Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2016
-
(2016): Why (and how) should we study the interplay between emotional arousal, Theory of Mind, and inhibitory control to understand moral cognition?. In: Psychonomic bulletin & review 23 (6), S. 1660-1680. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-016-1042-5
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1042-5 Abstract: Findings in the field of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience have shed new light on our understanding of the psychological and biological bases of morality. Although a lot of attention has been devoted to understanding the processes that underlie complex moral dilemmas, attempts to represent the way in which individuals generate moral judgments when processing basic harmful actions are rare. Here, we will outline a model of morality which proposes that the evaluation of basic harmful actions relies on complex interactions between emotional arousal, Theory of Mind (ToM) capacities, and inhibitory control resources. This model makes clear predictions regarding the cognitive processes underlying the development of and ability to generate moral judgments. We draw on data from developmental and cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and psychopathology research to evaluate the model and propose several conceptual and methodological improvements that are needed to further advance our understanding of moral cognition and its development. zitiert von 12
Keywords: Causality, Emotional Control, Emotions, Empathy, Executive Function, Humans, Inhibition (Psychology), Intention Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): Arousal, Kognitionswissenschaften, Moral, Morality, Morals, Neurowissenschaften, Response Inhibition, Social Perception, theory of mind, Thinking 2015
-
(2015): The social nature of benevolent sexism and the antisocial nature of hostile sexism. Is benevolent sexism more likely to manifest in public contexts and hostile sexism in private contexts?. In: International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie 50 (5), S. 363-371. DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12106
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12106 Abstract: Previous research converges on demonstrating that benevolent sexism (BS) is socially approved, whereas hostile sexism (HS) is socially disapproved. We postulated that a sample of married women would be likely to report that their husbands express hostile sexist attitudes and engage in related actions towards them more in private than public contexts, where they lie concealed from public censure. By contrast, the women would report that their husbands would be likely to express benevolent sexist attitudes and engage in related actions more in public than private contexts, where they are reinforced not only by their target (i.e. wife), but also by significant others and the society at large. We tested these hypotheses with a sample of Black, heterosexually married Zimbabwean women (n = 109, mean age = 31.83). Results supported our hypotheses: the women reported hostile sexist attitudes and actions to be more likely to occur in private than public contexts; on the other hand, they reported benevolent sexist attitudes and actions to be more likely in public than private contexts. We conclude that differences in social approval of BS and HS account for these results.
2001
-
(2001): An ambivalent alliance. Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. In: American Psychologist 56 (2), S. 109-118. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109
Abstract: The equation of prejudice with antipathy is challenged by recent research on sexism. Benevolent sexism (a subjectively favorable, chivalrous ideology that offers protection and affection to women who embrace conventional roles) coexists with hostile sexism (antipathy toward women who are viewed as usurping men's power). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, first validated in U.S. samples, has been administered to over 15,000 men and women in 19 nations. Hostile and benevolent sexism are complementary, cross-culturally prevalent ideologies, both of which predict gender inequality. Women, as compared with men, consistently reject hostile sexism but often endorse benevolent sexism (especially in the most sexist cultures). By rewarding women for conforming to a patriarchal status quo, benevolent sexism inhibits gender equality. More generally, affect toward minority groups is often ambivalent, but subjectively positive stereotypes are not necessarily benign. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) Zitiert von 1323
- <<
- <
- 1