Consensus on Evaluative Descriptions of One's Own Nation, Its Allies, and Its Enemies

Druckman, Daniel; Ludwig, Lawrence D.

doi:10.1080/00224545.1970.9922444

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, the results of this study serve to extend earlier findings (e.g., Taft, 1959 ;Lambert and Klineberg, 1967 ;Druckman and Ludwig, 1970) in several directions: 1. the previous finding of a higher level of agreement for liked (familiar) groups is clearly limited to evaluative categories; 2. the ethnocentrism theory prediction is limited to descriptive categories; 3. the relative salience of familiarity and friendliness is likely to vary from culture to culture, and 4. the central finding obtained by Lambert and Klineberg for friendly nations was strongly reaffirmed. However, much remains to be done.…”

Section: International Journal Of Psychology -Journal International Dsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…The previous studies by Taft (1959, see also his review of earlier studies), Lambert and Klineberg (1967) and by Druckman and Ludwig (1970) found more agreement in evaluating liked groups than disliked groups. Whether this was a function of liking per se or familiarity is unclear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…The higher the index, the more the agreement between respondents choosing the same "target" nation in the same condition. For further discussion of this index and its various alternatives, the reader is referred to Druckman and Ludwig (1970).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Determinants of Stereotypy in Three Cultures

Druckman

Ali

Bagur

1974

International Journal of Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data collected from India, Argentina and the U.S. served to arbitrate between competing predictions concerning the amount of agreement between nationals in depicting other nations. Amount of agreement was hypothesized to vary with friendliness, familiarity and type of adjective used to depict the " target " nation. Several findings were obtained in each of the three cultures, including: (a) a higher level of agreement for friendly (or familiar) than for unfriendly (unfamiliar) nations on evaluative traits; (b) considerably more agreement for friendly (or familiar) nations on evaluative than on descriptive traits, and (c) somewhat more agreement for unfriendly (or unfamiliar) than for friendly (familiar) nations on descriptive traits. These results reaffirm and extend previous findings. Other findings were culture-specific, including: (a) the relative salience of familiarity (more important in Argentina and the US.) and friendliness (more important in India) and (b) the higher levcl of agreement for unfriendly than for fricndly nations in Argentina. The first result clarifies interpretations of findings obtained in previous studies wbcre these dimensions were confounded while the second suggests that the ethnocentrism theory prediction for friendliness may be culturespecific.This study was designed to provide additional clarification for competing predictions concerning the amount of agreement among nationals in characterizing other nations. Most treatments of intergroup stereotyping would agree that in order for a perceived characteristic of a group to qualify as a stereotype, a certain level of agreement between individuals should be observed. The level of agreement has been referred to as the amount of stereotypy " l(e.g., Freund, 7 950; Lambert and Klineberg, 1967) or " stereotypical uniformity " (e.g., Katz and Braly, 1933;Berry, 1969). Three factors, in particular, hypothesized to affect the level of agreement are familiarity, friendliness and the type of trait used to depict the other nation.

show abstract

Section: International Journal Of Psychology -Journal International Dsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Determinants of Stereotypy in Three Cultures

Druckman

Ali

Bagur

1974

International Journal of Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The primary difference would seem to be the precise specification of context involved, which several critics of the traditional laboratory experiment (e.g., Secord, 1977; Tajfel, 1972), as we have discussed earlier, have deemed desirable. At the same time, it should be realized that Druckman & Ludwig's (1970) analysis bore especially close resemblance to traditional experimentation through use of a single dependent variable at a single point in time. That limitation was, of course, a product of their own interests rather than any imposition by the INS.…”

Section: Uses Of Simulation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%