Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Journal Article

We Value What Values Us: The Appeal of Identity-Affirming Science

Thomas A. Morton, S. Alexander Haslam, Tom Postmes and Michelle K. Ryan
Political Psychology
Vol. 27, No. 6 (Dec., 2006), pp. 823-838
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20447004
Page Count: 16
Were these topics helpful?
See something inaccurate? Let us know!

Select the topics that are inaccurate.

Cancel
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Add to My Lists
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
We Value What Values Us: The Appeal of Identity-Affirming Science
Preview not available

Abstract

Members of the public (Study 1; n = 184) and university students (Study 2; n = 101) evaluated a piece of research and indicated their support for its continuation. The research findings were held constant, but the methods that revealed those findings were attributed to either neuroscience or social science, and the conclusions based on those findings were biased either in favor of men or in favor of women. Study 1 revealed that participants were more positive about research that affirmed their gender identity and that was based on neuroscience rather than social science. Study 2 found this pattern to be apparent in more specialist samples. Indeed, particpants with some scientific training were more influenced by research that affirmed the reader's gender identity. Participants with less scientific training, in comparison, were more influenced by the type of science described when making judgments about the value of the research. Contrary to popular claims, this suggests that scientific knowledge alone is no protection against the effects of bias on research evaluation. Implications for the practice and popularization of science are discussed.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
823
    823
  • Thumbnail: Page 
824
    824
  • Thumbnail: Page 
825
    825
  • Thumbnail: Page 
826
    826
  • Thumbnail: Page 
827
    827
  • Thumbnail: Page 
828
    828
  • Thumbnail: Page 
829
    829
  • Thumbnail: Page 
830
    830
  • Thumbnail: Page 
831
    831
  • Thumbnail: Page 
832
    832
  • Thumbnail: Page 
833
    833
  • Thumbnail: Page 
834
    834
  • Thumbnail: Page 
835
    835
  • Thumbnail: Page 
836
    836
  • Thumbnail: Page 
837
    837
  • Thumbnail: Page 
838
    838