Book Reviews

Luc Boltanski, Distant Suffering: Morality, Media and Politics
Stephen Frosh, The Politics of Psychoanalysis: An Introduction to Freudian and Post-Freudian Theory
Dennis Chong, Rational Lives: Norms and Values in Politics and Society
Zsolt Enyedi and Ferenc Erös, Authoritarianism and Prejudice: Central European Perspectives
Stephanie Riger, Transforming Psychology: Gender in Theory and Practice
V. M. Bekhterev, Suggestion and Its Role in Social Life
Ian Glynn, An Anatomy of Thought: The Origins and Machinery of the Mind
David O. Sears, Jim Sidanius, and Lawrence Bobo (eds.), Racialized Politics: The Debate About Racism in America
Philip A. Klinkner with Rogers M. Smith, The Unsteady March: The Rise and Decline of Racial Equality in America     

Dyadic judgments based on conflicting samples: The failure to ignore invalid input

The present research demonstrates a so far unrecognized impediment of group performance, metacognitive myopia (Fiedler, 2012). Judges and decision-makers follow the given samples of information uncritically and neglect the metacognitive assessment of the samples' validity. Applying this notion to dyadic judgments, we instructed dyads to jointly estimate conditional probabilities p (Win|A) and p (Win|B) of Lotteries A and B. One person per dyad experienced a valid sample (winning rates conditional on lotteries). The other person experienced an invalid, reverse sample (lotteries conditional on winning). Whereas valid samples provide unbiased estimates of lotteries' winning probabilities, invalid samples can greatly misrepresent the association of winning and lotteries (depending on lottery base rates). Across three experiments, metacognitive myopia—both at the individual and at the dyadic group level—prevented participants from discriminating valid and invalid samples. Group judgments were biased toward erroneous implications of invalid samples, reflecting an equality bias among unequal group members.     

No Blame No Gain? From a No Blame Culture to a Responsibility Culture in Medicine

Healthcare systems need to consider not only how to prevent error, but how to respond to errors when they occur. In the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, one strand of this latter response is the ‘No Blame Culture’, which draws attention from individuals and towards systems in the process of understanding an error. Defences of the No Blame Culture typically fail to distinguish between blaming someone and holding them responsible. This article argues for a ‘responsibility culture’, where healthcare professionals are held responsible in cases of foreseeable and avoidable errors. We demonstrate how healthcare professionals can justifiably be held responsible for their errors even though they work in challenging circumstances. We then review the idea of ‘responsibility without blame’, applying this to cases of error in healthcare. Sensitive to the undesirable effects of blaming healthcare professionals and to the moral significance of holding individuals accountable, we argue that a responsibility culture has significant advantages over a No Blame Culture due to its capacity to enhance patient safety and support medical professionals in learning from their mistakes, while also recognising and validating the legitimate sense of responsibility that many medical professionals feel following avoidable error, and motivating medical professionals to report errors.     

The Role of Inclusive and Exclusive Victim Consciousness in Predicting Intergroup Attitudes: Findings from Rwanda,Burundi, and DRC

The present research examined the differential relationship between distinct construals of collective victimhood—specifically, inclusive and exclusive victim consciousness—and intergroup attitudes in the context and aftermath of mass violence. Three surveys in Rwanda (N = 842), Burundi (N = 1,074), and Eastern DRC (N = 1,609) provided empirical support for the hypothesis that while exclusive victim consciousness predicts negative intergroup attitudes, inclusive victim consciousness is associated with positive, prosocial intergroup attitudes. These findings were significant when controlling for age, gender, urban/rural residence, education, personal victimization, and ingroup superiority. Additionally, exclusive victim consciousness mediated the effects of ingroup superiority on negative intergroup attitudes. These findings have important theoretical implications for research on collective victimhood as well as practical implications for intergroup relations in regions emerging from violent conflict.     

Bad times are not good times for revolutions: Collective deprivation and the mobilization level of French radical movements (1882–1980)

Contrary to a popular belief, research has generally found no relationship between collective economic deprivation and the rise of radical political movements. On the other hand, various studies show that collective economic deprivation generates societal surges of conservatism. I therefore hypothesize that the absence of a relationship between collective deprivation and radical movements covers up opposite effects of collective deprivation depending on the ideology of radical movements: Reactionary (i.e., conservative radical) movements should mobilize more in times of collective deprivation, whereas revolutionary (i.e., progressive radical) movements should mobilize more in times of collective improvement. This paper tests this hypothesis via a new database measuring the level of mobilization of French radical organizations from 1882 to 1980. Statistical analyses confirm that collective deprivation, operationalized by long‐term economic recession and long‐term growth of inequality, increases the mobilization of reactionary movements and decreases the mobilization of revolutionary movements. These results contradict the view that economic conditions have no role in triggering radical movements and support recent development of system justification theory implying that ideology matters in the explanation of collective action.     

Unintended,but still blameworthy: the roles of awareness,desire, and anger in negligence,restitution, and punishment

Two experiments (Experiment 1 N?=?149, Experiment 2 N?=?141) investigated how two mental states that underlie how perceivers reason about intentional action (awareness of action and desire for an outcome) influence blame and punishment for unintended (i.e., negligent) harms, and the role of anger in this process. Specifically, this research explores how the presence of awareness (of risk in acting, or simply of acting) and/or desire in an acting agent's mental states influences perceptions of negligence, judgements that the acting agent owes restitution to a victim, and the desire to punish the agent, mediated by anger. In both experiments, awareness and desire led to increased anger at the agent and increased perception of negligence. Anger mediated the effect of awareness and desire on negligence rather than negligence mediating the effect of mental states on anger. Anger also mediated punishment, and negligence mediated the effects of anger on restitution. We discuss how perceivers consider mental states such as awareness, desire, and knowledge when reasoning about blame and punishment for unintended harms, and the role of anger in this process.     

A dynamic view of cultural influence: A review

Static models of culture's influence have given way to a dynamic view, which identifies not only differences across cultures in people's judgments and decisions, but also the situations and conditions in which these differences do or do not appear. Theory and evidence developed from a cognitive psychological perspective underlie this dynamic approach, including research emerging from the “dynamic constructivist” and “situated cognition” models. In the present review, we focus on findings that confirm the utility of this cognitively oriented approach, and briefly discuss the advantages and complementary nature of the “social collective” and neuroscience approaches to understanding culture.     

Economic Adversity and Depressive Symptoms in Mothers: Do Marital Status and Perceived Social Support Matter?

Over the past decade there has been increasing interest in the idea that marriage and perhaps other forms of interpersonal support can buffer the negative effects of poverty. The current study tests the hypothesis that marital status, perceived social support and neighborhood collective efficacy can moderate the effects of economic adversity on depressive symptoms among parents. Hierarchical Linear Modeling was used to analyze data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods. Participants were 1,957 mothers of minor children. Analysis of main effects revealed associations between neighborhood SES (β = ?0.69, SE (0.15), p < .001), family income (β = ?0.11, SE (0.05), p = .02) financial strain (β = 0.51, SE (0.18), p = .004), being single (β = 0.63, SE (0.24), p = .009) and perceived social support (β = ?0.22, SE (0.03), p < .001) on depressive symptoms. The hypothesis that interpersonal resources can buffer the effects of economic adversity was not supported. There were no significant interactions between marital status and economic adversity. There was a significant interaction between perceived social support and neighborhood level socioeconomic status (β = ?0.07, SE (0.03), p = .04) but the effects of social support were weakest in neighborhoods characterized by low socioeconomic status.