School of Medicine and Psychology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
College of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
PLoS One. 2023 Aug 29;18(8):e0286063. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286063. eCollection 2023.
The current research examined the proposition that debates over same-sex marriage are characterized, at least in part, by conflicting understandings about what is and is not prejudiced, normative and true. Toward this end, Australians' (N = 415) prejudice judgements of supportive and oppositional statements toward same-sex marriage were measured and analysed with analyses of variance. Unsurprisingly, same-sex marriage supporters perceived a supportive statement as unprejudiced, tolerant, truthful, in pursuit of individual liberty, and normative; oppositional statements were seen in precisely the opposite manner. Same-sex marriage opponents, however, disagreed, instead judging an oppositional statement as unprejudiced, tolerant, truthful, in pursuit of individual liberty, and normative; it was a supportive statement that was seen as relatively prejudiced. These effects remained even after controlling for independent expressions of in-group favouritism. The current data align with a collective naïve realism perspective, in which group members see their own views as veridical and those of disagreeing others as biased. We argue that prejudice-reduction efforts must be instantiated to facilitate a common in-group identity between supporters and opponents to enable consensus over facts and, ultimately, what is and is not prejudice. Without this consensus, each side of the political debate may simply hurl the pejorative label of "prejudice" against the other, with likely little opportunity for social influence and social change.
当前的研究检验了这样一个命题，即关于同性婚姻的争论至少在一定程度上是由对什么是有偏见的、规范的和真实的，以及什么不是有偏见的、规范的和真实的的理解冲突所构成的。为此，本研究通过方差分析，衡量并分析了澳大利亚人（N=415）对同性婚姻支持和反对言论的偏见判断。不出所料，同性婚姻的支持者认为支持同性婚姻的言论是无偏见的、宽容的、真实的、追求个人自由的和规范的；而反对同性婚姻的言论则恰恰相反。然而，同性婚姻的反对者不同意这种看法，他们认为反对同性婚姻的言论是无偏见的、宽容的、真实的、追求个人自由的和规范的；而支持同性婚姻的言论则被认为是相对有偏见的。即使在控制了群体内偏爱表达的独立影响后，这些影响仍然存在。当前的数据与集体朴素现实主义观点一致，即群体成员认为自己的观点是真实的，而持不同意见的人的观点是有偏见的。我们认为，必须实施减少偏见的努力，以促进支持者和反对者之间的共同群体认同，从而就事实以及什么是偏见达成共识。如果没有这种共识，政治辩论的每一方可能只会相互指责对方有“偏见”，而不太可能有机会产生社会影响和社会变革。
