正在加载图片...
60 WHITE ET AL the posters after the first week.we alsochecked to see if there a and the overall pattern of results was consistent across weeks onalitics.(49) Discussion lations (rust in family and trust in neighbor alities:ps <01). capture the extent to which participants trusted ingroup Study 5:Nation-Level Threats of Violence and Trust if ce score appr we predicte The results of Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that the relation represent the variance i arget-specific nature of this relation.Specifically.we examined ingroup trust index.B 39.(49) 97p= .005 ses to se whether the obser held when statisticall on the ess and nd me es of tru cant after i Several line pop (0 ined signific lling for the same Revelle 2008-Hahn Comre 1904-Kausel&Slar 201 Study s demons ted a relation between threats of ne and tr t the national level.Howe ultipl of dem aphic and ristic nfamiliar others Furtherme the relation between military (Ben-Ner Halldo of s pe of affilia that would be be General Discussion violence by becoming more socially rent investigation examined how threats of violene peopl influence personality characteristics and social behaviors at three fromother religions and nation Method ining the data nmilitary sp g with the data on t Neighbors Results and Discussion group Results indicated that military sthe posters after the first week, we also checked to see if there was an effect of time on our results. There was not. A similar number of tabs were taken during Week 1 (n 22) and Week 2 (n 19), and the overall pattern of results was consistent across weeks. Discussion The results of Study 4 replicate those of Study 3 with a realworld manipulation of threat and a behavioral assessment of agreeableness. Relative to a control condition, those primed with a threat of violence were more willing to help ingroup members and less willing to help outgroup members. Study 5: Nation-Level Threats of Violence and Trust The results of Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that the relation between threats of violence and agreeableness is target-specific. In Study 5, we returned to the national level to further assess the target-specific nature of this relation. Specifically, we examined the link between military spending and people’s trust in family and neighbors, on the one hand, and people from other religions or nationalities, on the other. Agreeableness and trust are closely related, as trust is one of the primary components of agreeableness, and measures of trust are centrally incorporated in the assessment of agreeableness (John & Srivastava, 1999). Several lines of research also suggest a relation between agreeableness and trust: Assessments of trust are strongly correlated with Big Five measures of agreeableness in both adults and children (Evans & Revelle, 2008; Hahn & Comrey, 1994; Kausel & Slaughter, 2011; Sneed, 2002); within organizations, employees are more likely to trust agreeable leaders (Quinlan, 2009); and, in one study, among multiple measures of demographic and personality characteristics, trait-level agreeableness was the best predictor of trust in an economic game (Ben-Ner & Halldorsson, 2010). Finally, trust should facilitate the type of affiliation that would be beneficial under threat, because people consider it the most important characteristic in interdependent relationships (Cottrell, Neuberg, & Li, 2007). If people respond to threats of violence by becoming more socially affiliative with familiar others, then people who experience threats of violence on the national level should especially show increased levels of trust toward family and neighbors and, mirroring the results of Studies 3 and 4, they should show decreased levels of trust in people from other religions and nationalities. Method As in Study 1, we used figures from the CIA World Factbook (2007) to assess military spending. To evaluate people’s trust in various social groups we used data reported in the World Values Survey (2009) on trust in four social groups: family, neighbors, members of other religions, and members of other nationalities. Combining the data on military spending with the data on trust left a total sample of 50 nations representing seven major geopolitical regions: Europe (19 nations), Africa (eight nations), Asia (eight nations), South America (seven nations), North America (three nations), the Middle East (three nations), and Oceania (two nations). Results and Discussion Results indicated that military spending was significantly, positively correlated with trusting family, r(48) .34, p .02; marginally positively correlated with trusting neighbors, r(50) .24, p .09; and significantly negatively correlated with trusting members of other religions, r(50) –.32, p .023, and other nationalities, r(49) –.29, p .045 (see Figure 4). Moreover, comparing each of these correlations with one another— both of the positive correlations (trust in family and trust in neighbors) were significantly different from both of the negative correlations (trust in members of other religions and members of other nationalities; ps .01). To capture the extent to which participants trusted ingroup members more than outgroup members, we also created a measure of ingroup trust bias. Following Edwards’s (1994) residualized difference score approach, we predicted trust in ingroup members from trust in outgroup members and saved the residual scores. These residuals, our ingroup trust index, represent the variance in trust in ingroup members that is distinct from trust in members of other groups. Military spending was significantly related to our ingroup trust index, .39, t(49) 2.97, p .005. As in Study 1, we conducted a series of multiple regression analyses to see whether the observed relation held when statistically controlling for a number of potentially confounding variables. Indeed, the link between military spending and ingroup trust bias remained significant after individually controlling for national GDP, GDP per person, population density, poverty rate, economic disparity, and disease prevalence (s between .41 and .54, ps .010). The observed relation also remained significant when controlling for the same variables in a single regression ( .34, p .022). In sum, Study 5 demonstrated a relation between threats of violence and trust at the national level. However, this relation was dependent on whether trust was assessed toward familiar others or unfamiliar others. Furthermore, the relation between military spending and trust appears to be quite robust, as it survives controlling for a number of potential confounds. General Discussion The current investigation examined how threats of violence influence personality characteristics and social behaviors at three Figure 4. Correlations between military spending and trust of various social groups (Study 5). 630 WHITE ET AL. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.