Добавил:
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

jost_j_t_kay_a_c_thorisdottir_n_social_and_psychological_bas

.pdf
Скачиваний:
3
Добавлен:
29.10.2019
Размер:
6 Мб
Скачать
☆

342

PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

 

 

forms of capital can be linked to political orientation and voting behavior. For example, regions that are high in creative capital (e.g., California, Massachusetts) are generally more likely to support liberal policies and candidates than are regions high in social capital (e.g., North Dakota, South Dakota). To the extent that differences in the types and amounts of human capital are related to personality traits, studies of regional and psychological characteristics have the potential to identify mechanisms that link specific cultural, economic, and technological factors to voting behavior and other political outcomes. Research programs that fuse insights and methods from different disciplines, including psychology and political science, will help broaden our understanding of the dynamics underlying voting behavior and regional differences in political ideology.

Authors’ Note

Portions of this research were presented at the 2005 International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP) conference in Toronto, Ontario, and the 2006 Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) conference in Palm Springs, CA. We are grateful to Stanley Feldman, Lew Goldberg, Mark Lewis, Matthias Mehl, Leonard Newman, James Pennebaker, Bill Swann, Simine Vazire, and Wendy Wood for their thoughtful comments on this research.

REFERENCES

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York: Harper.

Agnew, J. A. (1987a). Place and politics. London: Allen & Unwin.

Agnew, J. A. (1987b). The United States in the world-economy: A regional geography.

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison Wesley. Axelrod, R. (1972). Where the votes come from: An analysis of electoral coalitions,

1952–1968. American Political Science Review, 66, 11–20.

Axelrod, R. (1986). Presidential election coalitions in 1984. American Political Science Review, 80, 281–284.

Barnea, M. F., & Schwartz, S. (1998). Values and voting. Political Psychology, 19, 17–40.

Benet-Martinez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 729–750.

Bensel, R. F. (1984). Sectionalism and American political development 1880–1980. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Statewide Differences in Personality Predict Voting Patterns

343

 

 

Birnbaum, M. H. (2004). Human research and data collection via the Internet. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 803–832.

Bock, P. K. (2000). Culture and personality revisited. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 32–40.

Borkenau, P., & Amelang, M. (1985). The control of social desirability in personality inventories: A study using the principal-factor deletion technique. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 44–53.

Bourgeois, M. J., & Bowen, A. (2001). Self-organization of alcohol related attitudes and beliefs in a campus housing complex: An initial investigation. Health Psychology, 20, 434–437.

Brooks, C., & Manza, J. (1997). Social cleavages and political alignments: U.S. Presidential elections, 1960–1992. American Sociological Review, 62, 937–946.

Brooks, D. (2004, June 29). Age of political segregation. The New York Times, p. A27. Buss, D. M. (1987). Selection, evocation, and manipulation. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 53, 1214–1221.

Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Consiglio, C., Picconi, L., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2003). Personalities of politicians and voters: Unique and synergistic relationships.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 849–856.

Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1999). Personality profiles and political parties. Political Psychology, 20, 175–197.

Carney, D., Jost, J. T., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 29, 807–840.

Cohen, D. (2001). Cultural variation: Considerations and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 451–471.

Costantini, E., & Craik, K. H. (1980). Personality and politicians: California party leaders, 1960–1976. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 641–661.

Cutrona, C. E., Wallace, G., & Wesner, K. A. (2006). Neighborhood characteristics and depression: An examination of stress processes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 188–192.

D’Andrade, R., & Dart, J. (1990). The interpretation of r versus r2 or why percent of variance accounted for is a poor measure of size of effect. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, 2, 47–59.

Di Renzo, G. (Ed.) (1974). Personality and politics. New York: Doubleday.

Duncan, O. D, Cuzzort, R. P., & Duncan B. (1961). Statistical geography: Problems in analyzing aerial data. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Elazer, D. J. (1994). The American mosaic: The impact of space, time, and culture on American politics. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Elms, A. C. (1976). Personality in politics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: Norton.

Erikson, R. S., Wright, G. C., & McIver, J. P. (1993). Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. Cambridge University Press.

Feather, N. T. (1979). Value correlates of conservatism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1617–1630.

344

PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

 

 

Feldman, S. (2003). Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 477–508). New York: Oxford University Press.

Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. New York: Basic Books.

Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.

Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A Very Brief Measure of the Big Five Personality Domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528.

Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust webbased studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93–104.

Greenstein, F. I. (1992). Can personality and politics be studied systematically?

Political Psychology, 13, 105–128.

Heppen, J. (2003). Racial and social diversity and U.S. Presidential election regions. The Professional Geographer, 55, 191–205.

Hero, R. F. (1998). Faces of inequality: Social diversity in American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hofstede, G., & McCrae, R. R. (2004). Personality and culture revisited: Linking traits and dimensions of culture. Cross-Cultural Research, 38, 52–88.

Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Inkeles, A., Hanfmann, E., & Beier, H. (1958). Modal personality and adjustment to the Soviet socio-political system. Human Relations, 11, 3–22.

Jensen, A. R. (1971). Note on why genetic correlations are not squared. Psychological Bulletin, 75, 223–224.

Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.

John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.),

Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–139). New York: Guilford.

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003a). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.

Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. (2003b). Exceptions that prove the rule—Using a theory of motivated social cognition to account for ideological incongruities and political anomalies: Reply to Greenberg & Jonas (2003). Psychological Bulletin, 129, 383–393.

Kitayama, S., Ishii, K., Imada, T., Takemura, K., & Ramaswamy, J. (2006). Voluntary settlement and the spirit of independence: Evidence from Japan’s “Northern Frontier.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 369–384.

Krug, S. E., & Kulhavy, R. W. (1973). Personality differences across regions of the United States. The Journal of Social Psychology, 91, 73–79.

Lane, R. E. (1962). Political ideology. New York: Free Press.

Lasswell, H. D. (1930) Psychopathology and politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Statewide Differences in Personality Predict Voting Patterns

345

 

 

Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343– 365.

Lebo, H. (2000). The UCLA Internet report: Surveying the digital future. Retrieved July 1, 2004 from University of California, Los Angeles, Center for Communication Policy Web site: http://www.ccp.ucla.edu/UCLA-Internet-Report- 2000.pdf.

Leip, D. (2005). Dave Leip’s atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Last accessed February 2, 2005. http://www.uselectionatlas.org.

Lenhart, A. (2000). Who’s not online: 57% of those without Internet access say they do not plan to log on. Retrieved July 1, 2004 from Pew Internet & American Life Project Web site: http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=21.

Levin, B. H., & Schalmo, G. B. (1974). Self-rated liberalism is correlated with sensation seeking. Psychological Reports, 34, 298.

Lewin, K. (1936). Some social psychological differences between the United States and Germany. Character and Personality, 36, 265–293.

McClosky, H. (1958). Conservatism and personality. American Political Science Review, 52, 27–45.

McCrae, R. R. (1996). Social consequences of experiential openness. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 323–337.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 139–153). New York: Guilford.

Milbrath, L. (1962). Latent origins of Liberalism-Conservatism and party identification: A research note. Journal of Politics, 24, 679–688.

Nisbett, R. E., & Cohen, D. (1996). Culture of honor: The psychology of violence in the South. Boulder: Westview Press.

Ozer, D. J. (1985). Correlation and the coefficient of determination. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 307–315.

Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.

Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). New York: Academic Press.

Peabody, D. (1985). National characteristics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Peterson, B. E., Smirles, K. A., & Wentworth, P. A. (1997). Generativity and authoritarianism implications for personality, political involvement, and parenting.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1202–1216.

Plaut, V. C., Markus, H. R., & Lachman, M. E. (2002). Place matters: Consensual features and regional variation in American well-being and self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 160–184.

Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.

346

PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

 

 

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.

New York: Simon and Schuster.

Rentfrow, P. J., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2008). A theory of the emergence, persistence, and expression of regional variation in basic traits. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 339–369.

Richman, W. L., Kiesler, S., Weisband, S., & Drasgow, F. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 754–775.

Riemann, R., Grubich, C., Hempel, S., Mergl, S., & Richter, M. (1993). Personality and attitudes towards current political topics. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 313–321.

Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals.

American Sociological Review, 15, 351–357.

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.

Shelly, F. M., Archer, J. C., Davidson, F. M., & Brunn, S. D. (1996). Political geography of the United States. New York: Guilford Press.

Shively, W. P. (1969). “Ecological” inference: The use of aggregate data to study individuals. American Political Science Review, 63, 1183–1196.

Sidanius, J. (1985). Cognitive functioning and sociopolitical ideology revisited.

Political Psychology, 6, 637–661.

Smith, M. B., Bruner, J. S., & White, R. W. (1956). Opinions and personality. New York: Wiley.

Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2003). Development of personality in early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change?

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1041–1053.

St. Angelo, D., & Dyson, J. W. (1968). Personality and political orientation. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 12, 202–223.

Swann, W. B., Jr., Rentfrow, P. J., & Guinn, J. S. (2002). Self-verification: The search for coherence. In M. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 367–383). New York: Guilford Press.

Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Cognitive style and political ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 118–126.

Tetlock, P. E. (1984). Cognitive style and political belief systems in the British House of Commons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 365–375.

Thorisdottir, H., Jost, J. T., Liviatan, I., & Shrout, P. (2007). Psychological needs and values underlying left-right political orientation: Cross-national evidence from Eastern and Western Europe. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71, 175–203.

Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Left and right: A basic dimension of ideology and personality. In R. W. White (Ed.), The study of lives (pp. 388–411). Chicago: Atherton.

Trapnell, P. D. (1994). Openness versus intellect: A lexical left turn. European Journal of Personality, 8, 273–290.

Statewide Differences in Personality Predict Voting Patterns

347

 

 

United States Census Bureau (2000). Population (Section 1). In Statistical abstracts of the United States (pp. 1–62). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.

Vandello, J., & Cohen, D. (1999). Patterns of individualism and collectivism across the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 279–292.

Van Hiel A., Mervielde, I., & De Fruyt, F. (2004). The relationship between maladaptive personality and right wing ideology. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 405–417.

Walsh, J. P., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L. S., & Hesse, B. W. (1992). Self-selected and randomly selected respondents in a computer network survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 241–244.

Wiggins, J. S. (1996). The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York: Guilford.

Wolfenstein, E. V. (1967). The revolutionary personality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

This page intentionally left blank

P A R T V I

Perspectives on Justice and Morality

This page intentionally left blank

C H A P T E R 1 4

Procedural Justice and

System-Justifying Motivations

Irina Feygina and Tom R. Tyler

Abstract

Findings from system justifi cation theory (SJT) suggest that procedural justice information processing may be subject to motivational infl uences, and therefore may not always be accurate. In particular, experiencing procedural injustice may pose a threat to beliefs about the legitimacy and benevolence of the groups and systems a person belongs to, and motivate an inaccurately positive reinterpretation of the experience in line with one’s beliefs. This hypothesis was tested among 997 respondents who experienced personal interactions with legal authorities. Results indicate that more conservative respondents, who tend to exhibit a stronger motivation to justify the system compared with more liberal respondents, reported greater overall satisfaction with the authority fi gure, adjusting for outcome favorability, and greater overall decision acceptance. Moreover, while all respondents reached similar evaluations in response to just experiences, as procedural justice decreased conservatives showed less of a decrease in satisfaction with and acceptance of the authority. Implications for the perceived legitimacy of authorities and systems are discussed.

A central concern for research on social justice is how people perceive and respond to the institutions and systems within which they live, and how people interact with the authorities who represent those systems. Several lines of research address these issues by investigating people’s perceptions of legitimacy. Legitimacy is the belief that authorities, institutions, and other social arrangements (i.e., individual and group-based hierarchies) are appropriate, proper, and ought to be voluntarily deferred to (Jost & Major, 2001; Tyler, 2006a, 2006b). The perceived legitimacy of authorities and institutions is important because it elicits support and voluntary cooperation, and is essential for successful maintenance of institutions (Tyler, 2006a, 2006b). Therefore, a vital concern in groups, organizations, and societies is what gives rise to perceptions of legitimacy of institutions and systems, and how such perceived legitimacy, once established, is maintained and strengthened.

351