Identifying hostile versus paternalistic classism profiles
A person-based approach to the study of ambivalent classism
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 21624366 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Mario Sainz (0000-0002-2048-5872, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2023 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2023-08-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Current Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1046-1310 • E-ISSN: 1936-4733 |
| Editorial | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s12144-023-05007-z |
| OpenAlex | W4385493567 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 3 |
| Referencias citadas | 38 |
Research on ambivalent classism suggests that individuals can manifest classism not only in a hostile and explicit manner but also in a condescending and paternalistic form. However, researchers have not determined the existence of individual profiles or population subgroups that show this ambivalence pattern. Therefore, to assess the existence of different profiles based on their manifestation of ambivalent classism, we carry out a latent profile analysis with a national representative sample ( N = 1536). We identify different classist profiles among the population, including a minority of individuals who score low on both dimensions of classism (low generalized classists, 8.65%) and another minority who score high on both hostile and paternalism classism (high generalized classists, 8.13%). Further, we discovered that most of the population adhered to a moderated classism profile, endorsing both dimensions of classism (moderately generalized classist, 40.95%) or to an ambivalent profile, scoring low in hostile classism and high in paternalistic attitudes (paternalistic classists, 42.25%). The likelihood of adhering to the different profiles seems to be related to the individual’s level of education and system justification beliefs. Those individuals who score higher on system justification and with lower educational attainment are more willing to be highly generalized classists rather than be part of other profiles. Profiles also differ to an extent regarding concerns about economic inequality and social attitudes, with moderate and highly generalized classists being less concerned about economic inequality and less willing to support poor groups. We discuss the implications for developing targeted interventions aimed to confront classism patterns for each profile
Ambivalence · Inequality · Paternalism · Political science · Population · Sociology · Demography · Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies · Psychology · Social and Cultural Dynamics · Social Capital and Networks · Social Psychology
TidyLPA
The perception of economic inequality in everyday life
Ambivalent Classism
Spanish adaptation of the Ambivalent Classism Inventory (ACI)
Deconstructing bullying roles
Education-Based Status in Comparative Perspective
The person-based nature of prejudice
Identifying “types” of ideologies and intergroup biases
The Effects of Different Types of Classism on Psychological Outcomes
Assessing Implicit and Explicit Attitudes about Classism
A Latent Class Analytic Approach to Identifying Structures of Classist Ideology from World-View Orientations
The burden of benevolent sexism
On the relation between social class and prejudice
On the nature of sexist ambivalence
Social Class and Ideologies of Inequality
Attitudes Toward the Poor and Attributions for Poverty
The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory
Educationism and the irony of meritocracy
Social Class and Classism in the Helping Professions
Complementary Justice
A model of (often mixed) stereotype content
| Obras citantes distintas | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 1,5 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 1 |