Search

Previous work has established that gender, age, and self-control can predict Death Anxiety (DA), the distress that centers around thoughts of one's mortality. However, it has not been determined if DA is associated with Delay of Gratification (DG; a tendency to forgo immediate rewards to receive a more favorable outcome in the future), attitudes toward gender roles (as compared to gender identity itself), and Death Reflections (DR; positive goals that occur when contemplating death). To examine these relations, 131 adults (45% women; aged 23–67 years) completed questionnaires that assess these constructs. We found that greater DG, egalitarian gender role attitudes, and engagement with DR were all associated with reduced DA. Gender identity was not associated with any variable, including DA. Age correlated independently with DA, but not when included in the regression models. These results demonstrate that elements of self-regulation and prosocial attitudes may predict baseline DA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding how initiatives to support Black-owned businesses are received, and why, has important social and economic implications. To address this, we designed three experiments to investigate the role of antiegalitarian versus egalitarian ideologies among White American adults. In Study 1 (N = 199), antiegalitarianism (vs. egalitarianism) predicted viewing initiatives supporting a Black-owned business as less fair, but only when the business was competing with other (presumably White-owned) businesses. In Study 2 (N = 801), antiegalitarianism predicted applying survival-of-the-fittest market beliefs, particularly to Black-owned businesses. Antiegalitarianism also predicted viewing initiatives supporting Black-owned businesses as less fair than initiatives that targeted other (presumably White-owned) businesses, especially for tangible (vs. symbolic) support that directly impacts the success of a business. In Study 3 (N = 590), antiegalitarianism predicted rejecting a program investing in Black-owned businesses. These insights demonstrate how antiegalitarian ideology can have the effect of maintaining race-based inequality, hindering programs designed to reduce that inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A just or fair distribution of environmental bads and goods is important for solving environmental social dilemmas and is a core idea of environmental justice politics and research. Environmental justice is mostly associated with egalitarianism as the sole justice principle for all people. In contrast, we argue that it is important to uncover and consider heterogeneity in justice concerns to achieve socially accepted solutions to environmental social dilemmas. With noise pollution as an example, we explore citizens' preferences for justice principles regarding the allocation of politically initiated environmental benefits. In our survey in four European cities, respondents were asked to choose between different outcomes of a program to reduce road traffic noise in line with the following four notions of distributive justice: equal shares, equal outcomes, the greatest benefit for the least advantaged (Rawls), and the greatest benefit for the greatest number (Bentham). We found that most respondents chose Rawls' principle, a preference that was stable over time but weaker when explicitly introducing the veil of ignorance. The preference for Rawls notwithstanding, we observed substantial heterogeneity in justice preferences. Multinomial logit analyses of survey and geo-referenced data on noise exposure showed that respondents with a higher socio-economic status and lower exposure to traffic noise were more likely to choose Rawls' principle. Taken together, our study confirms the prominence of Rawls' principle, demonstrates empirically the heterogeneity of justice preferences, and calls for more direct measurements of such preferences in research on environmental social dilemmas, environmental justice, and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is important to understand men's participation in action for gender equality as true societal change necessitates aid from allies. In the present study, we investigated whether critical consciousness (CC) may be a tool men use to combat sexism. CC entails three interrelated components: critical reflection, critical efficacy, and critical action. According to the theory, people will act to change unjust social systems if they have critically reflected on injustice and possess internal efficacy. Additionally, external efficacy may stymie action for those who also have greater reflection. Men (N = 680) attending a predominantly White, liberal arts college in the United States answered questions about two forms of critical reflection (perceived inequality and egalitarianism), internal and external efficacy, and their participation in action for gender equality. Structural equation modeling was used to evaluate the hypothesized model that men who engaged in critical reflection would act for gender equality if they also possessed higher internal and lower external efficacy. Internal efficacy mediated the connection between perceived inequality and action and the connection between egalitarianism and action. External efficacy did not mediate relations between perceived inequality or egalitarianism and action. Our findings indicate that men may act if they have critically reflected on gender inequality, hold egalitarian views, and possess internal efficacy. Results suggest CC may be a resource men can use to serve as allies and help create a more gender-equitable society. Public Significance Statement: Gender equality will not be achieved without men's participation in actions to dismantle sexist social structures. The findings from this study suggest that men may act for gender equality if they possess critical consciousness regarding sexism and gender equality. Experiences that allow men to reflect critically on gender inequality, develop more egalitarian views, and feel confident in their understanding of gender equality issues may empower them to act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the fundamental role of unions in reducing economic inequality, social psychology still needs to incorporate the systematic study of unions concerning the contemporary theories of intergroup inequality. In this study, we do so by testing the reciprocal relationship between trust in unions and social‐dominance orientation egalitarianism (SDO‐E) over time. Using data from the Longitudinal Social Survey of Chile, which is a panel study with a representative sample of urban areas, we carried out a Random Intercept Cross‐Lagged Panel Model with four waves (2016–2019, N = 2972–2153). We controlled the main effect by sex, age, political ideology and educational level. The results show a positive relationship between SDO‐E and trust in unions within and between levels. This means that people who trust in unions also tend to have higher SDO‐E (between effect), and an intraindividual increase in trust in labour unions tends to be followed by an increase in SDO‐E (within effect). Trusting unions as an institution that promotes the hierarchy reduction between workers and employers helps increase people's SDO‐E over time. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unconditional basic income (UBI) is a redistributive policy proposal that is receiving increasing attention in the Spanish political sphere. Welfare attitudes literature has shown that support for UBI is higher among left‐wing citizens and those of lower socioeconomic status. However, previous studies have not addressed the mediating role of ideological values such as egalitarianism or meritocratism in supporting UBI. Furthermore, studies have not considered the interactive relationship between ideological and self‐interest motives when studying attitudes toward UBI. Drawing on modernization theory, we propose that individuals' socioeconomic status conditions the role of ideological motivations in shaping support for UBI. To test this hypothesis, we study data from two different surveys conducted in Spain in 2017 (N = 1958) and 2021 (N = 2004). Our findings suggest that ideology is a less relevant motivation for supporting UBI among the Spanish citizens of lower socioeconomic status, but it becomes increasingly salient among higher‐status citizens. Among the latter, egalitarian values lead leftists to support UBI, whereas anti‐egalitarian and meritocratic values lead rightists to anti‐UBI positions. We discuss these findings within the framework of modernization theory, addressing support for UBI by different social groups and the ability of this policy proposal to elicit broad‐based support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how speech and speech acts are central to Othering First Nations people in Australia. Werner Herzog's film, Where the Green Ants Dream (1984), centres around a fictional Dreaming story about green ants, which connect individual ancestral beings with the creation process, as well as forming the basis of First Nation law and culture. The Dreaming story projected in this film is intertwined with a specific nation of First Nations people and their connection and relationship to their Country (land). The film reveals an uneasy relationship between Dreaming and the positive law. In projecting First Nations people's speech and speech acts within the context of a trial, the film illustrates how the adversarial nature of the law (English common law versus First Nation laws and culture) does not always adequately deal with hard cases. This film manifests the trauma and violence of the white settler state upon First Nations people to illustrate the shortcomings of Australian legality and how the state reckons with the Other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite growing attention to income inequality in debates about European integration, our understanding of its effect on European Union support remains limited. Using European Social Survey data from 2002 to 2020, we analyse how income inequality and pro-redistribution attitudes shape diffuse and specific forms of support for the European Union. We find no direct effect of country-level income inequality, while individual support for redistribution has a negative effect on both. In line with benchmarking theory, inequality emerges as a contextual moderator: in unequal national settings, egalitarian citizens are comparatively more supportive of further integration than in more equal countries. This effect persists when we control for income position, suggesting an ideological rather than utilitarian basis for benchmarking European Union attitudes. We discuss implications in light of debates about a social Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the problem of social inequality in the Western cultural and civilizational paradigm. It is noted that in the history of Western philosophy and culture, there have always been two different approaches to understanding inequality. The first path of elitism involved the apology for inequality, proposing ideas of aristocracy (inequality within a single society) or racial domination (inequality between peoples and civilizations). This philosophical tradition can be called traditional-authoritarian (Plato, Aristotle) or romantic-conservative (H. Chamberlain). The second way is egalitarian, which insists on creating a society built on the idea of equality (the philosophy of liberalism and Marxism). If representatives of the liberal wing of egalitarianism (Locke, Bentham) focus on the justification of a society of equal opportunities with an emphasis on natural human rights, the tradition of Marxism tends to consider social contradictions caused by inequality as antagonistic. Therefore, protest, revolution, rebellion become a specifically Western way of eradicating inequality (Marx, Camus). At the same time, the article notes that the deep worldview basis of this way of solving the problem of inequality is the nihilistic nature of Western civilization, its "Faustian spirit" (Spengler). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building on current research into space and religion, this article explores how religious identity is negotiated in the small Modern Orthodox Jewish community in the Norwegian city of Trondheim. The focus is on Jews who question the synagogue as an Orthodox site with its strict definitions of who has access to the religious services and sections of the synagogue, which reflects the ongoing construction of Jewish identity among Jews in Trondheim. Three significant factors constitute this negotiation: loyalty towards the first generations of Jewish immigrants who established the Orthodox tradition in Trondheim and founded an Orthodox congregation, the desire to create a congregation that lives up to the contemporary ideal of gender equality, the desire to be affiliated with a congregation for those who identify as Jews. This article argues that the way religious space is contested has much to say about the way Jewish identity is currently understood in the Nordic countries. A focus on space and place also proves useful when analysing religious identity in Europe more generally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Goffman's terms, qualitative interviews are social encounters with their own realities. Hence, the 'situational critique' holds that interviews cannot produce knowledge about the world beyond these encounters, and that other methods, ethnography in particular, render lived life more accurately. The situational critique cannot be dismissed; yet interviewing remains an indispensable sociological tool. This paper demonstrates the value that situationalism holds for interviewing. We examine seemingly contradictory findings from interview studies of middle-class identity (cultural hierarchies and/or egalitarianism?). We then render these contradictions comprehensible by interpreting data excerpts through 'methodological situationalism': Goffman's theories of interaction order, ritual, and frontstage/backstage. In 'situationalist interviewing,' we suggest that sociologists be attentive to the 'imagined audiences' and 'imagined communities'. These are key to identifying the situations, interaction orders, and cultural repertoires that lie beyond the interview encounter, but to which it refers. In sum, we argue for greater situational awareness among sociologists who must rely on interviews. We also discuss techniques and measures that can facilitate situational awareness. A promise of situational interviewing is that it helps us make sense of contradictions, ambiguities, and disagreements within and between interviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I reflect on the implications that ultimatum and dictator game experiments might have for public policy and for the debates over egalitarianism. Experiments suggest that people are more inclined to redistribute when outcomes are influenced by luck than effort. This can create difficulties for public policy when people hold contrasting views over whether luck or effort determine outcomes. The results also appear to play into forms of luck egalitarianism. However, they may also be consistent with an alternative understanding of egalitarianism as the impulse to have rules that treat people equally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To elucidate how ingroup identification is implicated in attitudes towards gender equality, it is important to consider that (1) people simultaneously identify with more (a nation) vs. less abstract groups (gender), and (2) gender collective narcissism is the specific aspect of ingroup identification likely to inspire opposite attitudes towards gender equality among men (negative) and women (positive), but (3) national narcissism is likely to align with men's interests and inspire negative attitudes towards gender equality among men and women. In Study 1, we demonstrate that gender collective narcissism is the same variable among men and women. In Study 2, we show that among women (but not among men) in Poland, gender collective narcissism predicts intentions to engage in normative and non-normative collective action for gender equality. In Study 3, we show that gender collective narcissists among women endorse an egalitarian outlook, whereas gender collective narcissists among men reject it. In contrast, national narcissism predicts refusal to engage in collective action for gender equality and endorsement of an anti-egalitarian outlook among women and among men. Thus, national narcissism and gender collective narcissism among men impair pursuit of gender equality. Gender collective narcissism among women facilitates engagement in collective action for gender equality. Low gender collective narcissism among men and low national narcissism may also facilitate support for gender equality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International carbon allocation confronts the conflict between efficiency and equality. Previous research based on the intergroup bias perspective has attributed carbon allocation preference to the defence of ingroup interests (i.e., national interests) while overlooking the critical role of trade‐offs between competing moral values. Integrating the contingency theory of justice and moral philosophical theories of utilitarianism and egalitarianism, we proposed that the moral‐values trade‐off between utilitarianism and egalitarianism determines carbon allocation preference through justice reasoning. Analysis of large‐scale survey datasets (Study 1) revealed that aggregated national endorsement of utilitarianism over egalitarianism predicted greater efficiency preference in total and per capita carbon emission levels. Study 2 demonstrated that experimentally manipulating endorsement of utilitarianism versus egalitarianism boosted efficiency (vs. equality) preference in carbon allocation, and justice reasoning characterized by enhanced efficiency‐focused justice and diminished equality‐focused justice accounted for these effects. Using a 'manipulation‐of‐mediator' design, Study 3 further confirmed the causal link in the mediation model. By highlighting the significance of moral trade‐offs in shaping carbon allocation preference, this research not only provides a novel moral perspective in understanding debates on international carbon allocation but also has important implications for fostering international carbon abatement cooperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We introduce a new core selection to minimum cost spanning tree problems satisfying continuity, population and cost monotonicity, solidarity, and ranking. We prove that it Lorenz dominates every other allocation in the irreducible core of the problem, including the celebrated folk solution unless they yield the same outcome. Therefore, among the core selections satisfying solidarity, our solution generates the most egalitarian outcome for each problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I argue for a normative reconstruction, from a decolonial perspective of critical theory in Brazil and Latin America, of a democratic ethos that despite its weaknesses and normative deficits is capable of fostering an increasingly deliberative, participatory, and egalitarian democracy by making extensive use of new digital technologies (comprising both AI systems and digital governance). Its argumentative core boils down to the promotion of intersectional egalitarianism (socio-economic, gender, racial-ethnic, environmental) through digital inclusion, which seems only feasible to us from a perspective capable of accommodating the normative claims of a critical decolonial theory combined with a naturalistic view of sustainability, within a research program that I dubbed “mitigated social constructionism” in response to the phenomenological deficit of normative and naturalistic theories (including critical theory and neurophilosophy). If what matters is normativity, then to avoid the divide between naturalism and non-naturalist normativity one nonfoundationalist alternative is to resort to hermeneutical and procedural accounts of normativity as helpful clues to making sense of the naturalism-normativity problem, avoiding reductionist interpretations of both naturalism (Churchland) and normativism (Parfit). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Egalitarianism can be defined as the view which holds that a situation improves on at least one aspect if the value contained in this situation is distributed more equally among individuals. Despite having more followers, part of the theory was ignored by them: egalitarianism takes into consideration all sentient beings, but the non-human animals, which are the majority of them, were not included in the texts on the subject, making this literature incomplete and inaccurate. Because of this, it is necessary to study the consequences that this view has for non-human animals. Among the few who discuss, are Horta, Faria, Holtug, Lippert-Rasmussen, Person and Vallentyne, who are my bibliographical references to show six consequences of egalitarianism for non-human animals: (1) to reject speciesism, (2) do not harm non-human animals for self-benefit, (3) to engage yourself in ativism in favor of non-human animals, (4) actively assist non-human animals regardless of where these animals live, which includes animals who lives in the nature, (5) to give priority to attend non-human animals needs and (6) these five consequences above are independent of the kind of egalitarianism that is assumed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This response to the other Articles in this issue acknowledges the importance of some of the obstacles to sound antitrust-policy analysis that others find insurmountable but contends that they can and must be overcome, explains why I think some critiques of my approach are ill-specified and indefensible, clarifies some oligopolistic-conduct-related concepts my study uses about which one contributor poses questions, restates in my terminology the arguments of two contributions that delineate and evaluate particular E.U. antitrust policies and comments on some of the normative claims these two articles consider, and expresses my appreciation of the positive book review that two scholars have supplied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many domains of research suggest that high favourability to social power and low favourability to egalitarian ideals predict more prejudice against other groups. In the present article, we describe theory and evidence suggesting that the relations between power, egalitarianism and prejudice may be reversed for one group: fat men. Using both implicit and explicit measures, we found across four studies (N = 602) that target gender moderated the relation between values and attitude toward fat people. For male targets, implicitly but not explicitly measured positivity toward power (over egalitarian) values predicted significantly more spontaneous positive attitudes toward fat (over slim) people. Further, implicit attitude toward power (over egalitarian) values predicted the time‐pressured decision to choose a fat male. Together, the implicit evaluation of values allows us to identify processes in inter‐group attitudes and behaviours that would not be possible to detect using explicit measures of values alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urgent transfers of severely impaired patients with chronic neurological disability (PwND) from a neurological physical and rehabilitation medicine (nPRM) to an intensive care unit (ICU) or an emergency room (ER) served as the basis for this study. We hypothesized that human and structural factors interfered with but were not directly related to the acute context. We decided to use a qualitative methodology, based on in-depth interviews with 16 ICU/ER physicians. We used mixed bottom-up and top-down methods. We interpreted our data using a thematic approach based on the key principles of grounded theory, which were modified with consideration of the literature. Three main domains emerged. The impact of the clinical setting notably implied the patient's clinical typology between the acute event and the chronic background, but also bed availability. Key elements of the telephone negotiation were confidence and perceived usefulness of the transfer. Finally, the otherness of some categories of patients, transferred with more difficulty, involved those with cognitive impairment. The existence of healthcare pathways for many years has created an organizational culture between departments of nPRM and ICUs. But urgent transfers also imply organizational ethics, as a balance should be struck between utility and equity. Structural and human factors interfere in urgent transfers, involving the settings within health pathways, the key elements of negotiation to get confidence and a perceived utility of transfer, and certain categories of people, especially those with cognitive impairment. Transfers that imply negotiation between practitioners from physical and rehabilitation medicine and intensive care unit departments, lead to a need of organizational ethics, as a balance should be struck between the principles of utility and equity. The development of facilitating tools such as a commitment charter is of paramount importance as it can support ethical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate the possibility that women and men have distinct behavioral reactions to victimization. We conducted an experiment to elicit preferences for in-group egalitarianism and individual competitiveness for a random sample of 751 individuals in Sierra Leone (aged 18–85) to contrast the behavioral consequences of victimization during the 1991–2003 civil war across sex and parental status. Our results show that mothers and fathers display the highest level of cooperation, yet conflict exposure does not affect them. Egalitarianism increases after victimization only among non-parents, with an effect stronger for males, who are the least egalitarian to start with. Conflict exposure tames everyone's competitive tendencies, but has the opposite effect for mothers, the least competitive group in the absence of conflict. Measures of competitiveness among 191 parents from Colombia show a similar pattern. Our results suggests that conflict, by closing sex and parental gaps in behavior, may prime individuals toward strategies that either benefit the group or the individual, depending on sex and parental role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Korowai of Indonesian Papua have shifted their political order from rejecting relations of authority, to actively subordinating themselves to government patrons and implementing state structures locally. This shift was caused by how internal complexities of the past Korowai egalitarian system have interacted with dramatic macrostructural changes in the intruding state. Previously, I linked Korowai ideas about opacity of minds to political egalitarianism. Analyzing the new political shifts here, I emphasise again how opacity doctrines are embedded in wider processes of exchange and kinship that involve attributing thoughts to others, trying to influence those thoughts, and trying to deal in egalitarian ways with unequal economic conditions, as well as with the intrinsically power-laden dynamics of intersubjectivity itself. The Korowai example suggests wider lessons in how state formation takes hold at extreme colonial and market peripheries, and how doctrines of the knowability of minds articulate with practical institutionalisation of state administrative hierarchy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to square our considered judgements about the moral significance of healthcare with various empirical and conceptual challenges about its role in a theory of justice. I do so by defending the moral significance of healthcare by reference to a central but neglected dimension – healthcare's expressive function. Over and above its influence on health outcomes and other metrics of justice (such as opportunity or welfare), and despite its relatively limited impact on population health outcomes, healthcare expresses respect for individuals in a distinctive and morally salient way. Grounding the moral significance of healthcare in this way not only highlights an important distinguishing feature of healthcare, but it also makes our support for healthcare immune from several powerful objections against its significance. This conclusion has important implications for theorists of (health) justice and for political philosophers more widely, highlighting the appropriate role of healthcare within public policy and normative theorising about theories of justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Politicians are increasingly able to communicate their values, attitudes, and concerns directly to voters. Yet little is known about which of these signals resonate with voters and why. We employ a discrete choice experiment to investigate whether and which social‐psychological attitudes predict how adult British voters respond to corresponding attitudinal signals communicated by candidates in hypothetical social media posts. For all attitudes studied, covering social feelings (trust, collective nostalgia), social perceptions (nationalism, populist sentiment), and social commitments (national identification, authoritarianism, egalitarianism), we find that participants are much more likely to vote for candidates who signal proximity to their own attitudinal position and less likely for candidates who signal opposing views. The strongest effects were observed for national identification, authoritarianism, and egalitarianism, indicating the importance of commitment to a shared group and to particular principles for distributing power and resources within and between groups. We further demonstrate that social‐psychological attitudes are not acting as mere proxies for participants' past votes or left–right ideology. Our results extend adaptive followership theory to incorporate preferences concerning intragroup coordination and intergroup hierarchy, while highlighting the social‐psychological dynamics of political communication that may transcend the concerns of particular election cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding how resource characteristics influence variability in social and material inequality among foraging populations is a prominent area of research. However, obtaining cross-comparative data from which to evaluate theoretically informed resource characteristic factors has proved difficult, particularly for investigating interactions of characteristics. Therefore, we develop an agent-based model to evaluate how five key characteristics of primary resources (predictability, heterogeneity, abundance, economy of scale and monopolizability) structure pay-offs and explore how they interact to favour both egalitarianism and inequality. Using iterated simulations from 243 unique combinations of resource characteristics analysed with an ensemble machine-learning approach, we find the predictability and heterogeneity of key resources have the greatest influence on selection for egalitarian and nonegalitarian outcomes. These results help explain the prevalence of egalitarianism among foraging populations, as many groups probably relied on resources that were both relatively less predictable and more homogeneously distributed. The results also help explain rare forager inequality, as comparison with ethnographic and archaeological examples suggests the instances of inequality track strongly with reliance on resources that were predictable and heterogeneously distributed. Future work quantifying comparable measures of these two variables, in particular, may be able to identify additional instances of forager inequality. This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolutionary ecology of inequality'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary liberal states must provide an answer to the "question of cultural diversity", requiring a principled way to determine which minority cultural practices a state must accommodate and support. (Liberal egalitarian) multiculturalism answers this question neatly by creating a dichotomy between national minorities and ethnic minorities (the national/ethnic "dichotomy"). Where national minorities are entitled to extensive and far-reaching cultural rights, ethnic minorities are entitled to significantly fewer cultural rights and accommodations. This dichotomy is enacted through a distributive logic that allocates cultural rights to achieve equal individual autonomy. But the dichotomy is also influenced by the ways these groups were incorporated into the state. Their modes of incorporation are different and, thus, they have different requirements to achieve equally autonomous lives. Critics have challenged multiculturalism by questioning this dichotomy. They have suggested that the dichotomy does not adequately capture differences in kinds of minority groups and their entitlements. This paper defends the dichotomy by offering a supplementary principle to liberal egalitarian multiculturalism: the reparative multicultural principle. This principle allocates cultural rights as part of reparative entitlements for historical and ongoing injustices committed against minority groups. Supplementing multiculturalism in this way more accurately captures the idea of the historical mode of incorporation that inspires the dichotomy and can help resolve some the objections to multiculturalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Politicians are increasingly able to communicate their values, attitudes, and concerns directly to voters. Yet little is known about which of these signals resonate with voters and why. We employ a discrete choice experiment to investigate whether and which social‐psychological attitudes predict how adult British voters respond to corresponding attitudinal signals communicated by candidates in hypothetical social media posts. For all attitudes studied, covering social feelings (trust, collective nostalgia), social perceptions (nationalism, populist sentiment), and social commitments (national identification, authoritarianism, egalitarianism), we find that participants are much more likely to vote for candidates who signal proximity to their own attitudinal position and less likely for candidates who signal opposing views. The strongest effects were observed for national identification, authoritarianism, and egalitarianism, indicating the importance of commitment to a shared group and to particular principles for distributing power and resources within and between groups. We further demonstrate that social‐psychological attitudes are not acting as mere proxies for participants' past votes or left–right ideology. Our results extend adaptive followership theory to incorporate preferences concerning intragroup coordination and intergroup hierarchy, while highlighting the social‐psychological dynamics of political communication that may transcend the concerns of particular election cycles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has demonstrated that low social dominance orientation (social equality orientation) promotes empathy with disadvantaged group members. In three studies, we tested a model relating preference for egalitarianism to positive attitudes towards immigrants through emotional experiences (pride, guilt, moral anger/ anger, disgust). Studies 1 and 2 showed that social equality orientation was positively related to proimmigrant attitudes through increased pride in helping immigrants, controlling for participants' gender, age, and political orientation. Such a preference for egalitarianism was unrelated to proimmigrant attitudes through guilt for not helping immigrants and moral anger concerning mistreatment of immigrants. By focusing on emotional experience concerning proimmigrant national initiatives (e.g., integrating immigrants into the labor market), Study 3 corroborated the indirect effect of social equality orientation on proimmigrant attitudes through increased pride, controlling for participants' gender, age, political orientation, as well as competitive jungle and dangerous world beliefs. Although much weaker, we also found a positive association between social equality orientation and proimmigrant attitudes through reduced anger, while no significant association through guilt and disgust was found. Results suggest that, relative to guilt, anger, and disgust, pride is the key channel through which preference for egalitarianism is related to positive attitudes towards immigrants. Implications and future directions for research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much research has examined the link between (anti-)egalitarian ideology and motivated social cognition. However, this research is typically framed around anti-egalitarianism, with the other end of this ideological pole, egalitarianism, often ignored altogether or treated as merely the absence of anti-egalitarian-motivated cognition. We integrate long-standing ideas from social dominance theory with contemporary models of motivated social cognition and a recent wave of empirical findings to argue that egalitarian ideology also drives social cognition in meaningful ways. We discuss why pursuing this avenue of research is important and outline several unanswered questions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article inquires into the practices and the egalitarian discourse of the artiguist experience during the first decade of the revolution. We seek to examine the different dimensions of the notion of equality addressed by artiguismo as well as the network of concepts, images and metaphors linked to this notion and its changes throughout the period. We also wonder about what kind of equality could be proposed, practiced and imagined in a stamental society in war and revolution, where popular mobilization was based on novel political principles and the questioning of the structures and practices of the colonial order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Fair go' is one of the most pervasive and enduring expressions in Australian cultural and political discourse. While the phrase is routinely used by politicians, commentators and scholars, no one has systematically studied what a fair go originally meant to Australians. A mixed-method textual analysis of all Australian newspaper mentions of 'fair go' before Federation was conducted to determine the dominant values associated with the expression and the contexts in which it was used. The data show the fair go phrase mainly referred to striving for success in sporting competition, the pursuit of power in politics and civil society, and conformity to norms and rules in sport and legal matters. This historical analysis contributes knowledge about the social and political values associated with Australia's 'fair go tradition' and provides a framework and methodology for further research to trace the evolution of a key component of Australian political discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines morality in taste judgements. In response to Bourdieu's analysis of France in the 1960s, sociologists note that repertoires of moral evaluation vary across contexts. They typically highlight national variations, like Nordic egalitarianism weakens cultural boundaries, and temporal variations, with transformed values having made cultural hierarchies less defensible. The article investigates a neglected type of moral variation: contrasting cultural areas. In a study of class and culture in Stavanger, Norway, the authors combined oral interviews on taste with photo elicitation in the visual arts, literature and housing/architecture. While interviewees were often careful not to appear disdainful of other people's tastes, and expressed ambivalence about cultural boundaries, their thoughts on housing/architecture diverged. Here, people did not hesitate to criticise other people's taste, even to the point of ridiculing their houses. The authors discuss the implications for Lamont's symbolic boundary perspective, which is predicated on a separation of three types of symbolic boundaries (cultural, socioeconomic, moral). Morality can both weaken and reinforce cultural boundaries, depending on the areas under investigation. In conclusion, the authors suggest ways cultural sociology may conceive of different moral modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper offers a distinctive reading of Popper’s work, suggesting that his Logic of Scientific Discovery (LScD) might be re-interpreted in the light of his Open Society. Indeed, Popper can be interpreted as criticising certain aspects of his first book, and as a result improving upon them, in his second. It suggests translating what Popper says about ‘conventions’ into his later vocabulary of ‘social institutions’. Looking back, I believe that Popper never intended the language of conventions and decisions to be read individualistically. I remain unsure whether Popper was himself quite as clear about this as he could have been. My reading makes Popper a pioneer in the sociology of science. Scientific institutions are arenas of political power; but Popper did not discuss the structure and inter-relations of the social institutions of science, or offer a politics of science in the context of his methodology. What is missing from the skeletal sociology of LScD is the politics. We could put it in Popperian terms this way: scientific institutions are both open and closed. They are closed, firmly, to the inexpert, to the nonmembers; supposedly they are open to the qualified, provided the prerogatives of seniority and leadership are acknowledged. Despite these shortcomings, Popper’s critical and rational approach and his insistence on openness and intellectual honesty are still important today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A major evolutionary transition in individuality involves the formation of a cooperative group and the transformation of that group into an evolutionary entity. Human cooperation shares principles with those of multicellular organisms that have undergone transitions in individuality: division of labour, communication, and fitness interdependence. After the split from the last common ancestor of hominoids, early hominins adapted to an increasingly terrestrial niche for several million years. We posit that new challenges in this niche set in motion a positive feedback loop in selection pressure for cooperation that ratcheted coevolutionary changes in sociality, communication, brains, cognition, kin relations and technology, eventually resulting in egalitarian societies with suppressed competition and rapid cumulative culture. The increasing pace of information innovation and transmission became a key aspect of the evolutionary niche that enabled humans to become formidable cooperators with explosive population growth, the ability to cooperate and compete in groups of millions, and emergent social norms, e.g. private property. Despite considerable fitness interdependence, the rise of private property, in concert with population explosion and socioeconomic inequality, subverts potential transition of human groups into evolutionary entities due to resurgence of latent competition and conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Distributive theories evaluate distributions of goods based on candidate recipients' characteristics, e.g. how well off candidates are, how deserving they are, and whether they fare below sufficiency. But such characteristics vary across possible worlds, so distributive theories may differ in terms of the world which for them settles candidates' characteristics. This paper examines how distributive theories differ in terms of whether candidate recipients' relevant characteristics are grounded in the possible world that would take place if the distributor does not intervene (call it the "input" world) or if they are grounded in each possible world that the distributor can bring about through different decisions (call each an "output" world). We illustrate the importance of this distinction in relation to one distributive theory, prioritarianism. As we show, both input and output versions of prioritarianism are plausible interpretations of the literature, and there are good reasons to take input prioritarianism seriously. Ultimately, however, we argue that input prioritarianism should be rejected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many theorists think that discrimination is wrongful because it involves treating discriminatees as if they have a lower moral status than others when in fact all people are moral equals. However, there are strong reasons, expounded by Peter Singer and others, to doubt that all people are indeed moral equals. While it may turn out that, ultimately, these reasons can be shown to be unsound, we cannot rule out the possibility that we are not all moral equals. If we are not, discrimination cannot be wrong because it involves failure to treat people as moral equals. With this in mind, I propose two anti-inegalitarian accounts of the wrongness of discrimination – "anti-inegalitarian" rather than "egalitarian" because, strictly speaking, they do not posit equality of status, and "anti-inegalitarian" rather than "inegalitarian" because they reject almost all (and in the case of one of them, all) inequalities in status. These two accounts have many of the attractions of the moral equality account. Being immune to Singerian doubts about moral equality is also a strength of the accounts because it means that they are not hostage to the outcome of the intricate debate over moral equality. Lastly, the anti-inegalitarian accounts I propose are in some ways preferable to the moral equality account because they have certain implications for the wrongness of discrimination that an account given in terms of moral equality does not have, and which egalitarians so far have not theorized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What does it mean for algorithmic classifications to be fair to different socially salient groups? According to classification parity criteria, what is required is equality across groups with respect to some performance measure such as error rates. Critics of classification parity object that classification parity entails that achieving fairness may require us to choose an algorithm that makes no group better off and some groups worse off than an alternative. In this article, I interpret the problem of algorithmic fairness as a case concerning the ethics of the distribution of algorithmic classifications across groups (as opposed to, e.g., the fairness of data collection). I begin with a short introduction of algorithmic fairness as a problem discussed in machine learning. I then show how the criticism raised against classification parity is a form of leveling down objection, and I interpret the egalitarianism of classification parity as deontic egalitarianism. I then discuss a challenge to this interpretation and suggest a revision. Finally, I examine how my interpretation provides proponents of classification parity with a response to the leveling down criticism and how it relates to a recent suggestion to evaluate fairness for automated decision-making systems based on risk and welfare considerations from behind a veil of ignorance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Whether or not luck egalitarians must be committed to basic equality I qua i luck egalitarianism is a question we cannot settle here[4]; but we would certainly expect luck egalitarians to share this basic commitment, even if it is not, strictly speaking, required by luck egalitarianism. Keywords: egalitarianism; equality; ethos; luck egalitarianism; self-respect; shame; talent EN egalitarianism equality ethos luck egalitarianism self-respect shame talent 41 58 18 03/15/23 20230301 NES 230301 INTRODUCTION A recurring concern about luck egalitarianism is that it violates core egalitarian commitments because its implementation would make some individuals, in particular those who lack marketable talents, experience shame. So our response focuses on shame, rather than neighboring phenomena, and asks to what extent shame that occurs in a broadly (rather than ideal) luck egalitarian society can be imputed to luck egalitarian commitments and is inimical to egalitarian values at the same time. This type of respect is a central commitment of any egalitarian view so if the critics can show that the shame felt in a luck egalitarian society leads to unequal recognition respect they would have a strong argument against luck egalitarianism. [Extracted from the article]

Social dominance orientation (SDO) holds a central position in social dominance theory. Since the development, validation, and publication of the SDO7 scale in 2015, which was designed to distinguish between the dominance (SDO-D) and (anti-)egalitarianism (SDO-E) facets of SDO, it has become common in the literature to distinguish between these facets using the SDO7. This is based on the theoretical proposition that SDO-D and SDO-E meaningfully differ and have different relationships with other constructs. However, the present study critically reviews the original validity evidence provided for the SDO7's distinction between SDO-D and SDO-E and notes conceptual and empirical reasons to question this distinction. Because a sizable number of studies have used the SDO7 since the presentation of that original validity evidence, the present study uses meta-analysis to leverage this burgeoning literature to determine whether there has since been more convincing empirical evidence for the distinction between these facets. The meta-analysis finds that SDO-D and SDO-E have a magnitude of intercorrelation that would often be considered adequate for a reliability coefficient (mean ρ =.83), have extremely similar patterns and magnitudes of relationships with the variables in their nomological network, and have nearly identical means and standard deviations. Although the SDO7 is a useful, reliable, and valid measure of overall SDO, its use to distinguish between SDO-D and SDO-E is not empirically supported. The present meta-analysis also provides insights into the nomological network of SDO-D, SDO-E, and overall SDO and the distributional characteristics of study participants' SDO scale scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Democratic policymaking requires compromise, but public support for it varies substantially. Scholars know relatively little about the psychology of such public attitudes. In this investigation, we consider the predictive capacities of humanitarianism (a commitment to helping those who are suffering) and egalitarianism (a commitment to treating people equally). Such altruistic values, we argue, foster concern for the common good and a cooperative vision of democratic policymaking — which, in turn, engender support for compromise. Moreover, we suggest that partisan differences in such values (with Democrats being more likely than Republicans to prioritize them, on average), help explain Democrats' disproportionate support for compromise. Data from two nationally representative studies are consistent with this theoretical perspective, offering novel insights into the roots of political compromise, the reach of core values as political determinants, and the dynamics of partisan asymmetry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research focuses on the patrimonial assets of the business families of the city of Burgos at the end of the Ancient Regime (1700-1850) and their hereditary transmission. We have used abundant documentary sources, especially wills and testamentary accounts, whose analyses shows the differences in behaviour between these bourgeois families and their counterparts in the city of León. It can be observed that in the eighteenth century, and more particularly in the second half of that century, families that had a sound financial situation favoured partible inheritance, as proved by the quantitative analysis of the testamentary accounts. They thus privileged equity among heirs over the economic interests of the family. Similarly, improvements and legacies did not only benefit the descendants that were expected to take over the business -- who were usually the first-born males. They were rather distributed on the basis of the affections felt for religious sons and daughters, underage children and the most unprotected, including also widowed spouses. Finally, pre-inheritance was hardly ever used and the transfer of properties from uncles/aunts without progeny was also rare, which reinforces the previous ideas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim. The aim of the article is to reveal the experiences and attitudes of pupils who attended schools in the late Soviet era (1960s-1980s) towards the implementation of egalitarianism policies in the schools of the Lithuanian SSR. The analysis of the qualitative research material focuses on the word "felt" in the phrase "We all felt equal then", i.e., not so much on the fixation of social (in)equality by analysing the indicators of social class or economic status, but on the subjective experience of equality as a manifestation of human dignity. Methods. Following the methodology of oral history, material was collected during 32 in-depth interviews with people who had attended schools in the Lithuanian SSR in the late Soviet era. Results. Several themes emerged from the analysis of the interviews relating to the expression of egalitarianism in the Soviet school: the social class of the pupils; the economic situation of the parents; and the ability of the parents to have the socalled "blat". Conclusions. The study revealed that the implementation of the policy of egalitarianism officially declared by the Communist Party in the education system was subject to several reservations. In Soviet Lithuania, just as in the whole society, there were a lot of manifestations of blat, corruption, and favouritism. These were influenced by the positions held by pupils' parents, belonging to the nomenklatura and/or the ability to establish informal contacts. Pupils from rural schools had fewer opportunities to pursue higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Credentialism refers to the practice of hiring or promoting applicants on the basis of their educational qualifications. In this paper, we argue that this can amount to wrongful discrimination against the less qualified. A standard way to defend credentialism appeals to the fact that it minimizes the costs of production. We argue that this argument has unacceptable implications in some cases involving disability- and gender-based discrimination. We claim that, once we appropriately revise this argument, credentialism is revealed to be similarly wrongfully discriminatory. We then consider two objections and draw some preliminary lessons for policymaking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Intercultural performance" elicits complicated power dimensions in an exchange between center and periphery. To address these power dimensions, this paper focuses on dance pieces Behalf (2018) and the Rama's House opening performance (2019), co-choreographed and performed by Taiwanese artist Wu-Kang Chen and Thai artist Pichet Klunchun. By using a comparative approach to uncover the other's traditional dance training system, they cooperate to rewrite the conflicting history of performance in Southeast Asia—crossing several intricate borders. Their collaboration(s) can be viewed as a resistant imaginary in line with the "South-South" coalition scheme. That is, artists who share similar marginalized experiences under the hegemony of intercultural performance collaborate to create works based on equality and reciprocity, with respect for and curiosity regarding each other. This research explores how experiments in contemporary dance can liberate the body from the discipline of traditional cultural codes as well as colonial imperatives, and help reconstruct a new, tangible corporeality through South-South intercultural exchange. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Elites and higher-class people often downplay – even conceal – their status when interacting with people of lower class/status than themselves. This finding has been reported from several countries in the Global North. It is also shown in research from disparate academic fields and disciplines: the sociology of class, psychology, cognitive decision-making, and microsociology. This paper reviews and synthesises the literature on elites and high-status people who downplay social differences in cross-status social interaction. It makes two main contributions: First, I show that the phenomenon is more widespread transnationally than especially Nordic researchers have assumed. The second contribution comes from tracing the theoretical interpretations in the research. I notice tendencies of an individual – structure dualism in some strands of research, with the relevant analytical levels being the broader moral repertoires and predispositions. Other strands of research suffer from overly individualist interpretations. I argue that what is missing in most current research on cross-status interaction, is an adequate theoretical grasp of the social situation. I discuss how the study of cross-status interaction can be fertilised by the classical microsociological idea of situations’ existence in themselves, a social domain that cannot be reduced to dispositions or broader culture. I engage here especially Erving Goffman's ritual interaction order. From this vantage point, I also highlight situational variation, something attended to by few studies of cross-status interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In multi-agent partially observable sequential decision problems with general-sum rewards, it is necessary to account for the egoism (individual rewards), utilitarianism (social welfare), and egalitarianism (fairness) criteria simultaneously. However, achieving a balance between these criteria poses a challenge for current multi-agent reinforcement learning methods. Specifically, fully decentralized methods without global information of all agents' rewards, observations and actions fail to learn a balanced policy, while agents in centralized training (with decentralized execution) methods are reluctant to share private information due to concerns of exploitation by others. To address these issues, this paper proposes a Decentralized and Federated (D&F) paradigm, where decentralized agents train egoistic policies utilizing solely local information to attain self-interest, and the federation controller primarily considers utilitarianism and egalitarianism. Meanwhile, the parameters of decentralized and federated policies are optimized with discrepancy constraints mutually, akin to a server and client pattern, which ensures the balance between egoism, utilitarianism, and egalitarianism. Furthermore, theoretical evidence demonstrates that the federated model, as well as the discrepancy between decentralized egoistic policies and federated utilitarian policies, obtains an O (1 / T) convergence rate. Extensive experiments show that our D&F approach outperforms multiple baselines, in terms of both utilitarianism and egalitarianism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay we argue against preventing people from amassing extreme wealth via increased taxation. The first argument in favor of such a proposal, recently advanced by Ingrid Robeyns (2018), states that billionaires' resources would be better spent addressing morally important goals such as meeting disadvantaged people's needs and solving collective action problems. In response to this claim, we argue that billionaires are typically in a better position to benefit the poor and to solve collective action problems than public officials. The second argument in favor of preventing extreme wealth accumulation, advanced by Robeyns and Robert Reich (2018), states that billionaires have an inappropriate amount of influence in public life, which undermines political equality. We argue that corporate leaders tend to be more accountable to their fellow citizens than public officials. We then consider and criticize the objection that billionaires' success is typically a result of public investment, which entitles public officials to enforce taxes that demand a return on the public investment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a critical analysis of Ingrid Robeyns' "economic limitarianism" (2017, 2019, 2022), the suggestion that there is a moral case against allowing people to be richer than they need to be in order to achieve full flourishing. Wealth above a certain "riches line" lacks value and should be capped at that level. Robeyns claims that limitarianism is justified as a partial theory of economic justice, since vast wealth is a threat to political equality and the revenue raised from taxing wealth can be used to meet urgent needs. She also claims that limitarianism is problem-driven philosophy and should be judged by its capacity to address problems in the world as it is. The argument in this article is that limitarianism fails on its own premises, both as partial theory of justice and as guide to decision-making. The arguments invoked in its favour as theory does not provide reasons to support it over other redistributive schemes. As guide to practical action, it runs counter to what empirical research reveals about how attitudes to economic inequality works in that people's acceptance of inequality adjusts: the more unequal a society is, the more inequality is accepted as fair. By disregarding inequalities below the riches-line as well as the economic system that produces them, limitarianism has no tools for countering this adjustment and risks legitimating a politics of inequality. Anyone who shares Robeyns' concerns about economic inequality have reason to be wary of limitarianism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The theory of justice in health is a theory of justice developed around the distribution of limited medical resources. The theory of justice in health was also strongly influenced by John Rawls’ theory of justice, which is considered the pillar of contemporary justice theories. Accordingly, several theories formed around the idea of the just healthcare system, among which was the egalitarian just healthcare theory. Egalitarian theory has evolved from strict egalitarianism into several theories, one of which is luck egalitarianism. Founded upon a moral intuition that individuals’ shares of the distribution should not be unfairly influenced by luck beyond their control, luck egalitarianism suggests a way to offset the differential effects of luck in distribution. In particular, luck egalitarians advocate for eliminating the effects of brute luck, not all luck. However, luck egalitarianism faces harsh objections by insisting on the responsibility of patients who have not adequately cared for their health. Critics regard the luck egalitarianism’s view on patients’ responsibility for their own illness as harsh and unjust. In defense of justice in healthcare according to luck egalitarianism, Segall proposes a new concept of brute luck as an outcome that would be unreasonable to expect the agent to avoid. This adjusts the scope of personal responsibility to allow for a more persuasive application of luck egalitarianism in the healthcare field. Meanwhile, relational egalitarianism, a school of thought that explores equal relations among citizens, added to the discussions of justice in health and expanded its paradigm. Relational egalitarianism purports that the just health paradigm should shift from the equal distribution of medical resources to equal relations among citizens as equals. Relational egalitarianism focuses on the quality of social relations among citizens and the ways in which medical institutions treat citizens. Relational egalitarians call for eliminating unjust social relationships, such as domination, oppression, and discrimination, in health and healthcare. They regard members of society as citizens that can relate to others as equals, not only as entities distributed with equal amounts of medical resources. Relational egalitarianism pursues the ideal of equalizing relations between citizens in health and healthcare. Relational egalitarianism can manifest itself when these ideals are reflected in the healthcare system. Egalitarian theories provide an opportunity to examine the problem of inequalities in health, a subject heretofore dominated by liberalism, through a new lens, and contribute to establishing a new egalitarian model of justice in health and healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Money has been portrayed by major theorists as an agent of individualism, an instrument of freedom, a currency that removes personal values attached to things, and a generator of avarice. Regardless, the impact of money varies greatly with the cultural turf of the recipient societies. For traditional subsistence economies based on gifting and sharing, surplus perishable resources foraged from the environment carry low costs to the giver compared with the benefits to the receiver.With cash, costs to the giver are usually the same as benefits to the receiver, making sharing expensive and introducing new choices. Using quantitative data on possessions and expenditures collected over a 44-y period from 1974 to 2018 among the Ju/’hoansi (!Kung) in southern Africa, former hunter-gatherers, we look at how individuals spend monetary income, how a partial monetary economy alters traditional norms and institutions (egalitarianism, gifting, and sharing), and how institutions from the past steer change. Results show that gifting declines as cash is spent to increase the well-being of individual families and that gifting and sharing decrease and networks narrow. The sharing of meals and casual gifting hold fast. Substantial material inequalities develop, even between neighbors, but social, gender, and political equalities persist. A strong tradition for individual autonomy combined with monetary income allows individuals to spend their money as they choose, adapt to modern conditions, and pursue new options. However, new challenges are emerging to develop greater community cooperation and build substantial and sustainable economies in the face of such centrifugal forces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]