Identity fusion and the psychology of political extremism

textPast research in the psychology of extremism has argued that extremism is a psychological state characterized by a perception that the group is absolutely correct, endowed with moral authority, and threatened or opposed by some active group or entity working against the ingroup. There has been little research which has focused on what psychological processes may underlie this state. It is proposed in this dissertation that extremism is an outgrowth of identity fusion, a state in which the personal and social levels of the self-concept become closely aligned so that they may not be activated independently of each other. Identity fusion is theorized to follow from self-verification motives interacting with salient social identities, so that when people need verification for the way they see themselves and a group which provides such verification is activated, fusion may result. Three studies were conducted to examine different aspects of the identity fusion-extremism link. In Study 1, experimenters manipulated the need for selfverification motives and the social context to determine if self-verification predicted the development of fusion with a verifying, salient group. This study found little evidence of this link. Study 2 used counterattitudinal messages to assess the link between fusion and absolutist patterns of thinking. Fused participants were found to show significantly more emotional response to and rejection of counterattidudinal messages, in line predictions. Finally, Study 3 examined the behavioral and linguistic correlates of fusion and found some evidence that fusion predicted self-reported behaviors in line with political extremism and patterns of language use which emphasized the personal self.Psycholog

Explaining party cohesion and discipline in democratic legislatures: purposiveness and contexts

Legislative party discipline and cohesion are important phenomena in the study of political systems. Unless assumptions are made that parties are cohesive and act as unified collectivities with reasonably well-defined goals, it is really difficult, if not impossible, to consider their electoral and legislative roles usefully. But levels of legislative party cohesiveness are also important because they provide us with crucial information about how legislatures/ parliaments function and how they interact with executives/governments. Without cohesive (or disciplined) parties,1 government survival in parliamentary systems is threatened because executive and legislative powers are fused while in separated systems presidents' bases of legislative support become less stable. How do we explain varying levels of legislative party cohesion? The first part of this article draws on the purposive literature to explore the benefits and costs to legislators in democratic legislatures of joining and acting collectively and individualistically within political parties. This leads on to a discussion of various conceptual and empirical problems encountered in analysing intra-party cohesion and discipline in democratic legislatures on plenary votes. Finally, the article reviews the extant empirical evidence on how a multiplicity of systemic, party-levels and situational factors supposedly impact cohesion/discipline levels. The article ends with a discussion of the possibilities and limitations of building comparative models of cohesion/discipline

Why Mergers Reduce Profits and Raise Share Prices: A Theory of Preemptive Mergers

We explain the empirical puzzle why mergers reduce profits and raise share prices. If being an "insider" is better than being an "outsider," firms may merge to preempt their partner merging with a rival. The stock-value of the insiders is increased, since the risk of becoming an outsider is eliminated. We also explain why shareholders of targets gain while acquirers typically break even. These results are derived in an endogenousmerger model, predicting the conditions under which mergers occur, when they occur, and how the surplus is shared. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Warum Fusionen Profite reduzieren und Aktienpreise steigen lassen) Es wird ein "Mechanismus der Gewinnung eines Vorsprungs durch Fusion" aufgezeigt, der eventuell das empirische Rätsel, warum Fusionen Profite reduzieren und Aktienpreise steigen lassen, erklären kann. Eine Fusion kann starke negative externe Effekte bei den Unternehmen auslösen, die nicht an der Fusion beteiligt sind. Wenn es besser ist ein "Insider" zu sein als ein "Outsider", kann es sein, dass Firmen Fusionieren um dem zuvorzukommen, dass ihre Partner mit jemand anderem fusionieren. Desweiteren ist der Wert eines fusionierenden Unternehmens vor der Fusion niedrig, da er das Risiko ein Outsider zu werden reflektiert. Diese Ergebnisse werden aus einem Modell endogener Fusionen abgeleitet, welches die Bedingungen unter denen eine Fusion stattfindet, wann sie stattfindet und wie der Überschuss verteilt werden wird, vorhersagt.Mergers, Acquisitions, Defensive Mergers, Coalition Formation

Do membership benefits buy regulatory compliance?: an empirical analysis of EU directives 1978-1999.

Underlying several theories of European integration is the idea that countries' willingness to sign up to supranational rules is dependent on the expectation and/or realization of various benefits. In this paper, we explore whether such benefits also affect member states' implementation of these rules. Using econometric techniques, we estimate the influence of several measures of membership benefits on the annual number of legal infringements received by 15 member states over the period from 1978 to 1999. Our results provide qualified support for the idea that benefits positively influence compliance. We find that greater intra-EU trade dependence and voting power in European institutions relative to population size are negatively associated with legal infringements. Yet, contrary to a priori expectations, net fiscal transfers are positively correlated with infringements.

Valuing Nature For Climate Change Policy: From Discounting The Future To Truly Social Deliberation

The recent human impact on the environment is so unique in the geological record that the official geological body that defines the division of geological time, the International Commission on Stratigraphy, is considering designating a new geographical epoch called the Anthropocene, calling attention to the global impacts humans, and particularly the human economy, are having on the Earth’s biological, atmospheric and geological systems. Using the example of climate change, it is argued below that the magnitude, suddenness, and long-term consequences of the current human abuse of the natural world calls for a radical new approach to valuing nature, one based not on individual choice in the immediate present but rather on a socially embedded “deeper sense of time”. Such an approach would move beyond attempts to “correctly price” nature based on imputed market values and would instead rely on shared social values and a concern for future generations. These shared social values can be made concrete through discursive processes drawing upon our long evolutionary history of collectively solving the problem of intergenerational sustainability.