The Design of Everyday Hate: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis

Throughout history artists, poets, and writers have been interested in the nature of hate. Scientists from a variety of disciplines have also attempted to unravel its mysteries. Yet in spite of abundant theorizing and research, most modern scholars still complain that little is known about this complex emotion. In this study, a new approach has been taken. Following Heider’s (1958) observation that scientists can often learn a great deal by exploring people’s “common-sense” or “naïve psychologies,” students at the University of Texas and participants from a number of Internet sites were interviewed regarding their perceptions of the nature of emotion. Using grounded theory and employing mixed-method analyses (qualitative and quantitative), four questions were explored: (1) What do people mean by hate? (2) Whom do they hate? (3) Why do people hate the people they do? (4) How do people attempt to deal with such feelings? From participants’ answers, a theory concerning everyday hate was generated

Consequences of dual-group membership among children

textIncreasing numbers of individuals are simultaneously members of two or more social categories. To investigate the effects of single- versus dual-identity status on children's group views and intergroup attitudes, elementary-school-age children (N = 91) attending a summer school program were assigned to novel color groups that included single-identity ("blue" and "red") and dual-identity ("bicolored," or half red and half blue) members. The degree to which dual-identity status was verified by the authority members was also manipulated: teachers in some classrooms were instructed to label and make use of three social groups ("blues," "reds," "bicolors") to organize their classrooms, whereas teachers in other classrooms were instructed to label and make use of only the two "mono-colored" groups ("blues" and "reds"). After several weeks in their classrooms, children's (a) views of group membership (i.e., importance, satisfaction, perceived similarity, group preference), (b) intergroup attitudes (i.e., traits ratings, group evaluations, peer preferences), and (c) categorization complexity (i.e., tendency to sort individuals along multiple dimensions simultaneously) were assessed. Results varied across measures but, in general, indicated that dual-identity status affected children's views of their ingroup. Specifically, dual-identity children in classrooms in which their status was not verified were more likely to (a) perceive themselves as similar to other ingroup members (i.e., bicolored children), (b) want to keep their shirt color, and (c) assume that a new student would want their shirt color more than their single-identity peers. They also showed higher levels of ingroup bias in their competency ratings of groups than their single-identity peers, and demonstrated greater cognitive flexibility when thinking about social categories than their single-identity peers. Overall, these results suggest that dual-identity children experience identity issues differently than their single-identity peers and that additional theories are needed to address the complexities of social membership and bias among children with dual memberships.Psycholog

Pet attitudes predicting preferences for pets over people

The preference for animal companionship over human companionship may be predicted by attitudes about pet ownership. We hypothesized that pet attitudes could predict preferences for relationships with pets over humans. We sampled 182 people who named a person and a pet they love and care about. Participants rated their feelings of love, time spent, enjoyment, and equity in both their human and pet relationships. We also presented seven hypothetical negative event scenarios that involve both the pet and human and asked participants to predict their feelings and reactions based on these events. The Pet Attitudes Scale (Templer et al., 1981) was used to assess attitudes towards pets. People had similar positive feelings about their pet‑human and human‑human relationships. However, people were more likely to react negatively towards a human compared to a pet. Positive pet a;itudes predicted more positive and less negative reactions to pets. Positive pet a;itudes can predict preference for pet relationships over human relationships and may help researchers identify what relationships work best depending on a personʹs pet attitudes

An Evolutionary Perspective on Humor: Sexual Selection or Interest Indication?

Are people who are funny more attractive? Or does being attractive lead people to be seen as funnier? The answer may depend on the underlying evolutionary function of humor. While humor has been proposed to signal "good genes," the authors propose that humor also functions to indicate interest in social relationships-in initiating new relationships and in monitoring existing ones. Consistent with this interest indicator model, across three studies both sexes were more likely to initiate humor and to respond more positively and consider the other person to be funny when initially attracted to that person. The findings support that humor dynamics- and not just humor displays-influence romantic chemistry for both men and women, suggesting that humor can ultimately function as a strategy to initiate and monitor social relationships

Cross Cultural Examination of Hate

Using a mixed methods approach to understand love and hate in Japan, Thailand, US, and Sweden