Cynicism in Love and in Politics
- 812 Downloads
Following Leung and Bond, deception and its recognition are the key reasons for the existence of cynical beliefs among actors and observers of social life. While this mechanism is almost inherent in politics and power relations, sociobiology postulates its role also in intimate life, as part of mate selection strategies played by individuals of both sexes.
Our first study relates social axioms to love styles in a Polish-Spanish cross-cultural comparison. Based on Social Axioms Survey (SAS), this work attempted to test some of its methodological variations, such as: generality vs. domain specificity; individual vs. shared beliefs; and evenness vs. bias in gender targeting. As expected, there was a link between social cynicism and pragma (in Hendrick and Hendrick's conceptual scheme of love styles). This effect was moderated by an index of shared beliefs such that social cynicism led to pragmatic views on love, particularly in those participants who maintained that cynical beliefs were widespread in their society at large. Central to our second study is the hypothesis that social cynicism in political life is the consequence of deceptions committed by authorities, i.e., the discrepancy between propaganda and experienced reality. Our research involved the history of Polish-Russian/Soviet relations during the last 50 years, appraised by citizens of both countries. As expected, for periods when the propaganda exulted with most positive terms, the experienced versions of bilateral relations were reaching the lowest ebb. Also, the larger were those gaps, the more were participants filling them with online measures of cynicism. These results were more pronounced among Poles than Russians.
KeywordsCultural Distance Experienced Version Shared Belief Bilateral Relation Fate Control
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (1994). Social psychology. The heart and the mind. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- Babiuch, M. (2003). Style miłosci wsród młodziezy—porównania miȩdzykulturowe. [Styles of love among university students—cross-cultural comparisons—in Polish.] In A. Jurkowski (Ed.), Z zagadnien´ współczesnej psychologii wychowawczej (pp. 265–295). Warszawa: Instytut Psychologii PAN.Google Scholar
- Biłas-Henne, M. (2006). Aksjomaty społeczne i koncepcje miłości w Hiszpanii i w Polsce. Studia Psychologiczne, 44, 23–33.Google Scholar
- Bond, M. H. (2001). Surveying the foundations: Approaches to measuring group, organizational, and national variation. In M. Erez, U. Kleinbeck, & H. Thierry (Eds.), Work motivation in the context of a globalizing economy (pp. 395–412). Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Boski, P. (2006). Humanism-materialism: Centuries-long Polish cultural origins and 20 years of research in cultural psychology. In U. Kim, K.-S. Yang, & K. K. Hwang (Eds.), Indigenous and cultural psychology: Understanding people in context (pp. 372–403). New York: Kluewer Plenum/Academic.Google Scholar
- Boski, P. (2008). Kulturowe ramy zachowań społecznych. (Rozdział 8 Epistemologia kulturowa I: Aksjomaty społeczne jako przekonania o prawidłowościach rządzących swiatem—in Polish.) [Cultural framework of social behavior. A handbook of cross-cultural psychology] Warszawa, Poland: PWN.Google Scholar
- Brown, R., & Gaertner, S. (Eds.) (2001). Intergroup processes. [Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology.] Oxford, England: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Buss, D. M. (1996). Evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books/ Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (Eds.) (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
- Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.) (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations. The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Leung, K., & Bond. M. H. (2004). A model for social beliefs in multicultural perspective. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 36 (pp. 122–197). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic.Google Scholar
- Nelson, T. D. (2002). The psychology of prejudice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
- Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 25 (pp. 1–65). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
- Schwartz, S. H. (2004). Mapping and interpreting cultural differences around the world. In H. Vinken, J. Soeters, & P. Ester (Eds.), Comparing cultures: Dimensions of culture in a comparative perspective (pp. 43–73). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
- Sidanius J., & Pratto F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergoup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Wiȩckowska, J., & Boski, P. (2007). Stosunki polsko-rosyjskie z perspektywy obu nacji: Rozbiezność miȩdzy rzeczywistoscią propagandową i doswiadczaną a cynizm spoleczny [Polish-Russian relations from the perspectives of both nations: Discrepancy between propagandist vs. experienced reality and social cynicism—in Polish.] In K. Skarzynska, U. Jakubowska, & J. Wasilewski (Eds.), Konflikty miȩdzygrupowe (Intergroup conflicts, (pp. 184–206). Warszawa: Academica.Google Scholar