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) Thu, 26 Aug 2021 03:58:10 -0700 OJS 60 Addressing Social Polarization Through Critical Thinking: Theoretical Application in the “Living Well With Difference” Course in Secondary Schools in England <p>Responding to international calls for critical thinking programs to address social polarisations and extremism through education, this article examines the cognitive and socio-psychological foundations of a critical thinking programme for secondary schools in England called “Living Well With Difference” (LWWD). The aim of LWWD is to develop critical thinking about issues of social polarisation, prejudice and any kind of extreme thinking. These issues often involve the interaction of emotion and thinking, which is understood using a dual systems framework, illustrated with examples of course methodology and content. The learning process aims to promote more cognitively flexible, complex and integrated thinking, measured by integrative complexity, and is supported by meta-awareness to enable emotion management. The aim is for participants to engage with difficult social issues through structured group activities, while becoming aware of social, emotional, textual, visual and rhetorical influences to increase Media Information Literacy, as a foundation for engaging with differing perspectives in order to reduce barriers between groups in society.</p> Sara Savage, Emily Oliver, Ellen Gordon, Lucy Tutton Copyright (c) 2021 Sara Savage, Emily Oliver, Ellen Gordon, Lucy Tutton Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:51:09 -0700 Refining the Short Social Dominance Orientation Scale (SSDO): A Validation in Seven European Countries <p>People and societies differ in their tendency to justify inequalities and group hierarchies, a motivation that has been labelled social dominance orientation (SDO). In order to efficiently measure this motivational tendency, Pratto and colleagues (2013, proposed the four-item Short Social Dominance Orientation (SSDO) scale. The present study comprehensively assesses the SSDO scale’s psychometric properties in seven European countries (Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, France, Hungary, Italy, and Poland). Using large and diverse samples from these countries, we propose a measurement model to assess the scale’s structural validity and we assess measurement invariance (MI), reliability, and convergent validity. Results suggest that the scale is sufficiently reliable, shows theoretically predictable and consistent correlations with external criteria across countries, it exhibits at least partial scalar and partial uniqueness MI across the seven countries and full MI across gender. These findings offer support for the psychometric quality of the SSDO scale and its usefulness for cross-national and multi-topic social surveys.</p> Julian Aichholzer, Clemens M. Lechner Copyright (c) 2021 Julian Aichholzer, Clemens M. Lechner Thu, 16 Sep 2021 05:19:44 -0700 The Psychological and Socio-Political Consequences of Infectious Diseases: Authoritarianism, Governance, and Nonzoonotic (Human-to-Human) Infection Transmission <p>What are the socio-political consequences of infectious diseases? Humans have evolved to avoid disease and infection, resulting in a set of psychological mechanisms that promote disease-avoidance, referred to as the behavioral immune system (BIS). One manifestation of the BIS is the cautious avoidance of unfamiliar, foreign, or potentially contaminating stimuli. Specifically, when disease infection risk is salient or prevalent, authoritarian attitudes can emerge that seek to avoid and reject foreign outgroups while favoring homogenous, familiar ingroups. In the largest study conducted on the topic to date (N &amp;gt; 240,000), elevated regional levels of infectious pathogens were related to more authoritarian attitudes on three geographical levels: across U.S. metropolitan regions, U.S. states, and cross-culturally across 47 countries. The link between pathogen prevalence and authoritarian psychological dispositions predicted conservative voting behavior in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election and more authoritarian governance and state laws, in which one group of people imposes asymmetrical laws on others in a hierarchical structure. Furthermore, cross-cultural analysis illustrated that the relationship between infectious diseases and authoritarianism was pronounced for infectious diseases that can be acquired from other humans (nonzoonotic), and does not generalize to other infectious diseases that can only be acquired from non-human species (zoonotic diseases). At a time of heightened awareness of infectious diseases, the current findings are important reminders that public health and ecology can have ramifications for socio-political attitudes by shaping how citizens vote and are governed.</p> Leor Zmigrod, Tobias Ebert, Friedrich M. Götz, Peter Jason Rentfrow Copyright (c) 2021 Leor Zmigrod, Tobias Ebert, Friedrich M. Götz, Peter Jason Rentfrow Thu, 09 Sep 2021 04:58:47 -0700 The Social Axioms of Populism: Investigating the Relationship Between Culture and Populist Attitudes <p>Populism is on the rise with various movements having electoral breakthroughs. Most social-science research on populism has focused primarily on party tactics and rhetoric, and a definition for the term itself; only recently has populism emerged as a psychological construct. We contribute to this growing literature with two studies (n = 456 and n = 5,837) that investigated the cultural worldviews underpinned in populist attitudes. Using the social axioms model, an etic framework for assessing people’s generalized social expectations, we linked populist attitudes to universal dimensions of culture. We found that higher levels of social cynicism and social flexibility, and to a lesser extent, lower levels of fate control and reward for application predicted populist attitudes. These findings indicate that people who endorse populist attitudes, across a range of contexts, are cynical regarding the social world, believe in alternative solutions to social dilemmas, but may also perceive a world that is difficult to control and potentially unfair. The discussion focuses on the cultural forces that may drive or facilitate populist attitudes across context and time.</p> Waleed A. Jami, Markus Kemmelmeier Copyright (c) 2021 Waleed A. Jami, Markus Kemmelmeier Thu, 09 Sep 2021 04:14:52 -0700 Multicultural Attitudes in Europe: A Multilevel Analysis of Perceived Compatibility Between Individual and Collective Justice <p>Contemporary political philosophers debate the degree to which multiculturalism, with its emphasis on collective justice principles, is compatible with Western liberal societies’ core ideologies based on individual justice principles. Taking on a social psychological perspective, the present study offers a cross-national, multilevel examination of the asymmetric compatibility hypothesis, according to which majority and ethnic minority groups differ in the association between support for individualized immigration policies (based on individual justice principles) and support for multiculturalism (based on collective justice principles). Using data from Round 7 of the European Social Survey (N = 36,732), we compared minority and majority attitudes across 1) countries with stronger versus weaker equality policies at the national level (a Migrant Integration Policy Index [MIPEX] sub-dimension indicator), and 2) Western and post-communist European countries. In line with the asymmetric compatibility hypothesis, ethnic minorities perceived significantly less incompatibility between individual and collective justice than majorities. This majority-minority asymmetric compatibility was stronger in Western countries compared to post-communist European countries. Moreover, in Western countries and in countries with stronger equality policies, ethnic minorities generally supported multiculturalism to a greater extent than majorities. Overall, these findings suggest that deep-seated ideological orientations of national contexts shape minority and majority justice conceptions and hence, also, multicultural attitudes. Implications and future research directions are discussed.</p> Jessica Gale, Christian Staerklé, Eva G. T. Green, Emilio Paolo Visintin Copyright (c) 2021 Jessica Gale, Christian Staerklé, Eva G. T. Green, Emilio Paolo Visintin Thu, 09 Sep 2021 01:06:10 -0700 Revealing the Manifestations of Neoliberalism in Academia: Academic Collective Action in Turkey <p>Academic Collective Action (ACA) stands as a small-scale collective action for social change toward liberation, independence and equity in academia. Academic collectives in Turkey, as an example of ACA, prefigure building academia outside the university by emphasizing the extent to which neoliberal academia has already prepared the groundwork for more recent waves of oppression. In this research, we aim to reveal the manifestations of neoliberalism in ACA as captured with prominent social/political psychological concepts of collective action. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 dismissed academics to understand the social and political psychological processes in academic collectives. The narrations of ACA were accompanied by manifestations of neoliberalism as experienced by dismissed academics. We found that, as follows from the existing conceptual tools of collective action, neoliberalism serves as an embedded contextual factor in the process of ACA. This becomes mostly visible for grievances but also for collective identifications, politicization, motivations, finding/allocating resources and sustaining academic collectives. We provide a preliminary basis to understand the role of neoliberalism in organization, mobilization and empowerment dynamics of collective action.</p> Canan Coşkan, Yasemin Gülsüm Acar, Aydın Bayad Copyright (c) 2021 Canan Coşkan, Yasemin Gülsüm Acar, Aydın Bayad Tue, 07 Sep 2021 00:13:23 -0700 Competing Collective Narratives in Intergroup Rapprochement: A Transgenerational Perspective <p>In the context of an ethnically divided community, we explored the role of competing group narratives for intergroup rapprochement after violent conflict. In Study 1, data from a community survey conducted in Vukovar, Croatia, among 198 Croats, the local majority, and 119 Serbs, the local minority, were analysed to gain perspective on different narratives about the recent war and effects they may have on intergroup relations. In Study 2, focus groups with Croat and Serb children provided data to explore how these narratives were transmitted and transformed in living experience within the second generation. The quantitative results confirm the existence of opposing narratives of war among local Croats and Serbs. Multiple regression analyses show that, after controlling for exposure to war event and their personal impact, different factors predict rapprochement within the two groups. In the minority status group, that displayed higher overall levels of readiness for rapprochement, perceived ingroup victimization and outgroup stereotypes appeared more predictive than the outgroup affect. In contrast, within the majority group, variations in readiness for intergroup rapprochement were primarily predicted by outgroup affect, followed by perceived ingroup victimization. The qualitative inquiry complemented the findings from the survey. Despite the overwhelming dominant narrative, some alternative positions exist, but not consistent enough to be declared publicly. Perception of one’s own group as the primary victim of the war influences not only interpretations of the past, but also shapes identity, everyday life and future expectations. Mechanisms of perpetuating opposed narratives, as well as possible interventions, are discussed.</p> Margareta Jelić, Dinka Čorkalo Biruški, Dean Ajduković Copyright (c) 2021 Margareta Jelić, Dinka Čorkalo Biruški, Dean Ajduković Wed, 01 Sep 2021 00:36:50 -0700 Aung San Suu Kyi’s Defensive Denial of the Rohingya Massacre: A Rhetorical Analysis of Denial and Positive-Image Construction <p>In December 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accused the Myanmar government of genocide against Rohingya Muslims. Represented by Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar authorities denied such accusations. To understand how a political leader can deny ingroup wrongdoings, we unpacked Suu Kyi’s ICJ speech and analyzed her defensive rhetorical style through critical narrative analysis. We aimed to identify and describe the denial strategies Suu Kyi used as well as how she maintained a positive ingroup image to support her position. Our findings showed that Suu Kyi engaged in interpretative denial of genocide by arguing that genocide cannot occur when there is armed conflict, that there were victims and perpetrators on both sides, and that misconducts by law enforcement had been addressed. To maintain the ingroup’s positive image, she portrayed Myanmar as moral by emphasizing the government’s knowledge of ethical standards and laws, as well as their support for peace and justice. By examining political discourse used by a national leader internationally renowned for supporting human rights, our findings shed light on the dynamic, constructive nature of denial. Theoretical and applied contributions to understanding denial of ingroup wrongdoing are discussed.</p> Idhamsyah Eka Putra, Hema Preya Selvanathan, Ali Mashuri, Cristina J. Montiel Copyright (c) 2021 Idhamsyah Eka Putra, Hema Preya Selvanathan, Ali Mashuri, Cristina J. Montiel Thu, 26 Aug 2021 03:38:42 -0700 Social and Economic Determinants of Support for a Strong Non-Democratic Leader in Democracies Differ From Non-Democracies <p>A growing body of evidence suggests that support for a strong non-democratic leader is driven, in part, by low economic development and economic inequality at the country level, and low income and interpersonal trust at the individual level. In the current research, we tested the hypothesis that although such a pattern predicts support for a strong non-democratic leader in democracies, it should produce decreased support for a strong non-democratic leader in non-democracies (where the presence of such leaders is the political status quo). Using three waves of World Values Survey data (2005-2020), as predicted, we found that in democracies, low economic development, high inequality, and low interpersonal trust predicted support for a strong non-democratic leader. However, in non-democracies, support for a strong non-democratic leader was higher in more economically developed countries and among individuals with higher social trust. These results contradict modernization theory’s proposition that development promotes support for democratic rule and suggest that economic development reinforces support for the existing political system.</p> Silas Xuereb, Michael J. A. Wohl, Anna Stefaniak, Frank J. Elgar Copyright (c) 2021 Silas Xuereb, Michael J. A. Wohl, Anna Stefaniak, Frank J. Elgar Thu, 26 Aug 2021 02:22:30 -0700