Anger and disgust shape judgments of social sanctions across cultures, especially in high individual autonomy societies.

When someone violates a social norm, others may think that some sanction would be appropriate. We examine how the experience of emotions like anger and disgust relate to the judged appropriateness of sanctions, in a pre-registered analysis of data from a large-scale study in 56 societies. Across the world, we find that individuals who experience anger and disgust over a norm violation are more likely to endorse confrontation, ostracism and, to a smaller extent, gossip. Moreover, we find that the experience of anger is consistently the strongest predictor of judgments of confrontation, compared to other emotions. Although the link between state-based emotions and judgments may seem universal, its strength varies across countries. Aligned with theoretical predictions, this link is stronger in societies, and among individuals, that place higher value on individual autonomy. Thus, autonomy values may increase the role that emotions play in guiding judgments of social sanctions.

Psychometric Assessment of the Physicians' Job Demands and Resources Scale.

Job demands and resources have been consistently associated with the burnout syndrome in physicians, however the literature points to a lack of robust measures to assess these job characteristics across various medical specialties. This study aimed to develop a theoretically and empirically grounded physician-specific job demands and resources self-report measure - the Physicians' Job Demands and Resources Scale. Relevant dimensions of physicians' job demands and resources were identified, corresponding measurement items were generated and pre-tested, and the factor structure of the resulting 44 items was tested with a sample of 9,176 Portuguese physicians. The results of EFAs and CFAs with two random split samples provided consistent evidence of a nine-factor structure with 38 of the 44 items. Importantly, the nine-factor structure is consistent with the dimensions identified in the literature. The paper discusses the theoretical and practical impacts of the scale.

Crime Stereotypicality and Severity Database (CriSSD): Subjective norms for 63 crimes.

The existence of crime-related racial stereotypes has been well documented. People tend to associate certain groups with specific crimes, which, in turn, impacts criminal-sentencing decisions through the perceptions of crime severity. This evidence calls for regular updating of rating norms combining these variables. With this objective, and given that most of the normative studies provide norms for a small number of crimes and/or with an insufficient number of participants, a new norming study was conducted. Furthermore, norms from European countries are absent, and the existing ones (mostly with USA-based populations) do not simultaneously examine crime stereotypicality and crime severity. The Crime Stereotypicality and Severity Database (CriSSD) presents normative ratings for a set of 63 crimes on three dimensions: White stereotypicality, Black stereotypicality, and crime severity. The crimes were selected according to a comprehensive procedure. A total of 340 Portuguese participants (72.6% female; Mage = 26.86, SD = 7.65) answered an online survey. Each crime was evaluated by a range of 46-60 participants. Data allowed us to identify a crime typology with three clusters. We present descriptive data (means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals) for each crime. Crime evaluations were associated with sociodemographic characteristics. Additionally, this study gives input regarding the understudied link between crime stereotypes and crime severity, showing that crime severity is predicted by ratings of both Black and White stereotypicality. The CriSSD (available at osf.io/gkbrm ) provides a valuable resource for researchers in the field of social psychology to conduct studies with controlled materials on potential disparities in criminal-sentencing decisions.

The role of stereotypical information on medical judgements for black and white patients.

THIS ARTICLE USES WORDS OR LANGUAGE THAT IS CONSIDERED PROFANE, VULGAR, OR OFFENSIVE BY SOME READERS. The new generation of direct-acting antivirals has improved dramatically the rates of cure for chronic hepatitis C. Yet, evidence shows that racial groups are deemed more often ineligible for hepatitis C treatment, despite no clinical evidence supporting differential treatment for Black and White patients. One possible explanation has to do with providers' racial biases. This investigation sought to explore medical students' racial stereotypes (Study 1, N = 171) and the role of stereotypical cues on perceptions of medical adherence of Black and White patients (Study 2, N = 208). In Study 1, we first sought to identify health-related aspects that are consistently associated with Blacks as part of a stereotype. In Study 2, we experimentally manipulated racial stereotypes identified in Study 1 by asking participants to read a clinical vignette depicting a patient (Black vs. White) and their medical history (cause of exposure to hepatitis C: unprotected sex vs. non-injectable drugs use). The results show that the impact of stereotypicality on patient perceived compliance varies as a function of medical students' racial prejudice. Implications for further applied health inequalities research and for medical training are discussed.

Predictors of Burnout Among Physicians: Evidence From a National Study in Portugal.

The aims of this research on burnout among physicians were threefold, (1) to characterize the burnout symptoms' prevalence among Portuguese physicians, (2) to test the hypothesis that organizational demands and resources add, on top of other factors, to the explanatory level of burnout; and (3) to explore the predictors of organizational demands and resources. Data collection was conducted online at the national level in Portugal, with 9,176 complete replies and a response rate of 21%. Predictors stemming from theoretical models of an intra-individual, occupational, organizational, and socio-psychological nature were measured using an online/paper survey. Results were analyzed through a significantly modified version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) after transformations to address the fit of this measure in this sample. Results show that 66% of physicians have high levels of emotional exhaustion, 33% high levels of depersonalization, and 39% high levels of decrease of personal accomplishment. Moreover, a first set of hierarchical multiple regression models with burnout symptoms reveals that organizational resources, demands of the relationship with the patients and of work schedule are consistently important predictors of emotional exhaustion and depersonalization on top of other theoretically relevant predictors. A second set of regression models with the organizational-level variables shows that, aside from organizational variables, other context variables, like procedural justice and teamwork, have the most substantial predictive value. These results highlight the importance of recognizing physicians' burnout as a phenomenon that is predicted by a wide variety of factors, but also the importance of attending to the particular role of circumstancial factors that may be addressed in future interventions.

Social Dominance Orientation Boosts Collective Action Among Low-Status Groups.

We propose that low-status group members' support for group-based hierarchy and inequality (i.e., social dominance orientation; SDO) may represent an ideological strategy to guarantee the legitimacy of future ingroup status-enhancement. Specifically, we argue that, under unstable social structure conditions, SDO serves as an ideological justification for collective action tendencies aimed at competing for a higher status. In such context, SDO should be positively related with actions aimed to favor the ingroup (i.e., collective actions) by increasing group members' motivation to engage in direct competition with a relevant higher-status outgroup. We conducted two studies under highly competitive and unstable social structure contexts using real life groups. In Study 1 (N = 77), we induced Low vs. High Ingroup (University) Status and in Study 2 (N = 220) we used competing sports groups. Overall, results showed that, among members of low-status groups, SDO consistently increased individuals' motivation to get involved in actions favoring the ingroup, by boosting their motivation to compete with the opposing high-status outgroup. We discuss the results in light of the social dominance and collective action framework.

Early release from prison in time of COVID-19: Determinants of unfavourable decisions towards Black prisoners.

On the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the overcrowding in prisons led to efforts to decarcerate in order to prevent and control outbreaks in prisons. This study analyses how public support for such exceptional measures are determined by cognitive and ideological factors known to create and maintain racial biases in the criminal system. Participants were asked to express their level of agreement with the early-release of hypothetical prisoners. Results showed participants to be less favourable to the early-release of Black compared to White prisoners, when they had committed a stereotypically Black crime. As expected, the congruency between the crime stereotypicality and the colour of the prisoner's skin did not emerge for White prisoners. Moreover, the difference between the agreement with the release of the Black vs. the White prisoner when both committed a stereotypically Black crime was higher as the level of endorsement of Meritocracy increased. Contrastingly, Anti-egalitarianism only predicted an overall disagreement with prisoners' early-release. This paper highlights the cumulative explanation by different levels of analysis of this current problem and implications for the development of the public opinion on penal subjects.

Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies.

Norm enforcement may be important for resolving conflicts and promoting cooperation. However, little is known about how preferred responses to norm violations vary across cultures and across domains. In a preregistered study of 57 countries (using convenience samples of 22,863 students and non-students), we measured perceptions of the appropriateness of various responses to a violation of a cooperative norm and to atypical social behaviors. Our findings highlight both cultural universals and cultural variation. We find a universal negative relation between appropriateness ratings of norm violations and appropriateness ratings of responses in the form of confrontation, social ostracism and gossip. Moreover, we find the country variation in the appropriateness of sanctions to be consistent across different norm violations but not across different sanctions. Specifically, in those countries where use of physical confrontation and social ostracism is rated as less appropriate, gossip is rated as more appropriate.

Primes and Consequences: A Systematic Review of Meritocracy in Intergroup Relations.

Psychological interest in Meritocracy as an important social norm regulating most of the western democratic societies has significantly increased over the years. However, the way Meritocracy has been conceptualized and operationalized in experimental studies has advanced in significant ways. As a result, a variety of paradigms arose to understand the social consequences of Meritocracy for intergroup relations; in particular, to understand the adverse consequences of Meritocracy for disadvantaged group members. The present research seeks to understand whether there is strong support for the idea that (manipulated) Meritocracy disproportionally affects members of low status groups, and also to understand which specific components of this norm have been successfully manipulated and to what consequences. And this is particularly important given the recent call for greater transparency in how the success of experimental manipulations is reported. Thus, we carried out a systematic review examining the content of different prime tasks, summarizing prime manipulation checks' effectiveness, and analyzing whether priming Meritocracy leads to less favorable orientations toward low status groups. Results across 33 studies revealed that despite the existing differences in the components highlighted, the salience of any of the Meritocracy dimensions facilitates the use of internal causal attributions, negative evaluations and stereotyping toward low status groups, affecting negatively decisions involving low-status group members, particularly in specific domains, as organizational contexts. These results carry both practical and theoretical implications for future research on the role of Meritocracy in intergroup settings.

"Our Country Needs a Strong Leader Right Now": Economic Inequality Enhances the Wish for a Strong Leader.

Societal inequality has been found to harm the mental and physical health of its members and undermine overall social cohesion. Here, we tested the hypothesis that economic inequality is associated with a wish for a strong leader in a study involving 28 countries from five continents (Study 1, N = 6,112), a study involving an Australian community sample (Study 2, N = 515), and two experiments (Study 3a, N = 96; Study 3b, N = 296). We found correlational (Studies 1 and 2) and experimental (Studies 3a and 3b) evidence for our prediction that higher inequality enhances the wish for a strong leader. We also found that this relationship is mediated by perceptions of anomie, except in the case of objective inequality in Study 1. This suggests that societal inequality enhances the perception that society is breaking down (anomie) and that a strong leader is needed to restore order (even when that leader is willing to challenge democratic values).

Majority Group Members' Negative Reactions to Future Demographic Shifts Depend on the Perceived Legitimacy of Their Status: Findings from the United States and Portugal.

Using concepts from social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979), we examined whether racial/ethnic majority group members' reactions to future demographic shifts is a function of the degree to which they perceive their ingroup's higher-status in society to be legitimate. In two studies, participants who varied in the degree to which they perceived their group's status to be legitimate were either exposed to real projections for 2060 (i.e., large decline in proportion of population that is the "majority" group), or fake projections for 2060-that resembled current figures (i.e., small decline). In Study 1, White Americans who perceived their status to be highly legitimate expressed greater intergroup threat, and negative feelings (anger and fear) toward minorities after exposure to projections with a large decline in the relative size of the White American population. In contrast, demographic shift condition had no effect on intergroup threat and negative feelings toward minorities among White Americans who perceived their status to be relatively illegitimate; negative feelings and threat remained low across both conditions. Similarly, in Study 2, ethnic Portuguese people in Portugal exposed to projections in which there was a large decline in the relative size of the ethnic Portuguese population experienced more intergroup threat and expressed a greater desire to engage in anti-immigration behaviors. The effect of demographic shift condition on intergroup threat and anti-immigration behaviors was stronger among ethnic Portuguese who perceived their status to be legitimate compared to ethnic Portuguese people who perceived their status to be relatively illegitimate. These results highlight that across different cultural contexts, majority group members' beliefs about the legitimacy of intergroup relations can affect their reactions to the prospect of increased diversity.

Revisiting the Measurement of Anomie.

Sociologists coined the term "anomie" to describe societies that are characterized by disintegration and deregulation. Extending beyond conceptualizations of anomie that conflate the measurements of anomie as 'a state of society' and as a 'state of mind', we disentangle these conceptualizations and develop an analysis and measure of this phenomenon focusing on anomie as a perception of the 'state of society'. We propose that anomie encompasses two dimensions: a perceived breakdown in social fabric (i.e., disintegration as lack of trust and erosion of moral standards) and a perceived breakdown in leadership (i.e., deregulation as lack of legitimacy and effectiveness of leadership). Across six studies we present evidence for the validity of the new measure, the Perception of Anomie Scale (PAS). Studies 1a and 1b provide evidence for the proposed factor structure and internal consistency of PAS. Studies 2a-c provide evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Finally, assessing PAS in 28 countries, we show that PAS correlates with national indicators of societal functioning and that PAS predicts national identification and well-being (Studies 3a & 3b). The broader implications of the anomie construct for the study of group processes are discussed.

Categorisation salience and ingroup bias: the buffering role of a multicultural ideology.

The current work sought to test the moderating role of a multicultural ideology on the relationship between categorisation salience and ingroup bias. Accordingly, in one experimental study, we manipulated categorisation salience and the accessibility of a multicultural ideology, and measured intergroup attitudes. Results show that categorisation salience only leads to ingroup bias when a multiculturalism (MC) ideology is not made salient. Thus, MC ideology attenuates the negative effects of categorisation salience on ingroup bias. These results pertain to social psychology in general showing that the cognitive processes should be construed within the framework of ideological contexts.

Nations' income inequality predicts ambivalence in stereotype content: how societies mind the gap.

Income inequality undermines societies: The more inequality, the more health problems, social tensions, and the lower social mobility, trust, life expectancy. Given people's tendency to legitimate existing social arrangements, the stereotype content model (SCM) argues that ambivalence-perceiving many groups as either warm or competent, but not both-may help maintain socio-economic disparities. The association between stereotype ambivalence and income inequality in 37 cross-national samples from Europe, the Americas, Oceania, Asia, and Africa investigates how groups' overall warmth-competence, status-competence, and competition-warmth correlations vary across societies, and whether these variations associate with income inequality (Gini index). More unequal societies report more ambivalent stereotypes, whereas more equal ones dislike competitive groups and do not necessarily respect them as competent. Unequal societies may need ambivalence for system stability: Income inequality compensates groups with partially positive social images.

Is the attribution of cultural differences to minorities an expression of racial prejudice?

The social psychological literature considers two main perspectives on the study of perceived cultural differences between majorities and minorities: one proposes that perception of cultural differences is an antecedent of prejudice and another states that the attribution of cultural differences to minorities is already a hidden expression of racial prejudice. This paper offers further support to this latter perspective. One hundred and ninety-four participants answered a questionnaire measuring (1) general racist belief; (2) cultural differences attributed to Black people (hetero-ethnicization); (3) the asymmetric attribution of secondary and primary emotions to the in-group and to Black people (infra-humanization); (4) the asymmetric attribution of natural and cultural traits to in-group members and to Black people (ontologization); and (5) negative evaluation of this social category. The general racist belief scale was not anchored in a specific group and measured the belief in the inferiority of certain social groups or peoples based on biological or cultural factors. Relationships between the scales were analysed through a set of Structural Equation Models. According to the predictions, results showed that the attribution of cultural differences is a dimension of prejudice. Results also showed that attribution of cultural differences, negative evaluation of Black people, ontologization, and infra-humanization were different dimensions of a common latent factor that can be identified as racial prejudice; and that prejudice was predicted by general racist belief. Results are discussed in the light of the study of the impact of perceived cultural differences on intergroup relations and in the light of the "new racism" approaches.