With the ideational turn in populism studies (Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser 2013), researchers have started to conceptualize and measure populism as a set of attitudes individuals hold about politics and society (e.g. Akkerman et al. 2014; Elchardus and Spruyt 2014;Hawkins et al. 2012;Rooduijn 2014b;Spruyt 2014;Stanley 2011). As proposed in the introduction to this volume, such attitudes are ordinarily dormant, but may be activated given a favorable context for populist discourse and its articulation by political actors. The measurement of these attitudes, however, has been far from uniform, as the review by Van Hauwaert, Schimpf, and Azevedo in 1 Contact author: BCS. BCS wrote the paper with substantial support from BS; BCS, IA, LL ran the analyses; BCS and LL designed the study; IA, EA, NB, YMC, GD, GR, SR, MS collected data, provided valuable comments and edits, and are listed in alphabetical order; LL led the project. The authors would like to thank Andreea Nicutar, Daniel Kovarec, Elisa Totino, Federico Vegetti, Selina Kurer, and Sharon Belli for their help with questionnaire translation and survey implementation, and Sebastian Jungkunz and Nemanja Stankov for assistance with data cleaning and writing the codebooks.the previous chapter shows. The basis of the most commonly scale used today was set in Hawkins, Riding, and Mudde (2012). It was extended into the popularized six-item version by Akkerman, Mudde, and Zaslove (2014), and used by Spruyt et al. 2016, and in the chapters by Andreadis and Ruth; Singer et al.; and Busby et al. in this volume.However, as Van Hauwaert, Schimpf, and Azevedo have shown in their chapter, there is room for improvement in scale development. From a survey methodology perspective, the items fail to identify strong levels of populism and anti-populism and can only discriminate among moderate forms of it. They are not polarizing enough, as there seems to be a general trend of agreement: for all countries and items, the item averages are above the scales' middle point. A further limitation of the existing measures is that in most scales all items are positively wordedmeaning that more agreement indicates more populism. For this reason it is impossible to discriminate between actual agreement with the content and acquiescence bias.Our purpose with this study is to tackle the issue of scale development following practices common in psychology but that have yet to make their way into political science. We start with a large number of items, and use various techniques to select the few ones that work better at capturing populist attitudes. Next we test which items are invariant across countriesi.e., whether they measure the same thing, the same way, in different countries. Recent research has shown that several scales, some of which have been around for decades in social sciences, should not be used for cross-country comparisons because the measure is not invariant across cultures (Alemán and Woods 2016, Ariely and Davidov 2010, Piurko et al. 2011. Our analyses result in a short questio...

8 March (8M), now known as International Women’s Day, is a day for feminist claims where demonstrations are organized in over 150 countries, with the participation of millions of women all around the world. These demonstrations can be viewed as collective rituals and thus focus attention on the processes that facilitate different psychosocial effects. This work aims to explore the mechanisms (i.e., behavioral and attentional synchrony, perceived emotional synchrony, and positive and transcendent emotions) involved in participation in the demonstrations of 8 March 2020, collective and ritualized feminist actions, and their correlates associated with personal well-being (i.e., affective well-being and beliefs of personal growth) and collective well-being (i.e., social integration variables: situated identity, solidarity and fusion), collective efficacy and collective growth, and behavioral intention to support the fight for women’s rights. To this end, a cross-cultural study was conducted with the participation of 2,854 people (age 18–79; M = 30.55; SD = 11.66) from countries in Latin America (Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Colombia, and Ecuador) and Europe (Spain and Portugal), with a retrospective correlational cross-sectional design and a convenience sample. Participants were divided between demonstration participants (n = 1,271; 94.0% female) and non-demonstrators or followers who monitored participants through the media and social networks (n = 1,583; 75.87% female). Compared with non-demonstrators and with males, female and non-binary gender respondents had greater scores in mechanisms and criterion variables. Further random-effects model meta-analyses revealed that the perceived emotional synchrony was consistently associated with more proximal mechanisms, as well as with criterion variables. Finally, sequential moderation analyses showed that proposed mechanisms successfully mediated the effects of participation on every criterion variable. These results indicate that participation in 8M marches and demonstrations can be analyzed through the literature on collective rituals. As such, collective participation implies positive outcomes both individually and collectively, which are further reinforced through key psychological mechanisms, in line with a Durkheimian approach to collective rituals.

This study examined how internet use is related to subjective well-being, using longitudinal data from 19 nations with representative online samples stratified for age, gender, and region (N = 7122, 51.43% women, M age = 45.26). Life satisfaction and anxiety served as indices of subjective well-being at time 1 (t1) and then six months later (t2). Frequency of internet use (hours online per day) at t1 correlated with lower life satisfaction, r = -.06, and more anxiety, r = .13 at t2. However, after imposing multivariate controls, frequency of internet use (t1) was no longer associated with lower subjective well-being (t2). Frequency of social contact by internet and use of internet for following rumors (t1) predicted higher anxiety (t2). Higher levels of direct (faceto-face plus phone) social contact (t1) predicted greater life satisfaction (t2). In multivariate analyses, all effect sizes were small. Society-level individualism-collectivism or indulgencerestraint did not show a direct effect on outcomes nor moderate individual-level associations. Results are discussed in the framework of the internet as a displacement of social contact versus a replacement of deficits in direct contact; and as a source of positive and negative information.

La teoría de la Dominancia Social (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) postula que la discriminación grupal tiende a ser sistemática porque las ideologías sociales ayudan a coordinar las acciones de instituciones e individuos. La aceptación de ideologías que legitiman la desigualdad está en parte determinada por el deseo general de los individuos de dominación de unos grupos sobre otros. Este deseo es capturado por el constructo denominado Orientación de Dominancia Social (Social Dominance Orientation, SDO).Con el objetivo de indagar en los niveles de ODS y su relación con variables como el posicionamiento ideológico y valores, se desarrolló un estudio descriptivo correlacional, de diseño no experimental transversal sobre la base de una muestra no probabilística de tipo intencional compuesta por 254 estudiantes universitarios del cordón urbano circundante de la ciudad de Buenos Aires.Los resultados muestran que la ODS se asocia positivamente a valores de Poder y Logro y negativamente a la Benevolencia y el Universalismo. La ODS parece ser más fuerte en sujetos con posicionamiento ideológico cercano a la derecha. En los estudiantes prevalece una baja ODS, valores de Autotrascendencia y Autopromoción y un posicionamiento ideológico que tiende a la izquierda.