The role of individual differences in resistance to persuasion on memory for political advertisements.

When people see political advertisements on a polarized issue they take a stance on, what factors influence how they respond to and remember the adverts contents? Across three studies, we tested competing hypotheses about how individual differences in social vigilantism (i.e., attitude superiority) and need for cognition relate to intentions to resist attitude change and memory for political advertisements concerning abortion. In Experiments 1 and 2, we examined participants' intentions to use resistance strategies to preserve their pre-existing attitudes about abortion, by either engaging against opposing opinions or disengaging from them. In Experiment 3, we examined participants' memory for information about both sides of the controversy presented in political advertisements. Our results suggest higher levels of social vigilantism are related to greater intentions to counterargue and better memory for attitude-incongruent information. These findings extend our understanding of individual differences in how people process and respond to controversial social and political discourse.

Moral decision-making and support for safety procedures amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Given that individual differences influence virus-mitigating behaviors and the COVID-19 pandemic posed new moral dilemmas for individuals to resolve, across three studies (N = 704), we assessed how masculine honor beliefs (MHB), beliefs in pure good (BPG), evil (BPE), and the dark triad (DT) influence COVID-19 moral decision-making. Specifically, we analyzed moral decision-making at the microlevel (i.e., individual- and familial-level; Study 1), in decisions with (hypothetical) life-or-death consequences (Study 2), and at the macrolevel (i.e., nationwide virus-mitigation efforts; Study 3). In all studies, participants completed the four individual difference scales and rated their pandemic attitudes on Likert-type agreement scales, and resolved various moral dilemmas in Studies 2 and 3. Consistent with our hypotheses, individuals reported more virus-mitigation efforts in order to protect their families than themselves. In terms of hypothetical life-or-death and nationwide decisions, MHB, BPE, and the DT predicted more confidence and social motivations, whereas BPG predicted more distress. This research has implications for moral decision-making at varying degrees of severity during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hitting below the belt: Masculine honor beliefs and perceptions of unfair fighting behavior.

We examined the effect of masculine honor beliefs on perceptions of unfair fighting behavior. We proposed competing hypotheses about the nature of this relationship. Our Reputation by Any Means Hypothesis predicted masculine honor beliefs would be positively related to perceptions of unfair fighting behavior as permissible because they increase the likelihood of success. Conversely, our Reputation by Honorable Means Hypothesis predicted masculine honor beliefs would be negatively related to perceptions of unfair fighting behavior as permissible due to the importance of demonstrating masculinity through socially acceptable means (e.g., hitting above the belt). Across three studies, our results were generally consistent with the Reputation by Any Means Hypothesis. Individuals higher in masculine honor beliefs reporting greater perceptions of the fighting behavior as permissible, indicating they believe it is important, when involved in a physical fight, to win and to do so by any means necessary.

Differential housing and novelty response: Protection and risk from locomotor sensitization.

High novelty seeking increases the risk for drug experimentation and locomotor sensitization. Locomotor sensitization to psychostimulants is thought to reflect neurological adaptations that promote the transition to compulsive drug taking. Rats reared in enrichment (EC) show less locomotor sensitization when compared to rats reared in isolation (IC) or standard conditions (SC). The current research study was designed to test if novelty response contributed locomotor sensitization and more importantly, if the different housing environments could change the novelty response to protect against the development of locomotor sensitization in both adolescence and adulthood. Experiment 1: rats were tested for their response to novelty using the inescapable novelty test (IEN) and pseudorandomly assigned to enriched (EC), isolated (IC), or standard (SC) housing conditions for 30days. After housing, they were tested with IEN. Rats were then administered amphetamine (0.5mg/kg) or saline and locomotor activity was measured followed by a sensitization test 14days later. Experiment 2: rats were tested in the IEN test early adulthood and given five administrations of amphetamine (0.3mg/kg) or saline and then either stayed in or switched housing environments for 30days. Rats were then re-tested in the IEN test in late adulthood and administered five more injections of their respective treatments and tested for locomotor sensitization. Results indicate that IC and SC increased the response to novelty. EC housing decreased locomotor response to amphetamine and saline, and SC housing increased the locomotor response to amphetamine. Mediation results indicated that the late adult novelty response fully mediates the locomotor response to amphetamine and saline, while the early adulthood novelty response did not. CONCLUSIONS: Differential housing changes novelty and amphetamine locomotor response. Novelty response is altered into adulthood and provides evidence that enrichment can be used to reduce drug vulnerability.

Rape Myth Consistency and Gender Differences in Perceiving Rape Victims: A Meta-Analysis.

An overview discusses feminist analyses of oppression, attitudes toward rape victims, and previously studied predictors of individuals' attitudes toward rape victims. To better understand such attitudes, this meta-analysis examines the moderating influences of various rape victim, perpetrator, and crime characteristics' rape myth consistency on gender differences in individuals' perceptions of rape victims (i.e., victim responsibility and blame attributions and rape minimizing attitudes). Consistent with feminist theoretical predictions, results indicated that, overall, men perceived rape victims more negatively than women did. However, this sex difference was moderated by the rape myth consistency within the rape vignettes. Implications for research are discussed.

Rape Myths, Rape Scripts, and Common Rape Experiences of College Women: Differences in Perceptions of Women Who Have Been Raped.

Rape is prevalent at colleges. Although research suggests commonalities across many college women's rape experiences (e.g., perpetrators using multiple coercive strategies), vignettes used to assess rape perceptions often reflect false beliefs. Two studies varying a perpetrator's coercive tactics examine rape perceptions using vignettes reflecting rape myths, rape scripts, or many college women's common rape experiences. Participants perceive a woman who was raped more positively in vignettes reflecting common rape experiences versus those reflecting rape myths or scripts. Theoretical, educational, and research implications are discussed.

Precursors to rape: pressuring behaviors and rape proclivity.

We developed measures assessing personal and normative attitudes toward two types of behaviors that are symptomatic of rape culture. We conceptualize sexual violence as existing on a continuum and argue that two types of behaviors may be potential antecedents to (and consequences of) sexual violence: attempts to pressure, which mimic the power dynamics of rape in a less aggressive fashion, and benevolent dating behaviors, which are accepted dating scripts in which men initiate action. We examined individuals' acceptance of these behaviors in relation to their attitudes toward rape victims and among men to rape proclivity. This initial work suggests that these constructs and measures may be useful to investigate in future research.

Methodological and theoretical improvements in the study of superstitious beliefs and behaviour.

Via four studies (N = 901), we developed an improved Belief in Superstition Scale (BSS) composed of three distinct components (belief in bad luck, belief in good luck, and the belief that luck can be changed), whose structure was supported through exploratory (Study 1) and confirmatory (Studies 2 and 3) factor analyses using divergent samples. We found that among theoretical predictors, higher 'chance' locus of control (i.e., the belief that chance/fate controls one's life) best predicted all three BSS subscales (Studies 2-3). In Study 3, we found that BSS subscale scores were reliable, but largely invariant across age and education with a non-general psychology sample. In Study 4, the BSS subscales best predicted participants' superstitious attitudes and behaviour in a new lottery drawing paradigm among other commonly used superstition scales. Taken together, our results indicate that the BSS is a valuable addition to the burgeoning research on superstitious attitudes and behaviour.

Angels and demons are among us: assessing individual differences in belief in pure evil and belief in pure good.

We conducted five studies to demonstrate that individuals' beliefs in pure evil (BPE) and in pure good (BPG) are valid and important psychological constructs. First, these studies together demonstrated that BPE and BPG are reliable, unitary, and stable constructs each composed of eight theoretically interdependent dimensions. Second, these studies showed that across a wide variety of different measures, higher BPE consistently related to greater intergroup aggression (e.g., supporting the death penalty and preemptive military aggression) and less intergroup prosociality (e.g., opposing criminal rehabilitation, proracial policies, and beneficial social programs), while higher BPG consistently related to less intergroup aggression (e.g., opposing proviolent foreign relations and torture) and greater intergroup prosociality (e.g., supporting criminal rehabilitation and support for diplomacy). In sum, these studies evidence that BPE and BPG relate to aggressive and prosocial orientations toward others and have strong potential to advance current theories on prejudice, aggression, and prosociality.

Individuals' beliefs about the etiology of same-sex sexual orientation.

We examined the relationships between beliefs about the etiology of having a same-sex sexual orientation, sexual prejudice, and support for gay-relevant legislation using the justification-suppression model of prejudice as our theoretical foundation. Results indicated that more belief that a same-sex sexual orientation was due to nurture factors predicted less support for gay-relevant legislation, and that this relationship was mediated by levels of sexual prejudice. The opposite pattern was found for belief that a same-sex sexual orientation was due to nature factors. This suggests that beliefs about the etiology of sexual orientation may serve as justification (or suppression) factors in the expression of prejudice toward gay men and lesbians.

The effects of death reminders on sex differences in prejudice toward gay men and lesbians.

Terror management research shows that death reminders (mortality salience) increase prejudice toward worldview violators. Two studies investigated whether death reminders exacerbated differences in heterosexual men's and women's reports of sexual prejudice (negative attitudes based on sexual orientation). Results showed that following death reminders, sex differences in anti-gay discrimination and affective prejudice toward gay men (but not toward lesbians) were larger, and that these increased sex differences were mediated by gender role beliefs. The current studies suggest that researchers may attenuate the effects of death reminders by lessening the perceived worldview violation in addition to alleviating the existential terror of death.

Before the measurement of prejudice: early psychological and sociological papers on prejudice.

Given its renown, many psychologists and sociologists likely consider the publication of Gordon Allport's (1954/1979) seminal book The Nature of Prejudice as the inauguration of the psychological study of prejudice. However, we have uncovered rarely-cited, published papers (starting in 1830) that provide a wealth of speculation on prejudice even before psychologists/sociologists attempted to measure it (circa 1925). Thus, this paper intends to discuss early published work on prejudice in psychology and sociology by focusing on three key questions: a) when did psychologists/sociologists recognize prejudice as a psychological phenomenon, b) when did psychologists/sociologists recognize prejudice as a phenomenon in need of study, and c) what were the historical and personal conditions that gave rise to the interest in prejudice? In short, the seeds of prejudice research were maturing for some time before Allport's seminal book and the first attitudinal studies on prejudice, although these earlier works are seldom cited.

Effects of racism on perceptions and punishment of intra- and interracial crimes.

The majority of hate crimes in the United States are driven by racial bias. However, extra-legal factors such as the perpetrators' motivations, the races of the victims and perpetrators, and the presence or absence of hate symbols or slurs often result in ambiguity in the classification of crimes as hate crimes. This uncertainty evokes consideration of how such crimes are characterized and of how violent intra- and interracial crimes are perceived and responded to. The current study used violent crime vignettes to explore the effects of participants' levels of racism, perpetrator and victim race, and assault severity on perceptions of crimes as "hate crimes," victim blame, and sentence recommendations. These results contribute to the understanding of how intra- and interracial crimes are perceived and how individuals' levels of racism affect these perceptions.

Social vigilantism: measuring individual differences in belief superiority and resistance to persuasion.

Social vigilantism (SV) is an enduring individual difference that assesses the tendency of individuals to impress and propagate their "superior" beliefs onto others to correct others' more "ignorant" opinions. After establishing a reliable measure of SV, three studies showed that SV was associated with greater expressions of belief superiority (whether reacting to others holding dissimilar or similar beliefs) and greater resistance to persuasion (via increased rates of counterarguing and greater attitude stability after persuasion appeals) even after controlling for relevant individual differences (narcissism, dogmatism, psychological reactance, and need for cognition), as well as attitude importance and extremity. Thus, SV predicts expressions of belief superiority and resistance to persuasion above and beyond characteristics of the attitude and individual difference variables previously studied in the attitude literature. SV is a meaningful construct in increasing the understanding of persuasion, attitude resistance, and attitude dissemination that can be applied in a variety of psychological domains.

Oppression through acceptance?: predicting rape myth acceptance and attitudes toward rape victims.

Feminist theories of rape motivation are based on research suggesting a relationship between dominance and sexual aggression. However, the relationship between dominance and rape myth acceptance (RMA), a predictor of rape proclivity and sexual aggression and a key component in feminist theory, is understudied. The current study tests the hypotheses that individuals' scores on sex-based oppression and intergroup dominance measures will improve the predictive models for RMA and attitudes toward rape and rape victims. The hypotheses are supported. Individuals' general intergroup dominance and sex-based oppression attitudes provide significant unique prediction beyond previously studied predictors of attitudes about rape and rape victims.

The impact of racial slurs and racism on the perceptions and punishment of violent crime.

When a crime is committed by an individual of one race against an individual of another race, there is the possibility that the crime is a hate crime. Legislation often mandates harsher penalties for perpetrators convicted of crimes determined to be hate crimes, yet this determination is difficult to make. This study used vignettes of violent crimes to examine how the races of the perpetrators and victims, the severity of the assault, and the use of racial slurs by the perpetrators would affect perceptions of the crimes as "hate crimes," victim blaming, and sentencing recommendations. Results showed that each of these factors affected participants' perceptions and punishments of violent crime. Participants' levels of racism were an additional factor. These results contribute to the understanding of how crimes in which the perpetrator's and victim's races differ are perceived.

Effects of victims' characteristics on attitudes toward hate crimes.

Hate crimes are motivated by perpetrators' prejudice toward targets' group. To examine individuals' attitudes toward hate crime perpetrators and targets, participants responded to vignettes of court cases in which the victim's group membership was varied. Results showed that participants recommended more severe sentences for perpetrators when the targets of their crimes were not White males or White females and reported those crimes as more closely fitting the definition of "hate crime." These results show that participants consider penalty enhancements appropriate for hate crimes and that they do not consider crimes against women to be hate crimes, consistent with present hate crime legislation. These results have implications for the utility and support of hate crime legislation but may showcase the resistance to expanding the legislation to protect individuals of other groups, especially women.

Novelty seeking and drug use: contribution of an animal model.

Although sensation seeking or novelty seeking is a reliable predictor of drug use in humans, individual differences in free-choice novelty seeking in animal models have generally failed to predict drug use. In the current article, hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used on data collected from a large sample of rats. Rats were screened on measures of inescapable and free-choice novelty tests and then were trained to lever press for sucrose or intravenous amphetamine. Although scores from the inescapable novelty test weakly predicted responding for amphetamine, the addition of free-choice novelty preference scores into the regression analyses significantly improved the predictive models. These results indicate that, similar to evidence in humans, individual differences in novelty seeking may be able to predict drug use in rats.

Differences in helping whites and blacks: a meta-analysis.

The amount of help given to Blacks versus Whites is often assumed to reflect underlying levels of racism (or lack thereof). This meta-analysis assessed discrimination against Blacks in helping studies. The overall effect size for the 48 hypothesis tests did not show universal discrimination against Blacks (d = .03, p = .103). However, consistent with the predictions of aversive racism, discrimination against Blacks was more likely when participants could rationalize decisions not to help with reasons having nothing to do with race. Specifically, when helping was lengthier, riskier, more difficult, more effortful, and when potential helpers were further away from targets, less help was given to Blacks than to Whites. Interestingly, discrimination against Blacks was shown when there were higher levels of emergency. This suggests that discrimination may occur when the ability to control prejudicial responding is inhibited, or when the arousal of the emergency is misattributed to intergroup anxiety.

Civil unions in Vermont: political attitudes, religious fundamentalism, and sexual prejudice.

In 2000, Vermont passed civil union legislation that granted same-sex couples the same legal rights as traditionally married opposite sex couples. This study examined the influence that sexual prejudice, religious fundamentalism, social dominance orientation, and support for civil unions had on voters' choice for governor in the subsequent election. Results showed that support for civil unions was a primary motivator for many voters in the election, and that sexual prejudice, religious fundamentalism, and social dominance orientation were unique predictors of voters' choices. These results show that prejudice can be a key factor in determining whom voters elect to represent them in government.