Search

In a large nationally representative study in the United States, we explored the role of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism on adhering to protective measures against COVID-19. Controlling for one's politics, perception of risk, state policies, and important demographics, we find higher grandiose narcissism predicts less vaccination and less mask-wearing, but more telling other people to wear a mask, if one wears a mask. The individual facets of higher entitlement/exploitativeness predicted less mask-wearing and less vaccination while higher authority/leadership-seeking predicted telling others to wear a mask, but not getting vaccinated. Regarding vulnerable narcissism, higher self-centered/egocentrism predicted less mask-wearing or vaccination, while higher oversensitivity-to-judgement predicted more mask-wearing and vaccination. Our results are consistent with expectations that reflect narcissism's multidimensionality, and present a nuanced picture of narcissism's role in adhering to protective policies., Author(s): Peter K. Hatemi [sup.1] , Zoltán Fazekas [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.29857.31, 0000 0001 2097 4281, Political Science, Microbiology, The Pennsylvania State University, , 307 Pond Lab, University Park, [...]

In a nationally representative study, we explore the public's views of the 2016 presidential nominees. Current measures generally focus on approval of given candidates with closed‐ended questions, but much can be learned by soliciting the public's unconstrained candidate preferences—not only in the direction of how they feel, but the depth of their views and who they really want to see in office. Employing open‐ended questions, we find that more than 75% of the voting public preferred an option other than what was offered. Even when constraining choices to politicians, the Democratic and Republican nominees were not preferred by the majority of the public, and this held true when restricting the analyses to partisans only. We further asked voters to express, in their own words, what they thought of the two candidates for president. The majority of the public described both candidates in negative terms. They spoke with deep disdain for the opposition's candidate, as well as their own party's candidate. The results add support to the view that US primary elections are failing to produce candidates who represent the public's interests and signal the potential for further instability in US government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors explore the contributions of social and genetic influences to religious attitudes and practices in a population-based sample of 11-18 year olds and their mothers who responded to a Religious Attitudes and Practices Inventory and Religious Rearing Practices Inventory respectively. Contrary to genetic studies examining adult religious behavior, genetic influences were small, accounting for only 10 percent of the variance. Rather, the effects of the social environment were much larger, greater than 50 percent, and a majority of offspring similarity was explained by familial rearing. In light of the divergent finding between adults and adolescents, one supporting a socialization model and the other a genetic model, the importance of integrating genetic and social science methodology for complex social behaviors is discussed. (Contains 8 tables and 1 note.)