Search

The article offers information on the journal's invitation for submission of papers on the social psychology of precarity.

This article introduces the special issue 'Towards a Social Psychology of Precarity' that develops an orienting lens for social psychologists' engagement with the concept. As guest editors of the special issue, we provide a thematic overview of how 'precarity' is being conceptualized throughout the social sciences, before distilling the nine contributions to the special issue. In so doing, we trace the ways in which social psychologists are (dis)engaging with the concept of precarity, yet too, explore how precarity constitutes, and is embedded within, the discipline itself. Resisting disciplinary decadence, we collectively explore what a social psychology of precarity could be, and view working with/in precarity as fundamental to addressing broader calls for the social responsiveness of the discipline. The contributing papers, which are methodologically pluralistic and provide rich conceptualisations of precarity, challenge reductionist individualist understandings of suffering and coping and extend social science theorizations on precarity. They also highlight the ways in which social psychology remains complicit in perpetuating different forms of precarity, for both communities and academics. We propose future directions for the social psychological study of precarity through four reflexive questions that we encourage scholars to engage with so that we may both work with/in, and intervene against, 'the precarious'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social psychological scholarship has emphasized the importance of effective leadership during the COVID‐19 pandemic. However, the wider material contexts of these dynamics have often remained understudied. Through a critical discursive lens, this paper investigates differences in the social constructions used by leaders of richer and poorer nations during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We identify a sharp economic bifurcation in global discourses of pandemic leadership. Pandemic leadership in wealthier nations exercises power in abundance by mobilizing institutions and inspiring communities through discursive frames of coordination and collaboration. Conversely, pandemic leadership in poorer settings negotiates agency amid scarcity by tactically balancing resources, freedoms and dignity within discursive frames of restriction and recuperation. Implications of these findings are unpacked for understanding leadership especially during an international crisis, highlighting the need for critical sensitivities to wider societal structures for a genuinely global social psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]