Search

The rise of nationalism and populism in Europe has created significant political and policy challenges. Understanding and addressing these challenges will require attention to the psychological mechanisms and social dynamics that have engendered and promoted these societal shifts. This article presents the results of two new empirical studies that attempt to shed light on the relationships between nationalism, religiosity, national and religious identification, threat perception, and sentiment toward different groups. Informed by identity fusion theory and moral foundations theory, Study 1 collected and analysed survey data on these topics. Study 2 utilized the results of Study 1 to construct a system dynamics model in which causal propositions and links are added to the variables, creating an artificial society within which hypotheses about these dynamics can be tested. Both the survey and the simulation suggest that nationalism and religion are affected by the same variables. As such, religion might not be a cause of nationalism (or nationalism the cause of religion), but they could be correlated because of mutual causation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After the generally unexpected outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election, many explanations were proposed to account for the results. Three narratives that received a considerable amount of media attention were that sexist, racist, and/or nationalist attitudes influenced voting decisions. Some empirical work has supported each of these accounts. However, sexism, racism, and nationalism are interrelated, and most studies about the 2016 election have not examined these three factors in conjunction to determine the unique contribution of each. Thus, we investigated the extent to which each factor (assessed as sexism toward women, Modern Racism, and U.S. nationalism) was uniquely related to evaluations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, voting intentions, and actual voting behavior. Participants completed online questionnaires before (N = 489) and after (N = 192) the 2016 U.S. election. More positive evaluation of Clinton and intentions to vote for Clinton were associated with lower levels of Modern Racism. More positive evaluation of Trump was associated with greater sexism toward women, Modern Racism, and U.S. nationalism. Intent to vote for Trump was associated with greater sexism toward women and Modern Racism. However, only Modern Racism significantly predicted voting behavior. Greater Modern Racism was associated with greater likelihood of voting for Trump and lower likelihood of voting for Clinton. When considered in conjunction, Modern Racism was the most consistent predictor across the different election outcome variables. Sexism toward women and U.S. nationalism were generally not significantly related to evaluations, intentions to vote, or voting behavior when accounting for Modern Racism. Thus, our data indicate that Modern Racism was correlated with vote choice in the 2016 election. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neonatal sepsis is accounted for 30–50% of annual neonatal deaths in developing countries. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis study to evaluate the national prevalence and identification of the etiological pathogens of neonatal sepsis in Iran. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was done on the national and international databases for studies published between 2000 and 2019. The DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model was used to calculate pooled prevalence estimates, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions regarding the gender, type of sepsis and time during were also performed. Data were extracted, analyzed, and presented according to PRISMA guideline. Results: Of 944 publications identified, 22 studies containing 14,683 neonates met the eligibility criteria. The pooled national prevalence of sepsis in Iran was 15.98% (95%CI, 11.96–20.46%; 1,367/14,683). Prevalence rate in boys (20.42%; 95%CI, 9.03–34.8%) was slightly higher than girls (18.5%; 95%CI, 7.4–32.8). A decreasing trend in prevalence of neonatal sepsis was found in recent years, although not statistically significant (c = -0.005; P value = 0.4). The most prevalent causative bacterial pathogens were Enterobacter spp. (23.04%), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (17.54%), coagulase-negative Staphylococci (14.06%), Escherichia coli (13.92%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (12.67%), and Staphylococcus aureus (11.48%). Conclusion: Our findings showed a high prevalence of neonatal sepsis in suspected neonates, suggesting the need to implement preventive measures, routine assessment, and close monitoring of neonates. Also, Enterobacter spp. and Klebsiella pneumoniae were identified as the principal bacterial pathogens responsible for neonatal septicemia in Iran. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recent article has found nationalism to be negatively associated with government respect for several human rights. In this article, I replicate the original study’s findings, I demonstrate that these findings are robust to an alternate model specification, and I then extend the analysis to additional human rights not examined by the original author. Ultimately, I find that in comparison to when the chief executive is not nationalist, when the chief executive is highly nationalist, that state is less likely to be associated with high government respect for six ‘empowerment’ rights (i.e. the freedoms of assembly and association, electoral self-determination, speech, foreign movement, religion, and worker’s rights), and more likely to be associated with low government respect for these six empowerment rights. This study suggests that nationalism’s influence on human rights is greater than previous thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an investigation into marginalizing racism, a form of prejudice whereby ingroup members claim that specific individuals belong to their group, but also exclude them by not granting them all of the privileges of a full ingroup member. One manifestation of this is that perceived degree of outgroup membership will covary negatively with degree of ingroup membership. That is, group membership may be treated as a zero-sum quantity (e.g., one cannot be both Australian and Iraqi). Study 1 demonstrated that judges allocate more zero-sum membership assignments and lower combined membership in their country of origin and their adopted country to high-threat migrants than low-threat migrants. Study 2 identified a subtle type of zero-sum reasoning which holds that stronger degree of membership in one’s original nationality constrains membership in a new nationality to a greater extent than stronger membership in the new nationality constrains membership in one’s original nationality. This pattern is quite general, being replicated in large samples from four nations (USA, UK, India, and China). Taken together, these studies suggest that marginalizing racism is more than a belief that people retain a “stain” from membership in their original group. Marginalizing racism also manifests itself as conditional zero-sum beliefs about multiple group memberships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]