Intergroup Biases as a Function of Reflected Status Appraisals and Support for Legitimizing Ideologies: Evidence from the USA and Israel

Theory and research suggest that members of high-status groups feel more positively about their own group than members of low-status groups feel about their group. The studies presented here test two hypotheses derived from this general idea (1) that members of high-status groups will show greater bias in favor of the in-group when they believe that others perceive the status difference between their group and relevant low-status groups to be larger; and (2) that this relationship will be stronger when high-status group members also endorse ideologies legitimizing their privileged status. However, because low group status may have self-protective properties, it was hypothesized that imputed status differences would not relate to out-group bias among low-status group members, regardless of ideology endorsement. Two studies—using samples from the United States and Israel, respectively—provided clear support for these hypotheses. Implications for the study of both intergroup biases and legitimizing ideologies are discussed.     

Intent and Ordinary Bias: Unintended Thought and Social Motivation Create Casual Prejudice

Social psychologists have addressed stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination for nearly a century. Everyday prejudices first seemed to lodge in abnormal personalities, pathological bigots who were exceptional (bad apples), but Freudian explanations proved inadequate. Purely cognitive explanations took their place, arguing that bias inevitably results from normal processes of categorization and association, often automatic. But this so-called cognitive miser account denies the role of intent, which does influence the activation and use of stereotypes and prejudices. People are more realistically motivated tacticians who display more cognitive bias under particular social motivations. The author's continuum of impression formation, proceeding from initial categorization to possible moderation by motives, illustrates this view. Plausible social motives include belonging, understanding, controlling, self-enhancing, and trusting, all known to influence ordinary bias. Social neuroscience is beginning to show that motivation and cognition mix at the earliest stages of ordinary bias.     

养老金制度中的社会性别倾向

尽管国内理论界已有大量研究成果分析劳动力市场的男女分工及性别平等,但对由此而引发的养老金制度中的社会性别倾向少有涉及。实际上,多数国家的养老金制度都存在退休年龄、待遇水平乃至权利享有等多方面的性别差异。本文拟在回顾相关文献的基础上,从理论角度定义并度量养老金制度中的社会性别倾向,为中国相关问题研究提供思路。     

我国农民工就业歧视问题的心理学解释

农民工在城市就业所遭遇的歧视可以从心理学的角度进行剖析。歧视源于偏见,偏见产生的原因在于社会群体的利害冲突、社会化、个体人格和心理因素,偏见会产生预言的自我实现和疏离。要想消除偏见必须消除刻板印象、增加平等的接触并树立共同命运的意识,而且要制定有助于消除偏见的社会规范。     

Validity Beliefs and Ideology Can Influence Legal Case Judgments Differently

Jurors sometimes enter a case both with prior beliefs about its likely validity and with more general ideologies that are relevant to the case. Although prior validity beliefs may serve as heuristics, directly biasing decisions when cognitive capacity is low, we hypothesized that ideology may bias systematic thought even when cognitive capacity is high. This experiment studied simulated individual juror decisions in a sex-discrimination case, measuring validity beliefs about such cases as well as feminist ideology, and exposing participants to 1 of 3 case versions under time pressure or no time pressure. Validity beliefs had a direct, heuristic impact on judgment only under time pressure. However, feminist ideology had a mediated influence on judgment via valenced thoughts about the evidence, even under no time pressure. Also, people with initially proplaintiff beliefs judged a woman's sex-discrimination suit more negatively than did prodefendants if the evidence was weak. The results suggest that when jurors can fully process information, validity expectancies might backfire if not supported by case evidence, but ideology can have a more pervasive influence on the decision-making process.     

Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions

I examine the impact of long-term partisan loyalties on perceptions of specific political figures and events. In contrast to the notion of partisanship as a simple running tally of political assessments, I show that party identification is a pervasive dynamic force shaping citizens' perceptions of, and reactions to, the political world. My analysis employs panel data to isolate the impact of partisan bias in the context of a Bayesian model of opinion change; I also present more straightforward evidence of contrasts in Democrats' and Republicans' perceptions of objective politically relevant events. I conclude that partisan bias in political perceptions plays a crucial role in perpetuating and reinforcing sharp differences in opinion between Democrats and Republicans. This conclusion handsomely validates the emphasis placed by the authors of The American Voter on the role of enduring partisan commitments in shaping attitudes toward political objects.     

On Theory, Models, Model-Testing, and Estimation

I reply to comments and criticisms of my article raised in this Special Issue by Cantor and Land, Britt, O'Brien, Levitt, and Paternoster and Bushway.     

Partisan bias and redistricting in France

Decided by the executive, redistrictings in France have been claimed to have substantial partisan bias in favor of the right. We examine the evidence for this claim in terms of France's left bloc versus right bloc politics, combining information from both the first and the second round of France's two round electoral system. We also examine data at the constituency level to look at factors, such as malapportionment, that can affect bias. As France is characterized by a pattern of a limited number of redistrictings, population inequalities have grown in legislative constituencies between plans. Although the procedures used to draw constituency boundaries for the French Assembly are rather opaque, and under the control of political authorities, partisan bias appears as minuscule.     

强镇扩权背景下县镇权力配置、运行的偏差与优化--对于浙江省N市强镇扩权案例的实证分析

强镇扩权的核心内容是通过放权赋予试点镇与县级政府相同的经济社会管理权限，但从其权力下放过程来看，县镇之间的权力配置和运作与现实需要、制度文本之间均存在着偏差。引发权力下放中县镇权力配置、运行偏差的原因不仅有放权的法律限度、更有其利益动机及其所契入的地方治理权力架构等。优化强镇扩权背景下县镇两级权力配置及其运行，是一项系统工程，应以完善的分权制度安排为主要手段，以必要的监督约束机制为补充，改善包括分权逻辑、放权原则、考核体制机制在内的整体性制度设计。     

Crime,time, and punishment: An exploration of selection bias in sentencing research

The sentencing decision reflects the culmination of a long series of processing and, thus, selection decisions, with cases leaving the system at each decision point. Accordingly, the substantive implications of bias due to sample selection are of particular concern for sentencing research. In an effort to assess the existence and manifestations of selection bias, the sentencing decision is modeled for three samples, each of which was selected from different stages of the justice process. Event-history data on felony arrests in the State of California over a 3-year period are used, along with a relatively simple analytic technique which reduces such bias. Results indicate that biasis introduced when censored observations are excluded from the analyses. Also, the effects of certain exogenous variables on sentence length differ, depending upon the selection criteria. Of these, the influence of pleading guilty rather than going to trial is especially interesting. Overall, our findings are consistent with the possibility that selectivity bias has concealed effects of sentence bargaining in some earlier studies.The data utilized in this study were collected and made available by the State of California Department of Justice, Bureau of Criminal Statistics. The Department of Justice bears no responsibility for the analyses or interpretations presented here.