Divisive Topics as Social Threats
The current work provides evidence for a psychological obstacle to the resolution of divisive social issues (e.g., affirmative action, drug legalization); specifically, people approach discussions of these issues with a threatened mind-set. Across three studies, it is shown that the prospect of disc...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Communication research 2018-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-187 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 187 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 165 |
container_title | Communication research |
container_volume | 45 |
creator | Simons, Joseph J. P. Green, Melanie C. |
description | The current work provides evidence for a psychological obstacle to the resolution of divisive social issues (e.g., affirmative action, drug legalization); specifically, people approach discussions of these issues with a threatened mind-set. Across three studies, it is shown that the prospect of discussing topics which divide social opinion is associated with threatened responding (the dissensus effect). Divisive discussion topics are associated with both a greater level of self-reported threat (Studies 1 and 3) and a greater tendency to perceive neutral faces as threatening (Study 2). Furthermore, the effect is shown to be robust across manipulations of social opinion (ratings of multiple social issues in Studies 1 and 2; fictional polling data in Study 3), and was not reducible to individual attitude extremity (Studies 1 and 3) or a valence effect (Study 2). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0093650216644025 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1988775697</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0093650216644025</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1988775697</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-cf14fa33fa72c5af85716a3c8b0c0cd0828618a1a30f834445d415af4ef50ec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEFLxDAUhIMoWFfvHiueo-81SZMeZXVVWPBg7-GZTTTLamvSXfDf27IeRPA0h_lmBoaxc4QrRK2vARpRK6iwrqWESh2wApWquDAIh6yYbD75x-wk5zUA6AZ1wS5u4y7muPNl2_XR5ZJy-dy5SJuyfUuehnzKjgJtsj_70RlrF3ft_IEvn-4f5zdL7oSRA3cBZSAhAunKKQpGaaxJOPMCDtwKTGVqNIQkIBghpVQriSMnfVDgnZixy31tn7rPrc-DXXfb9DEuWmyM0VrVjR4p2FMudTknH2yf4julL4tgpx_s3x_GCN9HMr36X6X_8d9QxVpY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1988775697</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Divisive Topics as Social Threats</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>Simons, Joseph J. P. ; Green, Melanie C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Simons, Joseph J. P. ; Green, Melanie C.</creatorcontrib><description>The current work provides evidence for a psychological obstacle to the resolution of divisive social issues (e.g., affirmative action, drug legalization); specifically, people approach discussions of these issues with a threatened mind-set. Across three studies, it is shown that the prospect of discussing topics which divide social opinion is associated with threatened responding (the dissensus effect). Divisive discussion topics are associated with both a greater level of self-reported threat (Studies 1 and 3) and a greater tendency to perceive neutral faces as threatening (Study 2). Furthermore, the effect is shown to be robust across manipulations of social opinion (ratings of multiple social issues in Studies 1 and 2; fictional polling data in Study 3), and was not reducible to individual attitude extremity (Studies 1 and 3) or a valence effect (Study 2).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0093-6502</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-3810</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0093650216644025</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Studies</subject><ispartof>Communication research, 2018-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-187</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-cf14fa33fa72c5af85716a3c8b0c0cd0828618a1a30f834445d415af4ef50ec3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-cf14fa33fa72c5af85716a3c8b0c0cd0828618a1a30f834445d415af4ef50ec3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0093650216644025$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0093650216644025$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Simons, Joseph J. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Melanie C.</creatorcontrib><title>Divisive Topics as Social Threats</title><title>Communication research</title><description>The current work provides evidence for a psychological obstacle to the resolution of divisive social issues (e.g., affirmative action, drug legalization); specifically, people approach discussions of these issues with a threatened mind-set. Across three studies, it is shown that the prospect of discussing topics which divide social opinion is associated with threatened responding (the dissensus effect). Divisive discussion topics are associated with both a greater level of self-reported threat (Studies 1 and 3) and a greater tendency to perceive neutral faces as threatening (Study 2). Furthermore, the effect is shown to be robust across manipulations of social opinion (ratings of multiple social issues in Studies 1 and 2; fictional polling data in Study 3), and was not reducible to individual attitude extremity (Studies 1 and 3) or a valence effect (Study 2).</description><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0093-6502</issn><issn>1552-3810</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEFLxDAUhIMoWFfvHiueo-81SZMeZXVVWPBg7-GZTTTLamvSXfDf27IeRPA0h_lmBoaxc4QrRK2vARpRK6iwrqWESh2wApWquDAIh6yYbD75x-wk5zUA6AZ1wS5u4y7muPNl2_XR5ZJy-dy5SJuyfUuehnzKjgJtsj_70RlrF3ft_IEvn-4f5zdL7oSRA3cBZSAhAunKKQpGaaxJOPMCDtwKTGVqNIQkIBghpVQriSMnfVDgnZixy31tn7rPrc-DXXfb9DEuWmyM0VrVjR4p2FMudTknH2yf4julL4tgpx_s3x_GCN9HMr36X6X_8d9QxVpY</recordid><startdate>20180301</startdate><enddate>20180301</enddate><creator>Simons, Joseph J. P.</creator><creator>Green, Melanie C.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180301</creationdate><title>Divisive Topics as Social Threats</title><author>Simons, Joseph J. P. ; Green, Melanie C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-cf14fa33fa72c5af85716a3c8b0c0cd0828618a1a30f834445d415af4ef50ec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Simons, Joseph J. P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Melanie C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Communication research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Simons, Joseph J. P.</au><au>Green, Melanie C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Divisive Topics as Social Threats</atitle><jtitle>Communication research</jtitle><date>2018-03-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>165</spage><epage>187</epage><pages>165-187</pages><issn>0093-6502</issn><eissn>1552-3810</eissn><abstract>The current work provides evidence for a psychological obstacle to the resolution of divisive social issues (e.g., affirmative action, drug legalization); specifically, people approach discussions of these issues with a threatened mind-set. Across three studies, it is shown that the prospect of discussing topics which divide social opinion is associated with threatened responding (the dissensus effect). Divisive discussion topics are associated with both a greater level of self-reported threat (Studies 1 and 3) and a greater tendency to perceive neutral faces as threatening (Study 2). Furthermore, the effect is shown to be robust across manipulations of social opinion (ratings of multiple social issues in Studies 1 and 2; fictional polling data in Study 3), and was not reducible to individual attitude extremity (Studies 1 and 3) or a valence effect (Study 2).</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0093650216644025</doi><tpages>23</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0093-6502 |
ispartof | Communication research, 2018-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-187 |
issn | 0093-6502 1552-3810 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1988775697 |
source | SAGE Complete |
subjects | Studies |
title | Divisive Topics as Social Threats |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T12%3A52%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Divisive%20Topics%20as%20Social%20Threats&rft.jtitle=Communication%20research&rft.au=Simons,%20Joseph%20J.%20P.&rft.date=2018-03-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=165&rft.epage=187&rft.pages=165-187&rft.issn=0093-6502&rft.eissn=1552-3810&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0093650216644025&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1988775697%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1988775697&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0093650216644025&rfr_iscdi=true |