Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
432
result(s) for
"Konservatismus"
Sort by:
Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts
Both liberals and conservatives believe that using facts in political discussions helps to foster mutual respect, but 15 studies—across multiple methodologies and issues—show that these beliefs are mistaken. Political opponents respect moral beliefs more when they are supported by personal experiences, not facts. The respect-inducing power of personal experiences is revealed by survey studies across various political topics, a field study of conversations about guns, an analysis of YouTube comments from abortion opinion videos, and an archival analysis of 137 interview transcripts from Fox News and CNN. The personal experiences most likely to encourage respect from opponents are issue-relevant and involve harm. Mediation analyses reveal that these harm-related personal experiences increase respect by increasing perceptions of rationality: everyone can appreciate that avoiding harm is rational, even in peoplewho hold different beliefs about guns, taxes, immigration, and the environment. Studies show that people believe in the truth of both facts and personal experiences in nonmoral disagreement; however, in moral disagreements, subjective experiences seem truer (i.e., are doubted less) than objective facts. These results provide a concrete demonstration of how to bridge moral divides while also revealing how our intuitions can lead us astray. Stretching back to the Enlightenment, philosophers and scientists have privileged objective facts over experiences in the pursuit of truth. However, furnishing perceptions of truth within moral disagreements is better accomplished by sharing subjective experiences, not by providing facts.
Journal Article
The marketplace of ideology: “Elective affinities” in political psychology and their implications for consumer behavior
An abundance of research in political psychology demonstrates that leftists and rightists (or liberals and conservatives) diverge from one another in terms of: (a) personality characteristics; (b) cognitive processing styles; (c) motivational interests and concerns; (d) the prioritization of personal values; and (e) neurological structures and physiological functions. In this article, I summarize these findings and discuss some of their implications for persuasion, framing, and advertising; consumer choice, judgment, decision-making, and behavior; and customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction and politically motivated boycotts. I conclude that the theory and practice of consumer psychology will be enriched by taking into account ideological asymmetries and the ways in which human behavior both reflects and gives rise to left–right divergence in political orientation—not only in terms of beliefs, opinions, and values but also in terms of underlying psychological processes.
Journal Article
The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science
Among American Conservatives, but not Liberals, trust in science has been declining since the 1970's. Climate science has become particularly polarized, with Conservatives being more likely than Liberals to reject the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the globe. Conversely, opposition to genetically-modified (GM) foods and vaccinations is often ascribed to the political Left although reliable data are lacking. There are also growing indications that rejection of science is suffused by conspiracist ideation, that is the general tendency to endorse conspiracy theories including the specific beliefs that inconvenient scientific findings constitute a \"hoax.\"
We conducted a propensity weighted internet-panel survey of the U.S. population and show that conservatism and free-market worldview strongly predict rejection of climate science, in contrast to their weaker and opposing effects on acceptance of vaccinations. The two worldview variables do not predict opposition to GM. Conspiracist ideation, by contrast, predicts rejection of all three scientific propositions, albeit to greatly varying extents. Greater endorsement of a diverse set of conspiracy theories predicts opposition to GM foods, vaccinations, and climate science.
Free-market worldviews are an important predictor of the rejection of scientific findings that have potential regulatory implications, such as climate science, but not necessarily of other scientific issues. Conspiracist ideation, by contrast, is associated with the rejection of all scientific propositions tested. We highlight the manifold cognitive reasons why conspiracist ideation would stand in opposition to the scientific method. The involvement of conspiracist ideation in the rejection of science has implications for science communicators.
Journal Article
Client Conservatism and Auditor-Client Contracting
We find that auditors of more conservative clients charge lower fees, issue fewer going concern opinions, and resign less frequently, consistent with more conservative clients imposing less engagement risk on their auditors. Using path analysis, we find evidence that both inherent risk and auditor business risk explain these associations. Also consistent with conservatism reducing auditor business risk, we find that client conservatism is associated with fewer lawsuits against auditors and with fewer client restatements. Taken together, our results are consistent with auditors viewing client conservatism as an important determinant of engagement risk that, in turn, affects auditor-client contracting decisions. Our findings should be of interest to auditors who actively manage client risk and to standard-setters who recently dropped conservatism as a desired attribute of financial reporting quality.
Journal Article
The effects of COVID-19 on conditional accounting conservatism in developing countries: evidence from Jordan
The purpose of this study was to look at the impacts of COVID-19 on the Jordanian banking industry and how it affects the use of the conditional accounting conservatism concept. This study's sample consists of 16 banking institutions listed on the Amman Stock Exchange (ASE) and 64 observations from December 2018 to July 2021. A multiple linear regression model was used to evaluate the hypotheses, and the results show that COVID-19 had a substantial beneficial influence on conditional conservatism in the Jordanian banking industry over this period. Furthermore, when uncertainty grows, the function of conservatism becomes more significant, as more trustworthy accounting information allows investors to properly judge a company's past and future performance. The research suggests that the relevant authorities offer instructions for accountants that may be used in practice to attain the appropriate degree of accounting conservatism, under international standards and local laws and regulations. The current study is the first to be conducted in a developing nation, such as Jordan, and the findings may be useful to other developing nations.
Journal Article
CEO Gender, Ethical Leadership, and Accounting Conservatism
Since male CEOs dominate corporate leadership, the literature on top management decision making suffers from an implicit masculine bias. Although research indicates that males and females are biologically and psychologically different, the leadership characteristics of female CEOs are largely unexplored. Two of these characteristics, risk aversion and ethical sensitivity, are tied to key accounting issues, such as conservatism in financial reporting and steadfast opposition to fraud. In this study, we examine the relationship between CEO gender and accounting conservatism, and find a positive association between the two. Consistent with conventional wisdom, this association appears to be stronger in firms with high rather than low litigation and takeover risks. This study contributes to the ethics literature by highlighting the benefits of gender diversity in upholding the integrity of financial reporting.
Journal Article
Past-focused environmental comparisons promote proenvironmental outcomes for conservatives
Conservatives appear more skeptical about climate change and global warming and less willing to act against it than liberals. We propose that this unwillingness could result from fundamental differences in conservatives’ and liberals’ temporal focus. Conservatives tend to focus more on the past than do liberals. Across six studies, we rely on this notion to demonstrate that conservatives are positively affected by past- but not by future-focused environmental comparisons. Past comparisons largely eliminated the political divide that separated liberal and conservative respondents’ attitudes toward and behavior regarding climate change, so that across these studies conservatives and liberals were nearly equally likely to fight climate change. This research demonstrates how psychological processes, such as temporal comparison, underlie the prevalent ideological gap in addressing climate change. It opens up a promising avenue to convince conservatives effectively of the need to address climate change and global warming.
Journal Article
Does Accounting Conservatism Mitigate the Shortcomings of CEO Overconfidence?
Overconfident CEOs are more willing to initiate investment projects that require experimentation, yet tend to defer responding to the bad news when the project is not performing as planned. Accounting conservatism accelerates the recognition of the bad news and its dissemination to gatekeepers, making it more likely that the CEO will acknowledge the problem earlier and start searching for solutions. Therefore, firms where both characteristics—CEO overconfidence and accounting conservatism—are present should perform better. Our empirical tests confirm this prediction: firms that practice conservative accounting and are run by overconfident CEOs exhibit better cash flow performance. Our results continue to hold in a variety of settings, including market reactions to acquisitions, cash flow downside risk, and analyst following. Further, the joint positive effect of CEO overconfidence and accounting conservatism on firm performance is stronger in high-uncertainty environments and in firms facing less stringent financing constraints, consistent with theoretical predictions.
Journal Article
The Politics of Buying, Boycotting, Complaining, and Disputing
Research in political psychology indicates that liberals are less motivated than conservatives by epistemic, existential, and relational needs to reduce uncertainty, threat, and social discord, and are therefore more prone to challenge the status quo. In a compelling extension of this work into the field of consumer behavior, Jung, Garbarino, Briley, and Wynhausen (this issue) demonstrate that people residing in more liberal (vs. conservative) areas register more complaints with the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and dispute more resolutions offered in response to their complaints. Furthermore, liberals were found to object more strongly to the hypothetical imposition of an unanticipated banking fee, and this effect was mediated by system justification. Inspired by Jung and colleagues, we investigated the hypothesis that liberals would also be more likely to buy and boycott consumer products for political reasons. We analyzed data from the American National Election Studies and European Social Surveys and discovered that, even after we adjusted for demographic factors, liberals in the United States and leftists in all 15 European countries were more likely than conservatives and rightists to report having bought a product—or refrained from buying a product—for political reasons.
Journal Article