Personalidade nos Perturbações do Comportamento na Adolescência
Barra lateral de artigos
PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
Los autores que publican en la Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
- El Autor o los autores, desde que presenta(n) a consideración de esta revista su manuscrito, esta(n) informado(s) acerca de la política de Acceso Abierto, como condición indisociable de publicación, lo que significa que ni él(los), ni la revista han de percibir ingreso alguno por concepto de la lectura de resúmenes o del artículo completo, tampoco por su uso o explotación para generar nuevo conocimiento o para desarrollar aprendizajes alrededor de la obra.
- Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo, al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacionalque permite que permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado, siempre que se haga mención a la autoría del trabajo y la primera publicación en esta revista, no se utilice con fines comerciales y que las obras que se deriven del artículo se compartan en iguales condiciones.
- Los conceptos y opiniones expresados en los artículos son responsabilidad exclusiva de los autores y no comprometen a la Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología ni a la Corporación Universitaria Iberoamericana. Los contenidos de esta revista se distribuyen bajo licencia de tipo Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional, la cual exige el debido reconocimiento de las obras y cuyos términos se encuentran en: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.es
- La Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología es una revista de acceso abierto, por lo que tanto el proceso editorial como los contenidos publicados están disponibles para todos los usuarios sin cargo alguno: la Revista no realiza cobro alguno por acceso, lectura o descarga de contenidos ni por procesos o actividades de la editorial con fines de publicación.
Conteúdo do artigo principal
As atitudes e comportamentos em relação à desigualdade econômica variam de sociedade para sociedade, mas o estudo transcultural da desigualdade ainda está engatinhando. Considerando isso, realizamos uma pesquisa experimental em duas sociedades, uma na Europa (Espanha, N = 332, M idade = 26,01, DP = 4,47, mulheres = 54,5%) e outra na América Latina (Costa Rica, N = 338, M idade = 22,23, DP = 3,77, mulheres = 46,4%), com o objetivo de comparar o modo como a indução de orientações individualistas e coletivistas influencia o comportamento frente à desigualdade na distribuição de recursos. Verificamos que a indução do individualismo e do coletivismo não teve efeito sobre o comportamento diante da desigualdade na Espanha, exceto por uma das distribuições no jogo do ultimato (7:3). Na Costa Rica, verificamos que o priming individualista teve um efeito sobre uma maior rejeição da desigualdade em todas as distribuições aplicadas. Contrariamente às expectativas, na amostra costarriquenha houve maior rejeição da desigualdade em relação à espanhola. Esses resultados sugerem que, ao contrário do esperado, a sociedade relativamente mais coletivista (Costa Rica) apresentou maior rejeição à desigualdade do que a sociedade mais individualista (Espanha). Além disso, esses resultados não são influenciados pelo priming individualista, uma vez que a comparação dos efeitos sem considerar a estratégia de priming mostra uma maior rejeição da desigualdade na amostra costarriquenha do que na espanhola.
Downloads
Detalhes do artigo
Bianchi, E. C. (2016). American individualism rises and falls with the economy: Cross-temporal evidence that individualism declines when the economy falters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 567-584. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000114
Binder, C. C. (2019). Redistribution and the Individualism–Collectivism Dimension of Culture. Social Indicators Research, 142(3), 1175-1192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1964-6
Booysen, F., Guvuriro, S., & Campher, C. (2021). Horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism and preferences for altruism: A social discounting study. Personality and Individual Differences, 178, 110856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110856
Boyer, P. (2018). Minds make societies: How cognition explains the world humans create. Yale University press.
Cochard, F., Le Gallo, J., Georgantzis, N., & Tisserand, J.-C. (2021). Social preferences across different populations: Meta-analyses on the ultimatum game and dictator game. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 90, 101613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2020.101613
Elenbaas, L., Rizzo, M. T., & Killen, M. (2020). A Developmental-Science Perspective on Social Inequality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(6), 610-616. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420964147
Ensminger, J., & Henrich, J. P. (Eds.). (2014). Experimenting with social norms: Fairness and punishment in cross-cultural perspective. Russell Sage Foundation.
Fehr, E. (2009). Social Preferences and the Brain. En Neuroeconomics (pp. 215-232). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374176-9.00015-4
Fehr, E., Naef, M., & Schmidt, K. M. (2006). Inequality Aversion, Efficiency, and Maximin Preferences in Simple Distribution Experiments: Comment. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1912-1917. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.5.1912
García-Castro, J. D., Willis, G. B., & Rodríguez-Bailón, R. (2019). I know people who can and who cannot: A measure of the perception of economic inequality in everyday life. The Social Science Journal, 56(4), 599-608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.09.008
Gorodnichenko, Y., & Roland, G. (2012). Understanding the Individualism-Collectivism Cleavage and Its Effects: Lessons from Cultural Psychology. En M. Aoki, T. Kuran, & G. Roland (Eds.), Institutions and Comparative Economic Development (pp. 213-236). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137034014_12
Gummerum, M., López-Pérez, B., Van Dijk, E., & Van Dillen, L. F. (2022). Ire and punishment: Incidental anger and costly punishment in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 218, 105376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2022.105376
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7
Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., & McElreath, R. (2001). In Search of Homo Economicus: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies. American Economic Review, 91(2), 73-78. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.2.73
Henrich, J. P. (2020). The WEIRDest people in the world: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous (First edition). Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed). Sage Publications.
House, B. R., & Tomasello, M. (2018). Modeling social norms increasingly influences costly sharing in middle childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 171, 84-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.12.014
Houser, D., & McCabe, K. (2014). Experimental Economics and Experimental Game Theory. En Neuroeconomics (pp. 19-34). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-416008-8.00002-4
Inglehart, R. F. (2017). Evolutionary Modernization Theory: Why People’s Motivations are Changing. Changing Societies & Personalities, 1(2), 136-151. https://doi.org/10.15826/csp.2017.1.2.010
Inglehart, R. F. (2018). Cultural Evolution: People’s Motivations are Changing, and Reshaping the World (1.a ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108613880
Jetten, J., & Peters, K. (Eds.). (2019). The social psychology of inequality. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28856-3
Jiao, J., & Zhao, J. (2023). Individualism, Collectivism, and Allocation Behavior: Evidence from the Ultimatum Game and Dictator Game. Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13020169
Kanngiesser, P., Schäfer, M., Herrmann, E., Zeidler, H., Haun, D., & Tomasello, M. (2022). Children across societies enforce conventional norms but in culturally variable ways. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2112521118
Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 992-1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016357
Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological Review, 119(3), 546-572. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028756
Manstead, A. S. R. (2018). The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(2), 267-291. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12251
Mijs, J. J. B. (2021). The paradox of inequality: Income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand. Socio-Economic Review, 19(1), 7-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwy051
Nikolaev, B., Boudreaux, C., & Salahodjaev, R. (2017). Are individualistic societies less equal? Evidence from the parasite stress theory of values. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 138, 30-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2017.04.001
Oyserman, D. (2016). What does a priming perspective reveal about culture: Culture-as-situated cognition. Current Opinion in Psychology, 12, 94-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.10.002
Oyserman, D., & Lee, S. W. S. (2008). Does culture influence what and how we think? Effects of priming individualism and collectivism. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 311-342. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.311
Pickett, K. E., & Wilkinson, R. G. (2015). Income inequality and health: A causal review. Social Science & Medicine, 128, 316-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.12.031
Piketty, T., & Goldhammer, A. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Sánchez-Ancochea, D. (2021). The costs of inequality in Latin America: Lessons and warnings for the rest of the world. I.B. Taurus Bloomsbury Publishing.
Sapolsky, R. M. (2017). Behave: The biology of humans at our best and worst. Penguin Press.
Schäfer, M., Haun, D. B. M., & Tomasello, M. (2015). Fair Is Not Fair Everywhere. Psychological Science, 26(8), 1252-1260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615586188
Sommet, N., Morselli, D., & Spini, D. (2018). Income Inequality Affects the Psychological Health of Only the People Facing Scarcity. Psychological Science, 29(12), 1911-1921. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618798620
Stiglitz, J. E. (2013). The price of inequality. W. W. Norton & Company.
Uchida, Y., Takemura, K., & Fukushima, S. (2020). How do socio-ecological factors shape culture? Understanding the process of micro–macro interactions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 32, 115-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.033
van Dijk, E., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2021). Experimental Games and Social Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology, 72(1), 415-438. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-081420-110718
Vignoles, V. L., Owe, E., Becker, M., Smith, P. B., Easterbrook, M. J., Brown, R., González, R., Didier, N., Carrasco, D., Cadena, M. P., Lay, S., Schwartz, S. J., Des Rosiers, S. E., Villamar, J. A., Gavreliuc, A., Zinkeng, M., Kreuzbauer, R., Baguma, P., Martin, M., … Bond, M. H. (2016). Beyond the ‘east–west’ dichotomy: Global variation in cultural models of selfhood. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(8), 966-1000. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000175
Vinken, H., Soeters, J., & Ester, P. (2004). Comparing Cultures: Dimensions of Culture in a Comparative Perspective. BRILL. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047412977
