Framing Inequality as Advantage versus Disadvantage: A Systematic Review of Effects and a Two-Step Model to Explain Them.

IF 7.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Annette Malapally,Nicole Methner,Maike Braun,Sophia Wittenborn,Susanne Bruckmüller
{"title":"Framing Inequality as Advantage versus Disadvantage: A Systematic Review of Effects and a Two-Step Model to Explain Them.","authors":"Annette Malapally,Nicole Methner,Maike Braun,Sophia Wittenborn,Susanne Bruckmüller","doi":"10.1177/10888683251333458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Academic AbstractAlthough disadvantage and advantage jointly make up inequality, inequality is often one-sidedly framed as disadvantage. Concurrently, efforts to raise awareness for advantages are growing. Many studies have examined whether and how it matters if inequality is framed as advantage or disadvantage. However, empirical and conceptual integration of this work is lacking. For empirical integration, we systematically reviewed 71 experimental studies in 36 documents (n = 20,063). These investigated many different variables, but often only once, or with inconsistent findings. Framing manipulations varied in ways that could bias effects. Summarizing consistent effects, we conclude that framing can influence how people perceive and react to inequality, but this is contingent on moderators. For conceptual integration, we developed a two-step model, which defines (dis)advantage frames and aims to explain why (Step 1) and how (Step 2) they influence which variables, to help this exciting research field move forward in a more systematic way.Public AbstractInequality is one of the biggest challenges of our time. Both disadvantage and advantage are mechanisms that create and maintain inequality. However, there is often a one-sided focus on disadvantage, though awareness for advantage is growing slowly. This makes it important to ask whether and to what extent it matters if inequality is understood and talked about in terms of disadvantages or advantages. We analyzed and summarized previous studies that investigated these questions and developed an integrating conceptual model. Taken together, the way we talk about inequality can influence how people perceive and react to it, for example, how (il)legitimate they find it and what they want to do about it. Neither talking about inequality as advantage nor as disadvantage is per se more conducive to challenging or maintaining inequality. A balanced understanding of inequality seems necessary to fully understand the issue and to develop effective interventions.","PeriodicalId":48386,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Social Psychology Review","volume":"45 1","pages":"10888683251333458"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Social Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683251333458","RegionNum":1,"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

Academic AbstractAlthough disadvantage and advantage jointly make up inequality, inequality is often one-sidedly framed as disadvantage. Concurrently, efforts to raise awareness for advantages are growing. Many studies have examined whether and how it matters if inequality is framed as advantage or disadvantage. However, empirical and conceptual integration of this work is lacking. For empirical integration, we systematically reviewed 71 experimental studies in 36 documents (n = 20,063). These investigated many different variables, but often only once, or with inconsistent findings. Framing manipulations varied in ways that could bias effects. Summarizing consistent effects, we conclude that framing can influence how people perceive and react to inequality, but this is contingent on moderators. For conceptual integration, we developed a two-step model, which defines (dis)advantage frames and aims to explain why (Step 1) and how (Step 2) they influence which variables, to help this exciting research field move forward in a more systematic way.Public AbstractInequality is one of the biggest challenges of our time. Both disadvantage and advantage are mechanisms that create and maintain inequality. However, there is often a one-sided focus on disadvantage, though awareness for advantage is growing slowly. This makes it important to ask whether and to what extent it matters if inequality is understood and talked about in terms of disadvantages or advantages. We analyzed and summarized previous studies that investigated these questions and developed an integrating conceptual model. Taken together, the way we talk about inequality can influence how people perceive and react to it, for example, how (il)legitimate they find it and what they want to do about it. Neither talking about inequality as advantage nor as disadvantage is per se more conducive to challenging or maintaining inequality. A balanced understanding of inequality seems necessary to fully understand the issue and to develop effective interventions.
将不平等定义为优势与劣势:对影响的系统回顾和解释它们的两步模型。
虽然劣势和优势共同构成了不平等,但不平等往往被片面地定义为劣势。与此同时,提高对优势的认识的努力也在增加。许多研究都考察了不平等被定义为优势还是劣势是否重要,以及如何重要。然而,这项工作缺乏经验和概念的整合。为了进行实证整合,我们系统地回顾了36篇文献(n = 20,063)中的71项实验研究。这些研究调查了许多不同的变量,但往往只有一次,或者结果不一致。框架操作的方式各不相同,可能会产生偏见效应。总结一致的影响,我们得出结论,框架可以影响人们对不平等的看法和反应,但这取决于调节者。对于概念整合,我们开发了一个两步模型,该模型定义了(dis)优势框架,并旨在解释它们为什么(步骤1)和如何(步骤2)影响哪些变量,以帮助这个令人兴奋的研究领域以更系统的方式向前发展。不平等是我们这个时代最大的挑战之一。劣势和优势都是造成和维持不平等的机制。然而,人们往往片面地关注劣势,尽管对优势的认识正在缓慢增长。因此,我们有必要问一问,从不利或有利的角度来理解和谈论不平等是否重要,以及在多大程度上重要。我们分析和总结了以往研究这些问题的研究,并开发了一个整合的概念模型。综上所述,我们谈论不平等的方式会影响人们对不平等的看法和反应,例如,他们认为不平等是否合法,以及他们想为此做些什么。无论是将不平等视为优势还是劣势,本身都无助于挑战或维持不平等。要充分理解这个问题并制定有效的干预措施,平衡地了解不平等似乎是必要的。
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
19.00
自引率
1.90%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Title: Personality and Social Psychology Review (PSPR) Journal Overview: Official journal of SPSP, the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc. Premiere outlet for original theoretical papers and conceptual review articles in all areas of personality and social psychology Features stimulating conceptual pieces identifying new research directions and comprehensive review papers providing integrative frameworks for existing theory and research programs Topics Covered: Attitudes and Social Cognition: Examines the inner workings of the human mind in understanding, evaluating, and responding to the social environment Interpersonal and Group Processes: Explores patterns of interaction and interdependence characterizing everyday human functioning Intergroup Relations: Investigates determinants of prejudice, conflict, cooperation, and harmonious relationships between social groups Personality and Individual Differences: Focuses on causes, assessment, structures, and processes giving rise to human variation Biological and Cultural Influences: Studies the biological and cultural mediation of social psychological and personality processes
×
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