“均”与“寡”阶段性变动下中国居民公平感的变迁

利用中国综合社会调查和中国社会状况综合调查重复截面数据,通过年龄-时期-队列模型对居民公平感的时代变化进行分析。研究发现公平感在年龄上呈“J”型趋势;从时期效应看, 2008年公平感较高, 2010～2013年在低谷徘徊,2015年以后又开始回升;从队列视角看,建国前出生队列公平感偏低,建国后初期的队列相对较高,“50”后有所下滑,从“60”后开始公平感持续走低,到“80”后跌入低谷,但“90”后又开始升高。从1949年前后“寡且不均”到建国初期阶段的“寡且均”,再到改革开放40年快速经济增长下“不寡但不均”的社会变迁过程影响了居民的公平感。     

跨期选择的变易程度正向预测中华文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效：亚非欧美大洋洲18国跨国研究

跨期选择是对不同时间点的得失的权衡与选择。伊索寓言《蚂蚁和蚱蜢》假借群居型昆虫的跨期选择偏爱暗喻投资未来的慢策略比只顾眼前的快策略更利于生存。用跨期选择领域通用的语言解读这一寓言便是：选择大而迟选项的蚂蚁比选择小而早选项的蚱蜢更可能扛过严冬而生存下来。为了探索何种跨期选择策略更有助于我们扛过疫情,本研究调查了亚非欧美大洋洲这5大洲18个国家共计26355名受测者对混合得失双结果的跨期选择偏爱,测量了人们平时和疫时跨期选择偏爱的变易程度(2类变易的程度指标),以及人们自评的扛疫成效。跨文化比较结果的主要发现是：不同通货的选择变易程度(指标1)和不同时期的选择变易程度(指标2)能联合预测中国/新加坡文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效;不同时期的选择变易程度(指标2)也可以单独预测印度/马来西亚/菲律宾/尼日利亚文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效;这2类选择偏爱变易的程度指标不能预测其他文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效(或者预测方向和假设相反)。基于易经“穷则变,变则通”的要旨和跨国比较的发现,我们认为：面临历史危机时善于变通的特长抑或成就了中华民族特有的竞争优势;在应对危机时,与中国文化距离越相近的国家或民族抑或也能...     

“‘WE' AND ‘THEY'”: WHY MUST WE ENGAGE IN CROSS-CULTURAL CONVERSATION?

This article contains the principal ideas that I presented in four different sessions at the IRAS 2022 conference, on the theme “‘We' and ‘They’: Cross-Cultural Conversation on Identity.” Focusing on the central topic, the article begins with (i) the contents of my opening lecture; followed by (ii) a broad outline of the concerns discussed in my book, Cross-Cultural Conversation: A New Way of Learning, intertwined with glimpses of the intellectual journey that led me to CCC, delivered in the Book-discussion session; (iii) a summary of the main ideas about the importance of meeting of religions today, which formed the background for the CCC Panel discussion on religion, where I was in conversation with spokespersons of five world religions; and (iv) my comments on how science–religion dialogue can help promote a sense for human solidarity by combining knowledge with wisdom, in the concluding session.     

Are curmudgeon personality scales resistant to response distortion?

Curmudgeon personality, which is assessed by having participants evaluate a heterogeneous set of attitude objects, provides an applied value beyond that of more established personality traits. Recent research, for instance, suggests that curmudgeon personality is distinct from the Five Factor Model personality traits and that it predicts unique variance in important criteria, such as job attitudes and well-being. In the current paper we contribute to this literature by testing an explanation of how curmudgeon personality is distinct from other traits—their potential resistance to response distortion. We estimated response distortion for scales of curmudgeon personality and FFM traits across two quasi-experimental studies. As expected, the score shifts between nonapplicant and applicant conditions were smaller for scales of curmudgeon personality compared to scales of emotional stability and conscientiousness. We argue that curmudgeon personality scales may be more resistant to response distortion than are measures of other traits because curmudgeon personality items are semi-implicit and lack an obvious desirable response. The resistance to response distortion should serve as a call to future researchers to test the criterion validity of curmudgeon personality in regard to performance criteria.     

When the poor give more than the rich: The role of resource evaluability on relative giving

Five experiments examined the role of resource evaluability on giving. We systematically varied participants' resources they and another potential donor received and whether they could donate to a recipient either by themselves or with the other donor. Participants in the relative advantage condition received more resources than the other donor, and those in the relative disadvantage condition received fewer resources than the other donor. The presence of the other donor made participants' resources evaluable and shaped giving: Relatively disadvantaged participants were proportionally more generous than advantaged participants but only when they could evaluate their resources. Neither the mere presence of others nor reputational concerns could explain the results. Exploratory mediation and moderation analyses further showed that relatively disadvantaged participants give proportionally more the higher and the more equal they perceive their status to the advantaged donor. This shows that the generosity of those who have less does depend on how they evaluate their status compared to other donors. Our results provide insights into the question of why and when resource asymmetries between donors result in prosocial giving and can influence fundraising strategies of charitable organizations.     

Social support from weak ties: Insight from the literature on minimal social interactions

When people face difficult life events, such as cancer or bereavement, they fare better when they receive support. These “experiencers” are likely to seek and receive support from a wide range of people, from close others to acquaintances. Indeed, the social support literature has long acknowledged the value of having a diverse support network. Research suggests that experiencers often perceive “weak ties” (i.e., acquaintances) as sources of support, and that experiencers sometimes prefer to get support from weak ties rather than strong ties. Providing support can be challenging for all kinds of supporters, however weak ties may be more likely than strong ties to allow worries about their inability to provide effective support to stop them from providing any support at all, thus depriving experiencers of opportunities for additional support. In this paper, we focus on the fact that often the provision of support occurs via a social interaction. We draw on the social psychology literature on minimal social interactions to suggest reasons why potential weak tie supporters might doubt their ability to provide effective support, and to generate advice to encourage potential supporters to reach out. Finally, we suggest future areas of research, with the ultimate goal of helping to expand the support that is available for people experiencing difficult life events.     

Bringing critical social psychology to the study of political polarization

The study of political polarization, in both its ideological and its affective expressions, has garnered significantly more interest over the last years. But despite recent research on the conceptualization, measurement, causes, and consequences of this socio-political phenomenon, and some tentative interventions to mitigate it, relevant new avenues remain surprisingly underdeveloped. Indeed, scholarship in the field of political polarization, mainly in the case of affective polarization, frequently uses cognitivist approaches to make sense of the growing antipathy between different social and political groups. However, the bulk of this work seems to overlook valuable insights into the psychology of intergroup conflict, stereotyping, prejudice reduction, and discourse studies. The aim of this paper is to underline the main gaps in the political polarization literature, to subsequently argue how knowledge linked to the tradition of critical social psychology can help in filling them. Ultimately, the article aims to contribute to the psychosocial study of political polarization and to the design, if necessary, of interventions to counter its detrimental consequences.     

Predictors of COVID-19 precautionary behaviors to protect people with disabilities

Disability is conceptualized using one of two major frameworks: the medical and the social model of disability. The medical model of disability describes disability as an individual issue in which the appropriate intervention is to remove the disability. The social model of disability describes disability as a social construction in which the appropriate intervention is societal change to increase accessibility. This study drew on models of disability to understand predictors of engagement in COVID-precautionary behavior prior to the vaccine to protect people with disabilities (PWD) from contracting COVID-19. Participants (n = 720) with and without disabilities (n = 77 and n = 633, respectively) completed an online questionnaire measuring disability beliefs, attitudes toward PWD, concerns about PWD contracting COVID-19, and engagement in behavior protecting PWD from contracting COVID-19. Medical model beliefs were negatively associated with behavior. In addition, negative attitudes toward PWD and low concern about PWD contracting COVID-19 fully accounted for the relationship. Social model beliefs were positively associated with behavior. In addition, positive attitudes toward PWD and greater concern about PWD contracting COVID-19 partially explained the relationship. These findings suggest that framing disability as a social construction rather than a medical issue could promote greater public health behavior to protect PWD from contracting COVID.     

Implicit and explicit COVID-19-vaccine harmfulness/helpfulness associations predict vaccine beliefs,intentions, and behaviors

We investigated the role of implicit and explicit associations between harm and COVID-19 vaccines using a large sample (N = 4668) of online volunteers. The participants completed a brief implicit association test and explicit measures to evaluate the extent to which they associated COVID-19 vaccines with concepts of harmfulness or helpfulness. We examined the relationship between these harmfulness/helpfulness COVID-19 vaccine associations and vaccination status, intentions, beliefs, and behavior. We found that stronger implicit and explicit associations that COVID-19 vaccines are helpful relate to vaccination status and beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccine. That is, stronger pro-helpful COVID-19 vaccine associations, both implicitly and explicitly, related to greater intentions to be vaccinated, more positive beliefs about the vaccine, and greater vaccine uptake.