Jul 2026· Perspectives on Psychological Science· pp.
17456916261458313
· 0 citations· 70 references
Medicine
Abstract
Social psychology presents itself as liberal, yet its dominant narratives-obedience, cruelty, conformity, and bias-reflect a persistently pessimistic portrayal of human nature. Here I argue that this pattern is structurally produced. A two-level framework distinguishes the content level, in which pessimistic narratives circulate, from the structural level, in which incentive regimes in academic publishing, media, and pedagogy systematically select and stabilize that content. Two mechanisms are identified. A market-selection mechanism explains why attention economies favor dramatic, morally arousing findings. An institutional-stabilization mechanism explains why pessimistic narratives prove especially durable: They participate in the constitutive logic of the "psy-complex," in which psychological expertise gains authority by rendering human conduct legible as a problem requiring expert correction. Findings that portray ordinary people as biased, obedient, or morally fragile are apt to generate the remediation apparatus on which the field's social legitimacy depends. Archival evidence shows that classic studies were staged and selectively framed to produce pessimistic morals. The replication crisis retroactively identified much of this content as incentive-compatible rather than epistemically robust. Reform efforts (e.g., registered reports, open data, equity-oriented partnerships) can address the market-selection side; changing the institutional-stabilization dynamic requires reflexive attention to whose interests a deficit-focused discipline serves.
The WEIRD framework-Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic-introduced in 2010 by Henrich et al. drew widespread attention to psychology's overreliance on Western samples and its assumption of universal human psychology. However, in this article I argue that the framework's popularization-particularly in work explaining the origins and consequences of WEIRD psychology-has paradoxically generated a new form of exceptionalism. By designating Western populations as psychologically "peculiar," the framework inadvertently maintains the West as the central reference point against which human variation is measured. I identify three mechanisms through which this occurs. First, the WEIRD acronym itself embeds developmental assumptions: Its components connote achievements rather than neutral differences, while implicitly defining non-WEIRD populations through deficit (uneducated, undeveloped, poor, authoritarian). Second, the comparative structure positions WEIRD populations as the persistent baseline, with non-WEIRD psychologies understood through their deviation from Western patterns rather than as autonomous systems. Third, cultural-historical accounts tracing WEIRD psychology to internal European developments risk obscuring how extraction and violence constituted the material conditions for Western institutional dominance. I propose that genuinely decentering Western psychology requires moving beyond binary comparative frameworks, developing research programs that engage diverse cultural psychologies on their own terms and transforming institutional structures that implicitly favor Western theoretical frameworks as unmarked universals.
Unknown authors· Perspectives on Psychologica...· 0 citations
Big data and empirical social science share an often-subterraneous assumption, namely, positivism. Some of their jointly hidden premises are that experiences, preferences, and culture are all equally quantifiable, testable, and measurable. Further, their view is a reification of the status quo, a harmonistic view of society. On the other hand, the critical view espouses
social antagonism
, the view that society essentially consists of a struggle between groups. Critical theory argues against the critical rationalists that positivism (and thus, empirical social science) is guilty of a political agnosticism and, therefore, services the ends of bureaucracy and administration. This paper draws out some latent beliefs of big data as a new version of positivism and shows that big data inherits the problems of empirical social science. In particular, algorithms and data analytics for predictive policing, aggressively personalized advertisement, and prison recidivism stand out as substantial evidence of the new positivism that surges in administered society.
Andrew Burnside· Philosophy & Social Crit...· 0 citations
This conceptual article introduces “strategic mediocrity” as an analytical framework for explaining how contemporary higher education environments often incentivize administrative compliance over intellectual risk-taking. Driven by the rise of managerialism and pervasive audit cultures, faculty members may intentionally narrow their visible scholarly ambition to navigate precarious academic environments that reward safe, measurable performance. We distinguish this phenomenon from mere incompetence or passivity, framing it as a deliberate adaptive response to institutional constraints. The burden of this conformity is not distributed equally, as marginalized scholars and non-tenured faculty face heightened vulnerabilities that compel compliance. In practice, this dynamic manifests in behaviors such as strategic sycophancy and widespread risk aversion in both research and pedagogy. Scholars may also engage in the bureaucratic performance of competence to signal institutional loyalty. Left unchecked, these patterns risk diminishing long-term scholarly impact while reinforcing stagnant leadership loops. The resulting environment can also accelerate faculty burnout. To counter these trends, we advocate systemic structural reforms rather than individual resilience. Replacing narrow quantitative measures with holistic evaluation metrics is a necessary first step. Furthermore, strengthening genuine shared governance and securing equitable working conditions will help reclaim the university as a space for rigorous, transformative inquiry.
Jessie Ming Sin Wong, K. Li· The International Journal of...· 0 citations
This paper reconstructs and addresses three major critiques of Martha Nussbaum's capabilities approach (CA): (1) the claim that an exclusive focus on capabilities (rather than functioning) is ineffective in protecting people's well‐being; (2) the critique of paternalism; and (3) the objection according to which the CA relies on a vague notion of human nature. It argues that, while Nussbaum's account has the inner resources to partially address the objections, incorporating John Stuart Mill's harm principle offers a more robust defense of the CA. The paper contends that this liberal principle provides a sound criterion for distinguishing the human capabilities that merit political protection from those that do not. Moreover, the principle also allows the CA to better address the critiques of paternalism and laissez‐faire. After presenting this defense, the paper analyzes how the adoption of Mill's principle should shape the CA's treatment of self‐harm.
The ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) regime has consolidated as the principal normative architecture of corporate activity in Europe. Academic critique of the phenomenon has been predominantly technical—divergence among rating agencies, agency problems, and empirical ineffectiveness—ethical critique remains pending. This article advances such a critique from the convergence of three traditions: the libertarian ethics of natural law in its Rothbardian formulation; Hayekian spontaneous order theory and its economic correlate in the Austrian theories of dynamic efficiency and synergasia (Ravier); and Catholic Social Doctrine, from Rerum Novarum to Caritas in Veritate. The principal conceptual contribution consists in coining the analytical category of soft collectivism to name how the ESG regime operates: it subjects the firm through conditioning rather than command, hollowing out the content of rights without altering their juridical form. The mechanics of this subjection operate through soft law, institutional isomorphism, the spiral of silence, and the bootleggers-and-baptists coalition within a state culture that Bagus's counterfactual criterion identifies as indirect coercion. The convergence between Catholic subsidiarity and Hayekian spontaneous order—two formulations of the same formal structure—yields a unanimous verdict against the ESG regime. Against the bureaucratic simulacrum of social responsibility, the article posits genuine entrepreneurial responsibility—voluntary, prudential, subsidiary, and oriented to real service—as the only coherent alternative within the converging ethical demands established by the analysis.
In our social structure, women always face suspicion, blame, punishment, and judgment from the male population. This judgment is noticeable in social, political, and interpersonal areas. Women have been blamed for their persuasive behavior, but the behavior of men is always being ignored. In this paper we have tried to challenge the fairness of this prejudice, using psychological aspect. We tried to reach out manifestations from primitive religious narratives, which include the witch hunts of early modern Europe, to contemporary legal and cultural context. We have focused on system justification theory, ambivalent sexism, attribution theory and psychoanalytic perspectives. This analytical argument claims that the reason behind blaming women for their persuasive behavior functions psychologically and it has multiple functions. It maintains existing gender hierarchies, alleviates cognitive dissonance about gender inequality, and manages unconscious anxieties about female power. The paper concludes by considering the persistent influence of these historical patterns in the modern context and their implications for women's participation in public discourse.
Prionty Shaily, Asfakul Ashekin· Integral Research· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
