Ideology selectively shapes attention to inequality.
Ideology selectively shapes attention to inequality.
复制标题
意识形态有选择地塑造了对不平等的关注。
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.2023985118
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Waldfogel HB
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Waldfogel HB
当代关于解决不平等问题的辩论需要对手头问题的范围有一个共同的、准确的理解。然而，关于谁以及何时注意到周围世界的不平等，我们知之甚少。在五项研究（N= 8，779）采用各种范式，我们考虑了意识形态信仰的作用，对社会平等的愿望，在塑造个人的注意力和准确性检测跨阶级，性别和种族领域的不平等。在研究1中，社会平等主义水平较高（相对于较低）的个体在展示城市场景照片时更有可能自然地评论不平等。在研究2中，社会平等主义者在基本认知任务中更准确地区分男性和女性之间的平等与不平等资源分配。在研究3中，社会平等主义者更快地注意到不平等相关的变化，在图像中的变化检测范式索引的基本注意力过程。在研究4和研究5中，我们对不平等待遇是否对社会顶层或底层群体产生不利影响进行了研究。在研究4中，社会平等主义者，在一个激励任务，更准确地检测不平等的发言时间在小组讨论中，不利的妇女，但不是当不平等的不利男子。在研究5中，社会平等主义者更有可能自然地指出偏见的模式检测招聘任务时，雇主对少数民族有偏见，但不是当多数群体成员面临同等的偏见。我们的研究结果揭示了我们的意识形态信仰如何塑造我们是否准确地注意到不平等的细微差别，并对解决不平等问题的前景产生了影响。
Contemporary debates about addressing inequality require a common, accurate understanding of the scope of the issue at hand. Yet little is known about who notices inequality in the world around them and when. Across five studies (N= 8,779) employing various paradigms, we consider the role of ideological beliefs about the desirability of social equality in shaping individuals’ attention to—and accuracy in detecting—inequality across the class, gender, and racial domains. In Study 1, individuals higher (versus lower) on social egalitarianism were more likely to naturalistically remark on inequality when shown photographs of urban scenes. In Study 2, social egalitarians were more accurate at differentiating between equal versus unequal distributions of resources between men and women on a basic cognitive task. In Study 3, social egalitarians were faster to notice inequality-relevant changes in images in a change detection paradigm indexing basic attentional processes. In Studies 4 and 5, we varied whether unequal treatment adversely affected groups at the top or bottom of society. In Study 4, social egalitarians were, on an incentivized task, more accurate at detecting inequality in speaking time in a panel discussion that disadvantaged women but not when inequality disadvantaged men. In Study 5, social egalitarians were more likely to naturalistically point out bias in a pattern detection hiring task when the employer was biased against minorities but not when majority group members faced equivalent bias. Our results reveal the nuances in how our ideological beliefs shape whether we accurately notice inequality, with implications for prospects for addressing it.