Premium
Political disagreement in intergroup terms: Contextual variation and the influence of power
Author(s) -
OBrien Léan V.,
McGarty Craig
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
british journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 2044-8309
pISSN - 0144-6665
DOI - 10.1348/014466608x299717
Subject(s) - attribution , politics , social psychology , supporter , power (physics) , psychology , face (sociological concept) , sociology , political science , law , social science , physics , archaeology , quantum mechanics , history
In two studies we examined justificatory attributions made in the face of political disagreement. Study 1 showed that Australian supporters and opponents of Australian involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq made stereotypical attributions that justified the superiority of the in‐group over the out‐group. Stereotypical attributions were consistent with the justification that the supporters of the war had been misled by dishonest political leaders. Study 2 replicated this pattern with supporters and opponents of Australia's policy of mandatory detention of asylum seekers. It also identified pragmatism as a dimension that dominant, government‐aligned, groups may use to justify the superiority of the in‐group over the out‐group. In both studies political leaders were seen as more competent than members of the public. The results show the influence of intergroup power and within‐group leader/supporter distinctions on people's attributions about political disagreement. They point to the power of social psychological theory to help analyse important contemporary political concerns.