Premières évidences de la validité de l'échelle de désengagement moral pour des actes discriminatoires (Initial evidence of the validity of a scale on moral disengagement in discriminatory behavior)

De nombreuses études ont mis en évidence le fait que les individus étaient prêts à commettre des actes discriminatoires pour autant qu'ils puissent les justifier (Crandall & Eshleman, 2003). Nous proposons de contribuer à la compréhension de ce phénomène grâce au concept de désengagement moral pour des actes discriminatoires (DMD). Nous définissons le désengagement moral comme le fait de justifier ses propres actes immoraux de manière à les rendre acceptable. Ce concept trouve ses origines dans les travaux de Bandura et al. (1996) portant sur les comportements agressifs chez des enfants. Il se compose de huit mécanismes (p.ex. le déplacement de responsabilité). Notre recherche dépasse le cadre théorique développé par Bandura et al. pour inscrire le désengagement moral dans le champ de la discrimination intergroupe. De plus, en conceptualisant le désengagement moral comme une différence individuelle, nous proposons également de présenter les premières étapes du développement d'une échelle permettant de mesurer le DMD. L'échelle de DMD a été développée en trois étapes en suivant la procédure proposée par Hinkin (1998). Tout d'abord, une liste de 72 items a été générée suivant une méthode déductive. Puis, suite à une étude (n = 13) portant sur la cohérence des items vis-à-vis du concept et de ses mécanismes, cette liste a été réduite à 40 items (5 par mécanisme). Enfin, 118 étudiants universitaires ont participé à une étude dans le but de mener des analyses factorielles (exploratoire et confirmatoire), ainsi que de tester les validités convergente, divergente et prédictive de l'échelle. La première partie de cette étude se composait de différentes échelles (p.ex. mesure de personnalité, préjugés anti-immigrés, etc.). La seconde partie de l'étude était une expérience portant sur l'évaluation d'idées de méthodes de sélection (discriminatoire versus méritocratique) des étudiants suisses et étrangers à l'université, ayant pour but de réduire la surpopulation dans les salles de cours. Les résultats obtenus sont prometteurs pour le développement de l'échelle, autant du point de vue de sa structure (p.ex. α = .82) que de sa validité. Par exemple, plus le niveau de DMD des participants était élevé, plus ils étaient favorables à une méthode de sélection discriminatoire des étudiants à l'université. L'ensemble des résultats sera présenté durant la conférence. Nous discuterons également des potentielles contributions de cette échelle pour de futurs projets de recherche. Référence : Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement of the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71 (2), 364-374. Crandall, C. S., & Eshleman, A. (2003). The Justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129 (3), 414-446. Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use un survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1 (1), 104.121.

A model of gender prejudice, power, and discrimination: How hierarchy-enhancing factors predominate over hierarchy-attenuating factors

Gender inequalities remain an issue in our society and particularly in the workplace. Several factors can explain this gender difference in top-level managerial positions such as career ambitions but also biases against women. In our chapter, we propose a model explaining why gender inequalities and particularly discrimination against women is still present in our societies despite social norms and existing legislation on gender equality. To this purpose, we review research on discrimination through two different approaches, (a) a prejudice approach through the justification-suppression model developed by Crandall and Eshleman (2003) and (b) a power approach through the social dominance theory (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). In our work, we integrate these two approaches and propose a model of gender prejudice, power and discrimination. The integration of these two approaches contributes to a better understanding of how discrimination against women is formed and maintained over time.

Moral disengagement: Towards a context-general category-based measure of the concept

Bandura (1986) developed the concept of moral disengagement to explain how individuals can engage in detrimental behavior while experiencing low levels of negative feelings such as guilt-feelings. Most of the research conducted on moral disengagement investigated this concept as a global concept (e.g., Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996; Moore, Detert, Klebe Treviño, Baker, & Mayer, 2012) while Bandura (1986, 1990) initially developed eight distinct mechanisms of moral disengagement grouped into four categories representing the various means through which moral disengagement can operate. In our work, we propose to develop measures of this concept based on its categories, namely rightness of actions, rejection of personal responsibility, distortion of negative consequences, and negative perception of the victims, and which is not specific a particular area of research. Through our measures, we aim at better understanding the cognitive process leading individuals to behave unethically by investigating which category plays a role in explaining unethical behavior depending on the situations in which individuals are. To this purpose, we conducted five studies to develop the measures and to test its predictive validity. Particularly, we assessed the ability of the newly developed measures to predict two types of unethical behaviors, i.e. discriminatory behavior and cheating behavior. Confirmatory Factor analyses demonstrated a good fit of the model and findings generally supported our predictions.

Policy attitudes, ideological values and social representations

This article reviews research on policy attitudes and ideological values from the perspective of social representations theory. In the first part of the paper, key features of lay political thinking are presented, its pragmatic imperative, its focus on communication and the social functions of shared knowledge. Objectification transforms abstract and group-neutral ideological values into concrete and socially useful knowledge, in particular stereotypes of value-conforming and value-violating groups. Such shared understandings of intergroup relations provide citizens with common reference knowledge which provides the cognitive and cultural basis of policy attitudes. Social representations theory further suggests that lay knowledge reflects the social context in which it has been elaborated (anchoring), an aspect which allows conceptualising aggregate-level differences in policy attitudes. In the second part of the paper, a model of lay conceptions of social order is outlined which organises four shared conceptions of social order, along with the stereotype-based thinking associated with each conception: Moral order, Free Market, Social diversity and Structural inequality. We conclude by arguing that policy attitudes are symbolic devices expressed to justify or to challenge existing social arrangements.

Social sensing for psychology: Automated interpersonal behavior assessment

In this article, we show how the use of state-of-the-art methods in computer science based on machine perception and learning allows the unobtrusive capture and automated analysis of interpersonal behavior in real time (social sensing). Given the high ecological validity of the behavioral sensing, the ease of behavioral-cue extraction for large groups over long observation periods in the field, the possibility of investigating completely new research questions, and the ability to provide people with immediate feedback on behavior, social sensing will fundamentally impact psychology.

How are temporal and social comparisons related to appraisals of self-rated health during very old age?

This study investigated the direction of effects of temporal and downward social comparisons on self-rated health in very old age. Self-rated health can either reinforce or hinder comparison processes. In the framework of the Swiss Interdisciplinary Longitudinal Study on the Oldest Old, individuals aged 80 to 84 at baseline were interviewed and followed longitudinally for 5 years. Multilevel analyses were used to test the relative importance of temporal and social comparisons on self-rated health evaluations synchronically and diachronically (with a time lag of 12 to 18 months) as well as the direction of these relative influences. Results indicate that (a) at the synchronic level, continuity temporal comparisons have more impact than downward social comparisons on self-rated health; (b) both types of comparison had an independent and positive effect on self-rated health at the diachronic level; (c) self-rated health has an independent synchronic effect on both types of comparison and an independent diachronic effect in temporal comparison.