Power and Intra-Societal Conflict Dataset

This study employed social domain theory to examine individuals’ evaluations of intra-societal conflicts (e.g., between individuals and larger social entities and involving competing moral versus societal concerns) and the influence of power and culture on these evaluations. U.S. (N = 92) and Chinese (N = 98) university students received high or low power priming and then evaluated hypothetical scenarios about different intra-societal conflicts. They rated the acceptability of actions, agreement with various justifications for these actions, and the appropriateness of third-party involvement. Regardless of power priming and cultural background, collective-societal justifications were associated with higher approval of collective infringement on individual rights and lower support for third-party involvement, whereas individual-moral justifications were associated with lower approval of collective actions, higher approval of individual actions, and higher support for third-party involvement. However, judgments and their association with justifications were also differently affected by power priming between the two cultures, with high-power U.S. and low-power Chinese participants showing lower support for third-party involvement based on collective-societal concerns. These results show the importance of going beyond a focus on homogeneous cultural orientations when examining judgments about societal conflict, and instead considering individuals’ social status and what status and power mean in their societies.

本研究运用社会领域理论，探究个体对于社会内部冲突（例如，个人与更大社会实体之间的冲突，以及涉及相互竞争的道德与社会关注点的冲突）的评价，以及权力与文化对这些评价的影响。92名美国大学生和98名中国大学生接受了高或低权力启动，随后评估了不同社会内部冲突的假设情景。他们评价了行为的可接受性、对各种行为正当化理由的同意程度，以及第三方介入的适宜性。无论权力启动和文化背景如何，集体-社会正当化理由与对集体侵犯个人权利的更高认可度以及第三方介入的更低支持度相关联，而个体-道德正当化理由与对集体行动的更低认可度、对个体行动的更高认可度以及第三方介入的更高支持度相关联。然而，判断及其与正当化的关联也受到两种文化之间权力启动的不同影响，高权力美国参与者和低权力中国参与者基于集体-社会关注点的第三方介入支持度较低。这些结果表明，在考察关于社会冲突的判断时，超越对同质文化取向的关注具有重要意义，而应考虑个人的社会地位及其所在社会中地位与权力的含义。