More than fair: Outcome dependence, system justification, and the perceived legitimacy of authority figures

Legitimacy is a source of power for authorities because it promotes voluntary deference on the part of followers. From a system justification perspective, there is also reason to believe that power is a source of perceived legitimacy. We report five studies demonstrating that in addition to procedural fairness and outcome favorability, outcome dependence is an independent contributor to perceived legitimacy. In two cross-sectional field studies and one panel study, we hypothesized and found that dependence on an authority figure is positively associated with appraisals of legitimacy, measured in terms of trust and confidence in, empowerment of, and deference to authority. These effects were demonstrated in educational, political, and legal settings. Two additional experiments provided direct causal evidence for the hypothesized effect on both perceived legitimacy and voluntary deference (i.e., acquiescence to additional requests). We also found that participants assigned to a high (vs. low) dependence condition judged their outcomes to be more favorable, despite the fact that the outcomes were identical in the two conditions; this effect was mediated by perceived legitimacy. Taken as a whole, these findings suggest that perceived legitimacy is enhanced not only when authorities exercise fair procedures and deliver favorable outcomes, but also when subordinates are dependent on them. Implications for society and the study of legitimacy and social power are discussed.     

Testing the status-legitimacy hypothesis: A multilevel modeling approach to the perception of legitimacy in income distribution in 36 nations

The status-legitimacy hypothesis was tested by analyzing cross-national data about social inequality. Several indicators were used as indexes of social advantage: social class, personal income, and self-position in the social hierarchy. Moreover, inequality and freedom in nations, as indexed by Gini and by the human freedom index, were considered. Results from 36 nations worldwide showed no support for the status-legitimacy hypothesis. The perception that income distribution was fair tended to increase as social advantage increased. Moreover, national context increased the difference between advantaged and disadvantaged people in the perception of social fairness: Contrary to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, disadvantaged people were more likely than advantaged people to perceive income distribution as too large, and this difference increased in nations with greater freedom and equality. The implications for the status-legitimacy hypothesis are discussed.     

Problems for Mainstream Evidentialism

Evidentialism says that a subject S’s justification is entirely determined by S’s evidence. The plausibility of evidentialism depends on (1) what kind of entities constitute a subject S’s evidence and (2) what one takes the support relation to consist in. Conee and Feldman’s mainstream evidentialism (ME) incorporates a psychologist answer to (1) and an explanationist answer to (2). ME naturally accommodates perceptual justification. However, it does not accommodate intuitive cases of inferential justification. In the second part of the paper, I consider and reject a reply based on a refined explanationist theory of the support relation proposed by K McCain.     

Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Comparing different explanations based on system justification,multiple group membership,and positive adjustment

This study examined the relation between conservatism and life satisfaction. Analyses based on data from a representative German survey (ALLBUS 2010) revealed a positive relation between conservatism and self‐reported life satisfaction, thus supporting prior claims of this link. Different accounts have been proposed for this relationship, suggesting system justification, positive adjustment, or multiple group membership as potential mediators. Going beyond prior research, this study allowed for a comparison between these different mechanisms. Analyses revealed that system justification and one of the three examined constructs related to positive adjustment (i.e., religiosity) were significant mediators of the positive relationship between political conservatism and life satisfaction. Comparable results were obtained after controlling for a number of sociodemographic variables. The present findings indicate (i) that conservatives report to be more satisfied with their lives than liberals and (ii) that this difference is in part due to conservatives' system justification and religiosity.     

Personal attitudes toward time: The relationship between temporal focus,space‐time mappings and real life experiences

What influences how people implicitly associate “past” and “future” with “front” and “back?” Whereas previous research has shown that cultural attitudes toward time play a role in modulating space‐time mappings in people's mental models (de la Fuente, Santiago, Román, Dumitrache & Casasanto, 2014), we investigated real life experiences as potential additional influences on these implicit associations. Participants within the same single culture, who are engaged in different intermediate‐term educational experiences (Study 1), long‐term living experiences (Study 2), and short‐term visiting experiences (Study 3), showed their distinct differences in temporal focus, thereby influencing their implicit spatializations of time. Results across samples suggest that personal attitudes toward time related to real life experiences may influence people's space‐time mappings. The findings we report on shed further light on the high flexibility of human conceptualization system. While culture may exert an important influence on temporal focus, a person's conceptualization of time may be attributed to a culmination of factors.     

Experiences,Seemings, and Perceptual Justification

Several philosophers have distinguished between three distinct mental states that play a role in visual recognition: experiences, propositional seemings, and beliefs. I clarify and offer some reasons for drawing this three-fold distinction, and I consider its epistemological implications. Some philosophers have held that propositional seemings always confer prima facie justification, regardless of a particular seeming's relation to experience. I add to criticisms of this view in the literature by arguing that it fails to solve a version of the ‘problem of the speckled hen’. A more promising view holds that propositional seemings confer justification only when appropriately related to experiences. I offer advice for developing such an account.     

真实急病情境下共情对大学生慈善捐助的影响:有调节的中介效应

基于真实急病情境,采用道德强度、道德认同、共情和慈善捐助问卷对462名大学生进行调查,探讨了共情影响大学生慈善捐助的内在机制。结果显示:(1)女生在真实急病情境下比男生更容易对主人公的不幸事件产生共情反应;大学生真实急病情境下的共情反应随年级关系的疏远而逐渐降低;(2)共情在道德强度与慈善捐助的关系中具有部分中介作用,即道德强度通过共情对慈善捐助产生间接影响;(3)道德认同对共情的中介作用具有调节效应,具体而言,相对于低道德认同的个体,高道德认同的个体表现出更多的慈善捐助,并且共情对道德强度和慈善捐助的中介效应也显著增强。研究结论对于理解慈善捐助的内在机制具有理论价值,对于慈善捐助的教育和干预具有现实启示意义。     

Three attempts to replicate the behavioral sunk-cost effect: a note on cunha and caldieraro (2009)

Cunha and Caldieraro (2009) investigated whether sunk-cost effects, which are well documented in hypothetical situations involving monetary investments, also occur in choice situations with purely behavioral investments. Their results suggest that decision makers indeed fall prey to behavioral sunk-cost effects under certain circumstances. I have been unable to replicate their pattern of results in three separate investigations. In these studies, I attempted to recover the effect using two other behavioral effort manipulations in addition to the manipulation used by Cunha and Caldieraro. This failure to replicate the pattern of results calls into question the robustness of the initial findings.     

A METAPHILOSOPHICAL DILEMMA FOR EPISTEMIC EXTERNALISM

Abstract: In this article I argue that the prevalence of intersubjective disagreement in epistemology poses a serious problem for Epistemic Externalism. I put the problem in the form of a dilemma: either Epistemic Externalism is not a complete account of epistemic justification or it's implausible to claim that the belief that Epistemic Externalism is true is itself an externalistically justified belief.     

Transfer from “edible” categorization training to feeding behavior in pigeons (Columba livia)1

Abstract: We investigated a transfer from an operant experimental situation to a feeding situation in pigeons using real objects as stimuli. Four pigeons were trained in an operant box to categorize familiar edible items as positives and inedible items as negatives with a go/no‐go procedure. Next, two pairs of unfamiliar edible items were added as stimuli. One of the paired stimuli was arbitrarily assigned as positive and the other as negative. We tested the subjects in their home cages to see whether they would feed on the items they were trained to categorize as positives. In three of the six cases in which categorization training was successful, they continued to peck the positive items. This result suggests that the pigeons transfer what they learned in the operant training situation to the feeding situation.