Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Political Behavior
Erschienen in: Political Behavior 2/2010

01.06.2010 | Original Paper

Taking Threat Seriously: Prejudice, Principle, and Attitudes Toward Racial Policies

verfasst von: Christina Suthammanont, David A. M. Peterson, Chris T. Owens, Jan E. Leighley

Erschienen in: Political Behavior | Ausgabe 2/2010

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Drawing from group theories of race-related attitudes and electoral politics, we develop and test how anxiety influences the relative weight of prejudice as a determinant of individuals’ support for racial policies. We hypothesize that prejudice will more strongly influence the racial policy preferences of people who are feeling anxious than it will for people who are not. Using an experimental design we manipulate subjects’ levels of threat and find significant treatment effects, as hypothesized. We find that individuals’ racial policy attitudes are partially conditional on their affective states: individuals who feel anxious report less support for racial policies than those individuals who do not feel anxious, even when this threat is stimulated by non-racial content. More broadly, we conclude that affect is central to a better understanding of individuals’ political attitudes and behaviors.
Vorheriger Artikel A Genetic Basis for Social Trust?
Nächster Artikel The Dynamics of Critical Realignments: An Analysis Across Time and Space

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
For ease of exposition, we use the terms symbolic racism, racial resentment and modern racism interchangeably through the paper, and here refer to them collectively as “prejudicial racial attitudes.”
 
2
These three subjects are removed from the analysis.
 
3
We chose animal rights groups because we felt that they were likely to have no obvious racial overtones that would taint the racial policy preferences questions the way other groups (e.g. the Klu Klux Klan) would likely do.
 
4
When the measures are combined in a factor analysis, they have the same factor score to the third decimal place. The additive scale correlates with the factor score at 0.96. The Cronbach’s alpha on the two item scale is 0.70.
 
5
We computed t-tests of the responses to the individual items as well as the composite scales and found no statistically significant differences across the treatment and control groups. On the basis of this evidence, we concluded that the treatment did not affect any of these attitudes.
 
6
The other two measures, asking if the group ever made the subject feel hopeful or proud tap more into the enthusiasm the individual felt for this group. Neither of these vary significantly across the experimental conditions.
 
7
We have also run the models separately for the two indicators of the dependent variable as a bivariate regression. Our tests found no significant differences in the effects of our dependent variables across the indicators.
 
8
Note that the anxiety measure is mean centered so the coefficients that are not interaction terms in the tables are the effect of symbolic racism and ideology for those respondents who have average levels of anxiety.
 
9
The asymmetry in the variability of the estimated indirect effects is not unusual in small samples (Bollen and Stine 1990). In fact, that is one of the motivations for using the bootstrap.
 
10
We thank an anonymous reviewer for this suggestion.
 
Literatur
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. New York: Anchor Books.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRef
Blumer, H. H. M., Jr. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 3–7.
Bobo, L. (2000). Race and beliefs about affirmative action: Assessing the effects of interests, group threat, ideology and racism. In D. O. Sears, J. Sidanius, & L. Bobo (Eds.), Racialized politics: The debate about racism in America (pp. 137–164). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bollen, K. A., & Stine, R. (1990). Direct and indirect effects: Classical and bootstrap estimates of variability. Sociological Methodology, 20, 115–140.CrossRef
Brader, T. (2006). Campaigning for hearts and minds: How emotional appeals in political ads work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Branton, R. P., & Jones, B. S. (2005). Reexamining racial attitudes: The conditional relationship between diversity and socioeconomic environment. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 359–372.CrossRef
Cacioppo, J. T., & Gardner, W. L. (1999). Emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 191–214.CrossRef
Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1986). Emotional reactions to the economy: I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore. American Journal of Political Science, 30(1), 50–78.CrossRef
Cottrell, C. A., & Neuberg, S. L. (2005). Different emotional reactions to different groups: A sociofunctional threat-based approach to ‘prejudice’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 770–789.CrossRef
Duckitt, J. (2003). Prejudice and intergroup hostility. In D. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 559–600). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Feldman, S., & Huddy, L. (2005). Racial resentment and white opposition to race-conscious programs: Principles or prejudice? American Journal of Political Science, 49(1), 168–183.CrossRef
Gray, J. A. (1987a). The neuropsychology of emotion and personality. In S. M. Stahl, S. D. Iversen, & E. C. Goodman (Eds.), Cognitive neurochemistry (pp. 171–190). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Gray, J. A. (1987b). The psychology of fear and stress (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gray, J. A. (1990). Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion, 4(3), 269–288.CrossRef
Gray, J. A. (1991). Fear, panic, and anxiety: What’s in a name? Psychological Inquiry, 2(1), 77–88.CrossRef
Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (1996). The neuropsychology of anxiety: Reprise. In D. A. Hope (Ed.), Perspectives on anxiety, panic and fear (Vol. 43, pp. 61–134). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Gross, K. (2008). Framing persuasive appeals: Episodic and thematic framing, emotional response, and policy opinion. Political Psychology, 29(2), 169–192.CrossRef
Henry, P. J., & Sears, D. O. (2002). The symbolic racism 2000 scale. Political Psychology, 23(2), 253–283.CrossRef
Hutchings, V. L., & Valentino, N. A. (2004). The centrality of race in American politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 383–408.CrossRef
Just, M. R., Crigler, A. N., & Neuman, W. R. (1996). Cognitive and affective dimensions of political conceptualization. In A. N. Crigler (Ed.), The psychology of political communication. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kellstedt, P. M. (2003). Mass media and the dynamic of American racial attitudes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kinder, D. R., & Sears, D. O. (1981). Prejudice and politics: Symbolic racism versus racial threats to the good life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 414–431.CrossRef
Kramer, R. M., & Jost, J. T. (2002). Close encounters of the suspicious kind: Outgroup paranoia in hierarchical trust dilemmas. In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups. New York: Psychology Press.
Kuklinski, J. H., Sniderman, P. M., Knight, K., Piazza, T., Tetlock, P. E., Lawrence, G. R., et al. (1997). Racial prejudice and attitudes toward affirmative action. American Journal of Political Science, 41(2), 402–419.CrossRef
Ladd, J. M., & Lenz, G. S. (2008). Reassessing the role of anxiety in vote choice. Political Psychology, 29, 275–296.CrossRef
Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951–971.CrossRef
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 602–616.CrossRef
Mackie, D. M., & Smith, E. R. (2002). Beyond prejudice: Moving from positive and negative evaluations to differentiated reactions to social groups. In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups. New York: Psychology Press.
Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood, S. L. (1995). With Malice toward some: How people make civil liberties judgments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Thiess-Morse, E., & Stevens, D. (2005). The emotional foundation of political cognition: The impact of extrinsic anxiety on the formation of political tolerance judgments. Political Psychology, 26(6), 949–963.CrossRef
Mendelberg, T. (2001). The race card. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
Nadeau, R., Niemi, R. G., & Amato, T. (1995). Emotions, issue importance, and political learning. American Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 558–574.CrossRef
Neuberg, S. L., & Cottrell, C. A. (2002). Intergroup emotions: A biocultural approach. In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions: Differentiated reactions to social groups. New York: Psychology Press.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717–731.
Quillian, L. (1995). Prejudice as a response to perceived group threat: Population composition and anti-immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American Sociological Review, 60(4), 586–611.CrossRef
Redlawsk, D. P. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. Journal of Politics, 64, 1021–1044.
Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In K. Phyllis & T. Dalmas (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 53–84). New York: Plenum Press.
Sears, D. O., Sidanius, J., & Bobo, L. (2000). Racialized politics: The debate about racism in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Small, D. A., & Lerner, J. S. (2008). Emotional policy: Personal sadness and anger shape judgments about a welfare case. Political Psychology, 29(2), 149–168.CrossRef
Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence interval for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stenner, K. (2005). The authoritarian dynamic. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Stimson, J. A. (1999). Public opinion in America: Moods, cycles and swings (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview.
Tarman, C., & Sears, D. O. (2005). The conceptualization and measurement of symbolic racism. Journal of Politics, 67(3), 731–761.
Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., Banks, A. J., & Davis, A. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the Internet. Political Psychology, 29(2), 247–273.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Taking Threat Seriously: Prejudice, Principle, and Attitudes Toward Racial Policies
verfasst von
Christina Suthammanont
David A. M. Peterson
Chris T. Owens
Jan E. Leighley
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2010
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Political Behavior / Ausgabe 2/2010
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6687
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-009-9102-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2010

Political Behavior 2/2010 Zur Ausgabe

Original Paper

When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions

Original Paper

The Dynamics of Critical Realignments: An Analysis Across Time and Space

Original Paper

A Genetic Basis for Social Trust?

Original Paper

Social Networks and the Affective Impact of Political Disagreement

Original Paper

Does Economic Inequality Depress Electoral Participation? Testing the Schattschneider Hypothesis

Original Paper

Explaining the Decision to Withdraw from a U.S. Presidential Nomination Campaign

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise