Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Personality > Religiosity and Politics > Flashcards

Religiosity and Politics Flashcards

1
Q

Is religiosity a personality characteristic?

A

Religiosity is driven by situational factors

  • Religious socialization
  • Negative life events
  • Positive self-transcendent experiences 積極的自我超越的經驗
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

But religiosity

A

Also manifested 表現 in many behaviours across situations

e. g., praying, reading, attending services,…
- involves a variety of behaviours, thoughts, and feelings

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Unlike personality traits, individual differences in religiosity

A

Depend on people’s beliefs, whereas personality traits do not depend on beliefs

Involve an entire way of living

Bonding

Belonging

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Differences in motivations

A

“intrinsic religiosity” vs. “extrinsic religiosity”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Religiosity and personality dimensions

Saroglou: meta-analysis of 71 studies, examine the ‘personal religiosity’

A

‘Personal religiosity’: beliefs and practices referring to a transcendent being and legitimized, to some extent, by an established tradition or group

Associations with personality traits are not very strong
- Agreeableness (r = .19) and Conscientiousness (r = .16) are the two main personality characteristics of religiousness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Are high A and high C people more attracted to religion or does religion make people high in A and C?

Longitudinal study by Wink et al. (2007):
Personality in adolescence predicts religiosity in late adulthood

A

High A people: social harmony, positive qualities in human relations, and the idea of a protective and loving God

High C people: the meaningfulness of life and the world, order in the universe through a sense of transcendence, and disciplined pursuit of valued goals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Saroglou (2010) also investigated religious fundamentalism and spirituality

A

Religious fundamentalism: strict obedience and unquestioning devotion; authoritarian and dogmatic religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
- Negatively related to O

Spiritualism: emphasis on individual experience (often intense feeling), independence of religious traditions and beliefs
Positively related to Openness to Experience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

High O people

A

Inquisitive and unconventional: question religious traditions, rules, practices

Imaginative, feel connected to nature
-> seek spirituality

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Religiosity of the family/household/parents strongly related to individual differences in religiosity

Personality variables may, however, affect this association

McCullough, Tsang, and Brion (2003):
Emotional (in)stability (= Neuroticism)
Sample of intelligent children from 1922-23 and follow-up in 1940-41

A

Weaker association (less religious) for emotional stable children compared to unstable children when the children have very strict religious upbringing - unstable are more religious

-> Emotionally unstable children may want to avoid conflict with parents/family, so they are more likely to stick with the religious

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Altemeyer and Hunsberger (1997): Interviews with

“Amazing Apostates”: very non-religious people raised in a very religious household

“Amazing Believers”: very religious people raised in a very nonreligious household

A

Apostates - Conversion followed after thinking a great deal about their religion; period of reason and reflection and experiencing increasing doubts about their religion

Believers - conversion was more sudden, after a period of intense personal crisis; driven by passion and emotion suggesting a strong need for a sense of community and structure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Change and stability in religiosity: How do individual levels of religiosity change across the life-span?

McCullough et al (2005): Followed a sample of intelligent children from 1940 to 1991

A

Found a very small average increase in religiosity, But different patterns of change in religiosity

High - increasing
Low – declining
Parabolic - religious in early adulthood, becoming more so in midlife, then less religious through the remainder of the life course.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How stable are individual differences in religiosity?

McCullough et al (2005)

A

Fairly high level of stability Between 1940 and 1991 (51 years!): r = .55

For shorter spans (between 5 and 17 years): r’s = .61 to .92(!)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Religiosity and life outcomes

A

Health and Longevity 壽命

Life satisfaction

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Health and Longevity: McCullough, Hoyt, Larson, Koenig, and Koenig (2000)

Meta-analysis estimated the extent to which religious involvement is significantly associated with the odds of being alive at follow-up

A

Religious persons were about 25% less likely to die during the period of the study

Because of a healthier lifestyle

  • More support (psychological, financial,…) from community
  • Better recovery from illness due to less stress/more optimism
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Life satisfaction: Salsman, Brown, Brechting, and Carlson (2005)

A

Intrinsic religiousness and prayer fulfilment = greater life satisfaction

Partly attributable to greater optimism and more social support

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Religion

A
  1. Is religiosity a personality characteristic?
  2. Religiosity and personality dimensions
  3. Change and stability in religiosity
  4. Religiosity and life outcomes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Politics

A
  1. The Authoritarian Personality
  2. Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA)
  3. Social Dilemma Orientation
  4. Dual Process Model of Ideology and Prejudice
  5. Social attitudes and personality
  6. Attitudes and behaviours towards non-human animals
  7. Genetic and environmental influence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q
  1. The Authoritarian Personality
A

Right-wing extremism = syndrome of authoritarian personality

Landmark study in social/political psychology

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Psychodynamic (Freudian) theory of the development of authoritarianism
- Harsh, punitive parenting and rigid parental values cause a tension between anxiety/fear of disapproval and punishment and hostility/anger towards parents (“intra-psychic conflict”)

A
  • Suppression of impulses leads to displacement of aggression towards ‘safer’ / ‘weaker’ targets such as ethnic minorities
  • > Reflects the dynamics of authoritarian submission and aggression
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Anti-Semitic attitudes co-vary with other characteristics such as anti-democratic tendencies, ethnocentrism, political and economic conservatism

A

Adorno et al. found positive associations between these constructs in survey studies

F-scale
- Based on interviews looking for common patterns in attitudes, behaviours, histories

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

The F-scale

A
  1. Conventionalism 傳統主義
  2. Authoritarian submission 專制順從
  3. Authoritarian aggression
  4. Anti-intraception: Opposition to the subjective, the imaginative
  5. Superstition 迷信 and stereotypy:
  6. Pre-occupation with power and toughness
  7. Destructiveness and cynicism
  8. Projectivity
  9. Pre-occupation with sex
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Conventionalism

A

Rigid adherence to traditional, middle class norms and values

e.g. A person who has bad manners, habits, and breeding can hardly expect to get along with decent people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Authoritarian submission

A

Submissive, uncritical attitude toward in-group authorities

e.g. Young people sometimes get rebellious ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and settle down.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Authoritarian aggression

A

Support for rejection and punishment of people who violate conventional norms 懲罰違反傳統規範的人

e.g. Sex crimes, such as rape and attacks on children, deserve more than mere imprisonment; such criminals ought to be publicly whipped, or worse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Anti-intraception

A

Opposition to the subjective, the imaginative

e.g. When a person has a problem or worry, it is best for him not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things.

26
Q

Superstition and stereotypy

A

Belief in mystical determinants of individual’s fate

e.g. Some day it will probably be shown that astrology 占卜 can explain a lot of things

27
Q

Pre-occupation with power and toughness

A

Excessive concern with dominance-submission, strong-weak, leader-follower dimension

e.g. It is best to use some prewar authorities in Germany to keep order and prevent chaos.

28
Q

Destructiveness and cynicism

A

General hostility toward humanity

e.g. Human nature being what it is, there will always be war and conflict

29
Q

Projectivity

A

Outward projection of unconscious impulses leading to dangerous world beliefs

e.g. Nowadays when so many different kinds of people move around and mix together so much, a person has to protect himself especially carefully against catching an infection or disease from them

30
Q

Pre-occupation with sex

A

e.g. The wild sex life of the old Greeks and Romans was tame compared to some of the goings-on in this country, even in places where people might least expect it

31
Q

Problems with the F-scale

A

Acquiescence bias: All items were worded in the same directions (no reversed-keyed items)
-> Some people tend to agree with all items irrespective of the content

No support for 9 different factors

Studies using reversed items obtained low reliability coefficients

32
Q

Problems with the theory (authoritarian personality)

A

No empirical evidence for Freudian/psychodynamic theoretical assumptions

33
Q
  1. Right-Wing authoritarianism

Altemeyer (1981, 1988, 1996) developed the Right-Wing Authoritarianism scale (RWA)

Improved authoritarianism scale based on the F-scale

A

RWA-scale includes reverse-keyed items

3 (instead of 9) tendencies:

  • Conventionalism
  • Authoritarian submission
  • Authoritarian aggression

Tendencies are theoretically assumed to be strongly related

Better reliability

34
Q

Conventionalism

A

Adherence to social conventions endorsed by established in-group authorities

e.g. Women should have to promise to obey their husbands when they get married

35
Q

Authoritarian submission

A

Uncritical submission/obedience to established authorities

e.g. Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn

36
Q

Authoritarian aggression

A

Support for aggressiveness towards norm violators/deviants/outgroups

e.g. What our country really needs is a strong, determined leader who will crush evil, and take us back to our true path

37
Q

Social-cognitive approach instead of psychodynamic

A

Social learning during adolescence:

Harsh punishment leads to conformity, whereas tolerance leads to autonomy

38
Q

Studies show that RWA is associated with

A
  • Willingness to give harsher punishments to criminals
  • Approval of restrictions on civil liberties
  • Ethnocentrism
  • Anti-gay/anti-lesbian attitudes
  • Traditional gender roles
  • Support for aggressive military force
  • (extreme) Right-wing voting and party preferences
  • Opposition to environmental movement
39
Q
  1. Social Dominance Orientation (SDO)
A

SDO = Individual differences in desire for hierarchical vs. equal group relations in society

SDO-scale measures support for

  • group-based dominance
  • intergroup inequality
40
Q

Social Dominance Theory

Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, and Malle (1994)

A

Hierarchical social order are maintained through individual and institutional discrimination

41
Q

People differ in the extent to which they endorse attitudes, beliefs, ideologies, justifying group inequality and the oppression of some group by others: “legitimizing myths”

A

Two functional types of legitimizing myths:

  • Hierarchy-enhancing ideologies
  • Hierarchy-attenuating ideologies
42
Q

Hierarchy-enhancing ideologies

e.g., racism or meritocracy

A

Greater levels of group-based inequality

e.g. Some groups of people are just more worthy than others

43
Q

Hierarchy-attenuating ideologies

e.g., anarchism and feminism

A

Greater levels of group-based equality.

e.g. It would be good if all groups could be equal

44
Q

Extensive evidence shows that SDO is related to

A

Prejudice towards a wide range of social groups
- sexism, racism, anti-immigrant prejudice

Opposition to progressive and social policies, affirmative action policies

Support for military spending / military force

45
Q

SDO and RWA are positively interrelated but are too weakly correlated to suggest that both variables represent the same construct

A

SDO is only weakly related to authoritarian submission

Social dominators do not necessarily value conventions and traditions; only if these preserve hierarchical societal structures

46
Q
  1. Dual Process Model of Ideology and Prejudice

Duckitt, 2001; Duckitt et al., 2002

A

RWA and SDO both predict a range of criterion variables related to political and intergroup issues

47
Q

Two variables account for a different aspect in out-group prejudice

A

Adherence to social norms (RWA)

Preference for inequality (SDO)

  • > RWA and SDO: complementary predictors of ethnocentrism and out-group prejudice
  • > Two together produce a correlation considerably higher than either alone
48
Q

Both RWA and SDO were introduced as ‘personality’ constructs but research suggests that both constructs are…

A

Influenced by contextual factors

Predicted by ‘core’ personality traits

Interestingly, different contextual factors and personality traits predict RWA and SDO

49
Q

RWA and SDO represent two independent dimensions of social attitudes expressing different motivational goals

A

RWA: establish and maintain societal control, stability, and cohesion

SDO: asserting power and group dominance

50
Q

Threatening context + Personality: Social conformity -> Dangerous Worldview ->

A

RWA -> Prejudice towards threatening and low-status out-groups

51
Q

Competitive context + Personality: Tough-mindedness -> Competitive Jungle Worldview ->

A

SDO -> Prejudice towards threatening and low-status out-groups

52
Q

Effects of dangerous and competitive worldviews on RWA and SDO over a five months period of time

Sibley, Wilson, & Duckitt

A

RWA was so much higher than SDO

53
Q
  1. Social attitudes and personality

Sibley and Duckitt (2008): Meta-analysis of 71 studies (N = 22,068)

A

Low Openness to experience = higher RWA

High Conscientiousness = higher RWA
-> low O and high C = social conformity

Low Agreeableness = high SDO

Honesty-Humility (HEXACO) = high SDO

54
Q
  1. What about attitudes and behaviours towards non-human animals?

(Dhont & Hodson, 2014)

A

Speciesism is a prejudice similar to racism or sexism

  • using animals as objects for human benefit
  • meat consumption
55
Q

High RWA = stick to cultural traditions and norms, also with respect to the use and consumption of animals

A

Vegetarianism/veganism are a threat to societal norms

56
Q

High SDOs show a generalized striving for dominance, not restricted to human out-groups

A

Group-based dominance of humans over animals / human supremacy beliefs

Vegetarianism/veganism is a threat to the dominant meat-culture

57
Q

Example items of Vegetarianism threat

A

Vegetarians should have more respect for our traditional eating customs, which meat consumption is simply a part of

Nowadays, when it comes to nutrition and meals, people listen too much to what a minority of vegetarians wants

58
Q

Example items of Human Supremacy Beliefs

A

The life of an animal is just not of equal value as the life of a human being

In an ideal world, humans and animals would be treated on an equal basis (reverse-coded)

59
Q

RWA -> Threat perception ->…

A

Meat consumption + Speciesism support for exploitation of animals

60
Q

SDO -> Threat perception + Human supremacy ->…

A

Meat consumption + Speciesism support for exploitation of animals

Personality (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions