Figure 1 - uploaded by Jarret T Crawford
Content may be subject to copyright.
(Hilbig and Moshagen). Moving average (3 periods) of U.S.-party positions on the logit left-right (LLR) scale over time. 

(Hilbig and Moshagen). Moving average (3 periods) of U.S.-party positions on the logit left-right (LLR) scale over time. 

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Psychologists have demonstrated the value of diversity—particularly diversity of viewpoints—for enhancing creativity, discovery, and problem solving. But one key type of viewpoint diversity is lacking in academic psychology in general and social psychology in particular: political diversity. This article reviews the available evidence and finds sup...

Citations

... These trends continue even though evidence mount that this limits the development of critical thinking (Fenton and Smith, 2019). Lack of political diversity can also limit progress in specific subjects, like psychology and sociology (Duarte et al., 2015;Haaga, 2020;Baehr, 2020). Research suggests increasing viewpoint diversity will help Universities fulfill their core mission of advancing knowledge (Whittington, 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
Introduction: A number of recent surveys have shown that college campuses are becoming intolerant of different viewpoints. Part of the mission of any college should be to create a space where different viewpoints can be debated in a healthy, intellectual way. To gauge the campus climate at their own University, the authors deployed a survey to business students asking how comfortable they were sharing and responding to different viewpoints. Methods: Business students were surveyed for their attitudes towards diverse viewpoints. The survey instrument has been used at other colleges to survey students for several years. Results: A portion of students are censoring their views on controversial topics. There is often a reluctance to present honest viewpoints in the classroom. Discussion: Faculty needs to be mindful of the classroom environment they create. Colleges should be a major place where different viewpoints are discussed and debated. Limitations: Only business students were surveyed. There may be different outcomes for students in other majors. Conclusions: These results suggest that many students are self-censoring their views in class. Faculty should be aware of this and create an environment where different viewpoints are welcome.
... Det foreligger derfor begrenset kunnskap om psykologers politiske verdier, og hvordan verdiene påvirker terapi. Etter vår mening er politiske verdier relevante for psykologisk arbeid fordi politiske verdier bygger på moralske verdier, korrelerer med personlighet og er viktige for vår selvfølelse (Duarte et al., 2015;Hirsh et al., 2010;Redding, 2020). I tillegg angår temaet debatten om verdiladet versus verdifri psykoterapi, der man har gått fra å se på psykoterapi som verdifri til en oppfatning om at den ikke kan vaere det (Bergin,1980;Jackson et al., 2013). ...
... Dersom verdier i seg selv er såpass viktige i terapi, er det naerliggende å anta at politiske verdier også vil påvirke terapien. Forskningen som foreligger om psykologers politiske verdier, viser at psykologer tenderer mot å vaere mer venstreorienterte enn befolkningen generelt (Duarte et al., 2015;Gross & Simmons, 2007). Flere studier finner at terapeuter kan reagere negativt overfor klienter med motsatte politiske verdier (Gartner et al., 1990;Redding, 2020). ...
... I tillegg finner noen studier at likhet i politiske verdier kan styrke alliansen (Martini, 1978;Redding, 2020). Majoriteten av studiene på området er over 30 år gamle og har i stor grad blitt gjennomført på psykologer i høyere utdanningssektor i USA (Abramowitz & Dokecki, 1977;Duarte et al., 2015;Gartner et al., 1990;Redding, 2020). Så vidt oss bekjent har politiske verdier aldri blitt studert i en norsk kontekst. ...
Article
Background: Political values are essential to our sense of self and belonging. Yet the political orientation of clinical psychologists has either been neglected in psychological research or been investigated only in the United States several decades ago. This study therefore aimed to explore political values among psychologists and how they perceive the effect of political values on therapy in Norway. Method: Five clinical psychologists currently in active practice were recruited for semi-structured interviews. Results and discussion: A thematic analysis yielded several distinct themes. Political beliefs appear to play a part in therapy, and may influence both what the therapist thinks about the client and the choice of therapy. Nonetheless, the informants reported that talking about political beliefs in a psychotherapeutic setting was unusual and even uncomfortable for them. Conclusion: We therefore ask whether it is time to break the taboos associated with political values in and around psychotherapy, and conclude that further research should be devoted to this sensitive but vital topic. Keywords: politics, values, psychotherapy, therapeutic alliance, empathy, semi-structured interviews
... A merican academia is often accused of liberal bias, and some observers have blamed the academy's left-wing slant for undermining trust in science (Duarte et al., 2015). The impression that scientists are overwhelmingly liberal has provided an impetus for conservative attacks on scientific findings and fueled the rise of conservative counter-institutions dedicated to challenging "liberally biased" academic science, chiefly for a lay audience (Mann and Schleifer, 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
Scientists in the United States are more politically liberal than the general population. This fact has fed charges of political bias. To learn more about scientists’ political behavior, we analyze publicly available Federal Election Commission data. We find that scientists who donate to federal candidates and parties are far more likely to support Democrats than Republicans, with less than 10 percent of donations going to Republicans in recent years. The same pattern holds true for employees of the academic sector generally, and for scientists employed in the energy sector. This was not always the case: Before 2000, political contributions were more evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. We argue that these observed changes are more readily explained by changes in Republican Party attitudes toward science than by changes in American scientists. We reason that greater public involvement by centrist and conservative scientists could help increase trust in science among Republicans.
... Diversity actually makes us smarter and one should seek out people with different ideas (Phillips, 2014). Duarte et al. (2015) maintain: "Psychologists have demonstrated the value of diversityparticularly diversity of viewpoints -for enhancing creativity, discovery, and problem solving." ...
Article
Full-text available
Most Americans believe that higher education is heading in the wrong direction. In Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, the eponymous heroine’s tumble into a rabbit hole immerses her in a bizarre, surreal, disorienting universe. Has higher education fallen down the rabbit hole? This paper will examine the many ways that academe has become a peculiar, illogical, and topsy-turvy world where things are often the opposite of what we call them and of what we expect them to be. To restore the credibility of our education system and make it of value to most students, it must be completely reimagined and, in fact, totally rebuilt from the ground up.
... That said, a burgeoning chorus of scholars have asserted that the relation between conservatism and rigidity hinges crucially on a host of empirical (e.g., Ditto et al., 2019;Federico & Malka, 2018;Feldman & Johnston, 2014;Kahan, 2016;Malka & Soto, 2015;Zmigrod et al., 2019), methodological (e.g., Malka et al., 2017;Zmigrod, 2020), and metascientific (e.g., Duarte et al., 2015;Jussim et al., 2016) factors, such that the RRH's evidentiary foundation may be grounded in a noisy and contradictory literature. To provide a sense of these prior critiques, consider that many people identify as "socially liberal" and "economically conservative" (or vice versa), suggesting that "liberalism" and "conservatism" may not be psychologically coherent categories (Feldman, 2013;Kerr, 1952). ...
... An additional source of bias may be attributable to the fact that we live in an extremely polarized and politicized world, and psychologists, being humans, are not immune from the biases that tend to accompany partisanship. Namely, several authors (e.g., Duarte et al., 2015;Honeycutt & Jussim, 2020) have suggested that the RRH has benefited from the disproportionately left-leaning political preferences of social psychologists (Haidt, 2011;Langbert et al., 2016;von Hippel & Buss, 2017), which may have biased the literature in undetermined ways. All meta-analyses are liable to poor statistical accuracy due to biases introduced during the dissemination of results (e.g., publication bias) and/or those borne of correlated error variance across multiple studies. ...
... For instance, Gaffan and colleagues (1995) famously found that, in a meta-analytic review of the efficacy of various psychotherapeutic approaches, researchers' allegiance to a given therapeutic approach accounted for up to half of the difference between said approach and other treatments. The same may be true of political allegiance (Duarte et al., 2015). Still, evidence is for this possibility is mixed (e.g., a recent adversarial collaboration found that political allegiance is not related to replicability; Reinero et al., 2019) and warrants further examination. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
The rigidity-of-the-right hypothesis (RRH), which posits that cognitive, motivational, and ideological rigidity resonate with political conservatism, is an influential but controversial psychological account of political ideology. Here, we leverage several methodological and theoretical sources of this controversy to conduct an extensive quantitative review—with the dual aims of probing the RRH’s basic assumptions and parsing the RRH literature’s heterogeneity. Using multi-level meta-analyses of relations between varieties of rigidity and ideology measures alongside a bevy of potential moderators (s = 329, k = 708, N = 187,612), we find that associations between conservatism and rigidity are tremendously heterogeneous, suggesting a complex—yet conceptually fertile—network of relations between these constructs. Most notably, whereas social conservatism was robustly associated with rigidity, associations between economic conservatism and rigidity indicators were inconsistent, small, and not statistically significant outside of the United States. Moderator analyses revealed that non-representative sampling, criterion contamination, and disproportionate use of American samples have yielded over-estimates of associations between rigidity-related constructs and conservatism in past research. We resolve that drilling into this complexity, thereby moving beyond the question of if conservatives are essentially rigid to when and why they might or might not be, will help provide a more realistic account of the psychological underpinnings of political ideology.
... Consistent with research on political orientations in academia and, particularly, the field of psychology (e.g., Duarte et al., 2015;Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017;Inbar & Lammers, 2012), most I-O psychology academics and also practitioners who participated in our study reported holding a liberal personal political orientation. In light of recent position papers and commentaries proposing a (increasing) neoliberal bias in I-O psychology research (Bal & Dóci, 2018;Mumby, 2019), our finding suggests an intriguing paradox: most I-O psychologists hold a liberal (or left-wing) personal political orientation, but research in the field issupposedly -"captured by neoliberalism" (Guest & Grote, 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
Researchers and practitioners have become increasingly interested in the role of political orientation in the workplace. Importantly, people do not always agree with other members of their profession when it comes to politics. However, the effects of such person-occupation political orientation misfit on people’s work-related attitudes remain unclear. According to the social identity perspective, person-occupation political orientation misfit is likely to lead to the experience of identity threat which, in turn, should negatively impact people’s occupational identification. To address this idea empirically, the goal of this study was to examine the influence of different political depictions of the field of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology (i.e., as generally neoliberal, left-wing, pluralistic, or neutral) on I-O psychologists’ occupational identification, depending on their personal political orientation (i.e., more or less liberal vs. conservative). Specifically, we hypothesized that experiencing person-occupation political orientation misfit would reduce occupational identification. Results of an experiment (n = 800 I-O psychology academics and practitioners) provided some support for this hypothesis, suggesting specifically that person-occupation political orientation misfit might alienate people with a more conservative political orientation from their occupation.
... Hardey (2020) emphasized on paying attention to lack of diversity and restriction on women progression in the technology sector. It should be understood that diversity is the key to creativity, innovation and problem solving in any organization (Duarte et al., 2015). Technology itself is an innovative sector and people with similar experiences and backgrounds would not be able to contribute creative ideas for future developments (Friedman et al., 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
The extant literature has significantly contributed towards the body of knowledge on wearable technology by exploring its potential for enhancing the well-being of consumers. Another strand of literature focuses on the challenges being faced by women in the wearables industry. This study has critically investigated the prevailing status of women in the gendered imbalance technology industry particularly the wearables industry. To elucidate this, the study has followed the qualitative approach by conducting an inductive-thematic analysis on the interviews of women achievers in the wearables industry. The findings revealed that the future of wearable technology seems bright in the following sectors: AR/VR and Artificial intelligence (AI) industries, Medical, sports and fitness sectors, Clothing and Jewellery industry, Military, and other industrial applications. However, it would be more promising if women employees and entrepreneurs are encouraged at all levels, and their roles are substantiated in the organizations by reducing challenges and appreciating them for their achievements.
... 34 Therefore, one plausible explanation for the increasing mentions of prejudice themes and social justice terminology in media content could be due to the increasingly liberal ideological composition of newsrooms that might shape journalists' choices of topics to cover since people who identify more strongly on the left are far more focused on the topic of prejudice. 35 A third potential explanation for the rising incidence of prejudice and social justice rhetoric in news media content could be the recent emergence of financial incentives for media organizations to maximize diffusion of news articles through social media channels by triggering negative sentiment/emotions, 36 and/ or political out-group animosity, both of which have been shown to drive engagement of social media-based news consumption. 37 By focusing on more moralistic and polarising language, designed to generate clicks on social media platforms, the new social-media driven incentives may be encouraging discursive shifts in news media, though we would welcome insights in this regard from media organizations themselves. ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
• Recent years have seen considerable debate about the rise of political polarisation in British society. Specifically, over the last decade, various studies have suggested that the UK is now rapidly following the United States into a more polarised politics in which intensifying ‘culture wars’ over issues such as racism, identity, diversity, history, the legacy of history, and ‘social justice’ or so-called ‘woke’ politics are becoming far more prominent. • While this debate typically focuses on the role of party politics, much less attention has focused on the relationship between news media and rising polarisation. Building on recent pioneering research which has tracked a sharp increase in the overall prominence of prejudice and social justice rhetoric in US and Spanish media, our purpose in this report is to explore whether similar trends are now also visible in the UK. • We use computational content analysis to explore the chronological prevalence in UK news media of words which denote prejudice (i.e., sexism, racism, homophobia, etc.) and ‘social justice’ or ‘woke’ rhetoric (i.e., white privilege, whiteness, cultural appropriation, diversity, etc.). Our main interest in doing so is to explore how the media debate has changed over time. • Thus, we present analyses of UK media usage of these terms between the years 2000 and 2020 in 16 million news and opinion articles, published in a nationally representative sample of ten popular British media outlets: The Guardian, The Independent, The Daily Mirror, BBC, The Times, Financial Times, Metro, The Telegraph, Daily Mail and The Sun. To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive analysis of UK media coverage of these issues to date. • Consistent with recent studies in the U.S. and Spain, we find that references to prejudice and social justice rhetoric have increased sharply in UK media in recent years. Between 2010 and 2020, terms such as racism and white supremacy in popular UK media outlets increased on average by 769% and 2,827% respectively, while terms such as sexism, patriarchy and misogyny increased by 169%, 336% and 237% each. Additional terms such as transphobia, islamophobia and anti-semitism increased by 2,578%, 289% and 469% respectively. Similarly, terms associated with social justice discourse have also markedly increased over the same temporal period: diversity (199%), activism (146%), hate speech (880%), inequality (218%), gender-neutral (1,019%) or slavery (413%). • These sharp increases are pervasive across media, regardless of their ideological leanings. But overall prevalence tends to be larger in left-leaning outlets. Mentions of prejudice have also become far more prominent in the BBC, the UK’s leading public service outlet. From 2010 to 2020, mentions in BBC content of terms suggestive of racism have increased by over 802% while mentions of terms suggestive of sexism have increased by 610%. Mentions of homophobia and transphobia increased by 134% and 3,341% respectively. Terms signifying islamophobia and anti-Semitism increased by 585% and 2,431%. • By tracking the temporal prevalence of terms denoting prejudice and social justice in UK news media, we throw light on how the UK media debate is evolving and raise important questions about whether media institutions have got the balance right in how we talk about these issues. In the final section, we consider possible explanations for the sharp increase in the prominence of prejudice and social justice rhetoric in UK news media, including the shifting profile of the UK media class which has increasingly become far more elite.
... Scientists' objectivity has also been called into question. Scientists in certain fields are portrayed and perceived as exhibiting biased perspectives against Christian (22) and conservative (23) values. Indeed, many religious individuals reject science, in part, due to the perception that scientists are atheistic (24). ...
Article
Full-text available
From vaccination refusal to climate change denial, antiscience views are threatening humanity. When different individuals are provided with the same piece of scientific evidence, why do some accept whereas others dismiss it? Building on various emerging data and models that have explored the psychology of being antiscience, we specify four core bases of key principles driving antiscience attitudes. These principles are grounded in decades of research on attitudes, persuasion, social influence, social identity, and information processing. They apply across diverse domains of antiscience phenomena. Specifically, antiscience attitudes are more likely to emerge when a scientific message comes from sources perceived as lacking credibility; when the recipients embrace the social membership or identity of groups with antiscience attitudes; when the scientific message itself contradicts what recipients consider true, favorable, valuable, or moral; or when there is a mismatch between the delivery of the scientific message and the epistemic style of the recipient. Politics triggers or amplifies many principles across all four bases, making it a particularly potent force in antiscience attitudes. Guided by the key principles, we describe evidence-based counteractive strategies for increasing public acceptance of science.
... This paradox also exists in academic settings for researchers studying ideological communication. Academic institutions are becoming increasingly homogenous in ideology [14,15], and recruiting a wide range of opinions is notoriously difficult, let alone bringing opponents into the lab to have a heated discussion. To combat this difficulty, many researchers have opted to use imagined scenarios or forecasted experiences to study ideological communication [6]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The rise of ideological polarization in the U.S. over the past few decades has come with an increase in hostility on both sides of the political aisle. Although communication and compromise are hallmarks of a functioning society, research has shown that people overestimate the negative affect they will experience when viewing oppositional media, and it is likely that negative forecasts lead many to avoid cross-ideological communication (CIC) altogether. Additionally, a growing ideological geographic divide and online extremism fueled by social media audiences make engaging in CIC more difficult than ever. Here, we demonstrate that online video-chat platforms (i.e., Zoom) can be used to promote effective CIC among ideologically polarized individuals, as well as to better study CIC in a controlled setting. Participants ( n = 122) had a face-to-face CIC over Zoom, either privately or publicly with a silent ingroup audience present. Participant forecasts about the interaction were largely inaccurate, with the actual conversation experience found to be more positive than anticipated. Additionally, the presence of an ingroup audience was associated with increased conflict. In both conditions, participants showed preliminary signs of attitude moderation, felt more favorable toward the outgroup, and felt more informed about the issue after the CIC. These results suggest that face-to-face CIC’s are generally positive and beneficial for polarized individuals, and that greater effects may be achieved through private conversations, as opposed to more public social media-like interactions. Future researchers studying ideological conflict may find success using similar Zoom paradigms to bring together ideologically diverse individuals in controlled lab settings.