Erin P. Hennes

Can a Psychological Theory of Ideological Differences Explain Contextual Variability in the Contents of Political Attitudes

In this brief reply, we explore the ways in which a psychological theory of ideology as motivated social cognition (e.g., Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003a, 2003b) can explain several distinct but related empirical phenomena, including why (a) epistemic and existential needs to reduce uncertainty and threat would be positively associated with social or cultural conservatism in virtually all societal contexts and yet be associated with support for either capitalism or socialism, depending upon the local context; (b) conservatives eventually come to support policy positions that were once considered to be liberal or progressive; (c) liberals are more likely than conservatives to exhibit cognitive complexity and engage in “value trade-offs” between equality and freedom; and (d) time pressure and cognitive load produce “conservative shifts” in political opinion, even among liberal respondents. By clarifying the similarities and differences between the two core dimensions of Left–Right ideology (i.e., advocating vs. resisting social change and rejecting vs. accepting inequality) and highlighting the role of status quo acceptance in conservative ideology, we hope to demonstrate that a psychological theory of Left–Right differences can account for contextual variability in the contents of political attitudes.

Motivated Recall in the Service of the Economic System: The Case of Anthropogenic Climate Change

The contemporary political landscape is characterized by numerous divisive issues. Unlike many other issues, however, much of the disagreement about climate change centers not on how best to take action to address the problem, but on whether the problem exists at all. Psychological studies indicate that, to the extent that sustainability initiatives are seen as threatening to the socioeconomic system, individuals may downplay environmental problems in order to defend and protect the status quo. In the current research, participants were presented with scientific information about climate change and later asked to recall details of what they had learned. Individuals who were experimentally induced (Study 1) or dispositionally inclined (Studies 2 and 3) to justify the economic system misremembered the evidence to be less serious, and this was associated with increased skepticism. However, when high system justifiers were led to believe that the economy was in a recovery, they recalled climate change information to be more serious than did those assigned to a control condition. When low system justifiers were led to believe that the economy was in recession, they recalled the information to be less serious (Study 3). These findings suggest that because system justification can impact information processing, simply providing the public with scientific evidence may be insufficient to inspire action to mitigate climate change. However, linking environmental information to statements about the strength of the economic system may satiate system justification needs and break the psychological link between proenvironmental initiatives and economic risk. (PsycINFO Database Record

Power struggles: Estimating sample size for multilevel relationships research

Conducting research on human relationships entails special challenges of design and analysis. Many important questions benefit from the study of dyads and families, and studies of relationships in natural settings often involve longitudinal and/or clustered designs. In turn, power analyses for such studies require additional considerations, because multilevel statistical models (or structural equation modeling equivalents) are often used to analyze relationships data. Power calculations in multilevel models involve the difficult task of specifying hypothesized values for a large number of parameters. Planning studies can also involve power trade-offs, including whether to prioritize the number of dyads sampled or the number of repeated measurements per dyad. Unfortunately, the relationships literature provides limited guidance on how to deal with these issues. In this article, we present a data simulation method for estimating power for commonly used relationships research designs. We also illustrate the method using two worked examples from relationships research.

Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (video interventions for diversity in STEM).

Gender biases contribute to the underrepresentation of women in STEM. In response, the scientific community has called for methods to reduce bias, but few validated interventions exist. Thus, an interdisciplinary group of researchers and filmmakers partnered to create VIDS (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM), which are short videos that expose participants to empirical findings from published gender bias research in 1 of 3 conditions. One condition illustrated findings using narratives (compelling stories), and the second condition presented the same results using expert interviews (straightforward facts). A hybrid condition included both narrative and expert interview videos. Results of two experiments revealed that relative to controls, VIDS successfully reduced gender bias and increased awareness of gender bias, positive attitudes toward women in STEM, anger, empathy, and intentions to engage in behaviors that promote gender parity in STEM. The narratives were particularly impactful for emotions, while the expert interviews most strongly impacted awareness and attitudes. The hybrid condition reflected the strengths of both the narratives and expert interviews (though effects were sometimes slightly weaker than the other conditions). VIDS produced substantial immediate effects among both men and women in the general population and STEM faculty, and effects largely persisted at follow-up.

Increasing the perceived malleability of gender bias using a modified Video Intervention for Diversity in STEM (VIDS)

Scholars are increasingly responding to calls for interventions to address persistent gender disparities in the sciences. Yet, interventions that emphasize the pervasiveness of bias may inadvertently damage efficacy to confront sexism by creating the perception that bias is immutable. We examined this possibility in the context of a successful bias literacy program, Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM (VIDS; Moss-Racusin et al., in press). In two studies with working adults from the general public (N = 343) and science faculty (N = 149), we modified VIDS by developing a module (UNITE) that offers tools for addressing bias and promotes the mindset that bias is malleable. VIDS alone was sufficient to increase awareness of bias, reduce sexism, and improve bias identification. However, UNITE buffered against perceptions that bias is immutable and restored self-efficacy to address bias. We conclude that interventions must aim not only to increase bias literacy but also offer concrete tools and avoid implying that these problems are insurmountable.

Publisher Correction: Cultural evolution of normative motivations for sustainable behaviour

Owing to a technical error, this Perspective was originally published without its received and accepted dates; the dates ‘Received: 29 November 2017; Accepted: 9 April 2018’ have now been included in all versions.

Cultural evolution of normative motivations for sustainable behaviour

An emerging literature on the evolution of culture can offer new explanations for how norms encourage or obstruct sustainable practices. In particular, dual-inheritance theory describes how interactions between genetic and cultural evolution give rise, in part, to prosociality. Based on this theory, we identify the concept of normative motivation — internalized desires to follow and enforce norms. We discuss the utility of this concept in progressing two major research agendas across the social and behavioural sciences: the impact of motivation on cognition and normative behaviour, and the influence of norms on the policy process. Key contributions from considering norms from this evolutionary perspective include: (1) an improved model of the motivations that lead individuals to follow norms, (2) clarification of how and when incentives successfully generate motivations favouring sustainability and (3) new ideas for leveraging the influence of norms in public policy beyond financial incentives and education campaigns.Theories of cultural evolution can help explain how norms that are externally enforced are internalized to become intrinsic motivations to behave sustainably. This knowledge is useful for developing interventions for behavioural change.