Something to Prove? Manhood Threats Increase Political Aggression Among Liberal Men.

Manhood is a precarious state that men seek to prove through the performance of masculine behaviors-including, at times, acts of aggression. Although correlational work has demonstrated a link between chronic masculine insecurity and political aggression (i.e., support for policies and candidates that communicate toughness and strength), experimental work on the topic is sparse. Existing studies also provide little insight into which men-liberal or conservative-are most likely to display increased political aggression after threats to their masculinity. The present work thus examines the effects of masculinity threat on liberal and conservative men's tendency toward political aggression. We exposed liberal and conservative men to various masculinity threats, providing them with feminine feedback about their personality traits (Experiment 1), having them paint their nails (Experiment 2), and leading them to believe that they were physically weak (Experiment 3). Across experiments, and contrary to our initial expectations, threat increased liberal-but not conservative-men's preference for a wide range of aggressive political policies and behaviors (e.g., the death penalty, bombing an enemy country). Integrative data analysis (IDA) reveals significant heterogeneity in the influence of different threats on liberal men's political aggression, the most effective of which was intimations of physical weakness. A multiverse analysis suggests that these findings are robust across a range of reasonable data-treatment and modeling choices. Possible sources of liberal men's heightened responsiveness to manhood threats are discussed. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11199-023-01349-x.

The interplay between cognitive and affective risks in predicting COVID-19 precautions: a longitudinal representative study of Americans.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive risk figures prominently in models predicting health behaviors, but affective risk is also important. We examined the interplay between cognitive risk (personal likelihood of COVID-19 infection or death) and affective risk (worry about COVID-19) in predicting COVID-19 precautionary behaviors. We also examined how outbreak severity bias (overestimation of the severity of COVID-19 in one's community) predicted these outcomes. DESIGN: In a representative sample of U.S. adults (N = 738; Mage = 46.8; 52% women; 78% white), participants who had not had COVID-19 took two online surveys two weeks apart in April 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed cognitive risk, affective risk, and outbreak severity bias at baseline and at follow-up two precaution variables: prevention behaviors (e.g. social distancing) and behavioral willingness (e.g. vaccinations). RESULTS: Overall, affective risk better predicted precautions than cognitive risk. Moreover, overestimating the severity of the outbreak predicted more affective risk (but not cognitive risk) and in turn more precautions. Additional analyses showed that when affective risk was lower (as opposed to higher) greater cognitive risk and outbreak severity bias both predicted more precautions. CONCLUSION: These findings illustrate the importance of affective risk and outbreak severity bias in understanding COVID-19 precautionary behavior.

Descriptive Norms and Prototypes Predict COVID-19 Prevention Cognitions and Behaviors in the United States: Applying the Prototype Willingness Model to Pandemic Mitigation.

BACKGROUND: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, prevention behavior adoption occurred in a rapidly changing context. In contrast to expectancy-value theories, the Prototype Willingness Model (PWM) is well-suited for investigating novel and socially informed behaviors. PURPOSE: We explored whether PWM social cognitions predicted coronavirus prevention behaviors. METHOD: A representative sample of United States adults (N = 738; Mage = 46.8; 51.8% women; 78% white; April 2020) who had not had COVID-19 reported PWM predictor variables (perceived vulnerability, prevention descriptive norms, prototypes engaging in prevention behavior, and prevention behavioral intentions). Two weeks later, participants reported their prevention behaviors (handwashing, mask-wearing, social distancing, etc.) and future public health behavioral willingness (contact tracing, temperature checks, etc.). RESULTS: Controlling for putative demographic, past behavior, and coronavirus-contextual (e.g., local infection rates) covariates, mediation models indicated that higher norms and favorable prototypes were associated with greater prevention behavioral intentions, which in turn predicted increased prevention behavior, F(18, 705) = 92.20, p < .001, R2 = .70. Higher norms and favorable prototypes associated both directly and indirectly (through greater prevention behavioral intention) with greater willingness to engage in emerging public health behaviors, F(15, 715) = 21.49, p < .001, R2 = .31. CONCLUSIONS: Greater descriptive norms and favorable prototypes for prevention behavior predicted: (a) future prevention behaviors through increases in behavioral intentions and (b) willingness to participate in emerging public health behaviors. These results held across demographic groups, political affiliation, and severity of regional outbreaks. Public health efforts to curb pandemics should highlight normative prevention participation and enhance positive prototypes.

Precarious Manhood Predicts Support for Aggressive Policies and Politicians.

Precarious manhood (PM) theory posits that males are expected to actively maintain their reputations as "real men." We propose that men's concern about failing to meet masculine standards leads them to embrace policies and politicians that signal strength and toughness-or what we term political aggression. Three correlational studies support this claim. In Study 1, men's fear of failing to meet masculine expectations predicted their support for aggressive policies (e.g., the death penalty), but not policies lacking aggressive features (e.g., affirmative action). Studies 2 and 3 utilized Google searches to assess the relationship between regional levels of PM and real-world electoral behavior. The use of search terms related to masculine anxieties correlated with Donald Trump's vote share in the 2016 general election (Study 2) and, confirming preregistered predictions, with Republican candidates' vote shares in 2018 congressional elections (Study 3). We close by discussing potential sources of variation in PM.