Who is to blame? The relationship between ingroup identification and relative deprivation is moderated by ingroup attributions

Contradictory evidence can be found in the literature about whether ingroup identification and perceived relative deprivation are positively or negatively related. Indeed, theoretical arguments can be made for both effects. It was proposed that the contradictory findings can be explained by considering a hitherto unstudied moderator: The extent to which deprivation is attributed to the ingroup. It was hypothesised that identification would only have a negative impact on deprivation, and that deprivation would only have a negative impact on identification, if ingroup attributions are high. To test this, attributions to the ingroup were experimentally manipulated among British student participants (N = 189) who were asked about their perceived deprivation vis-à-vis German students, yield ing support for the hypotheses

Selling the Iran Nuclear Agreement: Prospect Theory and the Campaign to Frame the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action

This paper examines the Obama administration\u27s arguments for ratifying the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to limit Iran\u27s nuclear capabilities and whether these claims encouraged U.S. senators to approve the agreement. The analysis relies on Kahneman and Tversky\u27s (1979) prospect theory in which more risk is taken to avoid certain loss and improve conditions when options are framed in terms of losses rather than gains. We argue that the Obama administration was able to persuade Democratic senators to support the JCPOA by arguing the agreement had the potential to curb the development of nuclear weapons by the Iranian regime. But more importantly, the administration was able to frame the status quo as a certain loss, and thus, the risk associated with the JCPOA was acceptable in comparison to not adopting the agreement. Our analysis of the Obama administration\u27s lobbying efforts and the Democratic senators\u27 statements in support of the agreement demonstrate the value of applying prospect theory to understanding decision making with respect to American foreign policy formulation

A Framework for Improving Health in Cities: A Discussion Paper

This paper considers health in cities from the perspective of complex adaptive systems. This approach has a number of important implications for intervention that do not emerge in traditional accounts of cities and health. The paper reviews various accounts of the nature of cities and of health as well as the traditional urban health and Healthy Cities movements. It then provides a framework for intervention and tests it against an actual case study. It concludes that a complex adaptive systems framework opens up fresh possibilities for improving health in urban contexts