| 1. |
- Renström, Emma Aurora, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring a pathway to radicalization: The effects of social exclusion and rejection sensitivity
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. - : SAGE Publications. - 1368-4302 .- 1461-7188. ; 23:8, s. 1204-1229
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article aims to explore if social exclusion can constitute a pathway to radicalization, and if individual level of sensitivity of rejection moderates the effect of social exclusion. Humans innately seek belonging and meaning, and strive for re-establishing a sense of value and belongingness if faced with social exclusion. One way to achieve this is by adherence to a new and inviting group. In four studies, we test to what extent individuals who face social exclusion adapt to a radical including group. In Studies 1 (n = 104) and 2 (n = 308), we use a social media-like paradigm to manipulate social exclusion. In Study 3 (n = 1041), we use the so-called Cyberball paradigm, and in Study 4 (n = 40) we use a real-life manipulation. All studies show that rejected individuals who are sensitive to rejection are more prone to identify with, engage with and endorse an extreme group. The results hold over both ideological (Studies 1-3) and non-ideological (Study 4) content. Only the last study showed a main effect of social exclusion. We discuss the results in reference to the significance loss model of radicalization.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Vergoossen, Hellen P., et al.
(författare)
-
Are New Gender-Neutral Pronouns Difficult to Process in Reading? The Case of Hen in SWEDISH
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in Psychology. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 1664-1078. ; 11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Hen is a Swedish gender-neutral pronoun used for non-binary individuals and as a generic singular pronoun form. Hen was added to the Swedish Academy Glossary (SAOL) in 2015, and opponents of hen have argued that gender-neutral pronouns are difficult to process, and therefore should not be used. As of yet, this has not been empirically tested. This pre-registered study used eye-tracking to experimentally test if hen has a processing cost by measuring the process of understanding whom a pronoun refers to (i.e., pronoun resolution). Participants (N = 120) read 48 sentence pairs where the first sentence included a noun referring to a person (e.g., sister, hairdresser, person) and the second included a pronoun referring to the noun. The pronouns were either gendered (she and he) or gender-neutral (hen). The nouns were either neutral (e.g., person, colleague) or gendered, either by lexically referring to gender (e.g., sister, king), or by being associated with stereotypes based on occupational gender segregation (e.g., occupational titles like hairdresser, carpenter). We tested if hen had a greater processing cost than gendered pronouns, and whether the type of noun moderated this effect. The hypotheses were that hen referring to neutral nouns would lead to a smaller processing cost than hen referring to gendered nouns. Furthermore, we hypothesized that hen referring to lexically gendered nouns would lead to larger processing costs than stereotypically gendered role nouns. The processing cost of hen was measured by reading time spent on three regions of the sentence pairs; the pronoun, the spillover region (i.e., the words following the pronoun), and the noun. The only processing cost for hen occurred in the spillover region. The processing cost in this region was greater when hen referred to neutral nouns than when hen referred to a noun associated with gender. In contrast to the hypothesis, the type of gender information associated with the noun did not interact with these effects (i.e., the same reading time for hen following e.g., the queen or carpenter). Altogether, the results do not support that gender-neutral pronouns should be avoided because they are difficult to process.
|
|
| 4. |
- Vergoossen, Hellen Petronella, et al.
(författare)
-
Four Dimensions of Criticism Against Gender-Fair Language
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Sex Roles. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0360-0025 .- 1573-2762. ; 83, s. 328-337
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The gender-neutral third-person pronoun singular hen was recently introduced in Swedish as a complement to she (hon) and he (han). The initiative to add hen initially received strong criticism. In the present study, we analyzed 208 arguments from 168 participants with critical attitudes toward hen. We used Blaubergs’ (1980) and Parks and Roberton’s (1998) taxonomies of critical arguments against past gender-fair language reforms in English in the 1970s and 1990s as a basis for coding the arguments. A majority of arguments (80.7%) could be coded into existing categories, indicating that criticisms of gender-fair language initiatives are similar across different times and cultural contexts. Two categories of arguments did not fit existing categories (19.3%): gender-neutral pronouns are distracting in communication and gender information is important in communication. Furthermore, we established four overarching dimensions that capture assumptions and beliefs underlying gender-fair language criticism: (a) Defending the Linguistic Status Quo (39.4%), (b) Sexism and Cisgenderism (27.4%), (c) Diminishing the Issue and Its Proponents (26.9%), and (d) Distractor In Communication (6.3%). These dimensions of criticisms should be considered and addressed in different ways when implementing gender-fair language. © 2020, The Author(s).
|
|
