False Beliefs About Asylum Seekers to Australia: The Role of Confidence in Such Beliefs, Prejudice, and the Third Person Effect

There has been much controversy about the treatment of asylum seekers in Australia in recent years, with the Australian Government continuing to enforce a very hard-line stance on asylum seekers who arrive to Australia by boat. The present study examined attitudes towards asylum seekers using 164 Australian community members during June 2015 by way of questionnaire. Our primary research question involved how five variables predicted false beliefs about asylum seekers. Specifically, we measured prejudice, the third-person effect, and confidence in the answers given to false beliefs about asylum seekers. Regression results indicated that the main predictors of false beliefs were right-wing political orientation, prejudice, confidence in espousing false beliefs, and the third-person effect (politicians). Furthermore, most of our community participants accepted a large number of false beliefs as being true, with approximately two-thirds of our participants scoring above the midpoint. This reflects similar findings over the last decade or so. Our results indicate that, if one believes in bottom-up change, a more nuanced approach needs to be undertaken with community anti-prejudice interventions

Increasing integrative complexity on convicted terrorists in Indonesia

Located in Indonesia, the aim of the present study was to test the dynamics of integrative complexity of convicted terrorists in a series of dialogs set by the researchers. It was expected that if the meeting containing ideas related to humanity, peace, and intergroup harmony could be able to make the attendees stay until the end, cognitive complexity of the last meeting would be higher than the first meeting. Fifty nine statements were randomly collected from thirty eight convicted terrorists who participated in the meeting. The statements, then, were scored based on the level of cognitive complexity. A measure of cognitive complexity showed significant (Wilks’ Lambda = .748, F (3, 56) = 6.30, p < .001, partial eta2 = .252) increase during the process of the four meetings; compared to meeting 1, the level of integrative complexity in meeting 2, 3, and 4 were consistently higher. The findings indicate the possibility to increase the level of integrative complexity of the members of terrorist groups in a series of dialogs by highlighting the discussion about humanity and peace

Denying the accusation of plagiarism: power relations at play in dictating plagiarism as academic misconduct

In academia, plagiarism is considered detrimental to the advancement of sciences, and the plagiarists can be charged with sanctions. However, the plagiarism cases involving three rectors of universities in Indonesia stand out, as they could defend their stand for not committing academic misconduct despite evidence found. By analyzing the three rectors' cases, the present study aims to answer how power relations take a role in plagiarism discourse in Indonesia, particularly in determining what is considered academic misconduct and what is not. By employing critical discourse analysis, we found that when the accusation of plagiarism appears during rectorial elections, the accused could equivocate that the accusation was meant to undermine them as a political opponent. When the accused plagiarists win the election, they have more power to deny and tackle the accusations of plagiarism. The findings indicate that plagiarism issues can be politicized, in which by those in power it can be used as a tool to undermine their political opponents, whereas the accused plagiarists can claim that the actual problem is personal and not about plagiarism. It is also shown that in the real context, whether something is called plagiarism or not is subject to interpretation by those in power