No abstract

Psychological violence against women in intimate relations is one of the most widespread and hidden ways of limiting their human rights. Nowadays different ideologies, including sexism and feminism, can contribute to (dis)regard this phenomenon. This study focuses on the relationship between ambivalent sexism (in its hostile and benevolent dimensions) and feminism (in the egalitarian ideology dimension) with the identification of psychological violence and the perception of invulnerability to the intimate partner violence in women. The mediator role of the myths about genderbased violence in these relationships is analysed. Participants were 91 women, with heterogeneous socio-demographic characteristics. Results showed benevolent sexism as a risk factor and egalitarian feminism ideology as a protector factor in the process of the perception of psychological violence. The egalitarian feminism ideology also appears as the main predictor of the perception of invulnerability to abuse. This relationship is mediated by the degree of adhesion to the myths about gender-based violence. These findings reinforce † In memoriam "A vida é a arte do encontro, embora haja tanto descontro nessa vida" (Vinícius de Moraes) Ana-Luisa unfortunately left us during the time we were working on this manuscript. She entered our lives with extraordinary strength and she turned our shared moments into experiences of encounter, an art that she mastered like nobody else. We would like this work, led by her, to act as a tribute to her memory, a work she dedicated "to all the people who dare to move in the uncertain paths of change". / Ana-Luisa lamentablemente nos dejó durante el proceso de elaboración de este trabajo. Irrumpió en nuestra vida con una fuerza extraordinaria y convirtió los momentos compartidos en experiencias de encuentro, un arte que dominaba como nadie. Sirva como homenaje a su memoria este trabajo que ella lideró, un trabajo que quiso dedicar "a todas las personas que se arriesgan a lanzarse en los caminos inciertos de la transformación".

European identity is currently facing important challenges. From the beginning, European identity has been related to the national identities of Member States with different economic strengths. The recent economic recession made these disparities salient across countries. In this research conducted in two countries with relative low status in the European Union (EU), we explored whether the perceived disparities in wealth between the countries of the EU—perceived economic inequality—predicted disidentification with Europe. We also examined the mediators of this relationship. Study 1, conducted in Spain, revealed that perceived economic inequality positively predicted disidentification with Europe; importantly, this effect remained when controlling for individuals’ subjective socioeconomic status and the perceived status of the country. The experience of fear of economic inequality in the EU mediated this relationship. The results of Study 1 were replicated comparing a Spanish sample (Study 2a) and a Greek sample (Study 2b). These studies delved deeper into the specific appraisals of fear that mediate the relationship between economic inequality and disidentification with Europe. Four categories of fear appraisals obtained in a preliminary qualitative study were measured as potential mediators: losing national sovereignty, worsening of living conditions, being negatively stereotyped, and Europe losing fundamental values. The relationship between economic inequality in the EU and disidentification with Europe was mediated by fear of losing national sovereignty and fear of Europe losing fundamental values.

Expressing anger can engender desired change, but it can also backfire. In the present research we examined how power shapes the expression of anger. In Study 1, we found that powerless individuals were less inclined to express their anger directly but more inclined to express it indirectly by sharing it with others. Powerless participants’ reluctance to express anger directly was mediated by negative social appraisals. In Study 2, we replicated the effect of power on direct anger expression in a situation in which participants had actual power (or not). Anger was evoked in the laboratory using an ecologically valid procedure, and participants were given an opportunity to express anger. Study 3 showed that powerless participants expected direct anger expression to arouse more anger than fear in the target, whereas the opposite was true for indirect anger expression. Powerful participants always expected to elicit more fear than anger in the target.