<table style="border:1px solid #adadad; background-color: #F3F1EC; color: #666666; padding:8px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; line-height:16px; margin-bottom:6px;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><span style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:20px;font-weight:bold;">PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)</span></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-research-on-political-animosity-reveals-ominous-new-trend/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New research on political animosity reveals an “ominous” trend</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 20th 2024, 10:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>Usually, political tensions in the United States intensify as elections approach but return to pre-election levels once the elections pass. However, a new analysis of tens of thousands of interviews revealed that this did not happen after the 2022 elections. Individuals with more exposure to the campaign tended to be more polarized, and this sentiment endured after the elections. This trend held true for partisans on both sides of the political spectrum. The study, published in <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adm9198"><em>Science Advances</em></a>, highlights the persistence of polarization in current American politics.</p>
<p>For over a century, scholars have believed that elections based on the universal right to vote help facilitate collective decision-making and strengthen social cohesion. However, in the short term, elections tend to be polarizing events. Political parties compete for votes, which often leads to periods of intense animosity between them.</p>
<p>Elections can strengthen partisan identity, emphasizing political affiliation over other identities, such as national, professional, or familial ones. This can contribute to increased political polarization. In the past, research suggested that after elections, there is usually a cooling-off period, during which tensions between political opponents return to pre-election levels.</p>
<p>One explanation for the rise in polarization during the pre-election period is the negative tone of modern campaigns. Politicians frequently highlight policy disagreements and social divisions during this time, often portraying their opponents in a negative light. Another possible explanation is that repeated exposure to campaign messages and events solidifies voters’ party loyalties, hardening their partisan identities.</p>
<p>Study author Neil Fasching and his colleagues sought to explore whether it is the proximity of elections that activates partisan identities, leading to stronger political tensions and polarization. They analyzed data from 66,000 respondents interviewed between September 16, 2022, and October 12, 2023, covering both the period before and after the 2022 elections.</p>
<p>For 4,436 of these respondents, the researchers had data from both before and after the elections, providing insight into individual-level changes in attitudes. The average age of participants was 51 years, and 54% were female. The political breakdown of the sample included 51% Democrats, 31% Republicans, and 18% who identified as Independents. The study focused on three key indicators of partisan animosity: affective polarization, support for democratic norm violations, and support for political violence.</p>
<p>The results showed that partisan animosity was not affected by the proximity of the 2022 elections. Instead of a typical surge in polarization before the elections and a decline afterward, the researchers found that affective polarization—the difference in feelings toward one’s own party versus the opposing party—remained consistently high throughout the election cycle. While affective polarization was slightly elevated in the pre-election period, it remained stable as Election Day approached and showed no significant decline after the elections. This finding challenges the conventional view that political tensions ease in the aftermath of elections.</p>
<p>Similarly, support for democratic norm violations (such as supporting actions that undermine democratic processes like reducing polling stations in opposition-leaning areas or allowing party leaders to bypass judicial rulings) remained stable before and after the election. There was no significant change in attitudes toward violating democratic norms, indicating that these views are also relatively ingrained in the electorate.</p>
<p>Support for political violence—measured by respondents’ tolerance for acts such as vandalism or assaults against members of the opposing party—remained low overall. There was a slight increase in support for political violence as the election drew closer, but the increase was so small that it is unclear whether it represents a meaningful shift or simply a random variation. In short, political violence remained a minor concern but did not spike in any significant way during the election period.</p>
<p>The study also explored how exposure to political campaigns influenced polarization. Individuals who lived in areas with higher levels of campaign activity (for example, in states with competitive Senate or gubernatorial races) were more polarized than those in less politically active areas.</p>
<p>However, this difference in polarization was constant over time—that is, people in high-campaign exposure areas were already more polarized before the election, and this polarization did not increase further during or after the election. This suggests that campaign exposure can deepen existing divisions, but it does not cause new surges in polarization around the time of elections.</p>
<p>The researchers also found no evidence that partisans who voted for the winning candidate became less polarized after the election. Contrary to earlier theories suggesting that election winners might experience a post-election reduction in animosity toward the opposing party, both winners and losers remained equally polarized after the results were in. This was true whether the analysis focused on national races or state-level contests (such as Senate or gubernatorial races).</p>
<p>“For defenders of American democracy, our results arguably provide some grounds for optimism as they suggest that efforts by opportunistic candidates to stoke animus and division during campaigns are likely to prove ineffective, particularly when the rhetoric encourages partisans to violate established norms or turn to violence. On the other hand, political animosity has become such a durable feature of public life that it no longer ‘cools off’ in the aftermath of contentious political campaigns. The implications of such entrenched polarization could be ominous,” study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the trends of political polarization around the 2022 U.S. elections. However, it is important to note that the polarization trend observed in this study may be a product of the unique blend of political factors currently shaping U.S. society. Future elections or elections in other countries could yield different results, depending on the political context.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adm9198">Persistent polarization: The unexpected durability of political animosity around US elections,</a>” was authored by Neil Fasching, Shanto Iyengar, Yphtach Lelkes, and Sean J. Westwood.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/national-politics-now-a-key-factor-in-local-prosecutor-election-outcomes/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">National politics now a key factor in local prosecutor election outcomes</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 20th 2024, 08:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10659129241256604"><em>Political Research Quarterly</em></a> has shed light on the growing trend of nationalization in local elections, particularly focusing on elections for local prosecutors. Traditionally, local elections in the United States have been heavily influenced by local factors like the candidate’s experience or ties to the community. However, the new study shows that local prosecutor elections are increasingly affected by voter preferences at the national level. This change highlights how national political dynamics are now influencing even the most localized electoral contests.</p>
<p>Prosecutors play a significant role in the criminal justice system, deciding on cases ranging from local crimes to high-profile national issues. These elections used to be low-salience, non-competitive events but have garnered more attention in recent years, particularly with the rise of progressive prosecutors advocating for criminal justice reform.</p>
<p>This new wave of prosecutors, supported by high-profile donors like George Soros, has faced criticism from conservative politicians who tie these races to larger national political debates. Given the polarized nature of current U.S. politics, the researchers wanted to investigate how these dynamics influence the chances of incumbent prosecutors winning re-election and whether they face challenges in their races.</p>
<p>“My co-authors and I have been interested in the subject of nationalized politics and elections for several years and we were increasingly seeing evidence that nationalization was influencing down-ballot elections in recent years,” said <a href="https://spia.uga.edu/faculty-member/jamie-l-carson/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jamie L. Carson</a>, the UGA Athletic Association Professor of Public & International Affairs at the University of Georgia and author of <em><a href="https://amzn.to/3YFvEYp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nationalized Politics</a></em>.</p>
<p>“Based upon some past work that my co-authors have conducted on prosecutorial elections, we decided to investigate whether these races were also being affected by nationalized politics (i.e., who was at the top of the ticket). That is exactly what we found in this article illustrating that all politics is now nationalized. There was also surprisingly little work in political science on prosecutorial elections so we were attempting to fill a significant void in the literature as well.”</p>
<p>For their study, the researchers gathered data from prosecutor elections between 2012 and 2020 in 200 of the largest districts in the United States, covering over 50% of the U.S. population. They analyzed factors influencing whether incumbents won their elections and whether they faced challengers. The team specifically looked at how national-level dynamics, such as the political alignment of local prosecutors with the winning presidential candidate, impacted election outcomes. Other factors examined included population size of the electoral district, the presence of partisan versus nonpartisan elections, crime rates, the number of challengers, and the incumbent’s years in office.</p>
<p>The researchers found strong evidence that national-level political dynamics have a substantial influence on local prosecutor elections. Incumbents who were from the same political party as the presidential candidate who had won their district were significantly more likely to win re-election and face fewer challengers.</p>
<p>For example, an incumbent prosecutor aligned with the district’s winning presidential candidate had a nearly 20% greater chance of winning their election, and they were 25% more likely to run unopposed. This demonstrates that the success of a prosecutor’s party at the national level plays an increasingly important role in these local elections, overshadowing traditional factors such as incumbency and local reputation.</p>
<p>“For years, the adage of ‘all politics is local’ (as initially espoused by former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill) seemed to accurately sum up what was happening in American politics,” Carson told PsyPost. “That has clearly changed during the past few decades such that who is at the top of the ticket is now driving politics and political choices down the ballot. This is especially important in the current election year since who wins the presidential race will have far reaching implications for affiliated candidates lower down on the ticket.”</p>
<p>The study also found that the size of the district mattered. Prosecutors running in larger, more populous districts were more likely to face challengers and lose re-election compared to those in smaller districts. Larger districts, often urban, tend to have more competitive elections, which can erode the advantages incumbents usually enjoy. Additionally, prosecutors in nonpartisan elections were more likely to win, as voters in these districts had fewer partisan cues to influence their decision-making, allowing the incumbent’s reputation to play a bigger role.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the study found that while incumbents facing primary challengers were more likely to encounter a general election challenge, having a primary challenger did not significantly impact their chances of winning the general election. Multiple challengers in the general election also had no statistically significant effect on whether an incumbent won or lost.</p>
<p>Crime rates, as expected, were relevant to the outcomes of prosecutor elections, but not as much as one might assume. Incumbents in states with higher violent crime rates were more likely to win re-election and face fewer challengers, suggesting that voters prefer continuity in leadership during times of heightened crime. However, the effect of crime rates was relatively small compared to the influence of national political alignment. This finding highlights the growing impact of national politics in these races, even when voters are making decisions about offices focused on local issues like crime.</p>
<p>“The nationalization of local elections does indeed have a downside,” Carson said. “Local officials could end up running on issues they don’t actually have the power to directly affect rather than those more pertinent to the local level.”</p>
<p>Another notable finding was that female incumbents faced more challenges in prosecutor elections compared to their male counterparts. Female prosecutors were more likely to be opposed in elections, and they had a slightly lower probability of winning compared to male incumbents. The study noted that this gender disparity is consistent with findings in other political offices, where women candidates often face greater scrutiny and competition.</p>
<p>“Based upon our analysis, we found that incumbent prosecutors gain a meaningful advantage if they are the same party as the U.S. president, one that’s not easy for challengers to overcome,” Carson told PsyPost. “Other influences were statistically significant, although smaller when compared to the presidential party boost: Higher crime rates tend to give an advantage to an incumbent, for example, and female incumbents are less likely to win, likely due to the influence of gender stereotypes.”</p>
<p>Despite its comprehensive nature, the study has some limitations. One limitation is its focus on high-population districts, which may not fully represent the dynamics in smaller, more rural districts where prosecutor elections are often less competitive and less nationalized. Another limitation is that the study only analyzed data up to 2020, so it may not capture more recent developments in national politics and local prosecutor elections. Future research could expand to include smaller districts and explore the role of media coverage and campaign finance, particularly the influence of outside money in local races.</p>
<p>“We are currently working on subsequent papers that take a deeper look at the subject of prosecutorial elections,” Carson said. “We have written companion papers that investigate the effect of nationalization on the decisions by female prosecutor candidates to run and factors that affect their electoral success. We are also examining the effects of money in prosecutorial elections and whether increasing patterns of nationalization are driving the dramatic increases in spending in these races during recent election cycles.”</p>
<p>“We hope to highlight the relevancy and importance of prosecutor elections, especially given the enormous discretion they have in the criminal justice system. They are powerful officials, and these elections are becoming more salient and competitive given the increasingly nationalized state of American politics.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129241256604">The Increasing Nationalization of Local Elections: The Case of Prosecutors</a>,” was authored by Jamie L. Carson, Damon Cann, Jeffrey L. Yates, and Ronald F. Wright.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/new-study-links-a-common-personality-trait-to-higher-risk-of-early-death/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">New study links a common personality trait to higher risk of early death</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 20th 2024, 06:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in the <em><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165032724015659" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Journal of Affective Disorders</a></em> sheds light on the connection between neuroticism and the risk of mortality from various causes. Neuroticism is a personality trait characterized by emotional instability and a tendency to experience negative emotions such as anxiety, fear, and loneliness. The study, which used data from nearly half a million participants in the UK Biobank, found that individuals with higher levels of neuroticism were at greater risk of dying from a range of causes. Among the components of neuroticism, loneliness stood out as the most strongly associated with an increased risk of early death.</p>
<p>Previous research has suggested that neuroticism is linked to various mental and physical health problems, from depression and anxiety to cardiovascular disease and respiratory issues. However, findings about whether neuroticism is directly associated with higher mortality risk have been mixed.</p>
<p>While some studies found no clear link between neuroticism and death rates, others indicated that people with higher neuroticism scores might face a higher risk of dying earlier. Moreover, neuroticism is a broad trait made up of various components, including loneliness, anxiety, and irritability. These components could have different effects on health outcomes, but prior research had not fully explored these differences.</p>
<p>The new study aimed to provide a more detailed understanding of the link between neuroticism and mortality by examining specific causes of death, such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and external causes like accidents and self-harm. By using a large dataset with over 16 years of follow-up, the researchers hoped to clarify whether certain components of neuroticism, such as loneliness, were more strongly related to premature death than others.</p>
<p>“We are broadly interested in the links between psychological traits and health; this is the largest study on this topic and was uniquely powered to detect associations with cause-specific mortality. The sample was relatively young at the start of the study, so many of these deaths were at a relatively younger age, generally younger than the life expectancy in the United Kingdom,” said senior author <a href="https://public.med.fsu.edu/com/directory/Details/Full/16780" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Antonio Terracciano</a>, a professor of geriatrics at Florida State University College of Medicine and member of the <a href="https://lpclifespan.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Laboratory of Personality and Cognition across the Lifespan</a>.</p>
<p>The study analyzed data from nearly 500,000 participants in the UK Biobank, a large research initiative that collects health and genetic information from individuals across the United Kingdom. The participants were between the ages of 38 and 73 at the start of the study, and they were followed for an average of 13.4 years. During this period, more than 43,000 participants died. The researchers linked the participants’ data to national death records to determine the causes of death, including cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease, and intentional self-harm.</p>
<p>Neuroticism was measured using a 12-item questionnaire from the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, a widely used tool in personality research. Participants were asked to respond to statements like “Are you a worrier?” and “Do you often feel lonely?” based on how well these items described their typical behavior. The researchers calculated a neuroticism score for each participant and also looked at the individual components of neuroticism, such as loneliness, mood swings, and irritability.</p>
<p>To account for other factors that could influence mortality, such as age, sex, education, smoking habits, and underlying health conditions like diabetes or hypertension, the researchers used statistical models to adjust for these variables. This helped ensure that the relationships they observed between neuroticism and mortality were not simply due to other risk factors for poor health.</p>
<p>The researchers found that higher neuroticism was associated with a 10% increase in the risk of dying from any cause over the follow-up period. When the researchers looked at specific causes of death, they found that neuroticism was linked to a range of mortality risks, including respiratory and digestive diseases, intentional self-harm, and cardiovascular disease. However, the strength of the association varied depending on the cause of death. For example, neuroticism was more strongly linked to deaths from respiratory diseases and self-harm than it was to deaths from cancer.</p>
<p>The findings indicate that “the tendency to feel sad, tense, or lonely can increase the risk of premature mortality, especially deaths due to intentional self-harm, respiratory system, and digestive system diseases,” Terracciano told PsyPost. “While the study did not examine potential remedies, other research indicates that coping strategies and social connections could help manage such negative emotions.”</p>
<p>Loneliness, in particular, emerged as the strongest predictor of early death among the components of neuroticism. Individuals who reported feeling lonely had a 46% higher risk of dying compared to those who did not report loneliness. This relationship was especially pronounced among younger men and people without a college education. The link between loneliness and mortality was independent of other aspects of neuroticism, suggesting that loneliness on its own is a significant risk factor for early death.</p>
<p>The researchers also found that other aspects of neuroticism, such as mood swings and feeling fed up, were associated with higher mortality risks, particularly for digestive and respiratory diseases. On the other hand, some components of neuroticism, like being a worrier or feeling guilty, were not strongly related to early death. In fact, individuals who reported worrying too much after feeling embarrassed had a slightly lower risk of dying, which the researchers speculated might be because such individuals are more cautious or vigilant in other aspects of their lives.</p>
<p>“It was surprising that loneliness had a much stronger impact than other components of neuroticism,” Terracciano said. “In other words, the findings indicate that those who reported being lonely were at much higher risk of death than those who felt anxious or guilty. It was also surprising that among causes of death, people high in neuroticism were more likely to die from respiratory or digestive system diseases than cardiovascular diseases.”</p>
<p>One limitation to note is that the study was conducted using data from the UK Biobank, a sample that is not fully representative of the general population. Participants in the UK Biobank tend to be healthier and more educated than the average person, which could limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations.</p>
<p>“The participants were primarily white individuals from the United Kingdom, a wealthy country,” Terracciano said. “More research is needed to test whether the associations differ in contexts with fewer economic and healthcare resources.”</p>
<p>Another limitation is that the study did not account for changes in neuroticism over time. It is possible that individuals who experience major life events, such as serious illness or the death of a loved one, might become more neurotic as they age, which could influence their risk of dying earlier. Future research could explore how changes in personality traits like neuroticism over the course of life affect health outcomes.</p>
<p>The researchers also emphasized the need for more research on the specific pathways through which neuroticism influences mortality. While their analyses accounted for factors like smoking and underlying health conditions, the exact mechanisms linking neuroticism to early death remain unclear. It could be that individuals high in neuroticism are more likely to engage in risky behaviors, have difficulty coping with stress, or experience chronic stress that wears down their bodies over time.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2024.09.077" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Neuroticism, loneliness, all-cause and cause-specific mortality: A 17-year study of nearly 500,000 individuals</a>,” was authored by Karley Greer Deason, Martina Luchetti, Selin Karakose, Yannick Stephan, Páraic S. O’Súilleabháin, Andre Hajek, Angelina R. Sutin, and Antonio Terracciano.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/very-attractive-and-very-unattractive-men-show-the-highest-hostility-towards-women/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Very attractive and very unattractive men show the highest hostility towards women</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 19th 2024, 16:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study of men in the U.K. found that those who perceive themselves as either the most attractive or the least attractive tend to show higher levels of hostility towards women compared to men with an average view of their attractiveness. Additionally, men with strong right-wing authoritarian beliefs were also more likely to be hostile towards women. The research was published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13062"><em>Scandinavian Journal of Psychology</em></a>.</p>
<p>Misogyny refers to hatred, disdain, or prejudice against women. It manifests through discriminatory attitudes, behaviors, and societal norms that devalue or oppress women. Misogyny can range from subtle actions, like exclusion or belittling, to overt behaviors, such as aggression, verbal abuse, physical and sexual violence, and rape.</p>
<p>A related concept is sexism, which involves the belief that one gender is superior to the other, resulting in unequal treatment based on gender. Both misogyny and sexism perpetuate gender-based inequality, reinforcing harmful stereotypes and limiting opportunities for individuals, particularly women. These attitudes not only harm women but also contribute to rigid gender roles that affect men as well.</p>
<p>Study author Jiewen Zhang and her colleagues wanted to better understand the factors associated with men’s hostility towards women. While it has been well-established that hostility toward women is deeply rooted in certain political ideologies, such as right-wing authoritarianism, the researchers sought to examine whether other factors—such as loneliness, sensitivity to rejection, perceived attractiveness, and romantic relationships—also play a role in shaping these attitudes. Until now, it was unclear how these personal characteristics might influence hostility toward women in a general male population.</p>
<p>The research involved 473 single, heterosexual men living in the United Kingdom, aged between 18 and 35, with an average age of 26. Participants were recruited through Prolific, an online platform that helps researchers gather survey data, and each participant was compensated £8 for completing the survey. The survey included a variety of validated psychological assessments to evaluate factors such as hostile sexism, misogyny, self-perceived attractiveness, sensitivity to rejection, loneliness, gaming habits, gaming addiction symptoms, and right-wing authoritarianism.</p>
<p>For measuring hostile sexism, the researchers used the Hostile Sexism subscale of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, while misogyny was assessed using the Misogyny Scale. Sensitivity to rejection was measured using the Adult Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire, and loneliness was assessed through the Short-Form UCLA Loneliness Scale. The study also examined the participants’ time spent gaming and any potential symptoms of gaming addiction, as well as their levels of right-wing authoritarianism, measured using the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale.</p>
<p>Results showed that the strongest link was between right-wing authoritarianism and hostility towards women, both in the form of hostile sexism and misogyny. This suggests that men who hold authoritarian beliefs—characterized by a preference for strict social hierarchies and traditional gender roles—are more likely to express hostility toward women. The study highlights that right-wing authoritarian attitudes contribute significantly to the development of misogynistic views.</p>
<p>Another notable finding was the curvilinear relationship between self-perceived attractiveness and hostility towards women. Men who rated themselves as either very attractive or very unattractive were more likely to show hostility toward women compared to those who perceived their attractiveness as average. This indicates that both extremes of the self-perceived attractiveness spectrum may foster negative attitudes toward women, though the underlying motivations might differ. For instance, men with high self-perceived attractiveness may exhibit narcissistic tendencies, while men who consider themselves unattractive may externalize their frustrations, leading to hostility towards women.</p>
<p>In addition, the study found that men with symptoms of gaming addiction were slightly more likely to express misogynistic attitudes, though general time spent gaming was not a strong predictor of hostility once other factors were accounted for. Sensitivity to rejection was similarly associated with increased hostility towards women, suggesting that men who are more sensitive to perceived rejection may harbor more negative attitudes.</p>
<p>Regarding sexual experience, men with both the lowest and the highest numbers of sexual partners were less hostile towards women compared to men with an average number of sexual partners. This pattern suggests that the relationship between sexual experience and hostility towards women is complex, with those at the extremes of sexual experience showing less hostility than those in the middle range.</p>
<p>“Our findings suggest that high right-wing authoritarianism and low and high self-perceived attractiveness are associated with increased hostility towards women among men reflecting the general population,” the study authors concluded.</p>
<p>The study sheds light on the associations between various personal characteristics of men and hostility towards women. However, the study was conducted on an online sample of U.K. men. Results may not necessarily be applicable to men from different cultural backgrounds, as societal norms and values vary across cultures and could influence attitudes toward women in distinct ways.</p>
<p>The paper, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13062">Predicting hostility towards women: incel-related factors in a general sample of men,</a>” was authored by Jiewen Zhang, Amalie B. Mollandsøy, Cecilie Nornes, Eilin K. Erevik, and Ståle Pallesen.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/superhero-films-can-encourage-prosocial-behavior-new-study-finds/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Superhero films can encourage prosocial behavior, new study finds</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 19th 2024, 14:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A new study published in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2024.2387039"><em>The Journal of Psychology</em></a> suggests that superhero films, despite often depicting violence, can promote prosocial behavior — actions meant to benefit others, such as sharing or helping. By showing a specific scene from the 2016 film <em>Batman v Superman</em>, the researchers found that viewers who identified with Batman or believed his actions were morally justified were more likely to help others in a subsequent task.</p>
<p>While previous research has shown that prosocial media can encourage helpfulness and cooperation, violent media has typically been associated with increased aggression. Superhero films, a genre with widespread popularity, often mix these two elements. The researchers wanted to explore how these films might affect viewers, particularly in terms of empathy and moral reasoning, which could influence whether viewers engage in prosocial behavior despite the violence on screen.</p>
<p>The study involved two experiments, each with 200 Brazilian participants, who were randomly assigned to either an experimental group or a control group. The experimental group watched a 3-minute and 47-second clip from the movie <em>Batman v Superman</em>, in which Batman fights multiple armed villains to rescue Martha, a captured character. This scene was chosen for its combination of violent action and a clear prosocial motive—saving a life.</p>
<p>In contrast, the control group watched a neutral video that featured colorful shapes forming various patterns. This video, which had no violent or prosocial content, was meant to serve as a baseline for comparison.</p>
<p>After watching the videos, participants were asked to complete a prosocial behavior task. They were told they were helping with another study by distributing pieces of chocolate to future participants who liked the treat. The number of chocolate pieces each participant allocated served as a measure of their prosocial behavior.</p>
<p>The researchers also measured participants’ levels of empathy after viewing the videos. To do this, they used a scale that assessed three different types of empathy: affective empathy (sharing another person’s emotions), cognitive empathy (understanding another’s perspective), and associative empathy (identifying with the character in the video).</p>
<p>In the second experiment, the researchers introduced an additional measure—moral justification. Participants were asked to evaluate whether the violent actions taken by Batman were justified. This was done using a series of statements such as “The main character’s actions were necessary” or “It was impossible to deal with this situation in any other way.”</p>
<p>In the first study, participants who watched the superhero scene reported higher levels of empathy than those in the control group. More specifically, viewers showed increased associative empathy — they identified more with Batman and his mission to save the hostage. This identification with the hero was the key factor that indirectly boosted prosocial behavior.</p>
<p>While participants in the superhero group didn’t give significantly more chocolate than those in the control group overall, the effect of the movie on prosocial behavior was seen through the increase in empathy. This suggests that feeling connected to the hero and understanding their motives could encourage viewers to be more generous and helpful in their real-world actions.</p>
<p>The second study revealed that moral reasoning also played a role in prosocial behavior. Participants who watched the superhero scene were more likely to believe that Batman’s violent actions were justified. This belief, in turn, was linked to higher prosocial behavior, as measured by the chocolate allocation task.</p>
<p>Essentially, when participants viewed the hero’s actions as morally right, they were more inclined to engage in helpful behavior themselves. The researchers theorized that the portrayal of superheroes as protectors and defenders likely led viewers to accept their violent actions as necessary for the greater good, which then translated into a willingness to help others.</p>
<p>In short, simply watching the superhero scene did not directly cause participants to behave more prosocially. Instead, the participants who empathized with the characters or believed the violent actions were justified were more likely to act in a helpful way afterward.</p>
<p>While the study offers valuable insights into the effects of superhero films, it is not without limitations. One limitation is the use of an online experiment, which may reduce the level of control over participants’ environments and behavior. For instance, distractions during the video could have affected participants’ responses. Additionally, the study only used a single method of measuring prosocial behavior (the chocolate allocation task), which may not fully capture the complexity of prosocial actions in real-world situations.</p>
<p>Another limitation is the sample size and demographic characteristics. The participants were predominantly young adults from Brazil, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other age groups or cultural contexts. Future research could address this by replicating the study with different age groups and in various cultural settings.</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223980.2024.2387039" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Superhero Films’ Impacts on Prosocial Behavior: The Mediating Role of State-Empathy and Violence Justification</a>,” was authored by Isabella Leandra Silva Santos and Carlos Eduardo Pimentel.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table style="font:13px Helvetica, sans-serif; border-radius:4px; -moz-border-radius:4px; -webkit-border-radius:4px; background-color:#fff; padding:8px; margin-bottom:6px; border:1px solid #adadad;" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://www.psypost.org/political-narcissism-predicts-dehumanization-of-opponents-among-conservatives-and-liberals/" style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;padding:0 0 2px;font-weight: bold;font-size: 19px;line-height: 20px;color:#222;">Political narcissism predicts dehumanization of opponents among conservatives and liberals</a>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; text-align:left;color:#999;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;line-height:15px;">Oct 19th 2024, 12:00</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#494949;text-align:justify;font-size:13px;">
<p><p>A recent study in the <em>British Journal of Social Psychology</em> offers new insights into why some people view their political opponents in dehumanizing ways. The researchers found that political narcissism, rather than political identification alone, is strongly linked to seeing outgroups as less human. Both liberals and conservatives are susceptible to this behavior when their connection to their political group is driven by a sense of grandiosity and insecurity.</p>
<p>Political polarization has become a significant problem in many democracies worldwide, leading to greater hostility between political factions. This growing division often results in negative partisanship, where people express stronger dislike for opposing political groups than positive feelings toward their own.</p>
<p>Scholars have long debated whether conservatives or liberals are more prone to such biases, but this study aimed to shift the focus from ideological differences to the nature of how individuals identify with their political groups. Specifically, the researchers wanted to explore whether political narcissism, rather than political identification itself, leads to the dehumanization of political opponents.</p>
<p>“We were intrigued by how both liberals/Democrats and conservatives/Republicans can exhibit similar psychological patterns, particularly regarding political conflict,” said study author Marta Marchlewska, an associate professor and head of the <a href="https://psychpol.psych.pan.pl/en/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Political Cognition Lab</a> at the Polish Academy of Sciences.</p>
<p>“Central to this phenomenon is political collective narcissism, characterized by an inflated sense of superiority about one’s own political group. This mindset fosters blatant dehumanization, leading individuals to view opponents as less than human and to strip away empathy. Understanding these dynamics reveals how shared psychological processes contribute to escalating hostility across the political spectrum.”</p>
<p>The researchers conducted four separate studies to investigate the relationship between political narcissism and dehumanization. These studies took place in different contexts, including both Poland and the United States, and involved a mix of cross-sectional and experimental designs.</p>
<p>Study 1 focused on establishing the basic link between political narcissism and dehumanization in a Polish context. The researchers surveyed 320 participants, both liberals and conservatives, using various measures, including a scale to assess political narcissism and a well-known measure of blatant dehumanization called the “Ascent of Man” scale. They also measured political identification and the quality of intergroup contact. The goal was to determine whether political narcissism, independent of political identification, predicted dehumanization of political opponents.</p>
<p>Study 2 sought to replicate the findings from Study 1 in the United States, using a sample of 316 participants (Democrats and Republicans). In addition to measuring political narcissism and dehumanization, this study also assessed participants’ feelings of being dehumanized by others, a concept known as “metadehumanization.” The researchers hypothesized that people who felt dehumanized by political opponents might be more likely to dehumanize others in return.</p>
<p>Study 3 extended the previous studies by examining whether political narcissism also predicted aggressive tendencies toward political opponents. The researchers used a larger sample of 500 Americans (250 Democrats and 250 Republicans) and added an aggression measure known as the “Voodoo Doll Task,” where participants indicated how many needles they would insert into a doll representing their political opponents. This allowed the researchers to test whether political narcissism led to more aggressive inclinations, beyond just dehumanizing attitudes.</p>
<p>Study 4 was experimental in design and aimed to establish a causal relationship between political narcissism and dehumanization. The researchers manipulated political narcissism by exposing participants to a threat to their political ingroup, such as reading a fabricated news article portraying their group as under attack. The sample included 525 Polish participants, divided into liberals and conservatives. After the manipulation, participants completed the same measures of political narcissism, dehumanization, and aggression used in the previous studies.</p>
<p>Across all four studies, the researchers consistently found that political narcissism was positively linked to the dehumanization of political opponents. This relationship held true even when controlling for political identification, meaning that it was not simply a matter of people identifying strongly with their political group; it was the narcissistic quality of their identification that predicted dehumanization.</p>
<p>In Study 1, political narcissism predicted the dehumanization of both liberal and conservative outgroups in Poland. Interestingly, intergroup contact—the extent to which participants interacted with people from opposing political groups—was negatively associated with dehumanization, but it did not affect the link between political narcissism and dehumanization.</p>
<p>Study 2 replicated these findings in the United States, with political narcissism predicting dehumanization among both Democrats and Republicans. Additionally, metadehumanization—feeling dehumanized by others—was positively associated with dehumanizing political opponents, suggesting that people who feel dehumanized may, in turn, dehumanize others.</p>
<p>In Study 3, the researchers found that political narcissism not only predicted dehumanization but also aggressive tendencies toward political outgroups. Participants who scored high on political narcissism were more likely to express aggression toward their political opponents in the Voodoo Doll Task, regardless of whether they identified as Democrats or Republicans.</p>
<p>Study 4 provided experimental evidence that political narcissism could be heightened through perceived threats to one’s political group. Participants who were exposed to a threat to their political ingroup showed higher levels of political narcissism, which in turn led to greater dehumanization of and aggression toward political opponents. However, this effect was only observed among liberal participants in Poland, possibly because conservatives were in a position of political dominance at the time of data collection.</p>
<p>“Our findings suggest that dehumanization is not exclusive to any one political ideology,” Marchlewska told PsyPost. “Both liberals and conservatives may dehumanize their opponents when they identify with their political group in a narcissistic way. Collective narcissism stems from self-related psychological issues, such as anxious attachment styles and low personal control, as well as group-related concerns like perceived in-group disadvantage.”</p>
<p>“This narcissistic identification serves as a compensatory response. In our study, we focused on political groups and found that individuals who narcissistically identify with their political affiliations tend to exhibit greater hostility toward those with differing views. Our research indicates that how one identifies with a political group appears to be more critical than the specific political affiliation itself.”</p>
<p>Future studies could explore interventions aimed at reducing political narcissism. For instance, group affirmation techniques, which help people feel more secure in their group identity, may help reduce the defensive tendencies associated with political narcissism and, in turn, decrease political polarization.</p>
<p>“It’s crucial to recognize the role of psychological factors in shaping political attitudes and behaviors,” Marchlewska said. “By acknowledging our biases and understanding the motivations behind our political identities, we can foster healthier dialogues. I encourage readers to reflect on their own identification with political groups and how it might influence their perceptions of others. This awareness could lead to more empathetic interactions, even amidst differing viewpoints.”</p>
<p>The study, “<a href="https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12803" target="_blank" rel="noopener">So different yet so alike? Political collective narcissism predicts blatant dehumanization of political outgroups among conservatives and liberals</a>,” was authored by Marta Marchlewska, Paulina Górska, Wojciech Podsiadłowski, Marta Rogoza, and Dagmara Szczepańska.</p></p>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:13px; text-align: center; color: #666666; padding:4px; margin-bottom:2px;"></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Forwarded by:<br />
Michael Reeder LCPC<br />
Baltimore, MD</strong></p>
<p><strong>This information is taken from free public RSS feeds published by each organization for the purpose of public distribution. Readers are linked back to the article content on each organization's website. This email is an unaffiliated unofficial redistribution of this freely provided content from the publishers. </strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p><s><small><a href="#" style="color:#ffffff;"><a href="https://blogtrottr.com/unsubscribe/565/DY9DKf">unsubscribe from this feed</a></a></small></s></p>