Suchergebnisse

Abstract. Conservatives in the United States have more negative attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines and are less likely to be vaccinated than liberals. The present research tests whether political differences in knowledge underlie differences in vaccination. Participants in Study 1 completed a knowledge test about COVID-19 vaccines and indicated whether they had received a COVID-19 vaccine. Republicans had worse knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines than Democrats. Furthermore, political differences in vaccination were significantly mediated by knowledge. Study 2 found that exposure to facts about COVID-19 vaccines led to more favorable perceptions of vaccine effectiveness among Republicans, which in turn was associated with stronger vaccination intentions. These data suggest that knowledge about COVID-19 vaccines may help to explain political differences in vaccination.

This research examined how people explain major outcomes of political consequence (e.g., economic growth, rising inequality). We argue that people attribute positive outcomes more and negative outcomes less to their own political party than to an opposing party. We conducted two studies, one before the 2016 U.S. presidential election ( N = 244) and another before the 2020 election ( N = 249 registered voters), that examined attributions across a wide array of outcomes. As predicted, a robust partisan attribution bias emerged in both studies. Although the bias was largely equivalent among Democrats and Republicans, it was magnified among those with more extreme political ideology. Further, the bias predicted unique variance in voting intentions and significantly mediated the link between political ideology and voting. In sum, these data suggest that partisan allegiances systemically bias attributions in a group-favoring direction. We discuss implications of these findings for emerging research on political social cognition.

AbstractFew studies have examined how social comparisons with one's romantic partner influence self‐esteem. Ratliff and Oishi (2013) found that writing about a romantic partner's success versus failure lowered men's implicit self‐esteem (i.e., automatic associations between the concepts self/other and good/bad). We conducted three replications of this research (two preregistered). In each replication, the effect of writing about a romantic partner's success was not statistically significant. Furthermore, a meta‐analysis of our three replication studies yielded a small overall effect (d = 0.13) that was 78% smaller than the overall effect obtained by Ratliff and Oishi (2013). Our findings challenge the notion that merely thinking about a romantic partner's success or failure has a substantial impact on implicit self‐esteem. Exploratory analyses, however, suggest that this effect may occur for men who are low in relationship satisfaction.