Massey Documents by Type

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/294

Browse

Start date: 2021Subject: search.filters.subject.social psychology

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Internet Research Agency Campaign to Influence the 2016 US Presidential Elections: A Rhetorical Analysis
    (John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2025-08-19) Nelson N; Hodgetts D; Chamberlain K
    The centrality of information and communicative processes in persuading society has, historically, made the media one of the key networks of power and influence in society. The rapid expansion of social media platforms has, however, enabled revolutionary changes in how this power is wielded and how persuasion occurs. This has had a profound impact on how political, economic, and social issues are understood and addressed. While a comprehensive body of social psychological theory and applied practice on the topic of persuasion has been developed over many years, persuasion in the contemporary social media environment is one that researchers are yet to fully understand. Methods for achieving this understanding continue to evolve. This article draws on a large corpus of material (2218 Facebook advertisements and metadata) which documented the Russian Internet Research Agency campaign to influence the outcome of the 2016 US presidential elections. Drawing on Aristotle's rhetorical framework, this article presents a process analysis to understand how political persuasion is undertaken in the contemporary social media environment. The findings provide new insights into the social psychological processes of persuasion in contemporary society and demonstrate the utility of a rhetorical framework in understanding persuasion campaigns in dynamic digital settings.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A cross-cultural test of competing hypotheses about system justification using data from 42 nations
    (Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society of Political Psychology., 2024-09-25) Valdes EA; Liu JH; Williams M; Carr SC
    System justification theory (SJT) is a thriving field of research, wherein the primary questions revolve around why individuals and groups are motivated to see the systems they depend on as just, fair, and legitimate. This article seeks to answer how accurate the postulates of SJT are when compared to competing self-interest claims of social identity and social dominance theory. We addressed the ongoing debates among proponents of each theory by identifying who, when, and why individuals decide to system-justify. We used data comprised of 24,009 participants nested within 42 countries. Multilevel models largely supported the competing claims of social dominance and social identity theories over SJT. The most robust findings were: (1) greater objective socioeconomic status (SES) was associated with greater system justification; (2) the consistent positive relationship between subjective SES and system justification was partially mediated by life satisfaction; and (3) both ends of the political spectrum were willing to system-justify more when the political party they favored was in power. The results presented are used to discuss both the current state and the future directions for system justification research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Advancing science and creating a scientifically informed community at JCASP
    (John Wiley and Sons Ltd., 2023-07-13) Vezzali L; Hodgetts D; Liu L; Pettersson K; Trifiletti E; Wakefield JRH
    The present editorial team has now coordinated the Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology (JCASP) for 3 years. We have taken the journal in a precise direction towards increasing the volume and quality of articles, many of which articulate clear and positive societal and community impacts. In this editorial, we present JCASP's revised and expanded scope and the orientations and activities that are being undertaken in support of new initiatives. The editorial team welcomes research from all areas of community and social psychology. We accept empirical, theoretical, and methodological articles, and welcome a wide range of methodologies, including quantitative (Pecini et al., 2022), qualitative (Varma & Siromahov, 2023), and mixed methods research (Kothari, Fischer, Mullican, Lipscomb, & Jaramillo, 2022), as well as correlational (Gray, Randell, Manning, & Cleveland, 2023), longitudinal (Joshanloo, 2022), and experimental designs (Mäkinen et al., 2022). Relatedly, we have expanded the types of articles that we accept. In addition to research papers and commentaries traditionally accepted by this journal, we will now consider meta-analyses and reviews (Cadamuro et al., 2021). Importantly, however, these should be directly relevant for the advancement of community and social psychology praxis. Reviews should not just be a summary of research, they should also provide an analysis that creates a framework for understanding the literature regarding the focal topic and present potential to advance the field. Now we also welcome replication studies, which can strengthen the external validity of research results, and registered reports (requiring authors to submit the theoretical rationale and study plan before collecting the data), which contribute to increasing the transparency of research. In the case of registered reports, full articles will be published, independently of whether results support the hypotheses. Finally, we also welcome short research-based policy briefs that summarise key findings and present options for application at the level of policy and/or community action.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reproductive justice: A radical framework for researching sexual and reproductive issues in psychology
    (John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2021-05-13) Morison T
    The reproductive justice framework holds much promise for guiding research that can contribute to social change. Its limited integration and use in social psychology therefore represents a missed opportunity for justice-oriented social researchers. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the reproductive justice framework and demonstrate its value for social psychologists studying sexual and reproductive issues. Using the example of contraceptive provision, rights-based sexual and reproductive health research is contrasted with reproductive justice-oriented research to demonstrate how a reproductive justice lens can extend the analytical focus to illuminate the complex roots of an issue. This is crucial for developing policy and interventions that contribute toward longer-term systemic change and, ultimately, social transformation.