An Empirical Analysis of the Structuration of American Ideologies About Economic Justice

Q3 Social Sciences
Curtis C. Holland
{"title":"An Empirical Analysis of the Structuration of American Ideologies About Economic Justice","authors":"Curtis C. Holland","doi":"10.18778/1733-8077.9.4.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A consensus has been forming among structural social psychologists that most Americans hold beliefs in both individualistic and structural explanations of inequality. Yet, even many who espouse structural beliefs nonetheless emphasize individual-level explanations of inequality to disproportionate extents. This study is aimed to identify common trends in the logic used by a conventional group of Americans – MBA students – to rationalize their more general political and economic beliefs. While a large number of studies have emphasized the prevalence of dominant ideology beliefs, and others have speculated theoretically on how such beliefs are reproduced, this study aims to bring these bodies of work together. I sought to build an initial understanding of how contradictions in Americans’ political and economic ideologies are transmuted, and to identify heuristic concepts fundamental to this process. Findings suggest that particular assumptions about human nature serve to “fill” the cognitive “gap” which would otherwise present individuals with insurmountable ambiguities in their ideologies about economic justice. Respondents also reflected some level of awareness of the impact of ideology on their thought processes, even as they accept such processes, and the realities they constitute, as inevitable.","PeriodicalId":53708,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Sociology Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.9.4.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A consensus has been forming among structural social psychologists that most Americans hold beliefs in both individualistic and structural explanations of inequality. Yet, even many who espouse structural beliefs nonetheless emphasize individual-level explanations of inequality to disproportionate extents. This study is aimed to identify common trends in the logic used by a conventional group of Americans – MBA students – to rationalize their more general political and economic beliefs. While a large number of studies have emphasized the prevalence of dominant ideology beliefs, and others have speculated theoretically on how such beliefs are reproduced, this study aims to bring these bodies of work together. I sought to build an initial understanding of how contradictions in Americans’ political and economic ideologies are transmuted, and to identify heuristic concepts fundamental to this process. Findings suggest that particular assumptions about human nature serve to “fill” the cognitive “gap” which would otherwise present individuals with insurmountable ambiguities in their ideologies about economic justice. Respondents also reflected some level of awareness of the impact of ideology on their thought processes, even as they accept such processes, and the realities they constitute, as inevitable.
美国经济正义思想结构的实证分析
结构社会心理学家之间形成了一种共识,即大多数美国人对不平等的个人主义解释和结构解释都深信不疑。然而,即使是许多支持结构性信念的人,也过分强调个人层面对不平等的解释。这项研究的目的是确定一个传统的美国群体——MBA学生——用来合理化他们更普遍的政治和经济信仰的逻辑的共同趋势。虽然大量的研究强调了主导意识形态信念的普遍性,还有一些研究从理论上推测了这些信念是如何复制的,但本研究旨在将这些工作结合起来。我试图初步了解美国政治和经济意识形态中的矛盾是如何转变的,并确定这一过程的基本启发式概念。研究结果表明,关于人性的特定假设有助于“填补”认知上的“空白”,否则,这些空白将使个人在他们关于经济正义的意识形态中产生无法克服的模糊性。受访者还反映出,他们在一定程度上意识到意识形态对其思维过程的影响,尽管他们承认这种过程及其构成的现实是不可避免的。
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
Qualitative Sociology Review
Qualitative Sociology Review Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: For a long time, we have observed an increased interest in qualitative sociology, and the use of an interpretive frame to understand human actions, social processes, meanings and definitions, and new social theory generally. In order to enable a free flow of information and to integrate the community of qualitative sociologists, we have decided to create an open-access, international scientific journal. Qualitative Sociology Review publishes empirical, theoretical and methodological articles applicable to all fields and specializations within sociology.
×
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