Partisan Prejudice: The Role of Beliefs About the Unchanging Nature of Ideology and Partisans.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Crystal L Hoyt, Jeni L Burnette, Meghan Moore
{"title":"Partisan Prejudice: The Role of Beliefs About the Unchanging Nature of Ideology and Partisans.","authors":"Crystal L Hoyt, Jeni L Burnette, Meghan Moore","doi":"10.1177/01461672241283862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although there is a tendency to think all forms of essentialism-the belief that characteristics are inherent and unchangeable-are similar, some theories suggest different foundations and outcomes. We investigated if belief systems about the stability of political ideology (trait essentialism) and the fundamental nature of partisans (social essentialism) predict prejudice in opposite ways and if they do so via differential relations with blame. Across six studies (<i>N</i> = 2,231), we found that the more people believe the trait of political ideology is fixed (trait essentialism), the more they think that Republicans and Democrats are inherently different (social essentialism). Crucially, despite this positive correlation, trait essentialism was negatively linked to partisan prejudice and social essentialism was positively linked. The essentialism to prejudice links were driven, in part, by differential associations with blame attributions. Media messaging robustly influenced both types of essentialist thinking, with implications for prejudice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19834,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"1461672241283862"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241283862","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although there is a tendency to think all forms of essentialism-the belief that characteristics are inherent and unchangeable-are similar, some theories suggest different foundations and outcomes. We investigated if belief systems about the stability of political ideology (trait essentialism) and the fundamental nature of partisans (social essentialism) predict prejudice in opposite ways and if they do so via differential relations with blame. Across six studies (N = 2,231), we found that the more people believe the trait of political ideology is fixed (trait essentialism), the more they think that Republicans and Democrats are inherently different (social essentialism). Crucially, despite this positive correlation, trait essentialism was negatively linked to partisan prejudice and social essentialism was positively linked. The essentialism to prejudice links were driven, in part, by differential associations with blame attributions. Media messaging robustly influenced both types of essentialist thinking, with implications for prejudice.

党派偏见:关于意识形态和党派成员不变性质的信念所起的作用》(The Role of Beliefs About the Unchanging Nature of Ideology and Partisans)。
尽管人们倾向于认为所有形式的本质主义--认为特征是固有的、不可改变的--都是相似的,但有些理论却提出了不同的基础和结果。我们研究了关于政治意识形态稳定性的信念系统(特质本质主义)和关于党派成员基本性质的信念系统(社会本质主义)是否以相反的方式预测偏见,以及它们是否通过与指责的不同关系来预测偏见。通过六项研究(N = 2,231),我们发现,人们越相信政治意识形态的特质是固定不变的(特质本质论),就越认为共和党人和民主党人本质上是不同的(社会本质论)。重要的是,尽管存在这种正相关,特质本质主义与党派偏见呈负相关,而社会本质主义则呈正相关。本质主义与偏见之间的联系部分是由与责任归因的不同关联所驱动的。媒体信息有力地影响了这两种本质主义思维,并对偏见产生了影响。
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
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
5.00%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: The Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin is the official journal for the Society of Personality and Social Psychology. The journal is an international outlet for original empirical papers in all areas of personality and social psychology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信