You're OK,I'm OK: The Self-Presentation of Affective Reactions to Deprivation

Two experiments compared public and private reports of affective reactions to deprivation. In Experiment 1, participants completed a questionnaire concerning their resentment about poor marks in a course; they had previously been led to believe that another participant was either angry or not angry about his/her marks. Participants' ratings of resentment were more affected by the other participant's alleged emotions in a public than in a private reporting condition. In Experiment 2, employed adults completed a questionnaire concerning their affective reactions to the lack of day care facilities available for working parents; they had previously been led to believe that the experimenter was either upset or not upset about the facilities. When respondents' answers were public, their ratings of resentment were affected by the experimenter's alleged emotions, whereas under conditions of private responding, there was no effect of the experimenter's alleged emotions. Taken together, these experiments provide initial evidence that self-presentation motives can influence reports of affective reactions to deprivation. In particular, our data show that self-presentation can induce a matching strategy whereby public expressions of resentment mirror the expressions of salient others. Two experiments compared public and private reports of affective reactions to deprivation. In Experiment 1, participants completed a questionnaire concerning their resentment about poor marks in a course; they had previously been led to believe that another participant was either angry or not angry about his/her marks. Participants' ratings of resentment were more affected by the other participant's alleged emotions in a public than in a private reporting condition. In Experiment 2, employed adults completed a questionnaire concerning their affective reactions to the lack of day care facilities available for working parents; they had previously been led to believe that the experimenter was either upset or not upset about the facilities. When respondents' answers were public, their ratings of resentment were affected by the experimenter's alleged emotions, whereas under conditions of private responding, there was no effect of the experimenter's alleged emotions. Taken together, these experiments provide initial evidence that self-presentation motives can influence reports of affective reactions to deprivation. In particular, our data show that self-presentation can induce a matching strategy whereby public expressions of resentment mirror the expressions of salient others.     

A Latent Factor Approach to Belief in a Just World and its Association with Well-Being

Social Justice Research - Drawing on justice motive theory (Lerner et al. in Berkowitz and Walster (eds) Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic Press, New York, 1976), in the present...     

KEEPING SODA IN SNAP: Understanding the Other Iron Triangle

Participants in SNAP have always been allowed to use their taxpayer-funded benefit to purchase Sugar Sweetened Beverages (SSBs). Despite an acute public health crisis surrounding the consumption of unhealthy products including SSBs, especially among the low-income citizens who also qualify for SNAP benefits, this policy has yet to be changed. Interviews with policy participants in Washington, D.C., reveal that change is being blocked by a culture of “personal responsibility” in America, plus three specific political forces: corporate lobbying primarily by the beverage and food retail industries; a desire by liberals to defend SNAP as income support for the poor even if nutrition outcomes are sub-optimal; and institutional inertia within the Department of Agriculture and the agricultural committees of Congress. In the 2018 farm bill debate, this “iron triangle” of bipartisan resistance to change was strong enough to block even a pilot study of SSB restrictions in SNAP.     

Early Adolescent Sexual Initiation and Physical/Psychological Symptoms: A Comparative Analysis of Five Nations

Although most people in developed countries experience sexual initiation during adolescence, little is known about inter-country variability in the psychosocial correlates of early initiation. Population-based samples of 15-year-olds (n = 6,111, 52% female) who participated in the Health Behaviors in School-Aged Children Study (Finland, Scotland, France and Poland, 1997/1998) or the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (United States, 1996) self-reported sexual intercourse experience and physical (headaches, trouble sleeping) or psychological (unhappiness, loneliness, sadness, moodiness) symptoms. Analyses were conducted stratified by gender. Sexual initiation prevalence and symptoms scores varied significantly across nations. In adjusted models, sexual initiation was not related to symptoms among boys in any nation, but significantly positively related to symptoms among girls in Poland and the US. Results support variability by gender and nation in the relationship between adolescents’ sexual initiation and physical/psychological symptoms. Empirically investigating specific features of national contexts that generate these differences should be explored further.     

New Institutionalism and Minority Protection in the National Legislatures of Finland and Denmark

The individual camps within the new institutionalist paradigm generally argue that every political actor operates within a specific framework of opportunities and that the physical environment in which bargaining takes place is very important to understanding political outcomes. This article uses three of the new institutionalisms to answer two important questions concerning minority‐protecting institutions in the national constitutions of Denmark (Article 42) and Finland (Section 66). First, why were such institutions developed? Second, why were these institutions ultimately removed in Finland, but not in Denmark? For both countries, it is argued in this article that historical and discursive institutionalism are useful for understanding why such protections were originally considered necessary by particular political groups in society: the rise of socialism during the late twentieth and early twenty‐first centuries compelled non‐reformist parties to push strongly for constitutional change that would legalize powerful procedural tools that could delay and potentially reverse policy decisions passed in parliament. However, the article invokes rational choice institutionalism to explain why the outcomes in terms of the use of such institutions differed over time in the two countries: differences concerning the scope and timing of the relevant procedures compelled opposition parties to utilize them differently. As a result, the legislative process was often stalemated in Finland (and the procedures were subsequently removed in 1992), while in Denmark, the procedures contributed to a parliamentary culture based on consensus and pre‐legislative bargaining and hence, still remain.