A raw deal

Heightened liberalism following exposure to anomalous playing cards

T. Proulx, B. Major

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

According to the meaning maintenance model, people may respond to meaning violations by affirming unrelated beliefs to which they are committed. While this affirmation generally moves in the direction of social inequality, meaning violations that are not personally threatening—but that nevertheless evoke uncertainty—should evoke a heightened preference for social equality (i.e., a socially liberal judgment). We tested this hypothesis in an experiment that exposed participants to reverse colored playing cards, where participants were subsequently more supportive of Affirmative Action if they were relatively committed to a belief that social inequality is unjust. This study demonstrates that people will make heightened socially liberal judgments following a meaning violation that is not personally threatening, and that is unrelated to the affirmed meaning frameworks.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)455-472
JournalJournal of Social Issues
Volume69
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

liberalism
social inequality
affirmative action
equality
experiment

Cite this

@article{3a1ac64ef8894823abded90fb11b8bfb,
title = "A raw deal: Heightened liberalism following exposure to anomalous playing cards",
abstract = "According to the meaning maintenance model, people may respond to meaning violations by affirming unrelated beliefs to which they are committed. While this affirmation generally moves in the direction of social inequality, meaning violations that are not personally threatening—but that nevertheless evoke uncertainty—should evoke a heightened preference for social equality (i.e., a socially liberal judgment). We tested this hypothesis in an experiment that exposed participants to reverse colored playing cards, where participants were subsequently more supportive of Affirmative Action if they were relatively committed to a belief that social inequality is unjust. This study demonstrates that people will make heightened socially liberal judgments following a meaning violation that is not personally threatening, and that is unrelated to the affirmed meaning frameworks.",
author = "T. Proulx and B. Major",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1111/josi.12024",
language = "English",
volume = "69",
pages = "455--472",
journal = "Journal of Social Issues",
issn = "0022-4537",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

A raw deal : Heightened liberalism following exposure to anomalous playing cards. / Proulx, T.; Major, B.

In: Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 69, No. 3, 2013, p. 455-472.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A raw deal

T2 - Heightened liberalism following exposure to anomalous playing cards

AU - Proulx, T.

AU - Major, B.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - According to the meaning maintenance model, people may respond to meaning violations by affirming unrelated beliefs to which they are committed. While this affirmation generally moves in the direction of social inequality, meaning violations that are not personally threatening—but that nevertheless evoke uncertainty—should evoke a heightened preference for social equality (i.e., a socially liberal judgment). We tested this hypothesis in an experiment that exposed participants to reverse colored playing cards, where participants were subsequently more supportive of Affirmative Action if they were relatively committed to a belief that social inequality is unjust. This study demonstrates that people will make heightened socially liberal judgments following a meaning violation that is not personally threatening, and that is unrelated to the affirmed meaning frameworks.

AB - According to the meaning maintenance model, people may respond to meaning violations by affirming unrelated beliefs to which they are committed. While this affirmation generally moves in the direction of social inequality, meaning violations that are not personally threatening—but that nevertheless evoke uncertainty—should evoke a heightened preference for social equality (i.e., a socially liberal judgment). We tested this hypothesis in an experiment that exposed participants to reverse colored playing cards, where participants were subsequently more supportive of Affirmative Action if they were relatively committed to a belief that social inequality is unjust. This study demonstrates that people will make heightened socially liberal judgments following a meaning violation that is not personally threatening, and that is unrelated to the affirmed meaning frameworks.

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10411/20082

U2 - 10.1111/josi.12024

DO - 10.1111/josi.12024

M3 - Article

VL - 69

SP - 455

EP - 472

JO - Journal of Social Issues

JF - Journal of Social Issues

SN - 0022-4537

IS - 3

ER -