Journal of Social and Political Psychology <p>The&nbsp;<em>Journal of Social and Political Psychology</em>&nbsp;(JSPP) is a peer-reviewed open-access journal (without author fees). It publishes articles at the intersection of social and political psychology from different epistemological, methodological, theoretical, and cultural perspectives and from different regions across the globe that substantially advance the understanding of social problems, their reduction, and the promotion of social justice.</p> en-US <p>Authors who publish with Journal of Social and Political Psychology (JSPP) agree to the following terms:</p> <p><a href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img style="border-width: 0; float: left; margin-right: 2em; margin-bottom: 1em;" src="" alt="Creative Commons License"></a></p> <p>Articles are published under the <a href="" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</a> (CC BY 4.0).</p> <p>Under the CC BY license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their article, but authors grant others permission to use the content of publications in JSPP in whole or in part provided that the original work is properly cited. Users (redistributors) of JSPP are required to cite the original source, including the author's names, JSPP as the initial source of publication, year of publication, volume number and DOI (if available).</p> <p>Authors may publish the manuscript in any other journal or medium but any such subsequent publication must include a notice that the manuscript was initially published by JSPP.</p> <p>Authors grant JSPP the right of first publication. Although authors remain the copyright owner, they grant the journal the irrevocable, nonexclusive rights to publish, reproduce, publicly distribute and display, and transmit their article or portions thereof in any manner.</p> (Christopher Cohrs, Johanna Ray Vollhardt) (PsychOpen Support Team) Fri, 26 Aug 2022 05:45:26 -0700 OJS 60 Disentangling the Factors Behind Shifting Voting Intentions: The Bandwagon Effect Reflects Heuristic Processing, While the Underdog Effect Reflects Fairness Concerns <p>In today’s elections, abundantly available polls inform voters what parties lead and what parties trail. This allows voters to accurately predict the likely outcomes of elections before the final results are in. Voters may react to these ex-ante election outcomes by shifting their votes either toward leading parties, often termed the “bandwagon effect” or toward trailing parties, often termed the “underdog effect”. The published literature presents different perspectives on the strength of both effects and the underlying psychological processes. Three preregistered studies (total N = 1,424) test the psychological causes of both effects. Exploratory Study 1 relates differences in interpersonal, moral, strategic, and epistemic psychological factors to shifts in voting intentions before the 2019 Polish parliamentary elections. Results suggest that the bandwagon effect reflects a lack of political expertise, whereas the underdog effect reflects fairness concerns. To provide experimental evidence, Studies 2a and 2b manipulate these two factors in a simulated election design. The results confirm that low expertise increases the bandwagon effect and that fairness concerns increase the underdog effect.</p> Joris Lammers, Marcin Bukowski, Anna Potoczek, Alexandra Fleischmann, Wilhelm Hofmann Copyright (c) 2022 Joris Lammers, Marcin Bukowski, Anna Potoczek, Alexandra Fleischmann, Wilhelm Hofmann Wed, 30 Nov 2022 00:00:00 -0800 The Changing Association Between Political Ideology and Closed-Mindedness: Left and Right Have Become More Alike <p>Evidence suggests that politically right-leaning individuals are more likely to be closed-minded. Whether this association is inherent or subject to change has been the subject of debate, yet has not been formally tested. Through a meta-analysis, we find evidence of a changing association between conservatism and facets of closed-mindedness in the U.S. and international context using 341 unique samples, over 200,000 participants, and 920 estimates over 71 years. In the U.S., data ranging from 1948 to 2019 revealed a linear decline in the association between social conservatism (SC) and closed-mindedness, though economic conservatism (EC) did not vary in its association with closed-mindedness over time. Internationally across 18 countries, excluding the U.S., we observed a curvilinear decline in the association between SC and closed-mindedness over that same time, but no change in ECs association. We also tested variation over time for attitudinal measures of conservatism ranging between 1987 to 2018. In the U.S., we observed a linear increase in the association between right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and closed-mindedness, with a similar linear increase in the association between social dominance orientation (SDO) and closed-mindedness. Internationally, there was a curvilinear increase in the association between RWA and closed-mindedness, but no change in the association with SDO. We discuss the changes to the political landscape that might explain our findings.</p> Jesse Acosta, Markus Kemmelmeier Copyright (c) 2022 Jesse Acosta, Markus Kemmelmeier Fri, 28 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 “I feel it in my gut:” Epistemic Motivations, Political Beliefs, and Misperceptions of COVID-19 and the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election <p>This project examines the intersection of political constructs and epistemic motivations as they relate to belief in misinformation. How we value the origins of knowledge – through feelings and intuition or evidence and data – has important implications for our susceptibility to misinformation. This project explores how these epistemic motivations correlate with political ideology, party identification, and favorability towards President Trump, and how epistemic and political constructs predict belief in misinformation about COVID and the 2020 election. Results from a US national survey from Nov-Dec 2020 illustrate that Republicans, conservatives, and those favorable towards President Trump held greater misperceptions about COVID and the 2020 election. Additionally, epistemic motivations were associated with political preferences; Republicans and conservatives were more likely to reject evidence, and Trump supporters more likely to value feelings and intuition. Mediation analyses support the proposition that Trump favorability, Republicanism, and conservatism may help account for the relationships between epistemic motivations and misperceptions. Results are discussed in terms of the messaging strategies of right-wing populist movements, and the implications for democracy and public health.</p> Dannagal G. Young, Erin K. Maloney, Amy Bleakley, Jessica B. Langbaum Copyright (c) 2022 Dannagal G. Young, Erin K. Maloney, Amy Bleakley, Jessica B. Langbaum Wed, 26 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 Measuring Openness to Political Pluralism <p>In an era of increased political polarization, it is important to measure how receptive US American citizens are to diverse political views. Being more open to diverse political viewpoints—openness to political pluralism—may involve holding emotional and intellectual tolerance, non-rigidity, and proactive motivation to seek out different political perspectives. In three preregistered studies of US residents, we present a new self-report measure of openness to political pluralism (OPP) consisting of 25 items. In Study 1 (MTurk n = 400), we verified a preregistered bifactor model with four facets, conducted initial validity analyses, and created a short five-item version (OPPS). Both OPP and OPPS have high internal consistency and test-retest reliability. In Studies 2 and 3, MTurk participants (n = 258) and Qualtrics panel participants (n = 296) completed OPP and measures of related constructs to validate our scale. OPP was modestly correlated with actively open-minded thinking (AOT) and highly correlated with open-minded cognition-political (OMC-P). Greater OPP was associated with an inverted U-shape relation to left-right political orientation. It was also correlated with more politically diverse social networks and varied information seeking. We discuss how our measure of openness to political pluralism can be used in future research.</p> Patrick E. Shrout, Mao Mogami, Qi Xu, Yasaman Ghodse-Elahi, Elizabeth Mutter, Matthew T. Riccio, Timothy J. Valshtein, V. Baadan, Shahrzad Goudarzi Copyright (c) 2022 Patrick E. Shrout, Mao Mogami, Qi Xu, Yasaman Ghodse-Elahi, Elizabeth Mutter, Matthew T. Riccio, Timothy J. Valshtein, V. Baadan, Shahrzad Goudarzi Fri, 21 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 The Integration of Subgroups at the Supranational Level: The Relation Between Social Identity, National Threat, and Perceived Legitimacy of the EU <p>Previous research suggests that social identity influences public attitudes about the European Union, but little is known about the role of social identity for perceived legitimacy of the EU. This article explores the relation between different forms of identification (national, EU, dual) and EU legitimacy perceptions, and the moderation of this relationship by experienced threat to national power and sociocultural identity. A survey was conducted in six countries (N = 1136). A factor analysis of legitimacy items resulted in two subscales (institutional trust and duty to obey). Separate regression analyses were therefore run on these subscales. All forms of identification were positively related to perceived EU legitimacy, while threat was a strong and universal negative predictor. However, the results suggest that national identification only positively predicted legitimacy when participants experienced no threat to their nation by the EU, while dual identification positively predicted legitimacy even when participants experienced threat. Overall, respect for national identities and their values may offer opportunities to safeguard and improve the perceived legitimacy of the EU. Findings are discussed in terms of the literature on the ingroup projection model and the common ingroup model.</p> Eva Grosfeld, Daan Scheepers, Armin Cuyvers, Naomi Ellemers Copyright (c) 2022 Eva Grosfeld, Daan Scheepers, Armin Cuyvers, Naomi Ellemers Mon, 17 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 Political Psychology of Southeast Asia <p>This special thematic section spotlights the current state of political psychology in Southeast Asia. Drawing from various research methodologies, five papers published in this special thematic section provide psychological insights into different political topics in the past and present-day Southeast Asia, including 1) Islam and politics; 2) terrorist labelling; 3) violence against minorities; 4) moralised policies; and 5) vote-buying. Overall, this special thematic section contributes to the understanding of the political psychology of non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) populations, particularly in Southeast Asia. The need for more publications with non-WEIRD samples in the field of political psychology is discussed, as are some strategies to actualise this goal.</p> Ali Mashuri, Idhamsyah Eka Putra, Cristina Montiel Copyright (c) 2022 Ali Mashuri, Idhamsyah Eka Putra, Cristina Montiel Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 Islam and Politics: A Latent Class Analysis of Indonesian Muslims Based on Political Attitudes and Psychological Determinants <p>This study explored the diversity of Muslim political attitudes by conducting a latent class analysis in the rarely investigated context of Indonesia—the largest Muslim country in the world. We surveyed a total of 1208 Indonesian Muslim participants from eight out of 33 Indonesian provinces. The latent class analysis revealed that there are six clusters of Muslim Individuals based on their political attitudes: Fundamentalist Muslim, Nationalist Muslim, Apolitical Muslim, Hijrah Muslim, Moderate Muslim, and Progressive Muslim. Moreover, we also found several meaningful differences in psychological correlates (right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and need for cognitive closure) across the six clusters. Taken together, this study sheds some light upon the diversity of Muslim political attitudes and the psychological tendencies that correspond with such attitudes.</p> Istiqomah, Joevarian Hudiyana, Mirra Noor Milla, Hamdi Muluk, Bagus Takwin Copyright (c) 2022 Istiqomah, Joevarian Hudiyana, Mirra Noor Milla, Hamdi Muluk, Bagus Takwin Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 Narrative Expansion and "Terrorist" Labeling: Discursive Conflict Escalation by State Media <p>How does state rhetoric change as conflict intensifies against intrastate enemies? We forward the concept of narrative expansion and labeling, to analyze the escalatory transformation of conflict discourse by the Philippine state media. The data set includes 4,098 articles from the state’s official news agency, covering early attempts at reconciliation and the eventual failure of peace negotiations between the Philippine Government and the National Democratic Front (NDF). Analysis involves a mixed methods approach, combining computational network analytics of word networks with a qualitative interpretation of emergent themes. Results reveal a discursive shift emanating from the state’s mouthpiece, alongside the political deterioration of peace talks with the NDF. The state narrative initially expands to include not only conciliatory but also confrontational talk. Eventually combative talks dominate, including a shift in labeling the enemy as terrorist rather than rebel. Narrative expansion likewise refers to state news discursively increasing the number of social actors involved in the conflict as either enemy or ally. Our findings contribute to understanding how discursive shifts may move from conciliatory to hostile discourse in a protracted intrastate conflict.</p> Cristina J. Montiel, Erwine S. Dela Paz, Jose S. Medriano Copyright (c) 2022 Cristina J. Montiel, Erwine S. Dela Paz, Jose S. Medriano Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 Indonesian Civilians’ Attributions for Anti-Chinese Violence During the May 1998 Riots in Indonesia <p>The present research examines the perceptions of Indonesian civilians regarding the May 1998 riots, which occurred at the end of the period of military dictatorship in Indonesia and included looting, rapes, and murders, disproportionately targeting Chinese Indonesians. Using a mixed methods approach, the research explores the intersectionality of ethnicity and gender as factors associated with perceptions of the extent and causes of the riots. It aims to contribute to the literature concerning the Ultimate Attribution Error, and to the psychology of intergroup relations in non-WEIRD contexts more broadly. An online survey with qualitative and quantitative components was administered to 235 participants (134 Pribumi and 101 Chinese Indonesian participants). The present research provides what may be the first documentation of civilian perceptions of the May 1998 riots. Significant differences consistent with the Ultimate Attribution Error were found between perpetrator and victim groups’ accounts. Participants who are Pribumi (the group involved in perpetrating the violence) attributed the causes of the violence to external factors more strongly, while participants who are Chinese Indonesians (the victim group) attributed the causes of the mass violence more strongly to the internal factors of perpetrators. There was no evidence, however, that gender affected perceptions, despite the gendered nature of the violence.</p> Eunike Mutiara Himawan, Winnifred Louis, Annie Pohlman Copyright (c) 2022 Eunike Mutiara Himawan, Winnifred Louis, Annie Pohlman Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700 Negotiated Harms in Moralized Policies: The Case of Duterte’s War on Drugs <p>Viewing a policy as harmful can lead to its moral condemnation. However, this harmfulness can be constructed and negotiated to lead to different moral positions by building upon available, accessible, and relevant discourses. This study examined how individuals constructed and negotiated harm in moral reasoning about a contentious policy, Philippine President Duterte’s war on drugs, locally known as tokhang. We conducted thematic analysis with attention to discourse to analyze interviews with 12 Filipino young adults, using the Theory of Dyadic Morality as a starting point to make sense of constructions of harm. Reasoning about tokhang showed different constructions of intentional agents and vulnerable victims serving as the basis for moral positions. Moral condemnation of the war on drugs emphasized the vulnerability of its victims and the intentionality of the government and police as agents. On the other hand, moral justification of the policy constructed drug war victims as agentic and guilty of crimes, the police as potentially vulnerable victims acting according to protocol to defend themselves, and rogue agents acting independently of the policy. Ambiguous positions were also made possible when the causality of harm is unclear. These constructions and negotiations were built upon broader discourses deployed in the sociopolitical context of urban young adults, with individual contexts and characteristics contributing to variations in the accessibility and relevance of certain discourses and resulting moral positions.</p> Danielle P. Ochoa, Michelle G. Ong Copyright (c) 2022 Danielle P. Ochoa, Michelle G. Ong Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 -0700