Intergroup Bias and Inequity: Legitimizing Beliefs and Policy Attitudes

Glaser, Jack

doi:10.1007/s11211-005-6825-1

Cited by 32 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is also consistent with research from outside behavioral psychology (e.g., Blendon, Benson, & Donelan, 1993;Glaser, 2005;Rabinowitz, Sears, Sidanius, & Krosnick, 2009). For instance, the present results indicated that more people valued legislation when it was framed as about a woman's right to choose vs. about abortion.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Choose your words Wisely: Delay Discounting of Differently titled Social Policy Issues

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated whether altering how certain social policies were framed would alter how many participants valued and/or discounted those policies and also whether discounting of the policies would be related to several measures of the participants' religiousness and their political party affiliation. Five hundred ninety-seven university undergraduates were randomly divided into two groups and completed a delay-discounting task that involved one monetary and five social-policy outcomes. The phrasing of the policies differed between groups (e.g., affirmative action vs. equal rights). Results showed that framing the policies in different ways altered (a) the number of participants who indicated that the policy held value and (b) how participants discounted the policies. Levels of discounting were also related to measures of religiousness and/or political party affiliation for all but one outcome. The present results highlight the potential value of studying how individuals discount delayed outcomes pertaining to social issues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…For example, past research has suggested that participants object to government intervention in the lives of its citizens and view affirmative action as such (Glaser, 2005). Similar to the finding with abortion and right-to-choose policy, the more "benign" phrase of equal rights produced non-discounting to a much lesser degree.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Choose your words Wisely: Delay Discounting of Differently titled Social Policy Issues

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the theory assumes that individuals will engage in social action and work for the collective good if they develop a sense of critical consciousness (Gutierrez 1995). This is consistent with Glaser's (2005) findings that much of the basis for opposition to policies that redress inequality (such as affirmative action) derives from ideologies and beliefs that rationalize inequality and thereby justify the current system and status quo.…”

Section: Finding Food Justice: What Role For Academics?supporting

confidence: 86%

Mining for justice in the food system: perceptions, practices, and possibilities

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite much popular interest in food issues, there remains a lack of social justice in the American agrifood system, as evidenced by prevalent hunger and obesity in low-income populations and exploitation of farmworkers. While many consumers and alternative agrifood organizations express interest in and support social justice goals, the incorporation of these goals into on-the-ground alternatives is often tenuous. Academics have an important role in calling out social justice issues and developing the critical thinking skills that can redress inequality in the agrifood system. Academics can challenge ideological categories of inquiry and problem definition, include justice factors in defining research problems, and develop participatory, problem-solving research within social justice movements. In addition, scholars can educate students about the power of epistemologies, discourse, and ideology, thereby expanding the limits and boundaries of what is possible in transforming the agrifood system. In these ways, the academy can be a key player in the creation of a diverse agrifood movement that embraces the discourse of social justice.

show abstract

“…The issue of legitimating myths is most broadly explored by Glaser (2005), who considers such myths in a wide variety of policy settings, including affirmative action, hate crime legislation, same-sex marriage, capital punishment, racial profiling, and others. His essay examines how such myths are perpetuated in situations in which there are arguments for, and even empirical evidence of, their invalidity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: Legitimating Ideologies

Tyler

2005

Soc Just Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This special issue focuses upon the creation, maintenance, and use of legitimating ideologies by authorities, institutions, and societies. Such ideologies provide normative justifications for existing policies and practices through which they are seen as appropriate, reasonable, and fair and are, consequently, more readily accepted. KEY WORDS: legitmacy; power; governance; social order.Throughout history social and political commentators have recognized the role of power in creating the ability to rule over others. Those who have power can bribe or coerce others and are able to thereby shape their behavior, giving the powerful the ability to lead groups, organizations, and societies. This is true of political leaders, legal authorities, and the leaders of organizations. A core aspect of social dynamics, therefore, is that power provides a means to shape behavior. The argument that behavior in social settings is linked to the ability to reward and punish is not only central to psychological theories, but is also influential in political science, sociology, and economics, as well as in law, public policy and management.While accepting the realities of power in social life, early social theorists writing as long ago as Aristotle and Plato recognized that seeking to gain influence over others based solely on the possession of power is costly and inefficient. The use of power, particularly coercive power, requires a large expenditure of resources to obtain modest and limited amounts of influence over others. It is therefore important that under some circumstances people are also influenced by others because they believe that the decisions made and rules enacted by others are in some way "right" or "proper" and ought to be followed (Zelditch, 211 0885-7466/05/0900-0211/0 C 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

show abstract

Intergroup Bias and Inequity: Legitimizing Beliefs and Policy Attitudes

Cited by 32 publications

References 36 publications

Choose your words Wisely: Delay Discounting of Differently titled Social Policy Issues

Choose your words Wisely: Delay Discounting of Differently titled Social Policy Issues

Mining for justice in the food system: perceptions, practices, and possibilities

Introduction: Legitimating Ideologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About