Rejection of Cultural Biases and Effects on Party Preference

Olli, Eero

doi:10.4324/9780203197646_chapter_4

Cited by 16 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It arises over time in response to many factors indicative of social relations such as tone of voice, body language, visual appearance, etc . In line with plural rationality theory (Gross and Rayner, 1985 ; Olli, 2012 ), we suggest that the classification of social relations will occur at many points over the course of this emerging dynamic, resulting in a continually updated and re-calculated “average” classification. Each social scenario can differ in both the extent to which the four ways of organizing are represented, and the number of momentary classifications falling into each category.…”

Section: How Social Theory Can Improve Affective and Social Neurosciesupporting

confidence: 73%

“…Plural rationality theory provides a comprehensive framework of human decision-making in complex social situations that is based on this hypothesis. Moreover, an abundance of empirical evidence in favor of plural rationality theory has been collected in social anthropology, sociology, and political science (Douglas, 1982 ; Verweij and Thompson, 2006 ; Olli, 2012 ). Plural rationality theory can therefore complement, and further specify, the somatic marker mechanism.…”

Section: How Social Theory Can Improve Affective and Social Neurosciementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Emotion, rationality, and decision-making: how to link affective and social neuroscience with social theory

Verweij

Senior

et al. 2015

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we argue for a stronger engagement between concepts in affective and social neuroscience on the one hand, and theories from the fields of anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology on the other. Affective and social neuroscience could provide an additional assessment of social theories. We argue that some of the most influential social theories of the last four decades—rational choice theory, behavioral economics, and post-structuralism—contain assumptions that are inconsistent with key findings in affective and social neuroscience. We also show that another approach from the social sciences—plural rationality theory—shows greater compatibility with these findings. We further claim that, in their turn, social theories can strengthen affective and social neuroscience. The former can provide more precise formulations of the social phenomena that neuroscientific models have targeted, can help neuroscientists who build these models become more aware of their social and cultural biases, and can even improve the models themselves. To illustrate, we show how plural rationality theory can be used to further specify and test the somatic marker hypothesis. Thus, we aim to accelerate the much-needed merger of social theories with affective and social neuroscience.

show abstract

Section: How Social Theory Can Improve Affective and Social Neurosciesupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: How Social Theory Can Improve Affective and Social Neurosciementioning

confidence: 99%

Emotion, rationality, and decision-making: how to link affective and social neuroscience with social theory

Verweij

Senior

et al. 2015

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Oskarson & Ringdal 1998, 160^1). Olli (1999) has explored the ways in which individuals combine agreements and disagreements with cultural biases. This points in the direction of combinatory methods (Ragin 1987).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grid‐Group Theory and Political Orientations: Effects of Cultural Biases in Norway in the 1990s

Grendstad

2000

Scand Pol Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of cultural theories identify, or call for the elaboration of, deeper cultural patterns that both disallow cultural invariance and constrain cultural variation. Grid-group theory identi¢es four cultures: hierarchy, egalitarianism, individualism and fatalism. This article, which measures grid-group theory's four cultures by means of cultural biases, (1) explores the neglected relationship between sociodemographic correlates and cultural biases, and (2) tests the theory's hypothesized e¡ects of cultural biases, controlled for sociodemographics, on attitudes toward nature, technology and human nature, and on geographical belonging and trust in institutions. The test draws on three independent surveys of the general public in Norway in the 1990s. The empirical results show that cultural biases are signi¢cantly explained by sociodemographics, and whereas convergent validity of cultural biases on selected attitudes and beliefs was acceptable, discriminant validity was weaker and more inconsistent.

show abstract

“…7 7 Using surveys only, Olli (1999) has combined political biases with party preference. Others have either emphasised other parts of the theory or used different methods (Grendstad 1995; Bale 1997; 1999a; 1999b; Faucher 1999; Jensen 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering Nordic Party Space¹

Grendstad¹

2003

Scand Pol Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The erosion of the social and economic bases underlying traditional party systems has led analysts to search for new cleavage structures undergirding the present party systems. Meanwhile, analysts have identified a range of issue dimensions that also bear on voters' party preferences. This article studies the degree to which grid-group theory's four political biases of hierarchy, egalitarianism, individualism, and fatalism can make inroads into the left-right dimension's stronghold in accounting for voters' party preference. The analysis draws on a 1999 survey in the five Nordic countries (N = 4,832). The method combines voters' party preferences with their scores on issue dimensions, or political dimensions. Analyses show that conventional party families, with one exception, are not identified along any of the five political orientations. Only the five conservative parties are exclusively identified as a party family on the left-right dimension. Party preference is more closely associated with the left-right dimension than the political biases. Sweden has the purest and simplest party cleavage, whereas Denmark has the most composite one. Across the Nordic countries, the green party family is most dissimilar, whereas the progress siblings are most alike. The left-right dimension accounts well for differences between parties within polities, whereas political biases, and egalitarianism in particular, account well for differences between parties of similar origin across polities.

show abstract

Rejection of Cultural Biases and Effects on Party Preference

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Emotion, rationality, and decision-making: how to link affective and social neuroscience with social theory

Emotion, rationality, and decision-making: how to link affective and social neuroscience with social theory

Grid‐Group Theory and Political Orientations: Effects of Cultural Biases in Norway in the 1990s

Reconsidering Nordic Party Space¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Rejection of Cultural Biases and Effects on Party Preference

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Emotion, rationality, and decision-making: how to link affective and social neuroscience with social theory

Emotion, rationality, and decision-making: how to link affective and social neuroscience with social theory

Grid‐Group Theory and Political Orientations: Effects of Cultural Biases in Norway in the 1990s

Reconsidering Nordic Party Space1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Reconsidering Nordic Party Space¹