DOCSLIB.ORG

Social Psychology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Social Psychology Unit XIV Social Psychology PD Unit Overview The poet John Donne famously wrote, “No man is an island unto him- • Appreciate the importance of Milgram’s obedience experiments. self.” This unit explores the benefits and consequences of that thought. • Analyze how behavior is aff ected by the presence of others. People are by nature social animals. We seek out others for engage- • Understand how group polarization and groupthink work. ment, comfort, love, and even the kind of conflict that can lead to war. • Evaluate the power of the individual. Many times in social situations, people are self-seeking. Our own expec- • Explain the infl uence of cultural norms on behavior. tations, stereotypes, and interests distract us. Other times, people are • Understand prejudice and its social, cognitive, and emotional roots. more considerate of others around them. We help, we love, we share. • Diff erentiate between the psychological concept of aggression This unit discusses some of the most famous psychological studies and the popular understanding of it. investigating social situations. These studies teach us not only about • Identify biological factors that contribute to aggressive behavior. how we behave—and misbehave—in response to social context, but • also why ethics are important in research. The research explored here is Delineate the psychological and social-cultural triggers of aggression. • clear—we are both heroes within and victims of our social context. And Appreciate the factors that lead to friendship or love relationships our awareness can determine which role we play at any given moment. with some people and not others. After reading this unit, students will be able to: • Trace the evolution of romantic love over time. • Identify the topics included in the fi eld of social psychology. • Understand the factors that lead people to help others. • Understand how we explain others’ behavior and our own. • Explain social exchange theory and social norms in the context of • Determine how actions and attitudes interact. helping behavior. • • Describe automatic mimicry. Explain social traps and mirror-image perceptions. • • Analyze how conformity reveals the power of social infl uence. Evaluate how feelings of prejudice, aggression, and confl ict can be transformed into peaceful attitudes. Alignment to AP® Course Description Topic 14: Social Psychology (8–10% of AP® Examination) Module Topic Essential Questions Module 74 The Fundamental Attribution Error • How do we explain people’s behavior? • How do we explain our own behavior? Attitudes and Actions • How do attitudes and actions work together? Module 75 Conformity: Complying With Social • Why do we conform? Pressures • What is the effect of conformity on our behavior? Obedience: Following Orders • Why do we obey? • What is the effect of obedience on our behavior? Module 76 Social Facilitation • Do others help our performance? Social Loafi ng • Do others hurt our performance? Deindividuation • Are we individually responsible for our behavior regardless of context? Group Polarization • Why do we become polarized in a group? Groupthink • How can we avoid groupthink? The Power of Individuals • Can one person make a difference? Cultural Infl uences • How much influence does our culture have on our behavior? Social Psychology Unit XIV 753a MyersPsyAP_TE_2e_U14.indd 1 3/5/14 12:43 PM Module Topic Essential Questions Module 77 Prejudice • What impact does prejudice have on people? Module 78 The Biology of Aggression • What is aggression? Psychological and Social-Cultural • Why do people become aggressive? Factors in Aggression Module 79 The Psychology of Attraction • What makes one person attractive to another? Romantic Love • What does it mean to be “in love”? Module 80 Altruism • What does it mean to act selflessly? Confl ict and Peacemaking • How can we get along with others? Unit Resources Module 77 Module 74 STUDENT ACTIVITIES • Fact or Falsehood? TEACHER DEMONSTRATION • Measuring Stereotypes • Social Infl uence • Implicit Association Test STUDENT ACTIVITIES • Positions of Privilege and Institutional Racism • Fact or Falsehood? • Institutional Discrimination • Social Psychology on the Web • Belief in a Just World • The Fundamental Attribution Error FLIP IT VIDEO • Students’ Perceptions of You • Ingroup and Outgroup Bias • Introducing Cognitive Dissonance Theory FLIP IT VIDEO Module 78 • Cognitive Dissonance Theory STUDENT ACTIVITIES • Module 75 Fact or Falsehood? • Defi ning Aggression STUDENT ACTIVITIES • Road Rage • Fact or Falsehood? • Violating a Social Norm Module 79 • Would You Obey? STUDENT ACTIVITIES FLIP IT VIDEO • Fact or Falsehood? • Normative Social Infl uence • Love Styles Module 76 Module 80 STUDENT ACTIVITIES TEACHER DEMONSTRATION • Fact or Falsehood? • Social Traps • Group Polarization STUDENT ACTIVITIES MyersAP_SE_2e_Mod74_B.indd 753 1/21/14 10:30 AM FLIP IT VIDEO • Fact or Falsehood? • Social Facilitation and Social Loafi ng • Why Do People Volunteer? • Pleasurable Versus Philanthropic Activities—Which Brings More Happiness? • A Matter of Context • Intercultural Learning Activities 753b Unit XIV Social Psychology MyersPsyAP_TE_2e_U14.indd 2 3/5/14 12:43 PM Unit XIV Social Psychology Modules 74 Attribution, Attitudes, and Actions 75 Conformity and Obedience 76 Group Behavior 77 Prejudice and Discrimination 78 Aggression 79 Attraction 80 Altruism, Confl ict, and Peacemaking irk Willems faced a moment of decision in 1569. Threatened with torture and Ddeath as a member of a persecuted religious minority, he escaped from his As- peren, Holland, prison and fl ed across an ice-covered pond. His stronger and heavier jailer pursued him but fell through the ice and, unable to climb out, pled for help. With his freedom in front of him, Willems acted with ultimate selfl essness. He turned back and rescued his pursuer, who, under orders, took him back to captivity. A few weeks later Willems was condemned to be “executed with fi re, until death ensues.” For his martyrdom, present-day Asperen has named a street in honor of its folk hero (Toews, 2004). What drives people to feel contempt for religious minorities such as Dirk Wil- lems, and to act so spitefully? And what motivated the selfl essness of Willems’ re- sponse, and of so many who have died trying to save others? Indeed, what moti- vates any of us when we volunteer kindness and generosity toward others? As such examples demonstrate, we are social animals. We may assume the best or the worst in others. We may approach them with closed fi sts or open arms. But as the novelist Herman Melville remarked, “We cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads.” Social psychologists explore these connec- tions by scientifi cally studying how we think about, infl uence, and relate to one another. 753 Pacing Guide MyersAP_SE_2e_Mod74_B.indd 753Module Topic Standard Schedule1/21/14 10:30Days AM Block Schedule Days Module 74 The Fundamental Attribution Error Attitudes and Actions 1 Module 75 Conformity: Complying With Social Pressures Obedience: Following Orders Module 76 Social Facilitation 1 Social Loafi ng Deindividuation Group Polarization 1 Groupthink The Power of Individuals Cultural Infl uences Module 77 Prejudice Module 78 The Biology of Aggression 1 Psychological and Social-Cultural Factors in Aggression Module 79 The Psychology of Attraction 1 Romantic Love 1 Module 80 Altruism Confl ict and Peacemaking Social Psychology Unit XIV 753 MyersPsyAP_TE_2e_U14.indd 753 3/5/14 3:01 PM 754 Unit XIV Social Psychology TEACH TRMTRM Discussion Starter Module 74 Use the Module 74 Fact or Falsehood? activity from the TRM to introduce the Attribution, Attitudes, and Actions concepts from this module. TEACH Module Learning Objectives TRMTRM Identify what social psychologists study, and discuss how we Common Pitfalls 74-174-1 Frances Roberts/Alamy tend to explain others’ behavior and our own. Social psychology is diff erent from sociology. Social psychology consid- 74-274-2 Explain whether what we think affects what we do, and whether ers how individuals interact with each what we do affects what we think. other and society at large. Sociologists explore the behavior of groups and cultures as they interact internally and 74-174-1 What do social psychologists study? How do we tend to explain externally. others’ behavior and our own? Use Student Activity: Social Psy- Personality psychologists (Unit X) focus on the person. They study the personal traits and chology on the Web from the TRM to dynamics that explain why different people may act differently in a given situation, such as the one Willems faced. (Would you have helped the jailer out of the icy water?) Social social psychology the scientifi c help students explore this interesting psychologists focus on the situation. They study the social infl uences that explain why the study of how we think about, fi eld of psychology. infl uence, and relate to one another. same person will act differently in different situations. Might the jailer have acted differently— opting not to march Willems back to jail—under differing circumstances? attribution theory the theory that TEACH we explain someone’s behavior by crediting either the situation or the The Fundamental Attribution Error Concept Connections person’s disposition. fundamental attribution error Our social behavior arises from our social cognition. Especially when the unexpected occurs, Link the discussion of attribution to the tendency for observers, when we want to understand and explain why people act as they do. After studying how people analyzing others’ behavior, to explain others’ behavior, Fritz Heider (1958) proposed an attribution theory: We can at- explanatory style in positive psy- underestimate the impact of the tribute the behavior to the person’s stable, enduring traits (a dispositional attribution). Or we chology (Unit XII). We make certain situation and to overestimate the can attribute it to the situation (a situational attribution). impact of personal disposition. attributions (or explanations) about For example, in class, we notice that Juliette seldom talks. At the game, Jack talks nonstop. That must be the sort of people they are, we decide. Juliette must be shy and Jack outgoing.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Group Support and Cognitive Dissonance 1 I'ma
    Group support and cognitive dissonance 1 I‘m a Hypocrite, but so is Everyone Else: Group Support and the Reduction of Cognitive Dissonance Blake M. McKimmie, Deborah J. Terry, Michael A. Hogg School of Psychology, University of Queensland Antony S.R. Manstead, Russell Spears, and Bertjan Doosje Department of Social Psychology, University of Amsterdam Running head: Group support and cognitive dissonance. Key words: cognitive dissonance, social identity, social support Contact: Blake McKimmie School of Psychology The University of Queensland Brisbane QLD 4072 Australia Phone: +61 7 3365-6406 Fax: +61 7 3365-4466 Group support and cognitive dissonance 2 [email protected] Abstract The impact of social support on dissonance arousal was investigated to determine whether subsequent attitude change is motivated by dissonance reduction needs. In addition, a social identity view of dissonance theory is proposed, augmenting current conceptualizations of dissonance theory by predicting when normative information will impact on dissonance arousal, and by indicating the availability of identity-related strategies of dissonance reduction. An experiment was conducted to induce feelings of hypocrisy under conditions of behavioral support or nonsupport. Group salience was either high or low, or individual identity was emphasized. As predicted, participants with no support from the salient ingroup exhibited the greatest need to reduce dissonance through attitude change and reduced levels of group identification. Results were interpreted in terms of self
    [Show full text]
  • Polarized Ukraine 2014: Opinion and Territorial Split Demonstrated With
    Polarized Ukraine 2014: Opinion and Territorial Split Demonstrated with the Bounded Confidence XY Model, Parameterized by Twitter Data Maksym Romenskyy Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK and Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University, Box 480, Uppsala 75106, Sweden Viktoria Spaiser School of Politics and International Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK Thomas Ihle Institute of Physics, University of Greifswald, Felix-Hausdorff-Str. 6, Greifswald 17489, Germany Vladimir Lobaskin School of Physics, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland (Dated: July 26, 2018) Multiple countries have recently experienced extreme political polarization, which in some cases led to escalation of hate crime, violence and political instability. Beside the much discussed presi- dential elections in the United States and France, Britain’s Brexit vote and Turkish constitutional referendum, showed signs of extreme polarization. Among the countries affected, Ukraine faced some of the gravest consequences. In an attempt to understand the mechanisms of these phe- nomena, we here combine social media analysis with agent-based modeling of opinion dynamics, targeting Ukraine’s crisis of 2014. We use Twitter data to quantify changes in the opinion divide and parameterize an extended Bounded-Confidence XY Model, which provides a spatiotemporal description of the polarization dynamics. We demonstrate that the level of emotional intensity is a major driving force for polarization that can lead to a spontaneous onset of collective behavior at a certain degree of homophily and conformity. We find that the critical level of emotional intensity corresponds to a polarization transition, marked by a sudden increase in the degree of involvement and in the opinion bimodality.
    [Show full text]
  • On Rumors Also by Cass R
    On Rumors Also by Cass R. Sunstein Simpler: The Future of Government Conspiracy Theories and Other Dangerous Ideas Why Nudge? The Politics of Libertarian Paternalism Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness (with Richard Thaler) Worst-Case Scenarios Republic.com 2.0 Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge The Second Bill of Rights: Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More Than Ever Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle Why Societies Need Dissent Risk and Reason: Safety, Law, and the Environment One Case at a Time Free Markets and Social Justice Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech The Partial Constitution After the Rights Revolution On Rumors How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, and What Can Be Done Cass R. Sunstein With a new afterword by the author Princeton University Press • Princeton and Oxford Copyright © 2014 by Cass R. Sunstein Requests for permission to reproduce material from this work should be sent to Permissions, Princeton University Press Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 6 Oxford Street, Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1TW press.princeton.edu All Rights Reserved Originally published in North America by Farrar, Straus and Giroux in 2009 First Princeton Edition 2014 ISBN (pbk.) 978-0-691-16250-8 LCCN 2013950544 British Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available This book has been composed in Adobe Caslon Printed on acid-free paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Varieties of Opinion Change in a Finnish Citizen Deliberation Experiment on Immigration
    Varieties of Opinion Change in a Finnish Citizen Deliberation Experiment on Immigration Marina Lindell (Åbo Akademi University), André Bächtiger (University of Stuttgart), Kimmo Grönlund (Åbo Akademi University), Kaisa Herne (University of Tampere), Maija Setälä (University of Turku) Abstract In the study of deliberation, a largely underexplored area is why some participants become more extreme, whereas some become more moderate. Opinion polarization is usually considered a suspicious outcome of deliberation, while moderation is seen as a desirable one. This article takes issue with this view. Results from a deliberative experiment on immigration show that polarizers and moderators were not different in their socio-economic, cognitive, or affective profiles. Moreover, both polarization and moderation can entail deliberatively desired pathways: in the experiment, both polarizers and moderators learned during deliberation, levels of empathy were fairly high on both sides, and group pressures barely mattered. Finally, the absence of a participant with an immigrant background in a group was associated with polarization in anti-immigrant direction, bolstering longstanding claims regarding the importance of presence in interaction (Philips 1995). Paper presented at the “13ème Congrès National Association Française de Science Politique (AFSP), Aix-en-Provence, June 22–24, 2015 1 Introduction Empirical studies of citizen deliberation suggest that participants often change opinions (and also quite radically; see, e.g., Fishkin, 2009). Luskin et al. (2002) claim that knowledge gain is an important mechanism of opinion change, whereas Sanders (2012) was unable to identify any robust predictor of opinion change in a recent study based on a pan-European deliberative poll (Europolis). A largely understudied area in this regard is why some participants polarize their opinions due to deliberation, and why others moderate them.
    [Show full text]
  • ISSUE 14 • JUNE 2008 a Periodic Newsletter of the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission
    im ULSEISSUE 14 • JUNE 2008 A Periodic Newsletter of the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission CEO OF PITTSBURGH PENGUINS NEWEST COMMISSION MEMBER Montreal-born Kenneth G. Sawyer, chief executive officer of the Pittsburgh Penguins, has been elected to the board of the Carnegie Hero Fund. In announcing the election, Commission President Mark Laskow said that Sawyer would serve also on the Fund’s Executive Committee, which is the Hero Fund’s awarding body. Formerly the chief financial officer of the National Hockey League, Sawyer joined the Penguins in 1999 as executive vice president and chief financial officer. He was named president of the franchise in 2003 and then Wesley James Autrey, Sr., New York’s subway hero. Photo reprinted with permission from Josh chief executive Haner/The New York Times/Redux. officer three years Mr. Sawyer later. In addition to overseeing all operations of the team, Sawyer A year in the life of a hero: serves on the NHL’s Board of Governors. Sawyer was raised in Montreal and is a 1971 ‘Subway Superman’ enjoys the ride graduate of McGill University there. After seven By Larry McShane, Staff Writer• New York Daily News years in public practice with Ernst & Ernst in Montreal, Sawyer spent 14 years with the NHL, Wesley Autrey didn’t hesitate last January, and he doesn’t hesitate now: The hero of the where he served on all No. 1 train says he’d put his life on the subway line one more time for a total stranger. of the league’s major “Sure, I would do it all over again,” says the fearless construction worker, sitting in a committees, coffee shop just two blocks from the Harlem station where the “Subway Superman” including saved a seizure victim from death beneath the wheels of a downtown train.
    [Show full text]
  • Affective Polarization and Its Impact on College Campuses
    Bucknell University Bucknell Digital Commons Honors Theses Student Theses Spring 2020 Can We All Just Get Along?: Affective Polarization and its Impact on College Campuses Sam Rosenblatt Bucknell University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bucknell.edu/honors_theses Part of the American Politics Commons, and the Other Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Rosenblatt, Sam, "Can We All Just Get Along?: Affective Polarization and its Impact on College Campuses" (2020). Honors Theses. 529. https://digitalcommons.bucknell.edu/honors_theses/529 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses at Bucknell Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of Bucknell Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CAN WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?: AFFECTIVE POLARIZATION AND ITS IMPACT ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES by Sam Rosenblatt A Thesis Submitted to the Honors Council For Honors in Political Science April 3, 2020 Approved by: _____________________________________ Advisor: Chris Ellis _____________________________________ Department Chairperson: Scott Meinke Acknowledgements While the culmination of my honors thesis feels a bit anticlimactic as Bucknell has transitioned to remote education, I could not have accomplished this project without the help of the many faculty, friends, and family who supported me. To Professor Ellis, thank you for advising and guiding me throughout this process. Your advice was instrumental and I looked forward every week to discussing my progress and American politics with you. To Professor Meinke and Professor Stanciu, thank you for serving as additional readers. And especially to Professor Meinke for helping to spark my interest in politics during my freshman year.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Psychology Glossary
    Social Psychology Glossary This glossary defines many of the key terms used in class lectures and assigned readings. A Altruism—A motive to increase another's welfare without conscious regard for one's own self-interest. Availability Heuristic—A cognitive rule, or mental shortcut, in which we judge how likely something is by how easy it is to think of cases. Attractiveness—Having qualities that appeal to an audience. An appealing communicator (often someone similar to the audience) is most persuasive on matters of subjective preference. Attribution Theory—A theory about how people explain the causes of behavior—for example, by attributing it either to "internal" dispositions (e.g., enduring traits, motives, values, and attitudes) or to "external" situations. Automatic Processing—"Implicit" thinking that tends to be effortless, habitual, and done without awareness. B Behavioral Confirmation—A type of self-fulfilling prophecy in which people's social expectations lead them to behave in ways that cause others to confirm their expectations. Belief Perseverance—Persistence of a belief even when the original basis for it has been discredited. Bystander Effect—The tendency for people to be less likely to help someone in need when other people are present than when they are the only person there. Also known as bystander inhibition. C Catharsis—Emotional release. The catharsis theory of aggression is that people's aggressive drive is reduced when they "release" aggressive energy, either by acting aggressively or by fantasizing about aggression. Central Route to Persuasion—Occurs when people are convinced on the basis of facts, statistics, logic, and other types of evidence that support a particular position.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender Differences in Choice Shifts: a Study of Social Influence on Consumer Attitude Toward Food Irradiation Li-Jun Zhao Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1991 Gender differences in choice shifts: a study of social influence on consumer attitude toward food irradiation Li-Jun Zhao Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Food Science Commons, Social Influence and Political Communication Commons, and the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Zhao, Li-Jun, "Gender differences in choice shifts: a tudys of social influence on consumer attitude toward food irradiation" (1991). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 16783. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/16783 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Gender differences in choice shifts: A study of social influence on consumer attitude toward food irradiation by Li-jun Zhao A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Sociology Signatures have been redacted for privacy Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 1991 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION ••• .1 Objectives. .2 CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW •••••.• .3 Theories of Choice Shifts ••••••• .3 Persuasive Arguments Theory ••••••• • ••••• 5 Social Comparison Theory •••• • ••••• 6 Self-Categorization Theory •• .8 Gender Differences in Choice Shifts. .9 Expectation states Theory •••••• • ••• 11 Gender Schema Theory ••••••••••. ...... 12 Gender Role strain ••••••••••••• . ....... 13 Other Correlates of Choice Shifts •• . ........ 14 Self-Esteem ••••••••••••••• .15 Self-Efficacy •••••••••••••••••• • •• 16 Locus of Control •••••••••••••••••••• .
    [Show full text]
  • “We Are Coming for You Globalists!”
    “We Are Coming For You Globalists!” Rhetorical Strategies of Online Conspiracy Communities in the USA ID: 1754351 SUPERVISOR: Dr. G.M. van Buuren NAME: Philipp Blaas SECOND READER: Prof. Dr. E. Bakker WORDS: 26.998 PROGRAM: MSc Crisis and Security Management DATE: June 8th, 2017 1 Contents 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................................... 7 2.1. Defining Conspiracy ............................................................................................................... 7 2.2. Reality is Just a Matter of Perspective .................................................................................... 8 2.2.1. Social Constructivism ......................................................................................................... 9 2.2.2. Language versus Power in Political Discourse ................................................................. 10 2.3. The Threatening Other .......................................................................................................... 11 2.4. The Heroic ‘Us’ and the Evil ‘Them’ ................................................................................... 13 2.5. Rhetorical Strategies ............................................................................................................. 15 2.6. Populism: The Little Brother of Conspiracy
    [Show full text]
  • 30 Rock and Philosophy: We Want to Go to There (The Blackwell
    ftoc.indd viii 6/5/10 10:15:56 AM 30 ROCK AND PHILOSOPHY ffirs.indd i 6/5/10 10:15:35 AM The Blackwell Philosophy and Pop Culture Series Series Editor: William Irwin South Park and Philosophy X-Men and Philosophy Edited by Robert Arp Edited by Rebecca Housel and J. Jeremy Wisnewski Metallica and Philosophy Edited by William Irwin Terminator and Philosophy Edited by Richard Brown and Family Guy and Philosophy Kevin Decker Edited by J. Jeremy Wisnewski Heroes and Philosophy The Daily Show and Philosophy Edited by David Kyle Johnson Edited by Jason Holt Twilight and Philosophy Lost and Philosophy Edited by Rebecca Housel and Edited by Sharon Kaye J. Jeremy Wisnewski 24 and Philosophy Final Fantasy and Philosophy Edited by Richard Davis, Jennifer Edited by Jason P. Blahuta and Hart Weed, and Ronald Weed Michel S. Beaulieu Battlestar Galactica and Iron Man and Philosophy Philosophy Edited by Mark D. White Edited by Jason T. Eberl Alice in Wonderland and The Offi ce and Philosophy Philosophy Edited by J. Jeremy Wisnewski Edited by Richard Brian Davis Batman and Philosophy True Blood and Philosophy Edited by Mark D. White and Edited by George Dunn and Robert Arp Rebecca Housel House and Philosophy Mad Men and Philosophy Edited by Henry Jacoby Edited by Rod Carveth and Watchman and Philosophy James South Edited by Mark D. White ffirs.indd ii 6/5/10 10:15:36 AM 30 ROCK AND PHILOSOPHY WE WANT TO GO TO THERE Edited by J. Jeremy Wisnewski John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ffirs.indd iii 6/5/10 10:15:36 AM To pages everywhere .
    [Show full text]
  • A Tale of Two Paranoids: a Critical Analysis of the Use of the Paranoid Style and Public Secrecy by Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán
    Secrecy and Society ISSN: 2377-6188 Volume 1 Number 2 Secrecy and Authoritarianism Article 3 February 2018 A Tale of Two Paranoids: A Critical Analysis of the Use of the Paranoid Style and Public Secrecy by Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán Andria Timmer Christopher Newport University, [email protected] Joseph Sery Christopher Newport University, [email protected] Sean Thomas Connable Christopher Newport University, [email protected] Jennifer Billinson Christopher Newport University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/secrecyandsociety Part of the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons, and the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Timmer, Andria; Joseph Sery; Sean Thomas Connable; and Jennifer Billinson. 2018. "A Tale of Two Paranoids: A Critical Analysis of the Use of the Paranoid Style and Public Secrecy by Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán." Secrecy and Society 1(2). https://doi.org/10.31979/ 2377-6188.2018.010203 https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/secrecyandsociety/vol1/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Information at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Secrecy and Society by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. A Tale of Two Paranoids: A Critical Analysis of the Use of the Paranoid Style and Public Secrecy by Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán Abstract Within the last decade, a rising tide of right-wing populism across the globe has inspired a renewed push toward nationalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Bias and Affective Polarization
    Bias and Affective Polarization Daniel F. Stone Bowdoin College September 2016∗ Abstract I propose a model of affective polarization (\that both Republicans and Democrats increasingly dislike, even loathe, their opponents," Iyengar et al, 2012). In the model, two agents repeatedly choose actions based on private interests, the social good, their own \character" (willingness to trade private for social gains) and beliefs about the other agent's character. Each agent could represent a political party, or the model could apply to other settings, such as spouses or business partners. Each agent Bayesian updates beliefs about the other's character, and dislikes the other more when its character is perceived as more self-serving. I characterize the dynamic and long-run effects of three biases: a prior bias against the other agent's character, the false consensus bias, and limited strategic thinking. Prior bias against the opponent remains constant or dissipates over time, and actions do not diverge. By contrast, the other two biases, which are not directly related to character, cause actions to become more extreme over time and repeatedly be \worse" than expected, causing affective polarization|even when both players are arbitrarily \good" (unselfish). For some parameter values, long-run affective polarization is unbounded, despite Bayesian updating. The results imply that affective polarization can be caused by cognitive bias, and that subtlety and unawareness of bias are key forces driving greater severity of this type of polarization. Keywords: affective polarization, partyism, polarization, disagreement, dislike, over-precision, unawareness, media bias JEL codes: D72; D83 ∗I thank Steven J. Miller, Dan Wood, Gaurav Sood, Dan Kahan, Roland B´enabou, Andrei Shleifer, and participants at seminars at the University of Western Ontario, Wake Forest University and Southern Methodist University, in particular Saltuk Ozerturk, Tim Salmon, Bo Chen, James Lake, Al Slivinski, Greg Pavlov, and Charles Zheng, for helpful comments and discussion.
    [Show full text]