Defensive Partisanship? Evidence that In-Party Scandals Increase Out-Party Hostility

Contemporary U.S. politics is characterized by polarization and interpartisan antipathy. This is accompanied by a media landscape saturated with coverage of political scandals. Applying a social identity perspective, we examined whether exposure to scandals that threaten partisan's moral group image (i.e., in-party scandals), may motivate defensive hostility against opposing partisans. Across three experiments we exposed U.S. partisans to scandals attributed to either in-party or out-party politicians. We then assessed partisan hostility using a variety of operationalizations, including anger at a real outgroup politician (Study 1), judgments about the alleged misdeeds of a fabricated outgroup politician (Study 2), and negative perceptions of opposing party members (Study 3). Strength of partisan identity was assessed as a predicted moderator (Study 3). As expected in- (vs. out-) party scandals, were perceived as group-image threats and elicited greater hostility towards opposing partisans, independent of partisans' ideological extremity or prior affective polarization.     

Mass Response to the Lewinsky Scandal: Motivated Reasoning or BayesianUpdating?

This study attempts to account for the vastly different trajectories taken by mass andelite opinion in the wake of the Lewinsky affair. Data from a panel study, collected before andjust after the scandal broke, suggest that Clinton's prior popularity indelibly colored massresponse to the scandal, thereby constraining citizens' reactions. As would be predicted bytheories of "motivated reasoning," the influence of various considerations (like thecredibility and importance of the allegations) on reactions to the scandal was conditional uponprior affect for the president. Such findings are difficult to accommodate within the more rational"Bayesian updating" perspective. These data shed light on mass response to theLewinsky scandal in particular and citizen reaction to presidential behavior more generally, aswell as on the cognitive mechanisms that facilitate motivated reasoning in candidate evaluation.     

Emotional reactions to scandals: When does moral character make a difference?

A scandal can evoke public outrage when it is widely publicized and involves an individual who is perceived to have a high level of cultural representativeness. Two experiments showed that when the scandalous target's moral character was highlighted, emotional responses towards the target were least negative when the scandal was widely circulated and when the target was seen as a representative of his culture. These results suggest that when a cultural symbol is implicated in a widely‐circulated scandal, the negative emotions directed towards the scandalous individual can be alleviated when the public remains confident in his or her commitment to morality.     

Popular Politics and the Clinton/Lewinsky Affair: The Implications for Leadership

The Clinton/Lewinsky scandal unfolded in an era of "new media" politics that presented fresh and often unanticipated challenges for presidential leadership. New media actors, such as call-in talk radio and TV hosts, tabloid journalists, and Internet gossip columnists, played a significant role in scandal politics. They influenced the framework within which stories were reported and perceived by the public. New media channels, in particular, framed the events leading up to the presidential impeachment in terms of dramatic, prime time–style entertainment. This entertainment news frame allowed citizens to compartmentalize their perceptions of President Clinton as a leader versus a private individual involved in a sex scandal. Media Politics can explain, at least in part, President Clinton's strong job performance evaluations in the midst of one of the most publicized political scandals of the century.     

The Experience of Abandonment and Adoption,as a Child and as a Parent,in a Psychological Motivational Perspective

Abstract

The publication of the relationship between Sabina Spielrein and Carl Jung in 1980 gave rise to a veritable cottage industry of mythomania at the expense of historical truth. The fictions grafted upon the historical facts have conjured up a sensational aura of scandal and gossip about the protagonists. The arch fiction is that Spielrein and Jung had a sexual relationship during her analysis by Jung. At the very least, based on documents published by the author, this opinion can no longer be maintained beyond reasonable doubt. After 1905, Spielrein was no longer Jung's patient but continued as Jung's medical student, whereupon Jung sought her out as friend. In addition, it was Spielrein herself who fell passionately in love with Jung, and analysed this relationship as a case of mutual oedipal dynamics. The author further pursues the oedipal analysis of and links it to (1) love as reality and transference, (2) the reality of Jewish and Gentile relationships in Europe, and (3) mutual ethnic transferences between Spielrein and Jung. Jung, who was also passionately drawn to Spielrein, displaced his marital problems owing to a “Don Juan complex” to concocted problems in treatment, deceiving both himself and Freud out of the dread of social consequences.     

Scandal and Moral Demandingness in the Late Scholastics

This paper examines the views of a number of late scholastic moral theologians, with emphasis on Francisco Suárez, about the limits of the duty to refrain from those otherwise permissible actions which make it difficult for people to choose uprightly. In so doing, the paper singles out and analyses a number circumstantial factors capable of excusing ordinary agents for giving others an occasion of sin.     

Abuse and religious experience: A study of religiously committed evangelical adults

Two hypotheses were tested: (1) in a sample of religiously-committed evangelical adults, past experience of abuse is related to more frequent (a) religious behaviour such as prayer, church attendance and Bible reading, and (b) religious experiences, such as religious visions, healings and speaking in tongues; (2) abuse is also associated with evidence of alienation from God, as noted in more frequent reports of God as distant and more frequent religious doubting. Survey data from 3424 adults attending one of four new evangelical movement churches were analysed. Controlling for socio-economic and religious socialization variables, a series of regression equations were calculated looking at the relationship between the experience of abuse and the dependent variables of three factor scores representing conventional religious behaviour, transcendent religious experience and feelings of distance from God. Self-report of the frequency of abuse was positively associated with frequency of reported transcendent religious experiences and with feelings of distance from God. A significant relationship between abuse and more conventional religious behaviour was not found. The findings provide mixed support for the idea that abuse results in ambivalent responses toward religion and God in religiously committed adults. The lack of relationship between abuse and conventional religious behaviours is somewhat inconsistent with prior results, and likely represents a ceiling effect. The positive correlation with transcendent religious experiences and distance from God are consistent with prior studies, but may suggest alternative explanations.     

Investigating attitudes of Catholic priests toward the media and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops Response to the Sexual Abuse Scandals of 2002

Since 2002, researchers have investigated the incidence of clergy sexual abuse and the perceptions and attitudes of non-ordained Catholics toward the responses of the U.S. Catholic bishops. The perceptions of functioning Catholic priests were investigated in 2002. There has been little follow-up research about priests who have never been accused of sexual misconduct. Using non-probability sampling techniques, this study employed a structured format to confidentially interview 22 Catholic priests in 2006 and 2007. The interviews yielded themes around the reporting of the events of 2002 by the media, and the response of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to the crisis and the media. Findings suggest that most priest-respondents believed that the media had accurately reported that the bishops had engaged in a cover-up. Most respondents believed that the media had portrayed all priests as pedophiles. Most priest-respondents believed the response of the USCCB was inadequate, poorly conceived, and generated to satisfy public pressure. Most respondents believed that bishops had abandoned their priests and compromised the canonical rights of priests. Finally, several priest respondents identified a double standard in the process and outcome by which allegations against priests and bishops are handled.     

If Bill Clinton Were a Woman: The Effectiveness of Male and Female Politicians' Account Strategies Following Alleged Transgressions

As persons whose careers depend upon the support of the public, politicians by definition are required to be concerned with the management of their public impressions. This research considers the impact of a politician's sex on citizens' evaluations following alleged transgressions. The study uses an experimental design to test how the sex of the politician affects the acceptability of various accounts following transgressions. The interaction of sex with the nature of the offense and the type of account offered is examined. Analysis suggests that sex, type of account, and type of transgression affect citizens' evaluations although not always in obvious or direct ways. Most significantly, the analysis shows that women are not judged more harshly than men when involved in a transgression.     

Judging scandal: Standards or bias in politics

As the number of political scandals rises, we examined the circumstances that might influence how a politician would be judged as a result of a scandal. Specifically, we hypothesized that ingroup bias theory and shifting standards theory would produce different patterns of judgements. In two studies, we found support for the ingroup bias theory, such that participants rated the fictitious politician’s public approval and perceived character as higher if the politician was a member of their own political party (i.e. their ingroup) than if the politician was a member of the another political party (i.e. their outgroup). These results may explain, in part, why people may judge politicians involved in scandal more or less harshly depending on whether they are an ingroup member or outgroup member.