The British journal of social psychology
-
Donald J. Trump's 2016 presidential election victory spurred strong reactions and unprecedented collective action in the American Left. Taking advantage of the political climate in the wake of the election, this study examined whether the main antecedents of collective action (anger, political identification, and efficacy beliefs) in the immediate aftermath of the election loss for the American Left predicted varying types of collective action and social movement identification one month into Trump's presidency, and whether these factors in turn fuel anger and influence efficacy beliefs. ⋯ While efficacy to oppose Trump predicted higher social movement identification, efficacy to change hearts and minds predicted lower social movement identification. We also examined the iterative processes of collective action, showing that the anger route was more central to galvanizing collective action than the efficacy route. These findings extend collective action research to contexts of emerging social movements following electoral processes.
-
A few weeks prior to the EU referendum (23rd June 2016) two broadly representative samples of the electorate were drawn in Kent (the south-east of England, N = 1,001) and Scotland (N = 1,088) for online surveys that measured their trust in politicians, concerns about acceptable levels of immigration, threat from immigration, European identification, and voting intention. We tested an aversion amplification hypothesis that the impact of immigration concerns on threat and identification would be amplified when political trust was low. We hypothesized that the effect of aversion amplification on voting intentions would be mediated first by perceived threat from immigration, and then by (dis) identification with Europe. Results in both samples were consistent with this hypothesis and suggest that voters were most likely to reject the political status quo (choose Brexit) when concerns that immigration levels were too high were combined with a low level of trust in politicians.
-
People respond compassionately to transgressors whose immorality is rooted in an unfortunate life history. But, are reactions to such historicist narratives uniformly compassionate? We suggest not. We propose that historicist narratives also have a dark side. ⋯ In three studies, we provide evidence that historicist narratives evoke compassion for one but disdain for the multitude. We show that the resulting disdain can diminish prosocial behaviour in unrelated contexts, that it is elicited by both experimenter-provided and participant-generated historicist narratives, and that it is created via blame shifting. Our findings question the assumption that proliferation of historicist thinking would necessarily contribute to creating a more compassionate, humane society.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Bad guys suffer less (social pain): Moral status influences judgements of others' social suffering.
Research on pain judgement has shown that several features of a target influence empathy for others' pain. Considering the pivotal role of morality in social judgement, we investigated whether judgements of others' social and physical suffering vary as a function of the target's moral status. Study 1 manipulated the moral characteristics of an unknown other and found that participants ascribed less social (but not physical) suffering to a target depicted as lacking moral status rather than to a target high in morality. ⋯ Study 3 revealed the specific role of morality, as information on another evaluative dimension (i.e., competence) had no effects on pain judgements. Study 4 showed that social targets perceived as lacking moral qualities are thought to experience less social pain than highly moral targets because of their perceived lower level of humanity. Overall, our findings suggest that social (but not physical) pain might represent a capacity that is denied to social targets that are perceived low in morality.
-
We examined whether high self-monitors cognitively process self-presentation-related information and concepts more readily than low self-monitors. Results across three studies indicate that compared to low self-monitors, high self-monitors have greater cognitive access to self-presentation-related information and concepts. High self-monitors produced more words related to self-presentation in a shorter amount of time (Study 1) and in a cognitive load condition (Study 2). ⋯ In Study 3, high (vs. low) self-monitors showed faster reaction time to self-presentation-related concepts. In contrast, reaction time to non-self-presentation items did not differ. The findings contribute to both the theory and knowledge of self-monitoring by demonstrating that information processing related to self-presentational concepts is an important component of self-monitoring, in that such information is more cognitively accessible to high self-monitors.