uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 11 of 11
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Hellmer, Kahl
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Stenson, T Johanna
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Jylhä, Kirsti M.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    What's (not) underpinning ambivalent sexism?: Revisiting the roles of ideology, religiosity, personality, demographics, and men's facial hair in explaining hostile and benevolent sexism2018In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 122, p. 29-37Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Ambivalent sexism is a two-dimensional framework that assesses sexist and misogynous attitudes. The current corpus of research on such attitudes suggest that they are predicted by numerous variables, including religious beliefs, ideological variables, and men's facial hair. Most studies, however, have treated such predictors as if they are independent – inferring that zero-order correlations between sexism and its predictors are not confounded by omitted third variables. In the current work, we address ambivalent sexism using a large array of known correlates of sexist attitudes in two large and demographically diverse samples. We show that low empathic concern is the primary driver of hostile-, but not benevolent sexism (Study 1); that social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, religiosity, and low Openness and Agreeableness differentially predict ambivalent sexism (Study 2); along with male gender and low education level (Study 1 and 2). Contradicting an earlier finding, men's facial hair was not correlated with hostile sexism in either studies and a short full beard predicted lower scores on benevolent sexism in Study 2. Thus, we replicated the main findings from most previous research except for men's facial hair, and we also show the paths through which predictors of sexist attitudes exert their effects.

  • 2.
    Häkkinen, Kirsti
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Ideology and climate change denial2014Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 3.
    Häkkinen, Kirsti
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Ideology and climate change denial2014Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 4.
    Häkkinen, Kirsti
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Ideology and climate change denial2014In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 70, p. 62-65Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Examining the relation between ideological variables and climate change denial, we found social dominance orientation (SDO) to outperform right-wing authoritarianism and left-right political orientation in predicting denial (Study 1 and 2). In Study 2, where we experimentally altered the level of denial by a newscast communicating supporting evidence for climate change, we demonstrated that the relation between the ideology variables and denial remains stable across conditions (newscast vs. control). Thus, the results showed that denial can be altered by communicating climate change evidence regardless of peoples' position on ideology variables, in particular social dominance. We discuss the outcome in terms of core elements of SDO - dominance and system-justification motives - and encourage researchers on climate change denial to focus on these elements. 

  • 5.
    Häkkinen, Kirsti
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Political orientation and climate change denial: The effect of climate-related anxiety2014Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 6.
    Jylhä, Kirsti
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Refusing to acknowledge the problem: Interests of the few, implications for the many2016In: Environment, climate change and international relations / [ed] G. Sosa-Nunez & E. Atkins, E-International Relations Publishing , 2016, p. 75-85Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 7.
    Jylhä, Kirsti
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Social dominance orientation and climate change denial: The role of dominance and system justification2015In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 86, p. 108-111Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Extending previous research, we examined whether the relation between social dominance orientation (SDO) and climate change denial reflects group-based dominance (SDO and nature dominance) or general system justification. Moreover, we examined whether the relation between personality (domineering and empathy) and denial is mediated by group-based dominance variables. The results showed that the group-based dominance variables reduce the effect of system justification on denial to nonsignificant. Also, social dominance and nature dominance explain unique parts of the variance in denial. Moreover, path analyses showed that the relations between empathy and system justification with denial are mediated by both of the group-based dominance variables, while the relation between domineering and denial is mediated only by SDO. Together, these results suggest that denial is driven partly by dominant personality and low empathy, and partly by motivation to justify and promote existing social and human-nature hierarchies. We conclude by suggesting that climate change mitigation efforts could be more successful if framed as being clearly beneficial for everybody and nonthreateningto existing social order.

  • 8.
    Jylhä, Kirsti
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Sociopolitical ideology and environmentalism: Social dominance orientation as a primary predictor of climate change denial2015Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 9.
    Jylhä, Kirsti M.
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Cantal, Cantal
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Milfont, Taciano L.
    Psychological underpinnings of climate change denial: The central role of social dominance orientation2016Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 10.
    Jylhä, Kirsti M.
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Cantal, Clara
    Victoria Univ Wellington, Ctr Appl Cross Cultural Res, Wellington, New Zealand;Victoria Univ Wellington, Sch Psychol, POB 600, Wellington 6140, New Zealand .
    Akrami, Nazar
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Milfont, Taciano L.
    Victoria Univ Wellington, Ctr Appl Cross Cultural Res, Wellington, New Zealand;Victoria Univ Wellington, Sch Psychol, POB 600, Wellington 6140, New Zealand .
    Denial of anthropogenic climate change: Social dominance orientation helps explain the conservative male effect in Brazil and Sweden2016In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 98, p. 184-187Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Political conservatives and males are more likely to deny human influence on climate change. In this paper we examine the role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in explaining this “conservative male” effect by testing whether SDO mediates the influence of both political conservatism and gender on anthropogenic climate change denial. We use cross-sectional online-based data from Brazil (N = 367) and Sweden (N = 221) to test our mediation hypothesis. Results from path analysis showed that SDO partially or fully mediated the influence of political orientation and gender on anthropogenic climate change denial. The results provide insights about the role of SDO in the “conservative male” effect, and suggest that SDO could be considered more comprehensively in studies focusing on climate change denial and environmental attitudes/behaviors.

  • 11.
    Jylhä, Kirsti Maria
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
    Ideological roots of climate change denial: Resistance to change, acceptance of inequality, or both?2016Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Climate change denial has been found to correlate with sociopolitical ideology. The general aim of the present thesis was to investigate this relation, and more specifically to 1) test the unique effects of intercorrelated ideological variables on denial, and 2) investigate the psychological underpinnings of the ideology-denial relation. This approach helps estimating what component of right-wing ideology better explains climate change denial; resistance to change (indexed by left-right/liberal-conservative political orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, and system justification), or acceptance of inequality (indexed by social dominance orientation [SDO]). In Paper I, SDO outperformed the effects of right-wing authoritarianism and political left-right orientation on denial (Study 1 and 2). Further, the SDO-denial relation was stable when denial scores were experimentally lowered by a newscast that communicated supportive evidence for climate change (Study 2). Thus, the following studies focused specifically on the SDO-denial relation by testing path models that also included other ideological variables (political conservatism, system justification, and endorsement of nature dominance), as well as personality variables (dominance, empathy, openness to experience, and anxiety avoidance) and/or gender. In Paper II, SDO and endorsement of nature dominance explained unique parts of climate change denial, and both of these variables mediated the effects of system justification and (low) empathy on denial. SDO mediated also the effect of dominance. In Paper III, focusing specifically on denial of human-induced climate change, SDO either partially or fully mediated the effects of political conservatism and gender across two cultural contexts (Brazil and Sweden). Additional analyses extended these results, by building on the model presented in Paper II. These analyses showed that SDO (and in some cases also political conservatism and endorsement of nature dominance) fully mediated the effects of gender and personality variables on denial, with one exception: Predisposition to avoid experiencing anxiety predicted denial directly, as well as through a link via general conservative ideology (system justification or political conservatism). In sum, the results indicate that denial is more strongly and consistently predicted by SDO than by the other included variables. Thus, endorsement of group-based inequality/hierarchies offers an important explanation for climate change denial. 

    List of papers
    1. Ideology and climate change denial
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ideology and climate change denial
    2014 (English)In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 70, p. 62-65Article in journal (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    Examining the relation between ideological variables and climate change denial, we found social dominance orientation (SDO) to outperform right-wing authoritarianism and left-right political orientation in predicting denial (Study 1 and 2). In Study 2, where we experimentally altered the level of denial by a newscast communicating supporting evidence for climate change, we demonstrated that the relation between the ideology variables and denial remains stable across conditions (newscast vs. control). Thus, the results showed that denial can be altered by communicating climate change evidence regardless of peoples' position on ideology variables, in particular social dominance. We discuss the outcome in terms of core elements of SDO - dominance and system-justification motives - and encourage researchers on climate change denial to focus on these elements. 

    Keywords
    Ideology and climate change denial, Social dominance orientation, Right-wing authoritarianism, Political orientation
    National Category
    Psychology Climate Research
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-235053 (URN)10.1016/j.paid.2014.06.030 (DOI)000341469000012 ()
    Available from: 2014-10-29 Created: 2014-10-28 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved
    2. Social dominance orientation and climate change denial: The role of dominance and system justification
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Social dominance orientation and climate change denial: The role of dominance and system justification
    2015 (English)In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 86, p. 108-111Article in journal (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    Extending previous research, we examined whether the relation between social dominance orientation (SDO) and climate change denial reflects group-based dominance (SDO and nature dominance) or general system justification. Moreover, we examined whether the relation between personality (domineering and empathy) and denial is mediated by group-based dominance variables. The results showed that the group-based dominance variables reduce the effect of system justification on denial to nonsignificant. Also, social dominance and nature dominance explain unique parts of the variance in denial. Moreover, path analyses showed that the relations between empathy and system justification with denial are mediated by both of the group-based dominance variables, while the relation between domineering and denial is mediated only by SDO. Together, these results suggest that denial is driven partly by dominant personality and low empathy, and partly by motivation to justify and promote existing social and human-nature hierarchies. We conclude by suggesting that climate change mitigation efforts could be more successful if framed as being clearly beneficial for everybody and nonthreateningto existing social order.

    Keywords
    Climate change denial, Nature dominance, Social dominance orientation, System justification, Domineering, Empathy
    National Category
    Psychology Climate Research
    Research subject
    Psychology
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-255969 (URN)10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.041 (DOI)Accession Number: 000360255000018 ()
    Funder
    Swedish Research Council, 2011–1891
    Available from: 2015-06-21 Created: 2015-06-21 Last updated: 2017-12-04Bibliographically approved
    3. Denial of anthropogenic climate change: Social dominance orientation helps explain the conservative male effect in Brazil and Sweden
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Denial of anthropogenic climate change: Social dominance orientation helps explain the conservative male effect in Brazil and Sweden
    2016 (English)In: Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, E-ISSN 1873-3549, Vol. 98, p. 184-187Article in journal (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    Political conservatives and males are more likely to deny human influence on climate change. In this paper we examine the role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in explaining this “conservative male” effect by testing whether SDO mediates the influence of both political conservatism and gender on anthropogenic climate change denial. We use cross-sectional online-based data from Brazil (N = 367) and Sweden (N = 221) to test our mediation hypothesis. Results from path analysis showed that SDO partially or fully mediated the influence of political orientation and gender on anthropogenic climate change denial. The results provide insights about the role of SDO in the “conservative male” effect, and suggest that SDO could be considered more comprehensively in studies focusing on climate change denial and environmental attitudes/behaviors.

    Keywords
    Climate change denial; Political conservatism; Gender; Social dominance orientation
    National Category
    Psychology
    Research subject
    Psychology
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-284920 (URN)10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.020 (DOI)000382794700031 ()
    Funder
    Swedish Research Council, 2011–1891
    Available from: 2016-04-19 Created: 2016-04-19 Last updated: 2018-05-23Bibliographically approved
1 - 11 of 11
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf