Greek MPs pro European but weary of European institutions

Syriza, a radical left party critical of the functioning of the EU institutions, won the Greek parliamentary elections of 25 January 2015 and formed a government coalition with the smaller right-wing eurosceptic party of Independent Greeks (ANEL). Does this mean that Greek political elites are hostile to the EU? The answer to this question is obviously affected by the context of the Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) and loan agreements signed in 2010 and 2012 between Greece and its creditors, when Greece was on the brink of default. The ways in which Greek MPs perceive the EU were the topic of our attitudinal survey research, supported by the Hellenic Observatory, among Greek MPs. Our survey was conducted in April – October 2014 and involved face-to-face interviews with 74 MPs (25 per cent of the total) who were randomly sampled and came from all Greek parties except for the communist party (the KKE traditionally refuses interviews). The survey is topical, as before the elections the Syriza and ANEL parties had taken a strong anti-Memorandum stand which they will try to implement as government partners, while the centre-right New Democracy (ND) and the centre-left Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK), which were together in power in 2011-2014, had followed pro-Memorandum policies

What Greek political elites think about Europe and the crisis?: an exploratory analysis

In this paper the views of a sample of 74 Greek Members of Parliament (MPs) on European integration and the handling of the economic crisis by the EU are discussed and interpreted. The survey of MPs, which was conducted in 2014, is a replication of a comparable study conducted in 2007. Greek MPs continue to be attached to Europe, but evaluate negatively EU’s institutions’ role during the economic crisis. Overall, three groups of parliamentarians, namely pro-government MPs, parliamentarians self-placed at the centre of the left-right spectrum and more experienced MPs, tended to have more pro-European views and attitudes than MPs of the opposition, left-wing MPs and less experienced MPs. The dominant dimension of conflict for Greek political elites is the issue of the Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs). The SYRIZA-ANEL government that was formed after the January 2015 elections was not a surprise given the close proximity of these two parties on their stance towards the MoUs and the EU

Europe at the Epicenter of National Politics: The Attitudes of Greek Political Elites Towards the European Union and the Economic Crisis

This article presents new research on the Europeanness of Greek political elites under the economic crisis. It registers the views of a sample of 74 Greek Members of Parliament (MPs) on European integration and the handling of the economic crisis by the European Union (EU). The ENEC survey, which was conducted in 2014, shows that Greek MPs continue to be attached to Europe, but evaluate negatively the role of EU’s institutions during the economic crisis. They mostly view European integration positively, but are skeptical about the representativeness of EU organs. There is a discernible set of “core attitudes” which constitute the Europeanness of Greek MPs, but there is also a set of issues on which MPs are clearly divided. The dominant dimension of conflict within Greek political elites is the issue of economic austerity packages, i.e., the Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs), as since 2010 EU’s management of the crisis has become the epicenter of Greece’s domestic politics. The two party, SYRIZA-ANEL coalition government that was formed after the January 2015 elections was not a surprise given the close proximity of these two parties on their stance towards the MoUs and the EU

From local social mindfulness to global sustainability efforts?

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Reply to Nielsen et al. social mindfulness is associated with countries’ environmental performance and individual environmental concern

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Perceptions of the appropriate response to norm violation in 57 societies

An Author Correction to this article: DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-22955-x.Norm enforcement may be important for resolving conflicts and promoting cooperation. However, little is known about how preferred responses to norm violations vary across cultures and across domains. In a preregistered study of 57 countries (using convenience samples of 22,863 students and non-students), we measured perceptions of the appropriateness of various responses to a violation of a cooperative norm and to atypical social behaviors. Our findings highlight both cultural universals and cultural variation. We find a universal negative relation between appropriateness ratings of norm violations and appropriateness ratings of responses in the form of confrontation, social ostracism and gossip. Moreover, we find the country variation in the appropriateness of sanctions to be consistent across different norm violations but not across different sanctions. Specifically, in those countries where use of physical confrontation and social ostracism is rated as less appropriate, gossip is rated as more appropriate.Peer reviewe

Social mindfulness and prosociality vary across the globe

Humans are social animals, but not everyone will be mindful of others to the same extent. Individual differences have been found, but would social mindfulness also be shaped by one’s location in the world? Expecting cross-national differences to exist, we examined if and how social mindfulness differs across countries. At little to no material cost, social mindfulness typically entails small acts of attention or kindness. Even though fairly common, such low-cost cooperation has received little empirical attention. Measuring social mindfulness across 31 samples from industrialized countries and regions (n = 8,354), we found considerable variation. Among selected country-level variables, greater social mindfulness was most strongly associated with countries’ better general performance on environmental protection. Together, our findings contribute to the literature on prosociality by targeting the kind of everyday cooperation that is more focused on communicating benevolence than on providing material benefits

Anger and disgust shape judgments of social sanctions across cultures, especially in high individual autonomy societies

When someone violates a social norm, others may think that some sanction would be appropriate. We examine how the experience of emotions like anger and disgust relate to the judged appropriateness of sanctions, in a pre-registered analysis of data from a large-scale study in 56 societies. Across the world, we find that individuals who experience anger and disgust over a norm violation are more likely to endorse confrontation, ostracism and, to a smaller extent, gossip. Moreover, we find that the experience of anger is consistently the strongest predictor of judgments of confrontation, compared to other emotions. Although the link between state-based emotions and judgments may seem universal, its strength varies across countries. Aligned with theoretical predictions, this link is stronger in societies, and among individuals, that place higher value on individual autonomy. Thus, autonomy values may increase the role that emotions play in guiding judgments of social sanctions

REFMED2015

The data set of the survey comprises content analysis of the entire 24-h programme of the six largest, with respect to audience size, TV stations with nationwide coverage, namely ALPHA, ANT1, MEGA, SKAI, STAR and the public broadcaster ERT. These data were collected from the day after the referendum proclamation, until the day of its conduct, that is between 29 June and 5 July 2015. The project involved 15 coders consisting of academic staf, Ph.D. candidates and graduate and undergraduate students. From the examination and coding of the research material, two distinct data sets were created: in the first one, the media units concerning the referendum were coded, while in the second one, the "talking heads" that appeared in each unit/broadcast constituted the unit of analysis. Each of the 4,917 people (talking heads) who appeared in these segments separately was coded, excluding the host journalists of the shows/news bulletins. The data were then analysed according to the principles of quantitative content analysis. For each unit of analysis, a group of variables was coded. The construction of the variable categories was further derived from a process of qualitative thematic coding. This method was applied to deal with the exceptional characteristics of the referendum campaign