The Value Gap: How Gender, Generation, Personality, and Politics Shape the Values of American University Students

Zachary Rausch, Glenn Geher, Clare Redden
{"title":"The Value Gap: How Gender, Generation, Personality, and Politics Shape the Values of American University Students","authors":"Zachary Rausch, Glenn Geher, Clare Redden","doi":"10.58408/issn.2992-9253.2023.01.01.00000001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, in their book, The Coddling of the American Mind (2018), portrayed current undergraduate American college students (most of whom are in the generation Gen Z: 1995 - 2013) as valuing emotional well-being and the advancement of social justice goals above traditional academic values such as academic freedom and the pursuit of truth. We investigated whether this value discrepancy exists among 574 American university students by exploring the prioritization of five different academic values (academic freedom, advancing knowledge, academic rigor, social justice, and emotional well-being). We also explored how gender, generation, personality, major, and conservatism predict each academic value. Generational differences were present, with Gen Z students emphasizing emotional well-being and de-emphasising academic rigor. Males scored higher on measures of academic freedom and advancing knowledge, while lower on social justice and emotional well-being compared to females. Political conservatism was the strongest predictor for social justice scores, with increased liberal attitudes predicting higher scores on social justice. Emotional stability positively predicted advancing knowledge, while negatively predicting emotional well-being. Agreeableness positively predicted emotional well-being, while negatively predicting advancing knowledge. We ultimately argue that gender is a crucial, underestimated explanatory factor of the value orientations of American college students.","PeriodicalId":180485,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Open Inquiry in the Behavioral Sciences","volume":"100 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Open Inquiry in the Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58408/issn.2992-9253.2023.01.01.00000001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, in their book, The Coddling of the American Mind (2018), portrayed current undergraduate American college students (most of whom are in the generation Gen Z: 1995 - 2013) as valuing emotional well-being and the advancement of social justice goals above traditional academic values such as academic freedom and the pursuit of truth. We investigated whether this value discrepancy exists among 574 American university students by exploring the prioritization of five different academic values (academic freedom, advancing knowledge, academic rigor, social justice, and emotional well-being). We also explored how gender, generation, personality, major, and conservatism predict each academic value. Generational differences were present, with Gen Z students emphasizing emotional well-being and de-emphasising academic rigor. Males scored higher on measures of academic freedom and advancing knowledge, while lower on social justice and emotional well-being compared to females. Political conservatism was the strongest predictor for social justice scores, with increased liberal attitudes predicting higher scores on social justice. Emotional stability positively predicted advancing knowledge, while negatively predicting emotional well-being. Agreeableness positively predicted emotional well-being, while negatively predicting advancing knowledge. We ultimately argue that gender is a crucial, underestimated explanatory factor of the value orientations of American college students.
价值差距:性别、代际、个性和政治如何塑造美国大学生的价值观
Greg Lukianoff和Jonathan Haidt在他们的书《美国人心灵的溺爱》(2018)中描述了当前的美国大学生(其中大多数是Z世代:1995 - 2013),他们更重视情感健康和社会正义目标的进步,而不是传统的学术价值观,如学术自由和追求真理。我们通过探究五种不同学术价值观(学术自由、知识进步、学术严谨、社会公正和情感幸福)的优先级,调查了574名美国大学生中是否存在这种价值差异。我们还探讨了性别、年龄、性格、专业和保守主义如何预测每种学术价值。代际差异是存在的,Z世代的学生强调情感上的幸福,而不强调学术上的严谨。与女性相比,男性在学术自由和知识进步方面得分更高,而在社会公正和情感健康方面得分较低。政治保守主义是社会公正得分的最强预测因子,自由主义态度的增加预示着社会公正得分的提高。情绪稳定正向预测知识进步,负向预测情绪健康。宜人性正向预测情绪幸福感,负向预测知识进步。我们最终认为,性别是美国大学生价值取向的一个重要的、被低估的解释因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信