How does gender equality relate to men's and women's value priorities? It is hypothesized that, for both sexes, the importance of benevolence, universalism, stimulation, hedonism, and self-direction values increases with greater gender equality, whereas the importance of power, achievement, security, and tradition values decreases. Of particular relevance to the present study, increased gender equality should also permit both sexes to pursue more freely the values they inherently care about more. Drawing on evolutionary and role theories, the authors postulate that women inherently value benevolence and universalism more than men do, whereas men inherently value power, achievement, and stimulation more than women do. Thus, as gender equality increases, sex differences in these values should increase, whereas sex differences in other values should not be affected by increases in gender equality. Studies of 25 representative national samples and of students from 68 countries confirmed the hypotheses except for tradition values. Implications for cross-cultural research on sex differences in values and traits are discussed.

No abstract

This study explores the psychological challenges to social movements in the face of structural and cultural violence, and the cognitive and behavioral practices that help overcome these obstacles. It presents 3 case studies of social movements that brought about political and social transformation in Israel in the past 15 years: the struggles against industrial pollution in the city of Ashkelon; for the rights of the LGBT movement in Jerusalem; and of young Jews and Palestinians working against institutional discrimination in the city of Lydda. The research utilized qualitative methods: participative observations and interviews. We followed each group for approximately 1 year and documented its main activities for social change, as well as internal meetings and decision-making processes. We also conducted follow-up interviews with some of the groups' leaders after their goals were accomplished. Public Significance StatementOur research revealed 3 main practices used by social movements to effectively address psychological challenges: a complex view of identities; commitment to a moral compass; and the initiation of small and symbolic acts. Using these practices, the social movements we followed challenged the violent ground rules of a conflict situation, and promoted deep cultural and structural transformation.

This chapter discusses individual differences in the tendency to perceive interpersonal victimhood, and parallels to collective victimhood. Specifically, some people are more likely than others to perceive victimization on the interpersonal level, experience it more intensely, and incorporate these experiences into their identity. The tendency to perceive (interpersonal) victimhood consists of four dimensions: a need for recognition of suffering, perceived moral superiority, lack of empathy for others’ suffering, and rumination over negative feelings and thoughts related to experienced offenses. People who score higher on these dimensions show greater biases in their interpretation, memory, and attributions of interpersonal transgressions: They recall them more, perceive them as more severe, expect more to be harmed by others, and perceive more harm in ambiguous situations. They are also less willing to forgive transgressions. The authors compare this with parallel findings on intergroup relations in the context of collective violence, arguing that similar processes operate.

No abstract