Liberals and conservatives can show similarities in negativity bias

Brandt, Mark J.; Wetherell, Geoffrey; Reyna, Christine

doi:10.1017/s0140525x13002513

Cited by 25 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(55 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, fairness concerns are even more salient in the one-shot version of Trust Game (since participants had only a single interaction per group, so there is an higher risk of fraud), and this probably explains why low-RWA participants did not invest in them. In agreement, recent theories show that also liberals show similar levels of intolerance and prejudice as conservatives, especially towards dissimilar and threatening groups [ 77 – 80 ]. Further, this behavioral pattern might also be driven by stronger concerns about others’ fairness that characterize liberal participants [ 81 – 84 ] and made even more salient in the context of the one-shot version of the Trust Game.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Right-wing authoritarianism and stereotype-driven expectations interact in shaping intergroup trust in one-shot vs multiple-round social interactions

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust towards unrelated individuals is often conditioned by information about previous social interactions that can be derived from either personal or vicarious experience (e.g., reputation). Intergroup stereotypes can be operationalized as expectations about other groups’ traits/attitudes/behaviors that heavily influence our behavioral predictions when interacting with them. In this study we investigated the role of perceived social dimensions of the Stereotype Content Model (SCM)–Warmth (W) and Competence (C)—in affecting trusting behavior towards different European national group members during the Trust Game. Given the well-known role of ideological attitudes in regulating stereotypes, we also measured individual differences in right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). In Experiment 1, we designed an online survey to study one-shot intergroup trust decisions by employing putative members of the European Union states which were also rated along SCM dimensions. We found that low-RWA participants’ trusting behavior was driven by perceived warmth (i.e., the dimension signaling the benevolence of social intentions) when interacting with low-C groups. In Experiment 2, we investigated the dynamics of trust in a multiple-round version of the European Trust Game. We found that in low-RWA participants trusting behavior decreased over time when interacting with high-W groups (i.e., expected to reciprocate trust), but did not change when interacting with low-W groups (i.e., expected not to reciprocate trust). Moreover, we found that high-RWA participants’ trusting behavior decreased when facing low-W groups but not high-W ones. This suggests that low-RWA individuals employ reputational priors but are also permeable to external evidence when learning about others’ trustworthiness. In contrast, high-RWA individuals kept relying on stereotypes despite contextual information. These results confirm the pivotal role played by reputational priors triggered by perceived warmth in shaping social interactions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Right-wing authoritarianism and stereotype-driven expectations interact in shaping intergroup trust in one-shot vs multiple-round social interactions

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our hope, however, is that this exchange may lead Baron and Jost to modulate their claims as well. Research documenting particular ideological asymmetries in motivated social cognition is compelling, but so too is a growing body of research questioning the generality of these asymmetries (e.g., Brandt, Reyna, Chambers, Crawford, & Wetherell, 2014; Brandt, Wetherell, & Reyna, 2014; Collins, Crawford, & Brandt, 2017; Conway et al, 2016; Conway, Houck, Gornick, & Repke, 2017; Federico & Malka, 2018; Frimer, Skitka, & Motyl, 2017; Malka, Lelkes, & Holzer, 2017; Nisbet, Cooper, & Garrett, 2015; Pennycook & Rand, 2019; Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010; Washburn & Skitka, 2018). We believe strongly that a key impediment to future research progress, an impediment that our original article contributed to unfortunately, is to continue to frame the ideological symmetry issue as a simple question of which side, liberals or conservatives, is more biased.…”

Section: Final Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Partisan Bias and Its Discontents

Ditto

Clark

Liu

et al. 2019

Perspect Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. AbstractBaron and Jost (this issue) present three critiques of our meta-analysis demonstrating similar levels of partisan bias in liberals and conservatives: 1) that the studies we examined were biased toward finding symmetrical bias among liberals and conservatives, 2) that the studies we examined do not measure partisan bias but rather rational Bayesian updating, and 3) that social psychology is not biased in favor of liberals but biased instead toward creating false equivalencies. We respond in turn that: 1) the included studies covered a wide variety of issues at the core of contemporary political conflict and fairly compared bias by establishing conditions under which both liberals and conservatives would have similar motivations and opportunity to demonstrate bias, 2) we carefully selected studies that were least vulnerable to Bayesian counterexplanation and most scientists and laypeople consider these studies demonstrations of bias, and 3) there is reason to be vigilant about liberal bias in social psychology, but this does not preclude concern about other possible biases, all of which threaten good science. We close with recommendations for future research and urge researchers to move beyond broad generalizations of political differences that are insensitive to time and context.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, considering the link between political orientation and the phenomenon of immigration, being proimmigrant and proimmigration is not a clear‐cut left‐right issue (Brandt, Wetherell, & Reyna, ). Right‐wingers appear to oppose immigration out of a nationalistic and sometimes xenophobic position.…”

Section: The Effects Of Multiple Categorizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple and Counterstereotypic Categorization of Immigrants: The Moderating Role of Political Orientation on Interventions to Reduce Prejudice

Prati

Moscatelli

Pratto

et al. 2017

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple and counterstereotypic categorization of outgroup members reduces prejudice towards them. The present research addresses, for the first time, the role of political orientation in moderating the impact of these strategies on prejudice reduction. Given that right-wingers have very likely a higher need for cognitive closure compared to left-wingers and thus may be less tolerant to social diversity, for them, increasing the complexity of outgroup members through counterstereotypic versus stereotypic or multiple versus simple categorizations should be a less effective strategy of prejudice reduction than it is for left-wingers and moderate individuals. Results using Romanians and immigrants as outgroup targets for Italian participants supported our prediction. Further, we found that the effect of prejudice reduction was explained by the sequential mediation of increased individuation of immigrants and reduced sense of threat from them. Implications of the interplay between multiple categorization and political orientation are discussed.

show abstract

Liberals and conservatives can show similarities in negativity bias

Cited by 25 publications

References 53 publications

Right-wing authoritarianism and stereotype-driven expectations interact in shaping intergroup trust in one-shot vs multiple-round social interactions

Right-wing authoritarianism and stereotype-driven expectations interact in shaping intergroup trust in one-shot vs multiple-round social interactions

Partisan Bias and Its Discontents

Multiple and Counterstereotypic Categorization of Immigrants: The Moderating Role of Political Orientation on Interventions to Reduce Prejudice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About