Phyllis A. Anastasio

To Conserve or Not to Conserve: Is Status the Question?

Previous research has demonstrated that environmentally friendly behavior is perceived as low status, which can explain why such behavior is not more widespread. However, greater awareness of environmental issues and the advent of a “green” movement may have seen a change in those attitudes. As some conservation behaviors used in past research may have been conflated with lower socioeconomic status, Study 1 identified financially neutral behaviors so that SES would not be confused for status in general. Study 2 utilized two of those behaviors to investigate whether engaging in conservation behavior per se is viewed as low status. Participants rated a target who performed either zero, one, or two conservation behaviors. Counter to earlier research, it was found that neither number nor type of environmental behaviors performed affected the perceived status of the target. These results suggest that attitudes toward conservation behavior may be improving; implications for increasing environmentally friendly behavior are discussed.

Violence-Related Attitudes and Beliefs Scale Construction and Psychometrics

The 50-item Violence-Related Attitudes and Beliefs Scale (V-RABS) includes three subscales measuring possible causes of violent behavior (environmental influences, biological influences, and mental illness) and four subscales assessing possible controls of violent behavior (death penalty, punishment, prevention, and catharsis). Each subscale demonstrates good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Thus, the V-RABS and its component subscales can be valuable research tools for understanding peoples beliefs about the causes and controls of violent crime.

The Divisive Coverage Effect How Media May Cleave Differences of Opinion Between Social Groups

The media often depict public opinion as divided by gender, race, or political affiliation. Can this type of reporting help create the group differences portrayed? Two experiments investigated whether exposure to divisive coverage could widen the gulf between real groups. Participants in Experiment 1, some of whom were affiliated with pan-Hellenic (Greek) organizations, viewed a videotape depicting the tribunal of a fraternity member accused of vandalism. Interviews with other students ostensibly from the same university preceded the tribunal scene and depicted either (a) all Greek interviewees supporting the fraternity member and all non-Greek interviewees opposing him (divisive coverage) or (b) Greek and non-Greek interviewees holding equally mixed opinions (nondivisive coverage). Only the divisive coverage condition led to significant differences between Greek and non-Greek participants, with Greek participants judging the defendant less harshly. Experiment 2 replicated the divisive coverage effect using the issue of support for affirmative action among male and female participants.

Beyond Deserving More Psychological Entitlement Also Predicts Negative Attitudes Toward Personally Relevant Out-Groups

Psychological entitlement is defined as the “stable and pervasive sense that one deserves more and is entitled to more than others.” Research has shown those high in entitlement tend to behave selfishly, experience greater workplace conflict, and are low on the Big Five trait of Agreeableness. In a series of four studies, we demonstrate that psychological entitlement also predicts negative views of out-groups: It predicted lower liking for a rival student body, prejudice toward lesbians and gay men, negative attitudes toward female equality among male participants, and modern racism toward African Americans. Given that entitlement was unrelated to in-group identification or favoritism, these results suggest that it may be possible for those higher in entitlement to hold more negative views of out-groups without stronger in-group identification. Combined with previous findings, these studies suggest that the role of “others” in entitlement goes beyond merely believing that one deserves more than them.