for thwarting them (resistance). In the present study, we proposed a framework based on the theory of planned behaviour and ethical decision making research to predict employees' MST compliance and resistance intentions. We proposed that organizational commitment, organizational identification, and attitudes towards surveillance would predict intentions, with the relationships between attitudes and intentions being moderated by employees' perceived behavioural control and social norms. Moderated multiple regression models were tested and provided support for predictions about the attitudinal and belief constructs, and partial support for predictions about behavioural control and norms. Implications for organizational MST policies and practices are discussed.     

Partner's understanding of affective–cognitive meta‐bases predicts relationship quality

Knowledge that partners have about each other's attitudes are consequential for relationship quality. This article extends prior research and examines whether knowledge regarding a partner's meta‐attitudinal bases, or subjective perceptions of how one's attitudes are driven, can influence relationship quality. Given how meta‐bases are reflective of information‐processing goals, we hypothesized that partner understanding of meta‐attitudinal bases would positively predict relationship quality. Self and partner ratings of how relationally relevant attitudes were driven, as well as perceptions of relationship quality, were assessed. Results revealed that a partner's knowledge of one's meta‐bases positively predicts one's own reported relationship quality. Results remained significant when controlling for relationship duration and meta‐bases similarity. Implications of meta‐bases understanding for close relationship functioning are discussed.     

The Relationship Between Attitudinal Ambivalence and Desire to Quit Smoking Among College Smokers1

Growing evidence shows that attitudes can exist on a bivariate rather than a bipolar plane. This conceptualization provides a more dynamic approach to studying how attitudinal ambivalence (i. e., evaluating an attitude object as both positive and negative) affects smoking‐related behaviors. Based on a sample of 157 college smokers, we obtained preliminary validational support for a smoking‐specific felt attitudinal ambivalence scale. Felt attitudinal ambivalence correlated positively with potential for ambivalence, negative attitudes, and negative as well as positive outcome expectancies related to smoking. Smokers who felt more ambivalent reported a greater desire to quit and were more likely to be contemplators, as defined by the transtheoretical model of behavioral change. In multivariate analyses, felt ambivalence toward smoking predicted desire to quit after controlling for positive and negative attitudes and negative smoking consequences. These results provide promising support for the smoking‐specific felt‐ambivalence scale, and suggest that attitudinal ambivalence should be investigated further as a motivational mechanism to affect smoking cessation.     

Religion–state relations and public opinion: norms,institutions and social consensus

ABSTRACT

Are levels of religion–state regulation associated with cross-national variation in attitudes related to the place of religion in public life? Data sources measuring both the institutional relationship between religion and state and public opinion on the political role of religion have significantly improved in recent years, but scholars have just begun to examine relationships between political institutions and public attitudes. This contribution tests several potential examples of such links by exploring the relationship between religion–state institutions and norms of religion and politics, both between and within countries. The contribution first develops theoretical expectations regarding the institutional correlates of public opinion, then conducts initial tests of these expectations by blending data from the Religion and State project with comparative survey data drawn from Waves 4 and 5 of the World Values Survey. Analysis demonstrates modest links between institutions and aggregate public views, a relationship between institutions and social consensus, and, most robustly, consistent variation in institutional effects across political regime type.     

Is Democratic Toleration a Rubber Duck?

Democratic politicians face pressures unknown to the prerogative rulers of the early modern period when toleration was first formulated as a political ideal. These pressures are less often expressed as demands by groups or individuals for the permission of practices they dislike than for their restraint or outright prohibition; tolerant dispositions are less politically clamorous. The executive structure of toleration as a virtue, together with the ‘fact of reasonable pluralism’, make conflicts over toleration peculiarly intractable. Political conflicts are apt to take the form of mutual allegations ofintolerance; indeed, the problem of ‘tolerating the intolerant’, far from being a marginal case, is central to the theory and practice of toleration. Toleration thus exemplifies a category mistake committed in much contemporary political theory, particularly in its contractualist versions: the threshold of the political lies precisely where rational agreement proves impossible. The main prospects for democratic toleration are thus pre-emptive. The main way in which this can happen is by cultivating executive dispositions: in other words, encouraging people to detach themselves from strong evaluative commitments, so that toleration does not become politically contentious to start with. But this involves losses as well as gains. The gains in civil harmony and peace are obvious. The cost for tolerant political actors is alienation from what they have good reason to value. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Political polarization projection: social projection of partisan attitude extremity and attitudinal processes

What influences perceptions of political polarization? The authors examine the polarization of people's own political attitudes as a source of perceived polarization: Individuals with more extreme partisan attitudes perceive greater polarization than individuals with less extreme partisan attitudes. This "polarization projection" was demonstrated in 3 studies in which people estimated the distribution of others' political attitudes: one study with a nationally representative sample concerning the 2008 presidential election, and 2 studies concerning university students evaluating a policy regarding scarce resource allocation. These studies demonstrate that polarization projection occurs simultaneously with and independently of simple projection, the tendency to assume that others share one's partisan political attitudes. Polarization projection may occur partly because people assume that others engage in similar attitudinal processes as the self, such as extensive thought and emotional arousal. The projection of various attitudinal processes was demonstrated in a study concerning health care reform policies. Further supporting this explanation, polarization projection increased when people introspected about their own attitudinal processes, which increased the accessibility of those processes. Implications for perceptions of partisanship, social judgment, and civic behavior are discussed.     

Personifying the Radical

This study examines relationships among individual dispositions, news framing of civil liberties restrictions, security concerns, and political tolerance. We theorize that news frames condition the effects of individual dispositions on security and tolerance attitudes. To explore these relationships, an online‐survey experiment was conducted with 650 respondents. This experiment presented alternative versions of news stories about domestic security policies following September 11, and the policies' implications for a fringe activist group. One factor was whether the activists targeted by the government advocated for a cause supported or opposed by the respondent; another factor was whether the story framed government actions against the activists at the individual or group level. Findings show that individual framing—as opposed to group framing—made participants less tolerant of radicals they opposed and more tolerant of radicals they supported. Similar effects were observed for political ideology. Implications of personification as a framing device are discussed.     

Differential ability and attainment in language and arithmetic of Dutch primary school pupils

Background . In preschool and primary education, pupils differ in many abilities and competences (giftedness). Yet mainstream educational practice seems rather homogeneous in providing age‐based or grade–class subject matter approaches. Aims . To clarify whether pupils scoring initially at high ability level do develop and attain differently at school with respect to language and arithmetic compared with those displaying other initial ability levels. To investigate whether specific individual, family, or educational variables covary with the attainment of these different types of pupils in school. Samples . Data from the large‐scale PRIMA cohort study including a total of 8,258 Grades 2 and 4 pupils from 438 primary schools in The Netherlands. Methods . Secondary analyses were carried out to construct gain scores for both language and arithmetic proficiency and a number of behavioural, attitudinal, family, and educational characteristics. The pupils were grouped into four different ability categories (highly able, able, above average, average or below average). Further analyses used Pearson correlations and analyses of variance both between‐ and within‐ability categories. Cross‐validation was done by introducing a cohort of younger pupils in preschool and grouping both cohorts into decile groups based on initial ability in language and arithmetic. Results . Highly able pupils generally decreased in attainment in both language and arithmetic, whereas pupils in average and below‐average groups improved their language and arithmetic scores. Only with highly able pupils were some educational characteristics correlated with the pupils' development in achievement, behaviour, and attitudes. Conclusions . Preschool and primary education should better match pupils' differences in abilities and competences from their start in preschool to improve their functioning, learning processes, and outcomes. Recommendations for educational improvement strategies are presented at the end of the article.     

The Temporal Consistency of Personality Effects: Evidence from the British Household Panel Survey

Personality traits have been posited to function as stable influences on political attitudes and behavior. Although personality traits themselves exhibit high levels of temporal stability, it is not yet known whether the effects of these traits are marked by comparable temporal consistency. To address this question, this research note examines data from Wave 13 (2003–2004), Wave 15 (2005–2006) and Wave 17 (2007–2008) of the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS). Twenty‐seven behavioral and 14 attitudinal dependent variables are studied. Consistency of effects is gauged via a series of multilevel models in which personality effects are permitted to vary by year. High levels of temporal consistency are observed for personality traits as represented by the Big Five framework.     

Liberalism and Conservatism,for a Change! Rethinking the Association Between Political Orientation and Relation to Societal Change

According to common wisdom, which is supported by extant psychological theorizing, a core feature of political conservatism (vs. liberalism) is the resistance to (vs. acceptance of) societal change. We propose that an empirical examination of the actual difference in political liberals’ and conservatives’ attitudes toward change across different sociopolitical issues may call into question this assumed association between political orientation and relation to change. We examined this proposition in four studies conducted in Germany. In Study 1, we assessed lay people's intuitions about liberals’ and conservatives’ attitudes toward change. Results of this study concur with theoretical assumptions that liberals accept and conservatives resist change. In Study 2a, Study 2b, and Study 3, self‐identified liberals and conservatives were asked whether they would resist or accept change on various sociopolitical issues. Results of these studies suggest that both conservatives and liberals resist and accept societal changes, depending on the extent to which they approve or disapprove of the status quo on a given sociopolitical issue. Overall, our findings provide no evidence for a one‐directional association between political orientation and the tendency to accept or resist change. These findings therefore challenge theoretical and lay assumptions regarding general, context‐independent psychological differences underlying political ideologies.     

Racial Attitudes Predicted Changes in Ostensibly Race‐Neutral Political Attitudes Under the Obama Administration

Past research demonstrated that racial prejudice played a significant role in the 2008 presidential election, but relatively less is known about the relationship between prejudice and public opinion throughout the Obama administration. In the present research, we examined not only whether racial attitudes were associated with evaluations of Mr. Obama and his administration, but also whether they may have influenced the development of more general political attitudes during the early years of the Obama administration. We investigated this question using panel data from a nationally representative sample of Americans interviewed between September 2008 and July 2010. Racial attitudes measured prior to the election predicted early disapproval of President Obama's handling of important issues. Early disapproval of President Obama's performance, in turn, predicted later perceptions of whether the state of the nation was improving. Further, the divergence between high‐prejudice and low‐prejudice individuals in their perceptions of the state of the nation became greater over time, consistent with the idea that racial attitudes were more powerfully expressed in political judgments as time passed.     

Personifying the State: Consequences for Attitude Formation

Because states are abstract entities, they often require embodiment for mass publics and elites to understand them. This embodiment often occurs as personification, where the state is associated with the most salient figure in the political system, but embodiment can also occur through political institutions and social groups. Surprisingly, there is virtually no systematic empirical work on the political and psychological consequences of state personification, or other forms of embodiment. In this experiment, we investigate how various ways of embodying the state influence attitude formation processes. Drawing on the on-line/memory-based processing and entitativity literatures, we hypothesize that personification of the state should facilitate on-line processing and stronger attitudes, whereas embodying the state as a parliamentary institution should produce weaker attitudes that are formed in a memory-based fashion. The results support these hypotheses. Embodiment as a social group produced inconsistent results. This study provides the first systematic evidence that the widespread practice of personification of the state has robust and potentially far-reaching attitudinal consequences that have meaningful implications for strategic interaction, perception and learning, and attitude change in the international realm.