Jeffrey S Sinn
Biographic Data
| ID | 4394792 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Jeffrey S Sinn |
| GIVEN NAMES | Jeffrey S |
| FAMILY NAME | Sinn |
| SIGNATURE | SINN J S |
| AFFILIATIONS | Winthrop University |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-1890-3529 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 3 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 33 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 3 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1997 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2018 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
Is Political Conservatism Adaptive? Reinterpreting Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation as Evolved, Sociofunctional Strategies
The Dual Process Model (DPM) explains prejudice and political conservatism as functions of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and a Social Dominance Orientation (SDO; Duckitt, 2001). From an evolutionary perspective, such orientations may represent specific adaptations to coalitional competition in the ancestral environment (Sinn & Hayes, 2016). Supporting this view, recent research suggests the two orientations represent divergent strategies, wit…
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary‐Coalitional Theory of Liberal‐Conservative Differences
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) explains liberal‐conservative differences as arising from different moral intuitions, with liberals endorsing “individualizing” foundations (Harm and Fairness) and conservatives also endorsing “binding” foundations (Authority, Respect, and Purity). We argue these labels misconstrue ideological differences and propose Evolutionary‐Coalitional Theory (ECT) as an alternative, explaining how competitive dynamics in the …
The Predictive and Discriminant Validity of Masculinity Ideology
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary‐Coalitional Theory of Liberal‐Conservative Differences
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) explains liberal‐conservative differences as arising from different moral intuitions, with liberals endorsing “individualizing” foundations (Harm and Fairness) and conservatives also endorsing “binding” foundations (Authority, Respect, and Purity). We argue these labels misconstrue ideological differences and propose Evolutionary‐Coalitional Theory (ECT) as an alternative, explaining how competitive dynamics in the …
The Predictive and Discriminant Validity of Masculinity Ideology
Is Political Conservatism Adaptive? Reinterpreting Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation as Evolved, Sociofunctional Strategies
The Dual Process Model (DPM) explains prejudice and political conservatism as functions of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and a Social Dominance Orientation (SDO; Duckitt, 2001). From an evolutionary perspective, such orientations may represent specific adaptations to coalitional competition in the ancestral environment (Sinn & Hayes, 2016). Supporting this view, recent research suggests the two orientations represent divergent strategies, wit…
The Predictive and Discriminant Validity of Masculinity Ideology
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary‐Coalitional Theory of Liberal‐Conservative Differences
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) explains liberal‐conservative differences as arising from different moral intuitions, with liberals endorsing “individualizing” foundations (Harm and Fairness) and conservatives also endorsing “binding” foundations (Authority, Respect, and Purity). We argue these labels misconstrue ideological differences and propose Evolutionary‐Coalitional Theory (ECT) as an alternative, explaining how competitive dynamics in the …
Is Political Conservatism Adaptive? Reinterpreting Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation as Evolved, Sociofunctional Strategies
The Dual Process Model (DPM) explains prejudice and political conservatism as functions of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and a Social Dominance Orientation (SDO; Duckitt, 2001). From an evolutionary perspective, such orientations may represent specific adaptations to coalitional competition in the ancestral environment (Sinn & Hayes, 2016). Supporting this view, recent research suggests the two orientations represent divergent strategies, wit…
Politics (3 works) · Psychology (3 works) · Social Psychology (3 works) · Authoritarianism (2 works) · Conservatism (2 works) · Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior (2 works) · Ideology (2 works) · Law (2 works) · Law (2 works) · Political science (2 works)