A comprehensive measure of attitudes and behaviour: Development of the Support for Gender Equality among Men Scale

In this article, we develop and validate the 16-item Support for Gender Equality among Men Scale across four studies. Drawing on exploratory (Study 1, n = 322) and confirmatory (Study 2, n = 358; Study 4, n = 192) factor analysis, we determine a two-factor structure: public and domestic support for gender equality. In Study 3 (n = 146) and Study 4, we validate the scale by establishing its relationship with, among others, several prominent measures of sexism, a behavioural measure, and social desirability. The scale fills a psychometric gap in the literature: To date, no validated measure of support for gender equality, measuring both attitudes and behavioural intentions and focusing specifically on men, exists. Considering the recent increase in interest in men as allies of the feminist movement the scale functions as a useful tool to explore the topic in depth in future research.     

Standing up for whom? Targets’ different goals in the confrontation of discrimination

We challenge the common interpretation of targets’ immediate confrontation in reaction to discrimination as self-serving behavior and propose different underlying motivations for this phenomenon. In five online scenario studies (N_overall = 1,447), we demonstrate across different samples and contexts that targets indicate a distinct pursuit of the following self-reported confrontation goals: individual-benefit (e.g., perpetrator apologizes); group-benefit (e.g., prejudice reduction); and distancing (e.g., demonstrating that one is different from typical group members). Furthermore, meaningful associations of the pursuits of individual-benefitting goals and group-benefitting goals with group identification, disidentification, and further collective action intentions indicate that they represent different confrontation motivations: Individual-benefitting confrontation serves to cope with the individual mistreatment of discrimination, whereas group-benefitting confrontation represents a form of collective action. Distancing goals were associated with disidentification and—unexpectedly—group identification. Our results show that the phenomenon of confrontation in reaction to discrimination can be the result of different underlying psychological processes.     

Equality,Bias, and the Right to an Equal Say

Philosophia - Thomas Christiano argues that democracies acquire a right to rule by being the unique embodiment of publicly accessible rules. Justice requires the equal advancement of the interests...     

Zero-sum beliefs shape advantaged allies’ support for collective action

Three studies (N₁ = 1,019; N₂ = 312; N₃ = 494) tested whether seeing intergroup relations as inherently antagonistic shaped advantaged social groups’ allyship intentions. More specifically, we tested whether endorsing zero-sum beliefs related to their willingness to support system-challenging and system-supporting collective action. Zero-sum beliefs were negatively correlated with system-challenging and positively correlated with system-supporting collective action intentions. Zero-sum beliefs were more common among advantaged than disadvantaged groups and translated into lower allyship intentions. Advantaged group members with higher levels of zero-sum beliefs were also more likely to experience anger and fear when considering the demographic racial shift in the United States. Increased fear was associated with greater support for system-supporting and lower support for system-challenging collective action. We find consistent evidence that advantaged group members see intergroup relations as a zero-sum game and that these beliefs are negatively related to their intentions to become allies.     

The generalized approach,attainMent, maintenance,and avoidance (GAMMA) motivation scale: development,validation, and theoretical contribution

Motivation and Emotion - In this investigation, the Generalized Approach, attainMent, Maintenance, and Avoidance (GAMMA) Motivation Scale was developed and validated. This scale measures approach...     

Traditional Gender Ideology,Work Family Conflict,and Marital Quality among Chinese Dual-Earner Couples: A Moderated Mediation Model

Sex Roles - Dating initiation is a challenging phase of heterosexual romantic relationship development, with men and women often having different expectations and interpretations of communicative...     

Robots as Malevolent Moral Agents: Harmful Behavior Results in Dehumanization,Not Anthropomorphism

A robot's decision to harm a person is sometimes considered to be the ultimate proof of it gaining a human-like mind. Here, we contrasted predictions about attribution of mental capacities from moral typecasting theory, with the denial of agency from dehumanization literature. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated mind perception for intentionally and accidentally harmful robotic agents based on text and image vignettes. Experiment 3 disambiguated agent intention (malevolent and benevolent), and additionally varied the type of agent (robotic and human) using short computer-generated animations. Harmful robotic agents were consistently imbued with mental states to a lower degree than benevolent agents, supporting the dehumanization account. Further results revealed that a human moral patient appeared to suffer less when depicted with a robotic agent than with another human. The findings suggest that future robots may become subject to human-like dehumanization mechanisms, which challenges the established beliefs about anthropomorphism in the domain of moral interactions.     

Indicators of Affect Dynamics: Structure,Reliability, and Personality Correlates

Researchers are increasingly interested in the affect dynamics of individuals for describing and explaining personality and psychopathology. Recently, the incremental validity of more complex indicators of affect dynamics (IADs; e.g. autoregression) has been called into question (Dejonckheere et al., 2019), with evidence accumulating that these might convey little unique information beyond mean level and general variability of emotions. Our study extends the evidence for the construct validity of IADs by investigating their redundancy and uniqueness, split-half reliability based on indices from odd-numbered and even-numbered days, and association with big five personality traits. We used three diverse samples that assessed daily and momentary emotions, including community participants, individuals with personality pathology, and their significant others (total N = 1192, total number of occasions = 51 278). Mean and variability of affects had high reliability and distinct nomological patterns to big five personality traits. In contrast, more complex IADs exhibited substantial redundancies with mean level and general variability of emotions. When partialing out these redundancies by using residual variables, some of the more complex IADs had acceptable reliability, but only a few of these showed incremental associations with big five personality traits, indicating that IADs have limited validity using the current assessment practices. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology     

Stigma towards psychosis: Cross‐cultural differences in prejudice,stereotypes, and discrimination in White British and South Asians

Public stigma towards people with mental health problems has been demonstrated in Western societies. Little is known about non‐Western cultures and whether cultures differ in their perceptions of people with mental health problems. Aim of this study was to examine cultural differences in prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination towards people with psychosis. Participants were from White British and South Asian backgrounds (N = 128, aged 16–20 years) recruited from two schools and colleges in the United Kingdom. They completed a cross‐sectional survey on affective, cognitive, and behavioural dimensions of stigma. Results revealed significant cultural differences on all three stigma dimensions. South Asians attributed higher anger (prejudice) and dangerousness (stereotypes) to people with psychosis than White British. They also reported lower willingness to help, greater avoidance, and higher endorsement of segregation (discrimination). The effects of ethnic group on helping intentions, avoidance, and segregation endorsement were mediated by anger and by dangerousness. Understanding cultural differences in stigma towards psychosis will be important for designing stigma interventions as well as treatments for people with different cultural backgrounds.