种族和性别定型观念中的意识形态差异

IF 1.2 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Chadly Stern, Jordan R. Axt
{"title":"种族和性别定型观念中的意识形态差异","authors":"Chadly Stern, Jordan R. Axt","doi":"10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We investigated whether political ideology was associated with the endorsement of race and gender stereotypes, and examined motivational and cognitive factors that could account for any ideological differences. Across five preregistered studies, people who were more politically conservative more strongly supported the use of stereotypes to make social inferences based on race, and endorsed specific stereotypes about racial and gender groups. An internal meta-analysis indicated that a greater desire to uphold group-based hierarchy and lower epistemic motivation to deliberate explained, in part, why conservatives were more likely to endorse the use of stereotypes, while cognitive ability did not have a significant explanatory role. These findings suggest that characteristics of individuals not inherently linked to any particular social group can shape perceptions about whether stereotypes are valid, and highlight how basic psychological motivations lead liberals and conservatives to diverge in their perceptions of groups.","PeriodicalId":48050,"journal":{"name":"Social Cognition","volume":"39 1","pages":"259-294"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ideological Differences in Race and Gender Stereotyping\",\"authors\":\"Chadly Stern, Jordan R. Axt\",\"doi\":\"10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.259\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We investigated whether political ideology was associated with the endorsement of race and gender stereotypes, and examined motivational and cognitive factors that could account for any ideological differences. Across five preregistered studies, people who were more politically conservative more strongly supported the use of stereotypes to make social inferences based on race, and endorsed specific stereotypes about racial and gender groups. An internal meta-analysis indicated that a greater desire to uphold group-based hierarchy and lower epistemic motivation to deliberate explained, in part, why conservatives were more likely to endorse the use of stereotypes, while cognitive ability did not have a significant explanatory role. These findings suggest that characteristics of individuals not inherently linked to any particular social group can shape perceptions about whether stereotypes are valid, and highlight how basic psychological motivations lead liberals and conservatives to diverge in their perceptions of groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Cognition\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"259-294\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.259\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/SOCO.2021.39.2.259","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

我们调查了政治意识形态是否与支持种族和性别刻板印象有关,并研究了可以解释任何意识形态差异的动机和认知因素。在五项预先登记的研究中,政治上更保守的人更强烈地支持使用刻板印象来基于种族进行社会推断,并支持对种族和性别群体的特定刻板印象。一项内部荟萃分析表明,维护基于群体的等级制度的愿望更大,深思熟虑的认识动机更低,这在一定程度上解释了为什么保守派更有可能支持刻板印象的使用,而认知能力没有起到重要的解释作用。这些发现表明,与任何特定社会群体没有内在联系的个人的特征可以塑造人们对刻板印象是否有效的看法,并突显出基本的心理动机是如何导致自由派和保守派在对群体的看法上产生分歧的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ideological Differences in Race and Gender Stereotyping
We investigated whether political ideology was associated with the endorsement of race and gender stereotypes, and examined motivational and cognitive factors that could account for any ideological differences. Across five preregistered studies, people who were more politically conservative more strongly supported the use of stereotypes to make social inferences based on race, and endorsed specific stereotypes about racial and gender groups. An internal meta-analysis indicated that a greater desire to uphold group-based hierarchy and lower epistemic motivation to deliberate explained, in part, why conservatives were more likely to endorse the use of stereotypes, while cognitive ability did not have a significant explanatory role. These findings suggest that characteristics of individuals not inherently linked to any particular social group can shape perceptions about whether stereotypes are valid, and highlight how basic psychological motivations lead liberals and conservatives to diverge in their perceptions of groups.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Cognition
Social Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: An excellent resource for researchers as well as students, Social Cognition features reports on empirical research, self-perception, self-concept, social neuroscience, person-memory integration, social schemata, the development of social cognition, and the role of affect in memory and perception. Three broad concerns define the scope of the journal: - The processes underlying the perception, memory, and judgment of social stimuli - The effects of social, cultural, and affective factors on the processing of information The behavioral and interpersonal consequences of cognitive 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