|
|
- On (Im)Patience: A New Approach to an Old Virtue
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Kate Sweeny
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractPatience has been of great interest to religious scholars, philosophers, and psychological scientists. Their efforts have produced numerous insights but no cohesive theoretical approach to understanding the broad set of experiences people label as patience. I propose a novel view of patience, one that departs from but ties together existing approaches. Grounded in theories of emotion and emotion regulation, I propose impatience as a discrete emotion triggered by an objectionable delay of some sort, and patience (as a state or process rather than a virtue) as a form of emotion regulation that targets the subjective experience and outward expression of impatience. I propose a number of predictors and consequences of patience and impatience and provide initial evidence for many of the theory’s tenets. This theoretical approach, the process model of patience, reveals coherence across varied fields and methodologies and generates novel, testable, and timely questions for future patience scholars.Public Abstract“Patience is a virtue” is a familiar exhortation, and patience has been of great interest to religious scholars, philosophers, and psychological scientists. Their efforts have produced numerous insights but no cohesive theoretical approach to understanding the broad set of experiences people label as patience. This paper proposes an entirely novel view of patience, one that departs from but ties together existing approaches. I propose that impatience is an emotion, triggered by a frustrating delay of some sort, and patience captures the various ways people try to deal with their experience of impatience. I also propose that various aspects of the situation and the person combine to determine the intensity of impatience and the effectiveness of patience. Finally, I discuss the implications of a theoretical model, the process model of patience, for both scientific inquiry and issues of social justice, which are often fueled by appropriate experiences of impatience.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-07-28T08:36:28Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241263874
- Intergenerational Storytelling and Positive Psychosocial Development:
Stories as Developmental Resources for Marginalized Groups-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Nic M. Weststrate, Kate C. McLean, Robyn Fivush
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractWe articulate an intergenerational model of positive psychosocial development that centers storytelling in an ecological framework and is motivated by an orientation toward social justice. We bring together diverse literature (e.g., racial-ethnic socialization, family storytelling, narrative psychology) to argue that the intergenerational transmission of stories about one’s group is equally important for elders and youth, and especially important for groups who are marginalized, because stories provide a developmental resource for resistance and resilience in the face of injustice. We describe how storytelling activities can support positive psychosocial development in culturally dynamic contexts and illustrate our model with a case study involving LGBTQ+ communities, arguing that intergenerational storytelling is uniquely important for this group given issues of access to stories. We argue that harnessing the power of intergenerational storytelling could provide a culturally safe and sustaining practice for fostering psychosocial development among LGBTQ+ people and other equity-seeking populations.Public AbstractUnderstanding one’s identity as part of a group with shared history and culture that has existed through time is important for positive psychological functioning. This is especially true for marginalized communities for whom identity-relevant knowledge is often erased, silenced, or distorted in mainstream public discourses (e.g., school curricula, news media, television, and film). To compensate for these limitations around access, one channel for the transmission of this knowledge is through oral storytelling between generations of elders and youth. Contemporary psychological science has often assumed that such storytelling occurs within families, but when families cannot or would not share such knowledge, youth suffer. We present a model of intergenerational storytelling that expands our ideas around who counts as “family” and how knowledge can be transmitted through alternative channels, using LGBTQ+ communities as a case example.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-07-28T08:35:05Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241259902
- Being as Having, Loving, and Doing: A Theory of Human Well-Being
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Frank Martela
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractStronger theory on the nature of human well-being is needed, especially as well-being indicators are increasingly utilized in policy contexts. Building on Erik Allardt, who argued that a theory of well-being is, in essence, a theory of human nature, I propose four modes of existence each capturing one dimension central to human well-being: Having recognizes humans as biological creatures requiring certain material resources for survival. Loving captures human social nature and our dependence on others for well-being. Doing highlights the active and agentic nature of human existence. Being acknowledges humans as experiencing their existence. Each mode of existence gives rise to a few more specific needs, and a full assessment of human well-being requires both subjective and objective indicators tapping into these needs. The proposed theory integrates psychological well-being research with sociological and philosophical traditions and contributes to debates about how the progress of nations and sustainability should be measured.Public AbstractWell-being is something we all value individually, and it is also a key political goal. Accordingly, how we define and measure well-being influences what physicians, managers, policy-makers, politicians, and international organizations aim to improve through their work. Better theories of well-being make better measurement of well-being possible, which makes possible more effective and evidence-based advancement of human well-being. In this spirit, the present article argues that there are four fundamental dimensions to human well-being: Having highlights that as biological creatures, we have physical needs, loving highlights human social needs, doing highlights that we are active and agentic beings with goals and strivings, and being highlights that we feel and evaluate our lives. To assess well-being, we need measures tapping into all four of these dimensions. And to assess the sustainability of well-being, we need to examine how to provide well-being for all humanity while remaining within planetary boundaries.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-07-26T12:01:16Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241263634
- Decoding the Dynamics of Cultural Change: A Cultural Evolution Approach to
the Psychology of Acculturation-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Jonas R. Kunst, Alex Mesoudi
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Although acculturation psychology is extensively studied in the social sciences, research progress has slowed due to overused methodologies and theories and emerging challenges to core conceptual tenets. Here, we seek to stimulate scientific inquiry into acculturation by integrating underutilized cultural evolutionary perspectives. We propose that cultural evolutionary mechanisms, such as (anti)conformity, prestige bias, payoff bias, and vertical transmission are instrumental in understanding when, why, and how minority- and majority-group members acculturate. The direction and potency of these mechanisms are proposed to be modulated by a combination of contextual and individual factors, resulting in acculturation strategies that at the population level form “cultural evolutionary equilibria.” These equilibria in turn have consequences for the long-term, population-level dynamics of cultural evolution. We outline how our integration of perspectives can allow researchers to model the dynamics of large-scale cultural change, increasing our understanding of the complex challenges faced by today’s diverse societies.Public AbstractAcculturation describes the cultural and psychological changes resulting from intercultural contact. Here, we use concepts from “cultural evolution” to better understand the processes of acculturation. Cultural evolution researchers view cultural change as an evolutionary process, allowing them to borrow tools and methods from biology. Cultural evolutionary mechanisms such as conformity (copying the numerical majority), anti-conformity (copying the numerical minority), prestige bias (copying famous individuals), payoff bias (copying successful people), and vertical cultural transmission (copying your parents) can cause people to adopt elements from other cultures and/or conserve their cultural heritage. We explore how these transmission mechanisms might create distinct acculturation strategies, shaping cultural change and diversity over the long-term. This theoretical integration can pave the way for a more sophisticated understanding of the pervasive cultural shifts occurring in many ethnically diverse societies, notably by identifying conditions that empower minority-group members, often marginalized, to significantly influence the majority group and society.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-07-26T11:58:36Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241258406
- The Case for Heterogeneity in Metacognitive Appraisals of Biased Beliefs
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Corey Cusimano
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractProminent theories of belief and metacognition make different predictions about how people evaluate their biased beliefs. These predictions reflect different assumptions about (a) people’s conscious belief regulation goals and (b) the mechanisms and constraints underlying belief change. I argue that people exhibit heterogeneity in how they evaluate their biased beliefs. Sometimes people are blind to their biases, sometimes people acknowledge and condone them, and sometimes people resent them. The observation that people adopt a variety of “metacognitive positions” toward their beliefs provides insight into people’s belief regulation goals as well as insight into way that belief formation is free and constrained. The way that people relate to their beliefs illuminates why they hold those beliefs. Identifying how someone thinks about their belief is useful for changing their mind.Public AbstractThe same belief can be alternatively thought of as rational, careful, unfortunate, or an act of faith. These beliefs about one’s beliefs are called “metacognitive positions.” I review evidence that people hold at least four different metacognitive positions. For each position, I discuss what kinds of cognitive processes generated belief and what role people’s values and preferences played in belief formation. We can learn a lot about someone’s belief based on how they relate to that belief. Learning how someone relates to their belief is useful for identifying the best ways to try to change their mind.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-06-07T12:17:13Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241251520
- How and Why People Synchronize: An Integrated Perspective
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Elizabeth B. daSilva, Adrienne Wood
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractInterpersonal synchrony, the alignment of behavior and/or physiology during interactions, is a pervasive phenomenon observed in diverse social contexts. Here we synthesize across contexts and behaviors to classify the different forms and functions of synchrony. We provide a concise framework for classifying the manifold forms of synchrony along six dimensions: periodicity, discreteness, spatial similarity, directionality, leader–follower dynamics, and observability. We also distill the various proposed functions of interpersonal synchrony into four interconnected functions: reducing complexity and improving understanding, accomplishing joint tasks, strengthening social connection, and influencing partners’ behavior. These functions derive from first principles, emerge from each other, and are accomplished by some forms of synchrony more than others. Effective synchrony flexibly adapts to social goals and more synchrony is not always better. Our synthesis offers a shared framework and language for the field, allowing for better cross-context and cross-behavior comparisons, generating new hypotheses, and highlighting future research directions.Public AbstractPeople often match their behavior and physiology when they interact with each other. Their heart rates may become more similar, they may imitate each other’s facial expressions, or they may fall into step while walking together. This interpersonal synchrony happens in various social situations and relationship types. We propose a shared language and framework for describing the many forms synchrony can take and the functions it can serve. First, we identify six ways the form of synchrony can vary, for instance, whether the behavior is repetitive and rhythmic or unpredictable in its timing, and whether one partner is following the other’s lead or they are taking turns leading. Second, we identify four functions synchrony serves: synchrony makes an interaction less complicated, helps people accomplish tasks together, strengthens their social connection, and allows them to influence each other’s behavior. Our synthesis generates new ideas for research and highlights promising future directions.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-05-21T10:01:49Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241252036
- How Can Debiasing Research Aid Efforts to Reduce Discrimination'
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Jordan Axt, Jeffrey To
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractUnderstanding and reducing intergroup discrimination is at the forefront of psychological research. However, efforts to find flexible, scalable, and durable interventions to reduce discrimination have produced only mixed results. In this review, we highlight one potential avenue for developing new strategies for addressing discrimination: adapting prior research on debiasing—the process of lessening bias in judgment errors (e.g., motivated reasoning, overconfidence, and the anchoring heuristic). We first introduce a taxonomy for understanding intervention strategies that are common in the debiasing literature, then highlight existing approaches that have already proven successful for decreasing intergroup discrimination. Finally, we draw attention to promising debiasing interventions that have not yet been applied to the context of discrimination. A greater understanding of prior efforts to mitigate judgment biases more generally can expand efforts to reduce discrimination.Public AbstractScientists studying intergroup biases are often concerned with lessening discrimination (unequal treatment of one social group versus another), but many interventions for reducing such biased behavior have weak or limited evidence. In this review article, we argue one productive avenue for reducing discrimination comes from adapting interventions in a separate field—judgment and decision-making—that has historically studied “debiasing”: the ways people can lessen the unwanted influence of irrelevant information on decision-making. While debiasing research shares several commonalities with research on reducing intergroup discrimination, many debiasing interventions have relied on methods that differ from those deployed in the intergroup bias literature. We review several instances where debiasing principles have been successfully applied toward reducing intergroup biases in behavior and introduce other debiasing techniques that may be well-suited for future efforts in lessening discrimination.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-04-22T11:28:06Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241244829
- A Theoretical Model of Victimization, Perpetration, and Denial in Mass
Atrocities: Case Studies From Indonesia, Cambodia, East Timor, and Myanmar
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Idhamsyah Eka Putra, Any Rufaedah, Haidar Buldan Thontowi, Annie Pohlman, Winnifred Louis
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractThe present article discusses victimization, perpetration, and denial in mass atrocities, using four recent case studies from Southeast Asia. The four cases include Indonesia (in which hundreds of thousands died in anti-Communist violence), Cambodia (in which the Khmer Rouge killed more than one million civilians), East Timor (in which more than one hundred thousand civilians died during the Indonesian occupation), and Myanmar (in which the state/army is accused of genocide toward the Rohingyas). Our aim is to bring a psychological lens to these histories, with a focus on three processes relevant to genocide. We examine, first, how the victims were targeted; second, how the perpetrators were mobilized; and third, the denial, justification, meaning-making, and commemoration of the atrocities. We propose a novel theoretical model, TOPASC: A Theory of the Psychology of Atrocities in Societal Contexts, highlighting the psychology of atrocities as involving factors across the macro, meso, and micro contexts.Public AbstractWe introduce a new model, “TOPASC: A Theory of the Psychology of Atrocities in Societal Contexts,” to explain why people justify mass killings and why certain group members are consistently targeted. In our model, we explore how mass atrocities against specific groups are influenced by psychological dynamics in intergroup situations which, in turn, are shaped by socio-historical contexts and individual psychologies. To illustrate these ideas, we analyze four cases of mass atrocities in Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Cambodia, East Timor, and Myanmar. These cases highlight how different social groups, characterized by diverse ideologies, ethnicities, genders, or religions, exhibit varying vulnerabilities as perpetrators or victims based on their social and power status. Mass atrocities are not sudden occurrences but rather result from a series of complex processes and events.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-03-23T07:11:08Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241239097
- Beyond Trolleyology: The CNI Model of Moral-Dilemma Responses
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Bertram Gawronski, Nyx L. Ng
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
A large body of research has investigated responses to artificial scenarios (e.g., trolley problem) where maximizing beneficial outcomes for the greater good (utilitarianism) conflicts with adherence to moral norms (deontology). The CNI model is a computational model that quantifies sensitivity to consequences for the greater good (C), sensitivity to moral norms (N), and general preference for inaction versus action (I) in responses to plausible moral dilemmas based on real-world events. Expanding on a description of the CNI model, the current article provides (a) a comprehensive review of empirical findings obtained with the CNI model, (b) an analysis of their theoretical implications, (c) a discussion of criticisms of the CNI model, and (d) an overview of alternative approaches to disentangle multiple factors underlying moral-dilemma responses and the relation of these approaches to the CNI model. The article concludes with a discussion of open questions and new directions for future research.Public AbstractHow do people make judgments about actions that violate moral norms yet maximize the greater good (e.g., sacrificing the well-being of a small number of people for the well-being of a larger number of people)' Research on this question has been criticized for relying on highly artificial scenarios and for conflating multiple distinct factors underlying responses in moral dilemmas. The current article reviews research that used a computational modeling approach to disentangle the roles of multiple distinct factors in responses to plausible moral dilemmas based on real-world events. By disentangling sensitivity to consequences, sensitivity to moral norms, and general preference for inaction versus action in responses to realistic dilemmas, the reviewed work provides a more nuanced understanding of how people make judgments about the right course of action in moral dilemmas.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-03-13T07:43:07Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241234114
- When People Do Allyship: A Typology of Allyship Action
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Lucy De Souza, Toni Schmader
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractDespite increased popular and academic interest, there is conceptual ambiguity about what allyship is and the forms it takes. Viewing allyship as a practice, we introduce the typology of allyship action which organizes the diversity of ways that advantaged individuals seek to support those who are disadvantaged. We characterize allyship actions as reactive (addressing bias when it occurs) and proactive (fostering positive outcomes such as feelings of inclusion, respect, and capacity), both of which can vary in level of analysis (i.e., targeting oneself, one or a few other individuals, or institutions). We use this framework to profile six productive yet largely independent bodies of social psychological literature on social action and directly compare relative benefits and constraints of different actions. We suggest several future directions for empirical research, using the typology of allyship to understand when, where, and how different forms of allyship might succeed.Public AbstractDespite increased popular and academic interest in the word, people differ in what they believe allyship is and the forms it takes. Viewing allyship as a practice, we introduce a new way (the typology of allyship action) to describe how advantaged individuals seek to support those who are disadvantaged. We characterize allyship actions as reactive (addressing bias when it occurs) and proactive (increasing positive outcomes such as feelings of inclusion, respect, and capacity), both of which can vary in level (i.e., targeting oneself, one or a few other individuals, or institutions). We use this framework to profile six large yet mostly separate areas of social psychological research on social action and directly compare the relative benefits and limitations of different actions. We suggest several future directions for how the typology of allyship action can help us understand when, where, and how different forms of allyship might succeed.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-03-09T09:19:27Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241232732
- Power to Detect What' Considerations for Planning and Evaluating
Sample Size-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Roger Giner-Sorolla, Amanda K. Montoya, Alan Reifman, Tom Carpenter, Neil A. Lewis, Christopher L. Aberson, Dries H. Bostyn, Beverly G. Conrique, Brandon W. Ng, Alexander M. Schoemann, Courtney Soderberg
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractIn the wake of the replication crisis, social and personality psychologists have increased attention to power analysis and the adequacy of sample sizes. In this article, we analyze current controversies in this area, including choosing effect sizes, why and whether power analyses should be conducted on already-collected data, how to mitigate the negative effects of sample size criteria on specific kinds of research, and which power criterion to use. For novel research questions, we advocate that researchers base sample sizes on effects that are likely to be cost-effective for other people to implement (in applied settings) or to study (in basic research settings), given the limitations of interest-based minimums or field-wide effect sizes. We discuss two alternatives to power analysis, precision analysis and sequential analysis, and end with recommendations for improving the practices of researchers, reviewers, and journal editors in social-personality psychology.Public AbstractRecently, social-personality psychology has been criticized for basing some of its conclusions on studies with low numbers of participants. As a result, power analysis, a mathematical way to ensure that a study has enough participants to reliably “detect” a given size of psychological effect, has become popular. This article describes power analysis and discusses some controversies about it, including how researchers should derive assumptions about effect size, and how the requirements of power analysis can be applied without harming research on hard-to-reach and marginalized communities. For novel research questions, we advocate that researchers base sample sizes on effects that are likely to be cost-effective for other people to implement (in applied settings) or to study (in basic research settings). We discuss two alternatives to power analysis, precision analysis and sequential analysis, and end with recommendations for improving the practices of researchers, reviewers, and journal editors in social-personality psychology.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-02-12T12:55:19Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683241228328
- On Personality Measures and Their Data: A Classification of Measurement
Approaches and Their Recommended Uses-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: John D. Mayer, Victoria M. Bryan
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
We employ a new approach for classifying methods of personality measurement such as self-judgment, mental ability, and lifespace measures and the data they produce. We divide these measures into two fundamental groups: personal-source data, which arise from the target person’s own reports, and external-source data, which derive from the areas surrounding the person. These two broad classes are then further divided according to what they target and the response processes that produce them. We use the model to organize roughly a dozen kinds of data currently employed in the field. With this classification system in hand, we describe how much we might expect two types of measures of the same attribute to converge—and explain why methods often yield somewhat different results. Given that each measurement method has its own strengths and weaknesses, we examine the pros and cons of selecting a given type of measure to assess a specific area of personality.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2024-02-05T10:56:16Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683231222519
- Connecting to Community: A Social Identity Approach to Neighborhood Mental
Health-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: S. Alexander Haslam, Polly Fong, Catherine Haslam, Tegan Cruwys
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractIntegrative theorizing is needed to advance our understanding of the relationship between where a person lives and their mental health. To this end, we introduce a social identity model that provides an integrated explanation of the ways in which social-psychological processes mediate and moderate the links between neighborhood and mental health. In developing this model, we first review existing models that are derived primarily from a resource-availability perspective informed by research in social epidemiology, health geography, and urban sociology. Building on these, the social identity model implicates neighborhood identification in four key pathways between residents’ local environment and their mental health. We review a wealth of recent research that supports this model and which speaks to its capacity to integrate and extend insights from established models. We also explore the implications of the social identity approach for policy and intervention.Public AbstractWe need to understand the connection between where people live and their mental health better than we do. This article helps us do this by presenting an integrated model of the way that social and psychological factors affect the relationship between someone’s neighborhood and their mental health. This model builds on insights from social epidemiology, health geography, and urban sociology. Its distinct and novel contribution is to point to the importance of four pathways through which neighborhood identification shapes residents’ mental health. A large body of recent research supports this model and highlights its potential to integrate and expand upon existing theories. We also discuss how our model can inform policies and interventions that seek to improve mental health outcomes in communities.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2023-12-26T11:30:52Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683231216136
- Insight in the Conspiracist’s Mind
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Authors: Sander Van de Cruys, Jo Bervoets, Stephen Gadsby, David Gijbels, Karolien Poels
Abstract: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Ahead of Print.
Academic AbstractThe motto of the conspiracist, “Do your own research,” may seem ludicrous to scientists. Indeed, it is often dismissed as a mere rhetorical device that conspiracists use to give themselves the semblance of science. In this perspective paper, we explore the information-seeking activities (“research”) that conspiracists do engage in. Drawing on the experimental psychology of aha experiences, we explain how these activities, as well as the epistemic experiences that precede (curiosity) or follow (insight or “aha” experiences) them, may play a crucial role in the appeal and development of conspiracy beliefs. Aha moments have properties that can be exploited by conspiracy theories, such as the potential for false but seemingly grounded conclusions. Finally, we hypothesize that the need for autonomous epistemic agency and discovery is universal but increases as people experience more uncertainty and/or feel epistemically excluded in society, hence linking it to existing literature on explaining conspiracy theories.Public AbstractRecent events have made it painfully clear that conspiracy beliefs can tear deep rifts in society and that we still have not found an adequate, de-escalating response to this. To understand the appeal of conspiracy theories and find new, humanizing ways to talk about them, we propose in this perspective paper to start from the universal human need to autonomously make discoveries through personal knowledge-generating actions. Indeed, psychological research shows that the aha experiences that accompany subjective discoveries create confidence in and perceived ownership of ideas that may be exploited by conspiracy theories. We hypothesize that people experiencing more uncertainty and/or epistemic exclusion in society will especially feel the need to re-establish autonomous epistemic agency and discovery. While this explanation starts from shared human experiences and practices, it also illustrates the potential of those processes to lead to a narrowed world and ossified cognition.
Citation: Personality and Social Psychology Review
PubDate: 2023-09-30T01:56:59Z
DOI: 10.1177/10888683231203145
|
Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
