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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Communication research 2018-03, Vol.45 (2), p.165-187
Hauptverfasser: Simons, Joseph J. P., Green, Melanie C.
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